2015.06.16 CC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
Council Chambers ~ Public Safety Complex
250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds
BUSINESS MEETING
JUNE 16, 2015
7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE
1.(5 Minutes)Roll Call
2.(5 Minutes)Approval of Agenda
3.(5 Minutes)Approval of Consent Agenda Items
A.AM-7809 Approval of draft City Council Meeting Minutes of June 9, 2015.
B.AM-7807 Approval of claim checks #214662 through #214805 dated June 11, 2015 for
$274,296.03 (replacement claim check #214702 $2,000.00)
Approval of replacement payroll check #61645 dated June 11, 2015 for $572.88.
C.AM-7806 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Shirley Olsen ($867.24).
D.AM-7810 Reappointment of Mike Popke to the Edmonds Public Facilities Board
E.AM-7808 Renew Snohomish County ILA for IT equipment
F.AM-7801 Authorization for Mayor to sign a Professional Services Agreement with Murray, Smith
& Associates for the 2016-2017 Waterline Replacement Program
G.AM-7802 Renewal of Interlocal agreement with the Snohomish County Regional Drug & Gang
Task Force 2015-2016.
H.AM-7803 Authorization for Mayor to sign a Supplemental Agreement with KPG, Inc for the 238th
St SW Walkway and Drainage Improvements project
I.AM-7804 Authorization for Mayor to sign the 2015-2019 Commute Trip Reduction Agreement
Packet Page 1 of 680
J.AM-7811 Sprint Master Use Agreement and Site Use Agreement for installation, operation and
maintenance of wireless equipment in City Rights-of-Way.
4.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)*
*Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public
Hearings
5.(75 Minutes)
AM-7800
Public Hearing on Proposed 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update
6.(5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments
7.(15 Minutes)Council Comments
8.Convene in executive session regarding pending or potential litigation per RCW
42.30.110(1)(i).
9.Reconvene in open session. Potential action as a result of meeting in executive session.
ADJOURN
Packet Page 2 of 680
AM-7809 3. A.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted By:Scott Passey
Department:City Clerk's Office
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Approval of draft City Council Meeting Minutes of June 9, 2015.
Recommendation
Review and approve meeting minutes.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Attachment 1 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes.
Attachments
Attachment 1 - 06-09-15 Draft Council Meeting Minutes
Form Review
Form Started By: Scott Passey Started On: 06/11/2015 02:30 PM
Final Approval Date: 06/11/2015
Packet Page 3 of 680
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
June 9, 2015
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th 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
STAFF PRESENT
Don Anderson, Assistant Police Chief
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Scott James, Finance Director
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir.
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Program Mgr.
Rob English, City Engineer
Kernen Lien, Senior Planner
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
SPECIAL MEETING
1. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION PER RCW
42.30.110(1)(i) AND A REAL ESTATE MATTER PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(b)
At 6:00 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session to discuss
pending litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) and a real estate matter per RCW 42.30.110(1)(b). He stated
that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 45 minutes and would be held in the Jury
Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. Action may 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, Bloom (joined executive session at 6:20
p.m.), Mesaros and Nelson. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday, Finance Director Scott
James, Recreation Manager Renee McRae, and City Clerk Scott Passey. The executive session concluded
at 6:47 p.m.
2. MEET WITH PLANNING BOARD CANDIDATE NATHAN MONROE FOR APPOINTMENT TO
THE PLANNING BOARD
At 6:47 p.m., the City Council met with Planning Board candidate Nathan Monroe. The meeting took
place in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. All elected officials were present.
STUDY SESSION
Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. and led the flag salute.
Packet Page 4 of 680
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS,
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
5. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Petso requested Item D be removed from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS,
TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
A. APPROVAL OF DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 2, 2015
B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #214554 THROUGH #214661 DATED JUNE 4, 2015
FOR $244,913.65. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #61627
THROUGH #61636 FOR $486,090.72, BENEFIT CHECKS #61637 THROUGH #61644
AND WIRE PAYMENTS OF #422,066.67 FOR THE PAY PERIOD MAY 16, 2015
THROUGH MAY 31, 2015
C. REVISION TO PENALTY ADJUSTMENT POLICY
E. APRIL 2015 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
F. LOAN OF ARTWORK FROM CITY PUBLIC ART COLLECTION TO CASCADIA ART
MUSEUM
G. PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES CONTRACT AMENDMENT
Item D: CONFIRMATION OF NATHAN MONROE TO THE PLANNING BOARD ALTERNATE
POSITION
Councilmember Petso requested this be rescheduled on next week’s Consent Agenda as she had not
received additional information she requested.
COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO RESCHEDULE THIS ITEM TO NEXT WEEK’S CONSENT AGENDA. UPON
ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM, NELSON AND PETSO
VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS
BUCKSHNIS, JOHNSON AND MESAROS VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE ITEM D. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, JOHNSON, MESAROS AND
NELSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM AND PETSO VOTING NO.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Packet Page 5 of 680
Scott Blomenkamp, Edmonds, relayed he was extremely happy when he closed on his property on May
12. He moved in on May 23 and on June 2 a developer undercut 4 trees on his property. He has seen no
movement from the City’s administration and has seen complete incompetency in the Planning
Department with regard to their interpretation of the code. He has talked to the department head, the code
enforcement manager, and the mayor’s assistant. People are worried about a tree code that limits the
ability of single family property owners to cut down their trees; this developer cut 13 old growth trees and
undercut a 130-foot tree that could land on his house. He has been told the developer is procedurally
exempt from the clearing code. Mr. Blomenkamp found this ridiculous and said he moved to Edmonds
because he thought there was a reasonable level of environmental concern and development concern. The
City has limits on signage and other things but apparently lets this type of thing happen. He questioned
the City’s ability to enforce a Tree Code when it could not control one developer on one property. He
pledged to take every avenue to pursue every developer and person in government who was involved with
this. Mayor Earling advised Mr. Blomenkamp and he have an appointment this Friday.
Swan Seaberg, Edmonds, an Edmonds resident since 1971, said the Tree Code is ridiculous; the City
wants to regulate how he landscapes his yard, get a permit to remove a tree, and pay for an arborist report.
He has had two trees fall on his property, one on his house. Another was about to fall so he cut it down.
He summarized there were all kinds of problems in Edmonds and the last thing the City needed to do was
tell people how to landscape their property.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, relayed he attended the Tree Board meeting the week after the Planning
Board’s public hearing on the Tree Code. The Tree Board Chair admitted they missed a few things and
maybe should have done some things differently but all board members still believed in controlling what
happens on private property. He suggested if the Tree Board was allowed to continue, the City was giving
too much authority to people who have a passion for a particular thing which resulted in the City being
run by committees not by the City government. Next, with regard to Item 10 on last week’s agenda, Draft
Code of Ethics, Attachment 16, Review Options A, B, C and D, he pointed out the Council did not review
Attachment 16 or the options and instead voted on Attachment 13. He objected to having an agenda item
published but the discussion that was supposed to occur did not. The rest of the Council allowed Mayor
Earling and Council President Fraley-Monillas to control the meeting and agreed to take action on
Attachment 13. He was still waiting for review of Attachment 16.
Dave Page, Edmonds, said the Council knows how he feels about the invasion of private property and
personal liberties; the Tree Board went overboard. He acknowledged some regulations were needed but
every committee/council/board wants to make a difference. He resigned from the Snohomish County
Planning Commission after two years because every staff proposal was accepted. With regard to the
conference center, he feared it would be an anchor and he did not recommend the Council purchase it. He
supported limited government and felt debate was healthy. For example, Councilmember Bloom has had
an impact on the City Council and has changed the way some people do business and the way they think.
He summarized the more committees the City has, the more staff is need, the more staff, the higher
citizens’ taxes are.
7. SNOHOMISH COUNTY TOURISM PRESENTATION
Economic Development and Community Services Director Patrick Doherty introduced Amy Spain,
Executive Director, Snohomish County Tourism Bureau, who assists and mentors the City in its
tourism promotion strategies.
Ms. Spain presented the Snohomish County Tourism Bureau 2014 Annual Report. She described the
importance of tourism to economic development; visitors to Washington spent $19.5 billion in 2014,
accounting for $1.7 billion in local/state tax revenues and creating 163,450 jobs. She displayed a drawing
Packet Page 6 of 680
illustrating the impacts of tourism on many different aspects of the community. She displayed a graph of
national trends, illustrating the United States’ loss in market share compared with Europe and Asia.
She commented on the State’s lack of a Tourism Office:
• All other states have some form of state funding and/or involvement
• Washington Tourism Alliance, a membership-funded model, is not a suitable organization
o Receive funds from members and $500,000 bridge funding from the legislature to keep the
website open and distribute the Visitors Guide.
• Legislation was introduced in Olympia in 2015 to create a state tourism funding program was not
passed
She provided a comparison of competitor states’ budgets:
• Washington $481,000
• Alaska $17 million
• Idaho $7 million
• Oregon $12 million
• California $50 million
• Nevada $15 million
• Montana $12 million
• Wyoming $13 million
• Utah $14 million
• Arizona $13 million
• Colorado $15 million
• New Mexico $7 million
• Vancouver BC $53 million
She provided tourism sector percentages:
Accommodations 32% $2,400,000
Food Service 28% $2,100,000
Attractions 13% $ 975,000
Retail 19% $1,425,000
Transportation 8% $ 600,000
Total $7,500,000
She described components of long term funding:
• Dedicated funds
• Industry sector balance
• Sectors determine assessment method
She described the impact of travel to the local economy:
• Overnight travelers to Washington State (staying in commercial lodging)
o Average 2.2 people per travel party
o Stay 2.5 nights
o Spend $468 per travel party per day
o Totaling $19.5 billion
• Overnight travelers to Snohomish County (staying in commercial lodging)
o Average 2.0 people per travel party
o Stay 2.9 nights
o Spend $512 per travel party per day
o Totaling $992.9 million
Packet Page 7 of 680
• Economic impact of tourism in Snohomish County includes 10,100 jobs, $244.4 million payroll,
$17.9 million in local taxes, $49.4 million in state taxes
• Visitor spending in Snohomish County is $930.2 million per year; up 3.8% from previous year.
Ms. Spain displayed a bar graph illustrating the impact of travel to local economy, day traveler (less than
$100/day) compared to overnight travelers ($512/day). She described the effect of tourism in Snohomish
County:
• 10,340 jobs
• $256.4 million payroll
• 431.2 million local taxes
• $63.0 million state taxes
• Visitor spending in Snohomish County is $992.9 million/year, up 5.7% from previous year
o Restaurants: $289.4 million
o Transportation and Fuel: $152.5 million
o Retail Stores: $135.4 million
o Accommodations: $130.6 million
o Recreation and entertainment: $130.5 million
o Grocery stores: $60.5 million
Ms. Spain provided a brief overview of the Bureau’s accomplishments in 2014:
• Generated 6,708 requests for information from ads
• Website visitation up 9% - over 222,000 unique visitors
• Achieved over $272,000 of free media coverage
• 31,006 definite and 5,163 tentative group and convention room nights were processed in 2014
representing $43.4 million in economic impact
• Visitor centers served 38,402 visitors. Countywide centers served 95,839 visitors
• Tourism spending and economic impact of tourism in Snohomish County was $992.9 million –
up 5.7%
• Hotel occupancy levels were up 4.3% to 71.1%; ADR was up 6.8% leading to an increase in
RevPar of 11.3%
• Hotel/motel tax collections were up 7.3%
She commented their branding “Open Up” permeates all their creative executions, from brochures to
advertising and their website. She reviewed convention and group tour sales and services, explaining ads
generate leads, support branding and generate interest in Snohomish County as a meeting/event
destination:
• 2,084 group tour/convention/sports events collateral materials were distributed in 2014 at 20 trade
shows and 3 sales missions
• 25 familiarization tours were conducted for meeting, group tour and international tour and travel
planners and domestic and international media
• 5 sales missions to Vancouver BC, Olympia, Seattle, Indianapolis and Orlando along with
Lynnwood Convention Center, Future of Flight Aviation Center, Seattle Premium Outlets, Angel
of the Winds Casino, City of Lynnwood and 9 county hotels resulting in 32 new leads for hotels
and attractions and distribution of 98 packets of information
• 20 trade shows generating 183 direct leads and distribution of 2,084 tourism guides, 100 groups
assisted; distributing 3,929 guides to attendees
• Bar graph of tentative, definite and total room nights for 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014
o Large increase in 2014 compared to 2013 attributable to addition of one staff person
• Group tour, meeting and event planner bids were prepared which result in 31,006 total definite
room nights
Packet Page 8 of 680
o Additional pending bookings at yearend total 5,163 room nights
o Totaling 36,169 room nights
o Economic impact of group business: $43,395,198
• $37.1 million economic impact from sports
• The Snohomish County Sports Commission Board of Directors assists the sports marketing staff
with resources, referrals, direction and oversight
Ms. Spain reported on tourism development:
• 6,708 requests for information from ads, down from previous year due to visitors getting more
information online
• New quarterly E-newsletters
o Visitor Newsletter
o Sports Spotlight
o VIC Times Newsletter
o Sports Quarterly
• Website visitation up 9%
• Over 11,000 visits to RoomsAtPar and StayShopAndSave websites
• New collateral materials:
o Arts Guide
o Aviation Attractions
o Camping and RV Parks
o Waterfalls
o Golf
o Top 10 Hikes
• 85,000 copies of the official visitor guide distributed
• Public Relations and Media
o 6 issues of StoryLine were mailed to over 1,400 travel writers with each issue
o Attended Society of American Travel Writers and Travel Media Showcase
o 8 media fam tours for travel writers
o 17 press releases sent
o 100 media pitches
o 45 articles published
o $272,326 in free media coverage
o Social Media: Flickr, Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest and YouTube
o 2 television ads launched
Ms. Spain reported on efforts to implement the Strategic Tourism Plan initiatives:
• Manage Visitor Information Centers (VIC) at I-405/I-5, Historic Downtown Snohomish and
at the Future of Flight and Boeing tour
• Advertising presence at Alderwood Mall
• Unique presence at Seattle Premium Outlets (Snoh Co Yeti)
• Electronic kiosks at Lynnwood Convention Center and Tulalip Resort
• Mobile VIC operating at events and festivals
She provided a visitor snapshot:
• 66% from more than 50 miles away
o 6% from other Washington counties
o 31% from other states
o 29% from other countries
• 34% from local area (including surrounding counties)
Packet Page 9 of 680
• Served 95,839 visitors countywide
Ms. Spain described training of VIC volunteers including five countywide tourism related programs,
monthly hotel hot sheet, tourism industry month tours,
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if there was anything specific to Edmonds. Ms. Spain answered
there is a great deal of information on each community on their website including a description of the
community, links to the City’s website and VisitEdmonds.com, descriptions in the Visitor Guide, Arts
Guide, shopping and mobile tour of murals in downtown Edmonds. Council President Fraley-Monillas
clarified she was asking about information specific to revenue generation in Edmonds. Ms. Spain did not
have specifics regarding visitor spending in Edmonds. The Department of Revenue can provide lodging
tax collected in Edmonds.
Councilmember Mesaros inquired about the impact of the cruise industry flourishing in King County on
Snohomish County. Ms. Spain answered some tour companies provide transportation and some tour
operators include Seattle Premium Outlets and Alderwood mall in their shopping excursions as well as
the Future of Flight Boeing tour. The trend is when someone comes to Seattle for a cruise, they only
explore downtown Seattle unless they do a pre/post cruise tour. The Bureau is working with tour
companies in the greater Seattle area to provide itineraries to the Boeing tour which is unique to this area.
Pre/post tours tend to be for very short time period.
Councilmember Nelson referred to the visitor snapshot, 31% coming from other states and 29% from
other countries. He asked whether more specific were available regarding the countries or states most
attracted to the Snohomish County area. Ms. Spain said other research was conducted in 2012 as part of
the branding program regarding where travelers come from. Snohomish County is a regional destination;
the top three destinations for overnight stays are Vancouver BC, Portland and Seattle. California and
Oregon also rank high for visitors. International travels are primarily attracted to the Boeing tour. She
offered to send more data to Mr. Doherty.
8. RENEWAL OF INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY REGIONAL
DRUG & GANG TASK FORCE 2015-2016
Assistant to the Police Chief Don Anderson explained Edmonds has been a participant in the Task Force
since 1998 with several others Snohomish County cities. At one time Edmonds contributed a detective to
participate as a Task Force member. Since Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace formed their
own Drug Task Force, the three cities have chosen to continue their support of the Snohomish County
Regional Task Force through a financial contribution alone.
Task Force funding comes primarily from a U.S. Department of Justice grant with the remaining financial
support from Snohomish County and the participating municipalities. Most staff are on loan from the
participating agencies and their wages are paid by their home agencies. Other participants include the
Snohomish County Sheriff’s Office, 20 municipalities, DSHS Child Protective Services, the Washington
State Patrol, and Snohomish Health District; all pledge funds to the Task Force based on a local match
breakdown described in Exhibit C of the ILA. Edmonds’ assessment for July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2016 is
$10,548, a $4 increase over last year’s amount. Funds are included in the Police Department’s 2015
budget. The Police Department requests approval of the ILA and authorization for the Mayor to sign the
2015-2016 agreement on the Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Petso relayed she has been contacted by neighbors concerned about activities in their
neighborhood; she asked whether this group would assist with that. ACOP Anderson advised within the
city limits of Edmonds the South Snohomish County Regional Drug Task Force which consists of
members from Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace would handle drug activity. The only time
Packet Page 10 of 680
the Regional Task Force would be asked to assist the City would be on a case that goes federal and
additional recourses, personnel and equipment are needed, or a drug manufacturing lab. Councilmember
Petso asked the purpose of the Snohomish Regional Drug Gang Task Force. ACOP Anderson advised it
provides drug and gang suppression in all the cities in Snohomish County.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda.
9. BRIEFING ON THE 2016-2021 SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss distributed a list of projects added to the 2016-2021 TIP since
last year’s TIP, projects removed from the 2016-2021 TIP, projects where the description/project name
was revised since the 2015-2020 TIP, and revisions to the current 2016-2012 TIP. A public hearing is
scheduled on July 7, 2015.
He reviewed projects added to the 2016-2021 TIP:
Project name Reason for Addition
Dayton St. from 7th Ave. to 8th Ave. Added since ranked #1 in Short Walkway List (as
part of 2015 Transportation Plan )
Note: Description changed from “east side” to
“south side” of Dayton
236th St. SW from SR-104 to 100th Ave. W Added since ranked #3 in 2015 Long Walkway List
(as part of 2015 Transportation Plan )
Note: Project extended to 100th from 97th
(consistent with 2015 Transportation Plan)
84th Ave. W from 238th St. SW to 234th Added since ranked #4 in Long Walkway List (as
part of 2015 Transportation Plan )
80th Ave. W from 212th St. SW to 206th St. SW Added since ranked #1 in Long Walkway List (as
part of 2015 Transportation Plan ) Note: not
highlighted on spreadsheet (to be added in next
submittal)
218th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to 84th Ave. W Added since ranked #2 in Long Walkway List (as
part of 2015 Transportation Plan )
Waterfront At-Grade Crossing Alternative Study Added based on $500,000 recently secured state
funding, along with Port of Edmonds and Local
Funding
Citywide Transition Plan Addition based on required update of Plan,
identifying non-compliant ramps and possible
funding sources (needed to complete)
He highlighted projects removed from the 2016-2021 TIP:
Project Reason for removal
212th St. SW @ 84th Ave. / Five Corners Project Completed in '15
Main @ 9th (interim solution) Permanent solution identified in 6-year TIP
15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave. Project Completed in '15
ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave. S Project Completed in '15
Meadowdale Beach Rd. Walkway Ranked #23 in updated Long Walkway List
(as part of 2015 Transportation Plan )
Packet Page 11 of 680
80th Ave. Walkway from 188th to OVD Ranked #12 in updated Long Walkway List
(as part of 2015 Transportation Plan )
Walnut from 6th to 7th Ranked #9 in updated Short Walkway List
(as part of 2015 Transportation Plan )
SR-104 Corridor Study Completed in '15
He identified projects where the description/project name has been revised since 2015-2020 TIP:
Project Description change
196th @ 88th Intersection Guardrail Combined with 196th @ 88th Intersection
Improvements project
Restriping of 76th Ave from 220th to OVD and
Citywide Bicycle Connections
Both projects combined into Bike Link
project (with secured Verdant funding)
Sunset Ave. from Edmonds to Caspers project Changed from "sidewalk" to "multi-use path"
Dayton St. project from 7th to 8th Changed from "east side" to "south side"
Traffic Calming Program Non-motorized Transportation Safety
Improvements were added and removed
"Residential"
Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether more money should be included in the budget if the Traffic
Calming Program is being expanded from residential to citywide. Public Works Director Phil Williams
responded the funding is proposed to be increased from $10,000 to $20,000. Although not a large amount,
it will be helpful as the scope of the projects has been expanded. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested
increasing the funding to $50,000 due to numerous complaints about speeding. Mr. Williams noted traffic
calming is not just slowing vehicles although that has a safety benefit. There could be other strategies
employed that would make car, pedestrian and bicycle travel safer that do not necessarily include traffic
calming for automobiles.
Councilmember Petso asked whether the Council was expected to take action to adopt the TIP the night
of the July 7 public hearing. Mr. Hauss advised that was the intent. Councilmember Petso recalled
Council discussion at the retreat when the Council takes action immediately after the public hearing, it
can leave the impression that the Council did not care what the public had to say because there was no
time to consider their input. She asked whether the schedule could be rearranged so that the public
hearing precedes Council action by a week. Mr. Williams agreed that could be done.
Councilmember Petso referred to the comparison chart and the label on a walkway, 236th Street Walkway
from SR 104 to 97th. Mr. Hauss said should have been changed to SR 104. Councilmember Petso referred
to the purpose listed for the 80th Avenue Walkway, to provide safe and desirable route to the Old
Woodway High School and parks, pointing out that was not located near the Old Woodway High School.
Mr. Hauss advised that should be Edmonds-Woodway High School.
Councilmember Petso referred to 84th Avenue Walkway from 238th to 234th, which she envisioned was
behind Safeway on Highway 99. She has noticed private development putting in sidewalks the length of
their property and asked how it was decided which walkways the City does and which ones development
does. Mr. Williams agreed that was difficult because it is unknown when development will occur or the
scope. Staff selected projects that ranked the highest and applies for grants when possible. If the City can
partner with a private sector developer, that reduces the cost of the project.
Packet Page 12 of 680
Councilmember Petso inquired about grant funds shown for the Annual Street Preservation Program in
odd-numbered years. Mr. Williams answered in the past two years the City has received two grants for
paving projects via distribution of federal funds by Snohomish County that prioritized maintenance
paving. The City paved 5th Avenue 2 years ago via a $550,000 grant and a $780,000 grant will be used for
the 220th project this year. He was hopeful that same recommendation will continue; therefore some grant
funds at about the level received this year were included in the TIP every other year.
Councilmember Petso observed one of changes made was to change the Sunset Avenue project from a
sidewalk to a multiuse path. At the time the Council takes action on the TIP, she planned to make a
motion to undo that change and leave it as a walkway project.
Councilmember Nelson asked for examples of traffic calming projects that were not related to speed
reduction. Mr. Williams explained many people look at traffic calming as bulb outs, radar feedback signs,
speed cushions or other things designed to slow cars down. At key location where vehicles interact with
pedestrians, projects elements could be to protect the pedestrian crossing which also slows cars and
provides better visibility for pedestrians, a shorter crossing distance, etc. Although that is not necessarily
seen as traffic calming, staff would like that type of project to be eligible for the funding. He referred to a
very interesting seminar he and Mr. Hauss attended two weeks ago in Everett on accommodating bicycles
in a limited right-of-way. He summarized anything that could be done with paint, lights, signage will have
some effect on slowing cars but may not be the only benefit.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked whether the eastbound sidewalk at 238th @ Highway 99 was
included. She noted it is a steep road with two speed bumps and a chicane where people walk in the street
to reach 76th. Mr. Hauss advised it is included in the Transportation Plan but it was ranked fairly low. The
TIP does not identify all the walkway projects, only the top 3-4 in the long and short walkway list.
Council President Fraley-Monillas commented multiple speed bumps and other traffic calming devices
would seem to indicate a higher need on that road. She recalled Councilmember Johnson requested it be
included in the Transportation Plan in 2008. Mr. Hauss advised criteria are used for ranking projects; the
Transportation Committee was involved in that ranking exercise. That stretch received a top score with
regard to pedestrian activity but it ranked lower than other stretches with regard to distance from a school.
Council President Fraley-Monillas commented that stretch of roadway leads to the only park in that area
and the chicane reduces the area for pedestrians. She suggested looking at that again and potentially
moving it up on the project list. Mr. Hauss agreed installing sidewalks on all the stretches like that are
desirable in the long term. He pointed out the speed bumps and chicanes reduce traffic speeds. Mr.
Williams said the criteria used to rank the long and short walkways are not completely dissimilar to the
requirements for grant applications so projects are often matched with grant sources.
Councilmember Bloom asked whether “Residential” was removed from the Traffic Calming Program
because it limited projects only to residential streets. Mr. Williams explained the program was entitled
“Residential Traffic Calming Program” which meant local streets. A lot of the requests the City receives
are with regard to speeding and other safety hazards not necessarily on local streets; some are on collector
streets. Removing “Residential” broadens the places where traffic calming resources could be used and
broadens the list of potential solutions.
Councilmember Johnson inquired about the public meeting this week regarding the Transportation
Element. Mr. Hauss advised there is an open house Wednesday, June 10 in the Bracket Room, 3rd floor of
City Hall from 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. followed by a Planning Board meeting.
10. PRESENTATION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MURRAY, SMITH
& ASSOCIATES FOR THE 2016-2017 WATERLINE REPLACEMENT PROGRAM
Packet Page 13 of 680
City Engineer Rob English reported earlier this year the City issued an RFQ to seek a consultant to begin
design work on primarily the 2016 program as well as preliminary engineering for the 2017 program.
This contract and scope of work is for the surveying and preliminary design for 14,000 feet included in
both programs. Out of that, approximately 7,000 feet will be selected for the 2016 program. The proposed
design fee is $345,000 which includes a $25,000 management reserve for changes and unforeseen
conditions. The budget for this year’s program is $391,000.
Councilmember Nelson inquired about the service life of a water line. Mr. English answered the Water
Comprehensive Plan programs replacement of 1% of the system per year or a 100 year replacement cycle.
Mr. Williams commented new pipes have gotten much better; ductal iron is the material of choice now.
Wooden pipes were dug up in Main Street that were in pretty good shape although they were no longer in
use. Councilmember Nelson asked the service life of new pipes being installed. Mr. Williams answered it
depends on the type of soil, pressure fluctuations, etc. Many Water Comprehensive Plans have an 80-100
year replacement schedule.
Councilmember Mesaros asked when the pipes being replaced this year were installed. Mr. Williams
answered the oldest line that will be replaced in the next 12 months was 1929 vintage.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda.
11. PRESENTATION OF A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH KPG, INC FOR THE 238TH ST
SW WALKWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
City Engineer Rob English explained this project will be advertised for construction within the next
several weeks. The bulk of the work covered by this amendment is related to providing engineering
support during the construction phase such as services related to reviewing RFIs, submittals, assisting
with change orders, preparing record drawings at the conclusion of the project and attending meetings
throughout the course of construction and finalizing the stormwater report and infiltration rates. The
proposed fee is $26,025 which includes a 5% management reserve of $12,039. Project funds are primarily
stormwater and a Safe Routes to Schools grant will fund the sidewalk portion of the project.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda.
12. ACCEPTANCE OF THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION ON THE PROPOSED
TREE CODE
Senior Planner Kernen Lien described the Tree Code Update:
• ECC 10.95.030 Citizens’ Tree Board Powers and Duties:
o Developing a tree ordinance designed to preserve and protect existing trees, encourage
planting of additional trees, safeguard trees on parcels where construction or renovation is
occurring or planned to occur, and encouraging the Edmonds citizenry to become active
stewards of the urban forest.
• Develop a more comprehensive tree code with clear vision, and code which is easier for citizens
to understand and more efficient for staff to implement.
• Council budgeted $24,000 in 2014 which was supplemented with a $10,000 Urban and
Community Forestry Grant from the Department of Natural Resources
He described the current Tree Code:
• ECDC 18.45 Land Clearing and Tree Cutting
• Right-of-way Tree Removal or Trimming Policy (Adopted November 18, 2014)
• Critical Area Regulations ECDC 23.40 – 23.90
Packet Page 14 of 680
• Other Codes and Policies
o ECDC 20.13 Landscaping Requirements
o ECDC 18.85 Street Trees
o ECDC 23.10 Shoreline Master Program
He described current tree cutting permits:
• Exemptions
o Singe family lots
No critical areas
Not subdividable more than one additional lot
o Routine maintenance
o Hazard trees/emergencies
• Permitting differences
o Singe family: Type II, $820 application fee
o Multi-family/commercial: Type I, $250
o Right-of-way: ROW Construction Permit $90-$270
o New Development: Reviewed with underlying permit
Mr. Lien described major changes in proposed code over existing tree regulations:
• New tiered permitting process with same permit fees for singe family, multi-family, and
commercial development
• Permit required for removal of any tree not associated with a development proposal
o Tree removal reviewed with development proposal
• Right-of-way tree permit in same location in code
• Minimum Tree Density on singe family lots
Zoning Minimum Tree units
RS-6 2
RS-8 4
RS-10 6
RS-12 9
RS-20 12
Minimum Diameter Tree Units
3-5” 0.5
6-10” 1
12” 2
18” 3
24” 4
Mr. Lien explained staff’s concern with the draft code was the policy basis behind the recommendation.
When the Tree Board was compiling their recommendation, there were discussions about an Urban
Forestry Management Plan which would include the goals and objectives for canopy coverage. The City
does not currently have a policy to establish a tree density.
The Planning Board held a well-attended public hearing on May 27, 2015 after which the Planning Board
forwarded a recommendation to City Council:
A. Defer any action on the currently prepared draft. Complete development and adoption of an
Urban Forestry Management Plan for the City of Edmonds as proposed within the
Comprehensive Plan,
Packet Page 15 of 680
B. Consolidate existing tree code sections under existing policy guidelines during the Edmonds
Community Development Code rewrite process currently in progress; and,
C. Following development of an Urban Forestry Management Plan, consolidation of potential
revised tree code could be written consistent with policy directions provided within the Urban
Forestry Management Plan.
Mr. Lien provided information regarding the Urban Forestry Management Plan:
• Timing
o The intent was to develop the code under the existing policy framework
o Findings section intended to address expanded policy
• Urban Forestry Management Plan
o Provides policy framework that guides decision making
o Identifies principles, priorities, goals and strategies
o Sets foundation to direct and integrate the management of the City’s urban forest resources
• Urban Forestry Management Plan content
o Can address public and private property
o May include an inventory
o Can address a number of topics
View protection, solar access, tree canopy goals, tree protection and regulations on
private and public property
• Comprehensive Plan Update recommending an Urban Forestry Management Plan be completed
by end of 2017.
Councilmember Buckshnis complimented Ms. Hope and Mr. Lien on their presentation to the Planning
Board. She said the proposed Tree Code is well written although she may not agree with it. She asked
whether any of it could be saved or was the intent to draft an Urban Forestry Management Plan and then
try to resurrect some of the proposed code. Development Services Director Shane Hope said the intent
would be to consider some parts of it during the code update/rewrite process. Mr. Lien said examples of
things that relate to the code rewrite process include bringing the Street Tree Policy into the code and
including the Subdivision Tree Plan. He recommended items that do not have policy backup wait until an
Urban Forestry Management Plan is adopted.
Councilmember Bloom thanked Mr. Lien and Engineering Program Manager Jeanie McConnell for their
work with the consultant on the Tree Code as well as presentations to the Tree Board. She also relayed
praise for their work from the former and current Tree Board Chairs. She noted the community’s very
strong reaction made it clear the community does not want regulation on private property such as
requiring permits. With regard to things that could be saved from the proposed Tree Code, she recalled
staff requested clear definition and asked whether the definitions could be integrated into the code. Mr.
Lien said definitions could be considered to see how they could be incorporated into the existing code.
The existing code includes a definition of a tree.
Councilmember Bloom relayed from what she has read and heard, there may have been a
misunderstanding about the definition of a significant tree. It was her understanding a significant tree was
identified as a diameter of 6 inches at 4½ feet. Mr. Lien said that is consistent with the current definition
of a tree, 6 inches at breast height. Councilmember Bloom observed the difference in the Tree Code was
that a significant tree was regulated on private property. Mr. Lien answered significant trees are currently
regulated on private property but there are a number of exemptions that apply to private property. For
example a 6-inch tree on property with a critical area such as stream, wetland or slope would be a
regulated tree. There are exemptions to that such as hazard tree removal. If there was no critical area on a
developed single family property that is not capable of being subdivided into more than one additional lot,
any tree can be taken down regardless of the size or number of trees.
Packet Page 16 of 680
Councilmember Bloom inquired about a Type II permit. Mr. Lien explained a Type II permit is a staff
decision that requires public notice to property owners within 300 feet of a site, publication in the
newspaper, website and a few other places. Councilmember Bloom observed that is an existing permit.
Mr. Lien agreed, explaining for a single family property that did not meet the exemptions and required a
tree cutting permit, there would be Type II staff decision.
For Councilmember Bloom, Mr. Lien provided an example when a permit would be required for a single
family property: a single family property with a 30% slope which is considered an erosion hazard which
is a critical area. The tree cutting code also requires a permit for trees located on slopes greater than 25%.
If a property owner wants to remove that tree, a Type II permit would be required if it was not a hazard
tree. If it was a hazard tree in the same location, a permit would not be required but documentation of the
hazard tree would be required such as evaluation by a certified arborist and if it is in a critical area,
replanting would be required. He clarified that was in the current code.
Council President Fraley-Monillas thanked Tree Board Chair Hatzenbeler for handling opinions at the
Planning Board public hearing with grace and respect. She asked whether the proposed Tree Code was
modeled after Seattle’s code. Mr. Lien explained the consultant, who has 30 years of experience working
on urban tree issues throughout the Puget Sound region, looked at a number of jurisdictions. The main
framework of the code came from Lake Forest Park not Seattle. The consultant looked at codes from
Seattle, Kirkland, Redmond, Olympia, Tukwila and a number of other jurisdictions in developing the
recommendations.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she was glad the consultant looked at other codes but she wanted
Edmonds to write its own code. She was familiar with Lake Forest Park and Seattle; their challenges
differ from Edmonds. She was not interested in requiring permits via a tiered process for cutting trees on
private property. She asked how staff wanted Council’s input, observing that could affect the Urban
Forestry Management Plan. Ms. Hope said unless the Council directs staff otherwise, staff will not pursue
a permitting system on residential properties and the existing policies will remain in place. Staff will draft
changes to consolidate/clean up the code and add things like definitions. An Urban Forestry Management
Plan will be proposed as part of the budget process to include scoping with regard to what the Plan will
cover. For example the Council could decide to have the Plan focus only on public property and rights-of-
way.
Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested a positive approach that encouraged people to plant trees,
what to plant and how to plant. She recognized there needed to be regulations in critical areas or potential
hazards. Mr. Lien advised educational outreach could be included in an Urban Forestry Management
Plan.
Councilmember Johnson commented this has been a wonderful example of democracy in action. First the
Tree Board developed a plan, it was sent to the Planning Board for review, the public weighed in with one
loud voice and now the City Council has an opportunity for review. That check and balance system also
includes an opportunity for the Mayor to veto an ordinance. Her message to the community was to calm
down, not cut all their trees, take this in a logical process and avoid unnecessary consequences. For
example, one of her neighbors is planning to log his property of over ten mature trees to avoid the
regulations and fees. It is important to avoid trees. She said some people love their trees, some love their
solar access, others want to garden on their property. The overall message that she heard is to leave
private property alone. Her policy direction when an Urban Forestry Management Plan is prepared is to
have public land as the first priority, other publicly owned land such as schools, etc. second priority and
not include private property. People care very much about their property and do not want to be told what
Packet Page 17 of 680
to do. She observed it would be a tremendous job for the City to manage the tree density and cutting and
pruning. She thanked all the citizens and boards and commissions involved in this process.
Councilmember Nelson recalled one of the Tree Board’s stated duties was to encourage, not require,
Edmonds citizenry to become active stewards of the urban forest. He preferred a carrot rather than a stick
approach. He asked whether the process of developing an Urban Forestry Management Plan could be
started sooner than 2017. Ms. Hope said it would be included in the 2016 budget unless a grant was
obtained sooner.
Councilmember Petso relayed her understanding that staff will consider the definitions and bringing the
Street Tree Policy into code. She requested staff review the permit cost described earlier; $820 for a non-
exempt single family which is a staff decision with public notice. She questioned that the cost of
providing public notice was actually $820. Mr. Lien said that did not necessarily need to be done with the
code rewrite; the fee schedule is adopted by Council by resolution.
Councilmember Petso referred to view protection and solar access, recalling people wanted language
regarding the value of view protection and solar access included in Comprehensive Plan, She asked
whether that was removed from the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Hope did not recall language was removed;
there is draft language proposed about view protection, but she will check on that. Councilmember Petso
suggested language such as value is placed on view protection, solar access and trees, even though she
recognized those may be conflicting values.
Councilmember Petso referred to the incident described during Audience Comments and asked whether
there was anything related to that incident that the Council needed to be aware of for tonight’s discussion.
Ms. Hope answered she did not believe so. She learned of that particular site issue on Friday and assured
staff was following up on it. Councilmember Petso looked forward to hearing more about it.
Councilmember Bloom recalled one of the things the Tree Board was charged with was looking at the
fines. She asked whether that could be considered, noting that was potentially related to the audience
comment as well as Councilmember Petso’s comment. Ms. Hope agreed that could be considered this
year.
Councilmember Bloom observed because there was such a strong reaction to infringement on private
property rights, some people may have misunderstood the Tree Board’s role. She explained the function
of the Tree Board is to educate and to support the right tree in the right place and what Council President
Fraley-Monillas said. The Tree Board is not able to do much without staff support. She feared the
comments about the Tree Board making the decision were based on a people looking for someone to
blame. She has worked with the Tree Board for five years; they are a wonder group of dedicated
volunteers who meet for two hours a month. She appreciated the work staff did and hoped everyone
realized this was a community effort, democracy in progress. Ms. Hope said the Tree Board provides
excellent work; developing the ordinance was not the sole focus of their efforts. The Tree Board also
wants to work on Arbor Day, another way to provide information, educate the public and have fun. The
Tree Board is also interested in a voluntary Heritage Tree Program which the Council previously
authorized.
Ms. Hope advised the Council did not need to take further action related to this item. Staff will work on
the items that were discussed.
Mayor Earling declared a break recess.
13. DISCUSSION OF THE 2015-2019 COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION AGREEMENT
Packet Page 18 of 680
City Engineer Rob English explained this is a renewal of Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) agreement
with Community Transit. There are 3 work sites within the City with 100 or more employees – the City of
Edmonds, Swedish Medical Hospital and Edmonds Family Medical Clinic. The State provides $1750 per
site for a total of $5,250 for a CTR program. Those funds are provided via an Interlocal Agreement to
Community Transit. The previous agreement covered 2011-2015; the proposed agreement will extend it
through 2019.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule approval on next week’s Consent Agenda.
14. DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION TO SUBMIT PROPOSAL TO ACQUIRE THE
EDMONDS CONFERENCE CENTER
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM,
THAT THE CITY MAKE AN OFFER TO BUY THE EDMONDS CONFERENCE CENTER FOR
$300,000 WITH A DEED RESTRICTION THAT THE PROPERTY BE USED FOR PUBLIC USE
FOR AT LEAST 30 YEARS.
Councilmember Mesaros explained how he arrived at that number; if the land where the conference
center is located is valued at approximately $800,000 and if the conference center were demolished.
Testimony and information provided regarding the condition of the building indicates it would take
approximately $1 million to rehab the building. The City is not in the business of operating a conference
center but the land is very valuable to the City especially due to its location on the arts corridor from Main
Street to the Edmonds Center for the Arts. If $200,000 is subtracted from the $800,000 value for
demolition and basic cleanup of the property, the property would be worth about $600,000. The
restriction on the property for public use for the next 30 years would half the value of the property. He
believed the State would listen to that offer and it was a piece of property the City would love to have for
that price.
Councilmember Petso asked City Attorney Jeff Taraday whether he could provide a sample deed
restriction. Mr. Taraday responded, assuming the motion is approved, he anticipated the administration
would execute the Council’s intent by effectively sending a letter of intent to the State expressing this
offer. A full-blown purchase and sale agreement would not necessarily be sent to the State unless the City
was specifically directed to do so because the City has no idea where the State is on this. If the State is
interested, the City can formalize it through a purchase and sale agreement. He offered to locate language
that could be included in a purchase and sale agreement.
Councilmember Nelson asked where the $300,000 would come from and whether it would jeopardize any
other purchases or projects. Finance Director Scott James answered the Council has not discussed a
source of funds. In his presentation a couple weeks ago he identified opportunities and tradeoffs. The
tradeoffs were a list of items in the budget that could be sacrificed for this purchase. That is the only
information he has presented to the Council. There are other issues that have not been discussed such as
what would be done with the building, cost associated with a conference center, etc.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her concern that demolishing the building and restoring the land into a
park would cost more than $300,000. She loved parks but said a public-private partnership with the
building would be more advantageous such as a boutique hotel. She asked how much demolition and
restoration would cost, anticipating the total cost would be close to $1 million which did not include
designing and developing a park. Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick
Doherty said Councilmember Mesaros’ explanation estimated demolition and cleanup of $200,000 which
he felt was generous. He estimated demolition of a 50,000 square foot building without complications
was under $100,000, allowing for unexpected contingencies and cleanup of the site. Because the notion of
Packet Page 19 of 680
a park or other subsequent use has not been discussed or vetted, he did not have an estimated cost. He
acknowledged design and development of park or building would not be an inconsequential cost.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled staff saying because the City had right of first refusal, if there were
higher offers the City could still purchase it for $300,000. Mr. Doherty responded that was not correct; the
State staff person said her perception of the process, given that the City was another government agency,
was the State would deal with Edmonds until either negotiations fall apart or the parties come together
and a purchase and sale agreement is issued. If the parties do no come together, the State would move on
to other parties. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated her opinion that it was in the City’s best interest to
keep civic fields as its priority and the City was not in the business of operating a conference center. She
spoke with several former Councilmembers and a former Mayor who agreed the City was not in the
business of operating a conference center or purchasing and reselling property. She did not support
purchasing the conference center.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said her opinion during this process has been that the City should not
waste money and that the City was not in the business of operating anything because the City does not
have the staff or time to manage it. However, if the property can be purchased for $300,000, she
envisioned when the City’s finances were better, potentially building a tourism center or a welcome to the
arts corridor building to encourage visitors to the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor. She could not see doing that
for 10-15 years until the money is right or the City is able to obtain funds from somewhere else. If the
City can purchase the property for $300,000, it would be foolish not to attempt it. The City did not need
to do anything with the property for a while. The building has value to the arts corridor but she was not
willing to consider an amount much over that.
Councilmember Petso said neither the funding source nor future use of the property were part of the
motion. Information about funding sources indicates this purchase could be made if the Council chose.
The City ended 2014 with a General Fund fund balance of $13 million. The 001 Fund, a subfund of the
overall General Fund, after excluding reserve funds and various other funds, ended 2014 with $6.4
million. There is also the REET Fund; she recalled when Mr. James made the presentation regarding
roads, he indicated the 126 REET Fund ended last year with $500,000 more than expected. The Council
voted to spend $260,000 of that on roads. Even the 2015 budget did not expend all the REET 2 revenue
expected to be received. Therefore when the Council selects a funding source, it is likely REET 2 will be
selected and this purchase is an eligible acquisition from that fund. She suggested the issue of a funding
source be put aside.
Councilmember Petso also suggested the Council could aside immediate plans for the property.
Numerous ideas have been suggested such using the building as an incubator project or as a senior center
while the senior center building is built, or when the “building does fall down” it could be used as a park,
arts facility or parking lot. She suggested narrowing the focus to whether the Council wants to attempt to
acquire this for the price stated in recognition of the fact that is located on the arts corridor.
With regard to Mr. Taraday’s statement regarding a letter of intent, Councilmember Petso recalled the
City already provided the State a letter of intent. It was her understanding the City need to provide
something that would pass as an offer and not a second letter of intent. Mr. Taraday responded it is not
clear from the State’s process exactly what they want to see. Assuming the motion passes, that may be
clarified tomorrow. Mr. Doherty said the City already submitted a notice of interest. A letter of interest is
a standard real estate term for an intent to make an offer, it could be called an offer letter. The State’s
representative told him they did not expect a purchase and sale agreement; they expect an offer letter that
would begin negotiations and if successful would lead to a mutually crafted purchase and sale agreement.
Packet Page 20 of 680
Councilmember Petso said if she was interested in the contingencies that are included in a typical real
estate transaction such as an inspection, title search, etc. did that need to be added to the motion as an
amendment. Mr. Taraday said yes if there were substantive additions but if no if they were boilerplate. If
the State was not expecting a purchase and sale agreement, there was no need to get into the nitty-gritty
details such as the length of the feasibility/inspection period, etc. That would come to Council for
subsequent action when the negotiations with the State reach that stage. Mr. Doherty agreed only
substantive issues that would affect the deal needed to be identified. Councilmember Petso was uncertain
how a title search, damage assessment or inspection would be classified. Mr. Taraday considered that
standard and somewhat boilerplate and not a substantive deal term. A title search, environmental phase 1,
etc. are standard in commercial property transactions. Councilmember Petso relayed her support of the
motion.
Councilmember Bloom stated her support for the motion. She appreciated Council President Fraley-
Monillas and Councilmember Petso’s comments and Councilmember Mesaros’ visionary approach. She
agreed with looking at it in terms of getting something for a good price and exploring all options for
future use. She recalled Ms. Hite saying although she and Ms. Chapin were concerned about the cost and
operations, it would be a nice addition to the arts corridor. There is creativity to be had in the City; it
could be used for a park, initially for restrooms, an art park, etc. She was excited about the potential and
hoped a good price could be negotiated with the State.
Recognizing this was a controversial issue, Council President Fraley-Monillas encouraged
Councilmembers to describe their thinking and their vision for the building/property before a vote is
taken.
Councilmember Nelson said his vision is not necessarily running a conference center or other things in
the facility due to the extent of the damage and funds required for repairs. It is a unique opportunity to
purchase the land; the land alone at that price is a unique opportunity for the City.
Councilmember Johnson recalled the last time the Council voted on this she voted in favor of sending a
letter of interest/intent because the Council was fairly evenly divided and she wanted to continue the
discussion. As time passed, she has learned more about the building that tends to support demolition
including structural, construction and maintenance problems as well as materials problems. To invest the
City’s money to restore the building would be extensive, probably $1.5-$2 million. Although the land is
located on 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor and she was a strong supporter of the arts, for her the risks
outweigh the benefits and it was not an action she wanted to take.
Councilmember Mesaros explained the primary reason for his motion was it is a moment in time for the
City; how often will property on the 4th Avenue Corridor become available to the City? If 4th Avenue is an
arts corridor, this is an opportunity to provide a sense of place for visual and performing arts. He agreed
with Councilmember Johnson that the building is in bad shape. His vision was not to operate the building
but to demolish it. If the City is able to purchase the property for $300,000 and he estimated demolition at
$200,000, the real cost is $500,000. However that was $500,000 to acquire a property valued at $800,000
which he believed was a bargain price. If the City could get the property at that price, it would be
beneficial to the City because it may never be available again. The City has resources available and
acquiring this property and demolishing the building will be a good use of those resources. The Council
could then begin discussing how best to utilize the property.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she was trying to be a realist; she could not believe the State would
accept $300,000 for $2.3 million property. She was also a visionary but did not want Councilmembers to
feel bad or want to increase the amount if the State did not accept the City’s offer. She agreed it was a
great property but the City could do a private-public partnership such as with McMenamins or Mr. Spee
Packet Page 21 of 680
or use the money to enhance the 4th Avenue Corridor. The ECA has a park area in front and there is the
Sunset beach nearby. She urged the Council to be realistic, commenting if she was the State, she would be
insulted by the City’s offer of $300,000 for a $2.3 million property. She summarized this was the point of
view of a fiscally conservative, financially minded person who has worked in the industry for a long time.
In response to Councilmember Buckshnis’ comment, Councilmember Bloom said nothing ventured,
nothing gained. She questioned how the City could do a public-private partnership if the City does not
own the property. The City does not lose anything by making this officer and the City may be surprised
the State sees the value of keeping the property in the community and using it for public use in a way that
benefits the arts corridor. She was not afraid of embarrassing herself in front of the State and was strongly
in support of the motion.
Council President Fraley-Monillas requested as the CEO of the City that Mayor Earling have an
opportunity to provide input. Mayor Earling questioned how the Council planned to pay for this when
what it will be was not yet known. He understood that a lot of options were available but even if the total
cost was $500,000, funds would have to be shifted from somewhere else. There is a list of priorities such
as streets, infrastructure and capital project and he saw this as a speculative purchase. Although there was
nothing wrong with speculation, there are costs associated with whatever the future project is. He assured
this will not just be a $500,000 project; additional work will need to be done including additional costs
during the review period. He was also concerned the Council would be handing staff a large project that
requires a lot of staff time. He questioned how staff’s responsibilities would be shifted to address issues
this project brings. Although he is an arts supporter, he is trying to look at this from the City’s standpoint.
He summarized whatever the project is, it will cost the City substantially more money and staff time
regardless of whether it is a park or a parking garage, and whatever goes on the site will require ongoing
operational expenses.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. CALL FOR THE
QUESTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
UPON ROLL CALL, MAIN MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM, MESAROS AND PETSO VOTING YES; AND
COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, JOHNSON AND NELSON VOTING NO.
15. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Earling had no report.
16. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Bloom provided the following comment (included verbatim at her request):
“Based on some responses I got, the biggest news in Edmonds, at least since the opening of T-
ball season, was that I left last week’s Council session, early. At least, that got attention on a matter that
is important for our city.
The code of ethics that Council adopted last week is a watered down, tooth-less, ineffective
version of the code of ethics, Attachment 16, which was on the agenda. Ms. Fraley-Monillas’ version
excluded appointive officers (that is, all director-level positions), and contained only general statements
from the more substantially defined Shoreline Code of Ethics, which was the model for attachment 16. As
anyone knows who’s ever been exposed to the legal system, whether the show business version or the real
one, you can drive a truck full of weasel-words through general statements.
Let me ask a question: Do you believe that the manner in which the code of ethics got adopted
last week, managed to break the very code of ethics that was adopted last week?
Packet Page 22 of 680
Let’s see: (1) “Be dedicated to the concepts of effective and democratic government.”
The President of our Council, with the aid for the Mayor, squelched all debate regarding the
more robust code of ethics, bypassing Attachment 16, which was on the agenda for discussion, and
moving forward on Attachment 13, which was not on the agenda for discussion.
Next Code of Ethics statement: (2): “Seek to improve the quality of public service, and confidence
of citizens.” In conversation on My Edmonds News, residents stated the following:
- Bad politics. Attachment 16 should have had a robust discussion
- I find the whole code of ethics situation distressing and I have lost faith in this City Council
- The stench from something which has been smelling in Edmonds is getting much worse
And finally: (3) “Conduct business of the city in a manner which is not only fair in fact but also in
appearance.”
Do you believe that the Code of Ethics was adopted in a fair manner, in fact, or in appearance?
We also have a Code of Conduct, in place, adopted in 2013. Let me ask you if you believe the Code of
Conduct was followed?
All group leaders (that would include, in this case, both the Mayor and President of the Council) will
- Provide all group members (in this case, Council Members) a fair opportunity to participate
And all participants, including leaders, will
- Respect the individual talents and contributions of others
I spent three and a half years attempting to get an effective Code of Ethics in place, culminating in
Attachment 16, which Council Member Diane Buckshnis also worked on. It was the only Code of Ethics
version on the agenda for discussion, last session, and it was not even given a glance.”
Councilmember Mesaros reported last Friday’s joint meeting with the Seashore Transportation Forum
and City of Seattle Transportation Committee included a robust discussion about transportation issues
facing South Snohomish County, North King County and into Seattle. The two groups decided to hold
joint meetings twice a year and plan to meet again in November. He envisioned that will be beneficial for
discussing issues related to Sound Transit as well as Community Transit traveling south and Metro
traveling north. There are tremendous traffic issues on I-5 and the other corridors from South Snohomish
County, through North King County and into Seattle and it is good for the municipalities along those
routes to discuss them together.
Councilmember Petso announced a once in a lifetime opportunity to purchase a heritage brick in front of
the Historic Museum as part of their renovation process. Further information is available on their website,
HistoricEdmonds.org. The bricks are of significant size and will accommodate up to 3 lines with 18
characters per line.
Councilmember Johnson reported the historic Schumacher Building was recently added to the Edmonds
Register of Historic Places; a small ceremony was held last week outside the building known as
Chanterelles. The Palmer House on Main Street between 8th and 9th Avenues will be dedicated this
Thursday.
Councilmember Buckshnis clarified although her name was on the code of ethics agenda memo, she did
not prepare the agenda memo. The agenda memo states Discussion and Potential Action regarding Draft
Code of Ethics, Attachment 16. Review of Options A, B, C and D. Unfortunately Options A, B C and D
were included in the May 5 packet but were not included in the June 2 packet. She concurred with
Councilmember Bloom that since it was her agenda memo, she should have presented it. Overall it was a
process issue with A, B, C, D and not having a complete agenda memo.
Packet Page 23 of 680
With regard to a code of ethics, Councilmember Nelson said the Council now has a code of ethics which
is a good thing especially when the Council previously had been able to reach agreement after considering
it at least 10 times over multiple years. Love it or hate it, it is a start and it can be amended in the future.
Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed her belief that attachment 13 was a starting point and she
expected amendments to be made to it which did not occur. Instead Councilmember Bloom chose to leave
the meeting because it was not her opinion. Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested working on the
code of ethics for over three years and the inability to make a decision or work effectively as a group is a
problem with this Council. The adopted code of ethics provides a good basis for future amendments.
Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed information from the Snohomish County Law and Justice
Commission she attended that Washington state has the highest amount of property crimes of any state in
the United States and Snohomish County has highest amount of heroin use and drug dealing of any other
place in Washington State. She said those are issues the community needs to work on instead of worrying
about things that do not affect all citizens.
17. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
This item was not needed.
18. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION
This item was not needed.
19. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:37 p.m.
Packet Page 24 of 680
AM-7807 3. B.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted For:Scott James Submitted By:Nori Jacobson
Department:Finance
Review Committee: Committee Action:
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Approval of claim checks #214662 through #214805 dated June 11, 2015 for $274,296.03 (replacement
claim check #214702 $2,000.00)
Approval of replacement payroll check #61645 dated June 11, 2015 for $572.88.
Recommendation
Approval of claim and payroll checks.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance
#2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or
non-approval of expenditures.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2015
Revenue:
Expenditure:274,296.03
Fiscal Impact:
Claims $274,296.03
Replacement claim check $2,000.00
Replacement payroll check $572.88
Attachments
Claim cks 06-11-15
Project Numbers 06-11-15
Form Review
Packet Page 25 of 680
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Finance Scott James 06/12/2015 09:58 AM
City Clerk Scott Passey 06/12/2015 10:04 AM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/12/2015 10:26 AM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/12/2015 10:43 AM
Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Started On: 06/11/2015 10:11 AM
Final Approval Date: 06/12/2015
Packet Page 26 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214662 6/11/2015 069798 A.M. LEONARD INC CI15081295/SO1507763 PM FLOWER PROGRAM BAMBOO STAKES, HOSES,
PM FLOWER PROGRAM BAMBOO STAKES, HOSES,
125.000.64.576.80.31.00 762.47
Total :762.47
214663 6/11/2015 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 350204 PM & SENIOR CENTER PEST CONTROL CUST 1-1
PM & SENIOR CENTER PEST CONTROL CUST
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 125.92
Total :125.92
214664 6/11/2015 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 6153831 SPRING SOFTBALL MEN'S LEAGUE T-SHIRTS
P&R TSHIRTS
001.000.64.571.25.31.00 95.10
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.571.25.31.00 9.03
SPRING WOMEN'S VOLLEYBALL T-SHIRTS6153832
P&R TSHIRTS
001.000.64.571.25.31.00 50.76
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.571.25.31.00 4.82
SPRING 3 ON 3 BASKETBALL T-SHIRTS6153833
P&R TSHIRTS
001.000.64.571.25.31.00 42.48
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.571.25.31.00 4.04
Total :206.23
214665 6/11/2015 072189 ACCESS 1003019 STORAGE OF DOCUMENTS 06/01/15 - 06/30/15
STORAGE OF DOCUMENTS 06/01/15 - 06/30/15
001.000.25.514.30.41.00 85.00
Total :85.00
214666 6/11/2015 074143 AFFORDABLE WA BACKFLOW TESTING 10154 PM BACKFLOW TESTS
PM BACKFLOW TESTS
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 90.00
1Page:
Packet Page 27 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :90.002146666/11/2015 074143 074143 AFFORDABLE WA BACKFLOW TESTING
214667 6/11/2015 074606 AIRE FILTER PRODUCTS NW LLC 11843 WWTP - SUPPLIES, FACILITIES
Gates V-Belt
423.000.76.535.80.31.23 57.56
Freight
423.000.76.535.80.31.23 10.15
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.31.23 6.43
Total :74.14
214668 6/11/2015 065568 ALLWATER INC 060915062 WWTP - DRINKING WATER
cooler rental
423.000.76.535.80.31.00 16.00
water
423.000.76.535.80.31.00 34.70
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.31.00 1.52
Total :52.22
214669 6/11/2015 074674 AMERICAN PETROLEUM ENVIRO SVCS 3909052115 Fleet Shop - Recycle Fluids
Fleet Shop - Recycle Fluids
511.000.77.548.68.48.00 20.00
Total :20.00
214670 6/11/2015 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 1987997644 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.33
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.06
2Page:
Packet Page 28 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214670 6/11/2015 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.05
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.13
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.48
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MATS1987997645
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 5.28
FLEET DIVISION MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 8.76
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.50
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.83
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS1988004834
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
001.000.66.518.30.24.00 21.10
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.24.00 2.00
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS1988009102
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.33
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
3Page:
Packet Page 29 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214670 6/11/2015 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.05
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.13
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.48
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.06
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MATS1988009103
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 15.62
FLEET DIVISION MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 8.76
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 1.49
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.83
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS1988016222
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
001.000.66.518.30.24.00 17.30
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.64
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS1988020485
4Page:
Packet Page 30 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214670 6/11/2015 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.33
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.06
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.13
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.48
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.05
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MATS1988020486
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 25.96
FLEET DIVISION MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 8.76
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 2.47
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.83
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS1988027476
5Page:
Packet Page 31 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214670 6/11/2015 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
001.000.66.518.30.24.00 17.30
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.64
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS1988031740
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.33
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.05
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.13
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.48
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MATS1988031741
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 5.28
FLEET DIVISION MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 9.07
6Page:
Packet Page 32 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214670 6/11/2015 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.50
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.86
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS1988038849
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
001.000.66.518.30.24.00 17.30
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.64
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS1988043126
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.33
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.05
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.13
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.48
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.48
7Page:
Packet Page 33 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214670 6/11/2015 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MATS1988043127
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 15.62
FLEET DIVISION MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 9.69
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.24.00 1.48
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.92
WWTP - UNIFORMS, MATS & TOWELS1988050365
uniforms
423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.80
mats & towels
423.000.76.535.80.41.00 72.34
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.36
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.41.00 6.87
PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE1988050366
PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE
001.000.64.576.80.24.00 40.95
Total :473.50
214671 6/11/2015 064807 ATS AUTOMATION INC T073301 YOST POOL SERVICE AGREEMENTS
YOST POOL SERVICE AGREEMENTS
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 460.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 43.70
Total :503.70
214672 6/11/2015 073598 AUBURN MECHANICAL, INC 19841 YOST POOL SHOWER BOILER SERVICE
YOST POOL SHOWER BOILER SERVICE
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 267.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 25.37
8Page:
Packet Page 34 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :292.372146726/11/2015 073598 073598 AUBURN MECHANICAL, INC
214673 6/11/2015 001777 AURORA PLUMBING & ELECTRIC INV163663 PM MALE ADAPTER, TY SEAL, BULKHEAD FITTI
PM MALE ADAPTER, TY SEAL, BULKHEAD
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 110.44
Total :110.44
214674 6/11/2015 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 81670 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS
UB Outsourcing area #300 Printing
422.000.72.531.90.49.00 150.01
UB Outsourcing area #300 Printing
421.000.74.534.80.49.00 150.01
UB Outsourcing area #300 Printing
423.000.75.535.80.49.00 154.55
UB Outsourcing area #300 Postage
421.000.74.534.80.42.00 545.82
UB Outsourcing area #300 Postage
423.000.75.535.80.42.00 545.81
9.6% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.49.00 14.40
9.6% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.49.00 14.40
9.6% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.49.00 14.84
Total :1,589.84
214675 6/11/2015 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 38264 STANDARD ROUGH BOX-PAPAGEORGIOU
STANDARD ROUGH BOX-PAPAGEORGIOU
130.000.64.536.20.34.00 430.00
Total :430.00
214676 6/11/2015 012005 BALL AND GILLESPIE POLYGRAPH 2015-136 INV 2015-136 EDMONDS PD
PRE-EMPLOY EXAM - PHILLIPS
001.000.41.521.10.41.00 225.00
Freight
001.000.41.521.10.41.00 7.00
9Page:
Packet Page 35 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :232.002146766/11/2015 012005 012005 BALL AND GILLESPIE POLYGRAPH
214677 6/11/2015 002100 BARNARD, EARL 39 LEOFF 1 Medical Reimbursement
LEOFF 1 Medical Reimbursement
617.000.51.517.20.23.00 315.99
Total :315.99
214678 6/11/2015 074616 BASSETT HOME HEATING BLD20150508 ON-LINE PERMIT DUPLICATE
ON-LINE PERMIT DUPLICATE
001.000.257.620 85.00
Total :85.00
214679 6/11/2015 002258 BENS EVER READY 10671 Fleet- 8 New Fire Extinquishers for
Fleet- 8 New Fire Extinquishers for
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 384.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 36.48
Total :420.48
214680 6/11/2015 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 0836061-IN Fleet Auto Propane 630.1 Gal
Fleet Auto Propane 630.1 Gal
511.000.77.548.68.34.12 885.57
Fleet Auto Propane 700 Gal4111
Fleet Auto Propane 700 Gal
511.000.77.548.68.34.12 1,135.70
Fleet Auto Propane 471.2 Gal4150
Fleet Auto Propane 471.2 Gal
511.000.77.548.68.34.12 801.40
Fleet Auto Propane 471.2 Gal4191
Fleet Auto Propane 471.2 Gal
511.000.77.548.68.34.12 772.79
Total :3,595.46
214681 6/11/2015 073760 BLUELINE GROUP LLC 10183 E4GA/E4JA/E4JB.SERVICES THRU MAY 2015
E4GA.Services thru May 2015
423.000.75.594.35.41.30 946.00
E4JA.Services thru May 2015
10Page:
Packet Page 36 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214681 6/11/2015 (Continued)073760 BLUELINE GROUP LLC
421.000.74.594.34.41.10 157.50
E4JB.Services thru May 2015
421.000.74.594.34.41.10 1,132.50
Total :2,236.00
214682 6/11/2015 065739 BOBBY WOLFORD TRUCKING &3421 Storm Asphalt Dump Fees
Storm Asphalt Dump Fees
422.000.72.531.10.49.00 1,280.00
Total :1,280.00
214683 6/11/2015 002800 BRAKE & CLUTCH SUPPLY 546504 Unit 106 - Brake Parts
Unit 106 - Brake Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 560.88
9.6% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 53.84
Total :614.72
214684 6/11/2015 067391 BRAT WEAR 15190 INV#15190 - EDMONDS PD - HWANG
BALLISTIC VEST
001.000.41.521.22.24.00 896.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00 85.12
INV#15311 - EDMONDS PD - BOWER15311
JUMPSUIT W/ITEMS
001.000.41.521.22.24.00 515.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.24.00 48.93
Total :1,545.05
214685 6/11/2015 002840 BRIM TRACTOR CO INC IL58624 Fleet Supplies
Fleet Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 56.48
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.37
Fleet SuppliesIM66506
11Page:
Packet Page 37 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214685 6/11/2015 (Continued)002840 BRIM TRACTOR CO INC
Fleet Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 177.70
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 16.89
Fleet - ReturnsIM66895
Fleet - Returns
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -461.24
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -43.82
Unit 18 - SuppliesIM78625
Unit 18 - Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 129.35
Freight
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 17.60
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 13.96
Unit 18 - KeysIM78861
Unit 18 - Keys
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 29.34
Freight
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.65
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 3.70
Unit 18 - SuppliesIM80393
Unit 18 - Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 48.04
Freight
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 17.91
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.27
Total :27.20
214686 6/11/2015 003001 BUILDERS SAND & GRAVEL 311644 PW Yard - Gravel
PW Yard - Gravel
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 460.84
12Page:
Packet Page 38 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214686 6/11/2015 (Continued)003001 BUILDERS SAND & GRAVEL
PW Yard - Gravel
422.000.72.531.40.31.00 460.84
PW Yard - Gravel
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 460.84
PW Yard - Gravel
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 460.82
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 43.78
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.40.31.00 43.78
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 43.78
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 43.78
PW Yard - Crushed Rock311653
PW Yard - Crushed Rock
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 140.16
PW Yard - Crushed Rock
422.000.72.531.40.31.00 140.16
PW Yard - Crushed Rock
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 140.16
PW Yard - Crushed Rock
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 140.15
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 13.32
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.40.31.00 13.32
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 13.32
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 13.30
Total :2,632.35
214687 6/11/2015 074442 CAPITAL ONE 8941 PW - Soaps for Building
13Page:
Packet Page 39 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214687 6/11/2015 (Continued)074442 CAPITAL ONE
PW - Soaps for Building
111.000.68.542.90.31.00 10.69
PW - Soaps for Building
422.000.72.531.90.31.00 10.69
PW - Soaps for Building
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 10.69
PW - Soaps for Building
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 10.69
PW - Soaps for Building
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.67
PW - Supplies For Defensive Driving
111.000.68.542.90.31.00 16.14
PW - Supplies For Defensive Driving
422.000.72.531.90.31.00 16.14
PW - Supplies For Defensive Driving
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 16.14
PW - Supplies For Defensive Driving
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 16.14
PW - Supplies For Defensive Driving
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 16.13
Total :134.12
214688 6/11/2015 071816 CARLSON, JESSICA 20054 ADVENTURES IN 20054 ADVENTURES IN DRAWING INSTRUCTOR F
20054 ADVENTURES IN DRAWING INSTRUCTOR
001.000.64.571.22.41.00 310.50
Total :310.50
214689 6/11/2015 070334 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS STORES 2523-248587 Fleet Returns
Fleet Returns
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -145.88
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -13.86
Unit 891 - Oil Filter2523-248901
Unit 891 - Oil Filter
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 3.13
14Page:
Packet Page 40 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214689 6/11/2015 (Continued)070334 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS STORES
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.30
Unit 138 - Oil Filter2523-249148
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.64
Unit 138 - Oil Filter
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.69
Fleet Returns2523-249273
Fleet Returns
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -139.91
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -13.29
Unit 134 - Air Filter2523-250441
Unit 134 - Air Filter
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 30.42
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 2.89
Unit 51 - Elect Fuel Pump2523-251169
Unit 51 - Elect Fuel Pump
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 52.28
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 4.97
Fleet Break Inventory2523-252095
Fleet Break Inventory
511.000.77.548.68.34.40 673.02
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.40 63.94
Unit 98 - Filters2523-252634
Unit 98 - Filters
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 20.70
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.97
Total :548.01
214690 6/11/2015 003320 CASCADE MACHINERY & ELECTRIC 425267 YOST POOL PUMP REMOVE & REPLACE MOTORS
15Page:
Packet Page 41 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214690 6/11/2015 (Continued)003320 CASCADE MACHINERY & ELECTRIC
YOST POOL PUMP REMOVE & REPLACE MOTORS
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 1,000.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 95.00
Total :1,095.00
214691 6/11/2015 071443 CED - KENT 2340-636239 Library - Lighting supplies
Library - Lighting supplies
001.000.66.518.30.31.00 55.92
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00 5.31
Total :61.23
214692 6/11/2015 068484 CEMEX LLC 9430851811 Roadway - Asphalt
Roadway - Asphalt
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 162.10
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 15.40
Storm Dump Fees9430879307
Storm Dump Fees
422.000.72.531.10.49.00 795.89
Roadway - Asphalt9430925904
Roadway - Asphalt
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 270.60
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 25.71
Roadway - Asphalt9430934468
Roadway - Asphalt
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 322.80
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 30.67
Total :1,623.17
214693 6/11/2015 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY 220831 Fleet - Supplies
Fleet - Supplies
16Page:
Packet Page 42 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214693 6/11/2015 (Continued)003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 218.67
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 20.78
HELIUM TANK RENTAL - GYMNASTICSRN05151022
HELIUM TANK RENTAL - GYMNASTICS
001.000.64.571.28.45.00 12.75
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.571.28.45.00 1.21
WWTP - SUPPLIES, GASRN05151023
nitrogen, oxygen & carbon monoxide
423.000.76.535.80.31.11 74.25
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.31.11 7.05
Total :334.71
214694 6/11/2015 064291 CENTURY LINK 206-Z02-0478 WWTP TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
WWTP TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
423.000.76.535.80.42.00 147.58
Total :147.58
214695 6/11/2015 069457 CITY OF EDMONDS E4JB.ENG20150243 E4JB.ENG20150243 ROW PERMIT
E4JB.ENG20150243 ROW Permit
421.000.74.594.34.41.10 385.00
Total :385.00
214696 6/11/2015 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD M&O MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS
MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS
423.000.75.535.80.47.20 27,602.00
Total :27,602.00
214697 6/11/2015 004095 COASTWIDE LABS GW2780019 PM LINERS, NEUTRAL DIS CL, DISP TT TWIN
PM LINERS, NEUTRAL DIS CL, DISP TT TWIN
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 933.94
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 88.72
17Page:
Packet Page 43 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214697 6/11/2015 (Continued)004095 COASTWIDE LABS
CLEANER/DISINFECTANT FOR CLASSROOMSNW2776877
CLEANER/DISINFECTANT FOR CLASSROOMS
001.000.64.571.22.31.00 41.76
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.571.22.31.00 3.97
Total :1,068.39
214698 6/11/2015 064369 CODE PUBLISHING CO 49999 EDMONDS CITY CODE ELECTRONIC UPDATE 5/29
EDMONDS CITY CODE ELECTRONIC UPDATE
001.000.25.514.30.41.00 214.54
Total :214.54
214699 6/11/2015 065683 CORRY'S FINE DRY CLEANING MAY 2015 DRY CLEANING APR/MAY 2015 - EDMONDS PD
CLEANING/LAUNDRY APR/MAY 2015
001.000.41.521.22.24.00 488.81
Total :488.81
214700 6/11/2015 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3301160 E5AA.RFQ/P ADVERTISEMENT
E5AA.RFQ/P Advertisement
112.200.68.595.33.41.00 312.00
Total :312.00
214701 6/11/2015 073823 DAVID EVANS & ASSOC INC 357498 E1CA.SERVICES THRU 05/16/15
E1CA.Services thru 05/16/15
112.200.68.595.33.41.00 1,068.07
E1CA.Services thru 05/16/15
112.200.68.595.20.61.00 1,575.41
Total :2,643.48
214702 6/11/2015 072174 DEMIERO JAZZ FESTIVAL TOURISM PROMO TOURISM PROMO JAZZ FEST
TOURISM PROMO JAZZ FEST
123.000.64.573.20.41.00 2,000.00
Total :2,000.00
214703 6/11/2015 047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES 2015050057 CUSTOMER ID# D200-0
Scan Services for May 2015
18Page:
Packet Page 44 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214703 6/11/2015 (Continued)047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES
001.000.31.518.88.42.00 940.00
Total :940.00
214704 6/11/2015 075285 DEVILBISS, KERI 6/5 BEACH WALKS 6/5 BEACH WALKS
6/5 BEACH WALKS
001.000.64.571.23.41.00 45.00
Total :45.00
214705 6/11/2015 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 15-3560 INV#15-3560 - EDMONDS PD
TRANSCRIPTION CASE #15-0871
001.000.41.521.21.41.00 59.40
TRANSCRIPTION CASE #15-1256
001.000.41.521.21.41.00 115.50
TRANSCRIPTON CASE #IA15-001
001.000.41.521.10.41.00 181.50
TRANSCRIPTION CASE #15-1559
001.000.41.521.21.41.00 122.10
Total :478.50
214706 6/11/2015 074389 DRAKE, BARB 6/1 REIMB MILEAGE 6/1 REIMB MILEAGE CLASSROOM TRIPS - MAY
6/1 REIMB MILEAGE CLASSROOM TRIPS - MAY
001.000.64.571.23.43.00 89.70
Total :89.70
214707 6/11/2015 007253 DUNN LUMBER 3179401 PUBLIC SAFETY SANIKAN ENCLOSURE FOR SUMM
PUBLIC SAFETY SANIKAN ENCLOSURE FOR
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 504.26
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 47.90
PM CEDAR FITTED POT CAPS3202534
PM CEDAR FITTED POT CAPS
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 21.58
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.05
PM SILT FENCE W/STAKES3236407
19Page:
Packet Page 45 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214707 6/11/2015 (Continued)007253 DUNN LUMBER
PM SILT FENCE W/STAKES
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 74.46
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 7.07
Total :657.32
214708 6/11/2015 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 44347 Fleet Shop Supplies
Fleet Shop Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 15.72
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 1.49
Unit M-1644857
Unit M-16
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 15.84
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.50
Unit 66 - Supplies45447
Unit 66 - Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 19.88
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.89
PM SS OPEN BASE CLEAT48987
PM SS OPEN BASE CLEAT
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 29.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.85
Total :89.16
214709 6/11/2015 067703 EDMONDS COMMUNITY COLLEGE 050-1415 SEAVIEW GYMNASIUM MAR-MAY
SEAVIEW GYMNASIUM MAR-MAY
001.000.64.571.25.45.00 3,110.00
Total :3,110.00
214710 6/11/2015 074302 EDMONDS HARDWARE & PAINT LLC 000823 PM IRRIG CONTR & BROOM CLIP FOR WATER TR
PM IRRIG CONTR & BROOM CLIP FOR WATER
20Page:
Packet Page 46 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214710 6/11/2015 (Continued)074302 EDMONDS HARDWARE & PAINT LLC
001.000.64.576.81.31.00 33.97
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.81.31.00 3.23
PM JUTE TWIN000827
PM JUTE TWIN
001.000.64.576.81.31.00 19.53
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.81.31.00 1.86
PM BRAIDED ROPE000852
PM BRAIDED ROPE
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 35.98
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3.42
Total :97.99
214711 6/11/2015 038500 EDMONDS SENIOR CENTER 2015-05-01 05/15 RECREATION SERVICES CONTRACT FEE
05/15 Recreation Services Contract Fee
001.000.39.569.10.41.00 5,000.00
06/15 RECREATION SERVICES CONTRACT FEE2015-06-01
06/15 Recreation Services Contract Fee
001.000.39.569.10.41.00 5,000.00
Total :10,000.00
214712 6/11/2015 069878 EDMONDS-WESTGATE VET HOSPITAL 211696 INV#211696 CLIENT#5118 - EDMONDS PD
SPAY DOG - IMPOUND #9187
001.000.41.521.70.49.01 97.50
NEUTER CAT - IMPOUND #9181
001.000.41.521.70.49.01 44.75
Total :142.25
214713 6/11/2015 068803 EJ USA INC 3835367 Storm - Storm Grates
Storm - Storm Grates
422.000.72.531.40.31.00 271.74
8.8% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.40.31.00 23.91
21Page:
Packet Page 47 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :295.652147136/11/2015 068803 068803 EJ USA INC
214714 6/11/2015 031060 ELECSYS INTERNATIONAL CORP 136574 RADIX MONTHLY MAINT AGREEMENT
Radix Monthly Maint Agreement -
421.000.74.534.80.48.00 152.00
Total :152.00
214715 6/11/2015 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 114501 ZSYST MK0315 PRINTER MAINTENANCE
Maintenance for printers 04/21/15 -
001.000.31.518.88.48.00 687.96
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.31.518.88.48.00 65.36
COPY CHARGES C1030114585
Copier charges for C1030
001.000.61.557.20.45.00 7.31
Copier charges for C1030
001.000.22.518.10.45.00 7.31
Copier charges for C1030
001.000.21.513.10.45.00 7.31
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.61.557.20.45.00 0.69
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.22.518.10.45.00 0.69
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.21.513.10.45.00 0.70
Total :777.33
214716 6/11/2015 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD EDH634490 E5AA.RFQ/P ADVERTISEMENT
E5AA.RFQ/P Advertisement
112.200.68.595.33.41.00 141.04
AMD20140008 HEARING DATE CORRECTIONEDH635662
AMD20140008 HEARING DATE CORRECTION
001.000.62.558.60.41.40 49.88
CITY NOTICESEDH635678
CITY NOTICE TO INCLUDE NEW DATA &
001.000.25.514.30.41.40 39.56
22Page:
Packet Page 48 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214716 6/11/2015 (Continued)009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD
CITY ORDINANCESEDH636301
Consider Passage of Ordinance RE:
001.000.25.514.30.41.40 37.84
Total :268.32
214717 6/11/2015 063953 EVERGREEN STATE HEAT & A/C 28028 City Hall IT Server Room - AC Install
City Hall IT Server Room - AC Install
001.000.31.518.87.41.00 480.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.31.518.87.41.00 45.60
Total :525.60
214718 6/11/2015 075282 FARLEY, EILEEN 1 Consultation services for RFQ for
Consultation services for RFQ for
001.000.22.518.10.41.00 5,400.00
Total :5,400.00
214719 6/11/2015 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU35995 Fleet Shop Supplies
Fleet Shop Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 238.93
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 22.70
PM: TOP LK GR, HCS3/8-16X2, 3/8"-16 FHNWAMOU36012
PM: TOP LK GR, HCS3/8-16X2, 3/8"-16 FHN
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 12.61
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1.20
Total :275.44
214720 6/11/2015 071026 FASTSIGNS OF LYNNWOOD 443 16599 FLOWER BASKET TAGS
FLOWER BASKET TAGS
127.000.64.575.50.31.00 284.28
9.5% Sales Tax
127.000.64.575.50.31.00 27.01
Total :311.29
23Page:
Packet Page 49 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214721 6/11/2015 011900 FRONTIER 206-188-0247 TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY ACCOUNT
TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY ACCOUNT
421.000.74.534.80.42.00 258.30
TELEMETRY MASTER SUMMARY ACCOUNT
423.000.75.535.80.42.00 258.30
LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCESS LINES253-003-6887
LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCESS LINES
423.000.75.535.80.42.00 41.81
FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FAX LINES425-771-0158
FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FAX LINES
001.000.66.518.30.42.00 128.82
LIFT STATION #8 VG SPECIAL ACCESS LINES425-774-1031
LIFT STATION #8 TWO VOICE GRADE SPECIAL
423.000.75.535.80.42.00 47.12
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PHONE LINE425-776-1281
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PHONE LINE
001.000.66.518.30.42.00 52.05
LIFT STATION #7 VG SPECIAL ACCESS LINE425-776-2742
LIFT STATION #7 V/G SPECIAL ACCESS LINE
423.000.75.535.80.42.00 26.21
425-776-5316 PARKS MAINT FAX LINE425-776-5316
425-776-5316 PARKS MAINT FAX LINE
001.000.64.576.80.42.00 96.67
CITY HALL ALARM LINES 121 5TH AVE N425-776-6829
CITY HALL FIRE AND INTRUSION ALARM
001.000.66.518.30.42.00 128.82
LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCESS LINE509-022-0049
LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCESS LINE
423.000.75.535.80.42.00 26.21
Total :1,064.31
214722 6/11/2015 063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER 124168 Unit 37 - Tire Inventory (2)
Unit 37 - Tire Inventory (2)
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 521.94
State Tire Fees
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 2.00
24Page:
Packet Page 50 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214722 6/11/2015 (Continued)063137 GOODYEAR AUTO SERVICE CENTER
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 49.58
Unit 40 - Tire Inventory (4)124344
Unit 40 - Tire Inventory (4)
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 535.84
State Tire Fees
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 4.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 50.90
Fleet Returns 2 Tires124396
Fleet Returns 2 Tires
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 -267.92
State Tire Feess
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 -2.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.30 -25.45
Total :868.89
214723 6/11/2015 072515 GOOGLE INC 3228114043 BILLING ID# 5030-2931-5908
Google Apps Usage - May-2015
001.000.31.518.88.48.00 31.00
Total :31.00
214724 6/11/2015 074852 GREGORYK, ALEXANDRA JANE 5/19 PRESCHOOL SUB 5/19/15 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUB
5/19/15 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUB
001.000.64.571.29.41.00 40.00
Total :40.00
214725 6/11/2015 070437 HARDIE, MARY ANN 06/2015 Milage Reimbursement for attending 2015
Milage Reimbursement for attending 2015
001.000.22.518.10.43.00 182.85
Total :182.85
214726 6/11/2015 060985 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS 007G3531 Water - Tube Assemblys for Peristaltic
Water - Tube Assemblys for Peristaltic
25Page:
Packet Page 51 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214726 6/11/2015 (Continued)060985 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 336.36
Freight
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 13.63
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 33.25
Total :383.24
214727 6/11/2015 012900 HARRIS FORD INC 154243 Unit 450 - Regulator
Unit 450 - Regulator
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 85.64
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 8.14
Unit 35 - RepairsFOCS389341
Unit 35 - Repairs
511.000.77.548.68.48.00 119.65
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.48.00 11.37
Total :224.80
214728 6/11/2015 013007 HASNER, EZRA J 40 LEOFF 1 Medical Reimbursement
LEOFF 1 Medical Reimbursement
009.000.39.517.20.23.00 1,714.45
Total :1,714.45
214729 6/11/2015 074746 HIGUCHI, ROD 20114 UKULELE 20114 UKULELE INSTRUCTOR FEE
20114 UKULELE INSTRUCTOR FEE
001.000.64.571.22.41.00 334.40
Total :334.40
214730 6/11/2015 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 8041808 WWTP - REPAIR/MAINTENANCE, MECHANICAL
1-1/2" X 10 pipe
423.000.76.535.80.48.21 165.72
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.48.21 15.74
Total :181.46
26Page:
Packet Page 52 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214731 6/11/2015 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 25884 WWTP - CLARIFIER C465
Groundwater Monitoring
423.100.76.594.39.41.10 17,250.89
Total :17,250.89
214732 6/11/2015 063558 IDDINGS INC 1116 PM INFIELD MIX
PM INFIELD MIX
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2,100.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 199.50
Total :2,299.50
214733 6/11/2015 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2633100 OFFICE SUPPLIES- ENGINEERING
OFFICE SUPPLIES- ENGINEERING
001.000.62.524.10.31.00 71.16
WIRELESS MOBILE MOUSE2635047
Kesington PocketMouse Wireless Mobile
001.000.31.514.23.31.00 21.34
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.31.514.23.31.00 2.03
OFFICE SUPPLIES- DEV SERV2635707
office supplies- dev serv
001.000.62.524.10.31.00 247.65
SUPPLIES2635728
SUPPLIES
001.000.23.512.50.31.00 77.26
OFFICE SUPPLIES- PLANNING2635806
Office Supplies- Planning
001.000.62.558.60.31.00 17.64
WWTP - SUPPLIES, OFFICE2637671
pens and pads
423.000.76.535.80.31.41 66.49
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.31.41 6.32
Total :509.89
27Page:
Packet Page 53 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214734 6/11/2015 063569 INDUSTRIAL COATING & SEALANTS 5699 GRAND STANDS BASECOAT
GRAND STANDS BASECOAT
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 114.20
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.85
Total :125.05
214735 6/11/2015 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 758185 PM GLOVES, EAR PLUGS, DUST MASK, RESPIRA
PM GLOVES, EAR PLUGS, DUST MASK,
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 384.65
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 36.54
Total :421.19
214736 6/11/2015 072650 KCDA PURCHASING COOPERATIVE 3914774 INV#3914774 ACCT#100828 - EDMONDS PD
10 CASES MULTI USE COPY PAPER
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 237.30
HANDLING FEE
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 55.20
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 22.54
INV#3914778 ACCT#100828 - EDMONDS PD3914778
PURELL HAND SANITIZER - 4 OZ
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 36.24
PURELL HAND SANITIZER - 8 OZ
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 36.36
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 6.89
HANDLING FEE
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 17.00
Total :411.53
214737 6/11/2015 074240 KNIGHT, KAREN 20094 FUN FACTORY 20094 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTOR FEE
20094 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTOR FEE
001.000.64.571.22.41.00 426.18
20095 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTOR FEE20095 FUN FACTORY
28Page:
Packet Page 54 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214737 6/11/2015 (Continued)074240 KNIGHT, KAREN
20095 FUN FACTORY INSTRUCTOR FEE
001.000.64.571.22.41.00 515.03
Total :941.21
214738 6/11/2015 017135 LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC 0035235 ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECH DUE DILLIGENCE
ENVIRONMENTAL AND GEOTECH DUE
126.000.64.594.75.61.00 4,000.00
Total :4,000.00
214739 6/11/2015 072059 LEE, NICOLE 1569 INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.23.523.30.41.01 122.02
Total :122.02
214740 6/11/2015 075016 LEMAY MOBILE SHREDDING 4439342 INV#4439342 ACCT#2185-952778-819 EDMONDS
SHRED 3 TOTES @ $4.38 5/28/15
001.000.41.521.10.41.00 13.14
Total :13.14
214741 6/11/2015 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 911412 Unit 62 - Parts
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 2.59
Unit 62 - Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 27.27
Unit 62 - Motor912411
Unit 62 - Motor
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 191.93
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 18.23
Total :240.02
214742 6/11/2015 074263 LYNNWOOD WINSUPPLY CO 007682-01 CITY PARK SPRAY PARK ARTIF ROCK MED
CITY PARK SPRAY PARK ARTIF ROCK MED
132.000.64.594.76.65.00 425.27
9.5% Sales Tax
29Page:
Packet Page 55 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214742 6/11/2015 (Continued)074263 LYNNWOOD WINSUPPLY CO
132.000.64.594.76.65.00 40.40
CITY-WIDE IRRIGATION PARTS008017-00
CITY-WIDE IRRIGATION PARTS
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 276.94
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 26.31
Total :768.92
214743 6/11/2015 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 31149200 WWTP - REPAIR/MAINTENANCE, MECHANICAL
steel ball valve and fittings
423.000.76.535.80.48.21 632.70
Freight
423.000.76.535.80.48.21 7.01
Total :639.71
214744 6/11/2015 021890 MICONTROLS INC 868786 FAC - Actuator, Valve
FAC - Actuator, Valve
001.000.66.518.30.31.00 239.19
Freight
001.000.66.518.30.31.00 11.49
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00 23.81
Total :274.49
214745 6/11/2015 020450 MICRO DATA BUSINESS FORMS 41775 INV#41775 - EDMONDS PD
2,200 INFRACTION FORMS
001.000.41.521.11.31.00 935.00
2,200 CRIMINAL CITATION FORMS
001.000.41.521.11.31.00 935.00
Freight
001.000.41.521.11.31.00 59.38
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.11.31.00 183.29
Total :2,112.67
30Page:
Packet Page 56 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214746 6/11/2015 020495 MIDWAY PLYWOOD INC 64962 GREEN RESOURCE CENTER - SUPPLIES
Green Resource Center - Supplies~
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 101.75
Green Resource Center - Supplies~
422.000.72.531.90.31.00 101.74
Green Resource Center - Supplies~
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 101.74
GREEN RESOURCE CENTER - SUPPLIES64974
Green Resource Center - Supplies~
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 18.95
Green Resource Center - Supplies~
422.000.72.531.90.31.00 18.94
Green Resource Center - Supplies~
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 18.94
GREEN RESOURCE CENTER - SUPPLIES64988
Green Resource Center - Supplies
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 28.41
Green Resource Center - Supplies
422.000.72.531.90.31.00 28.42
Green Resource Center - Supplies
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 28.42
GREEN RESOURCE CENTER - SUPPLIES64999
Green Resource Center - Supplies\~
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 25.32
Green Resource Center - Supplies\~
422.000.72.531.90.31.00 25.33
Green Resource Center - Supplies\~
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 25.33
GREEN RESOURCE CENTER - SUPPLIES65003
Green Resource Center - Supplies~
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 15.99
Green Resource Center - Supplies~
422.000.72.531.90.31.00 15.99
Green Resource Center - Supplies~
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 15.98
31Page:
Packet Page 57 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :571.252147466/11/2015 020495 020495 MIDWAY PLYWOOD INC
214747 6/11/2015 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 212514 PM RENTAL LIFT TO INSTALL FLOWER BASKETS
PM RENTAL LIFT TO INSTALL FLOWER BASKETS
001.000.64.576.80.45.00 516.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.45.00 49.02
PM GLOVES212641
PM GLOVES
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 59.88
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5.69
Total :630.59
214748 6/11/2015 072746 MURRAY SMITH & ASSOCIATES 14-1605-6 Water - Prof Engineering Services
Water - Prof Engineering Services
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5,357.00
Total :5,357.00
214749 6/11/2015 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0552250-IN Unit 001 - Filter
Unit 001 - Filter
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.58
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.53
Fleet Filter Inventory0553102-IN
Fleet Filter Inventory
511.000.77.548.68.34.40 29.71
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.40 2.82
Total :38.64
214750 6/11/2015 075271 NEWWAY ENERGY INC BLD20150364 DUPLICATE. PLUMBING ON MAIN PERMIT
DUPLICATE. PLUMBING ON MAIN PERMIT
001.000.257.620 235.00
Total :235.00
214751 6/11/2015 025217 NORTH SOUND HOSE & FITTINGS 64357 Unit 7 - Supplies
32Page:
Packet Page 58 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214751 6/11/2015 (Continued)025217 NORTH SOUND HOSE & FITTINGS
Unit 7 - Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 64.04
Shop Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 77.42
9.2% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.89
9.2% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 7.12
Total :154.47
214752 6/11/2015 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 2-1220501 EDMONDS ELEMENTARY HONEY BUCKET
EDMONDS ELEMENTARY HONEY BUCKET
001.000.64.576.80.45.00 111.65
CIVIC FIELD HONEY BUCKET2-1221079
CIVIC FIELD HONEY BUCKET
001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.85
SIERRA PARK HONEY BUCKET2-1226146
SIERRA PARK HONEY BUCKET
001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.85
MADRONA ELEMENTARY HONEY BUCKET2-1226308
MADRONA ELEMENTARY HONEY BUCKET
001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.85
MARINA BEACH HONEY BUCKET2-1227550
MARINA BEACH HONEY BUCKET
001.000.64.576.80.45.00 600.05
Total :1,053.25
214753 6/11/2015 075140 NORTHWEST PERMIT BLD20150354 ON-LINE REROOF PERMIT THAT THE OWNER CAN
ON-LINE REROOF PERMIT THAT THE OWNER
001.000.257.620 160.00
Total :160.00
214754 6/11/2015 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 566 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
001.000.62.558.60.41.00 527.00
33Page:
Packet Page 59 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214754 6/11/2015 (Continued)025690 NOYES, KARIN
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING EXAMINER000 00 567
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING EXAMINER
001.000.62.558.60.41.00 170.00
Total :697.00
214755 6/11/2015 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 626371 Fleet / Street - Dymo Label Makers (2),
Fleet / Street - Dymo Label Makers (2),
111.000.68.542.90.31.00 61.09
Fleet / Street - Dymo Label Makers (2),
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 61.09
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.90.31.00 5.81
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.80
PW - Admin - Office Supplies636957
PW - Admin - Office Supplies
001.000.65.518.20.31.00 105.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.31.00 10.07
INV#650911 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD650911
STAPLE REMOVERS
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 25.98
DESK STAPLER
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 13.28
RETRACTABLE BLACK PENS
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 47.28
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 8.23
P&R ADMIN: TAPE, DISCOVERY: FOLDERS723070
ADMIN: TAPE
001.000.64.571.21.31.00 14.97
DISCOVERY: FOLDERS
001.000.64.571.23.31.00 23.97
CAMP GOODTIME: CONSTRUCTION PAPER & COLD730605
CAMP GOODTIME: CONSTRUCTION PAPER &
34Page:
Packet Page 60 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
35
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214755 6/11/2015 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC
001.000.64.571.26.31.00 39.02
Total :422.58
214756 6/11/2015 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER May, 2015 COURT, BLDG CODE & JIS TRANSMITTAL
Emergency Medical Services & Trauma
001.000.237.120 1,607.32
PSEA 1, 2 & 3 Account
001.000.237.130 32,179.32
Building Code Fee Account
001.000.237.150 200.00
State Patrol Death Investigation
001.000.237.330 62.34
Judicial Information Systems Account
001.000.237.180 5,628.34
School Zone Safety Account
001.000.237.200 171.34
Washington Auto Theft Prevention
001.000.237.250 3,209.12
Traumatic Brain Injury
001.000.237.260 624.29
Hwy Safety Acct
001.000.237.320 98.99
Crime Lab Blood Breath Analysis
001.000.237.170 43.67
WSP Hwy Acct
001.000.237.340 354.07
Total :44,178.80
214757 6/11/2015 075284 OLMSTED, PETER PONK15-003 INV#PONK15-003 - EDMONDS PD
SURVEY FOR CHAIR ISSUES-CLERKS
001.000.41.521.11.48.00 75.00
Total :75.00
214758 6/11/2015 075060 O'NEILL, CAITLIN 5/26 PRESCHOOL SUB 5/26 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUB
5/26 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUB
35Page:
Packet Page 61 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
36
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214758 6/11/2015 (Continued)075060 O'NEILL, CAITLIN
001.000.64.571.29.41.00 40.00
Total :40.00
214759 6/11/2015 063750 ORCA PACIFIC INC 15474 YOST POOL SUPPLIES ACID MAGIC
YOST POOL SUPPLIES ACID MAGIC
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 383.80
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 36.46
Total :420.26
214760 6/11/2015 060945 PACIFIC POWER BATTERIES 19001990 Unit 35 - Battery
Unit 35 - Battery
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 121.05
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 11.50
Unit 23 - Battery19001991
Unit 23 - Battery
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 121.05
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 11.50
Unit 16 - Battery19002018
Unit 16 - Battery
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 137.18
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 13.03
Unit E100PO - Parts19002019
Unit E100PO - Parts
511.100.77.594.48.64.00 9.80
9.5% Sales Tax
511.100.77.594.48.64.00 0.93
Total :426.04
214761 6/11/2015 074422 PARTSMASTER, DIV OF NCH CORP 20898133 Fleet Shop Tool - Auto Adj Pliers
Fleet Shop Tool - Auto Adj Pliers
511.000.77.548.68.35.00 87.10
36Page:
Packet Page 62 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
37
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214761 6/11/2015 (Continued)074422 PARTSMASTER, DIV OF NCH CORP
Freight
511.000.77.548.68.35.00 13.07
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.35.00 9.52
Total :109.69
214762 6/11/2015 065787 PATRIOT DIAMOND INC A04517 Roadway - Concrete and Asphalt Blades
Roadway - Concrete and Asphalt Blades
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 621.00
Freight
111.000.68.542.31.31.00 31.00
Total :652.00
214763 6/11/2015 073871 PERSONNEL EVALUATION INC 14037 INV 14037 EDMONDSPD - MAY 2015
3 PERSONNEL EVALUATION PROFILES - MAY
001.000.41.521.10.41.00 60.00
Total :60.00
214764 6/11/2015 074793 PETDATA INC 4334 INV#4334 - EDMONDS PD - MAY 2015
95 ONE YR PET LICENSES
001.000.41.521.70.41.00 370.50
1 REPLACEMENT TAG
001.000.41.521.70.41.00 3.90
59 LATE FEES COLLECTED
001.000.41.521.70.41.00 147.50
Total :521.90
214765 6/11/2015 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC G945271 PM SUPPLIES
PM SUPPLIES
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 235.81
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 22.40
Total :258.21
214766 6/11/2015 064088 PROTECTION ONE 2010551 ALARM MONITORING MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE
37Page:
Packet Page 63 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
38
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214766 6/11/2015 (Continued)064088 PROTECTION ONE
ALARM MONITORING CLUBHOUSE 6801 N
001.000.66.518.30.42.00 118.08
ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL31146525
ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N
001.000.66.518.30.42.00 46.89
Total :164.97
214767 6/11/2015 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 200009595790 FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST SW / MET
FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST SW /
001.000.66.518.30.47.00 233.42
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE R200019375639
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE
001.000.66.518.30.47.00 161.84
Total :395.26
214768 6/11/2015 070809 PUGET SOUND EXECUTIVE 15-1475 COURT SECURITY
COURT SECURITY
001.000.23.512.50.41.00 2,925.00
Total :2,925.00
214769 6/11/2015 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 00000155222 MARKER/INSCRIPTION-KINNISON
MARKER/INSCRIPTION-KINNISON
130.000.64.536.20.34.00 603.00
Total :603.00
214770 6/11/2015 070955 R&R STAR TOWING 100876 INV#100876 - EDMONDS PD
TOW 1996 TOYOTA #6HEJ6690
001.000.41.521.22.41.00 166.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.41.00 15.77
INV#101007 - EDMONDS PD101007
TOW 1994 MITSUBISHI #AIC8533
001.000.41.521.22.41.00 166.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.22.41.00 15.77
38Page:
Packet Page 64 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
39
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :363.542147706/11/2015 070955 070955 R&R STAR TOWING
214771 6/11/2015 066786 RELIABLE SECURITY SOUND & DATA 21771 MULTIPLE - SECURITY CAMERAS, MOUNTS,
MULTIPLE - SECURITY CAMERAS, MOUNTS,
423.000.75.535.80.49.00 610.15
MULTIPLE - SECURITY CAMERAS, MOUNTS,
001.000.65.518.20.49.00 610.15
MULTIPLE - SECURITY CAMERAS, MOUNTS,
001.000.66.518.30.35.00 610.15
MULTIPLE - SECURITY CAMERAS, MOUNTS,
511.000.77.548.68.49.00 610.15
MULTIPLE - SECURITY CAMERAS, MOUNTS,
421.000.74.534.80.49.00 610.15
MULTIPLE - SECURITY CAMERAS, MOUNTS,
422.000.72.531.90.49.00 610.15
MULTIPLE - SECURITY CAMERAS, MOUNTS,
111.000.68.542.31.49.00 610.16
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.49.00 57.96
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.49.00 57.96
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.35.00 57.96
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.49.00 57.96
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.49.00 57.96
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.49.00 57.96
9.5% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.31.49.00 57.99
Total :4,676.81
214772 6/11/2015 061540 REPUBLIC SERVICES #197 3-0197-0800478 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W
FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W
001.000.66.518.30.47.00 148.47
39Page:
Packet Page 65 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
40
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214772 6/11/2015 (Continued)061540 REPUBLIC SERVICES #197
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW3-0197-0800897
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
001.000.65.518.20.47.00 29.81
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
111.000.68.542.90.47.00 113.26
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
421.000.74.534.80.47.00 113.26
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
423.000.75.535.80.47.10 113.26
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
511.000.77.548.68.47.00 113.26
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
422.000.72.531.90.47.00 113.24
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW3-0197-0801132
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW
001.000.66.518.30.47.00 158.65
CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE RD3-0197-0829729
CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE RD
001.000.66.518.30.47.00 69.50
Total :972.71
214773 6/11/2015 073819 ROCK SOLID LEARNING LLC 20079 GEOLOGY ROCKS 20079 GEOLOGY ROCKS INSTRUCTION FEE
20079 GEOLOGY ROCKS INSTRUCTION FEE
001.000.64.571.22.41.00 69.30
Total :69.30
214774 6/11/2015 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC 5-004448 Unit 452 - 80 AMP Breaker
Unit 452 - 80 AMP Breaker
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 141.72
Unit 453 - Battery5-004589
Unit 453 - Battery
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 85.10
Total :226.82
214775 6/11/2015 071467 S MORRIS COMPANY MAY 2015 INVOICE 5/31/15 ACCT#70014 - EDMONDS PD
40Page:
Packet Page 66 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
41
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214775 6/11/2015 (Continued)071467 S MORRIS COMPANY
#167147 5 NPC - 5/14/15
001.000.41.521.70.41.00 58.55
#165936 3 NPC - 5/28/15
001.000.41.521.70.41.00 35.13
Total :93.68
214776 6/11/2015 067802 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQUIP CO 617916 INV#617916 CUST#1733 - EDMONDS PD (SWAT)
.556 MARKING CARTRIDGE (GRN)
628.000.41.521.23.31.00 578.00
.556 MARKING CARTRIDGE (RED)
628.000.41.521.23.31.00 578.00
9MM MARKING CARTRIDGE (BLUE)
628.000.41.521.23.31.00 241.47
9MM MARKING CARTRIDGE (WHITE)
628.000.41.521.23.31.00 241.47
9.5% Sales Tax
628.000.41.521.23.31.00 155.70
Total :1,794.64
214777 6/11/2015 065001 SCHIRMAN, RON 41 LEOFF 1 Medical Reimbursement
LEOFF 1 Medical Reimbursement
009.000.39.517.20.23.00 1,888.96
Total :1,888.96
214778 6/11/2015 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC S3-611534 Unit 455 - Brake Pads
Unit 455 - Brake Pads
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 147.20
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 13.98
Unit 135 - SensorsS3-613813
Unit 135 - Sensors
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 74.54
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 7.08
Unit 454 - FilterS3-614542
41Page:
Packet Page 67 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
42
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214778 6/11/2015 (Continued)066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC
Unit 454 - Filter
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 19.82
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.88
Unit 454 - Auto Trans OilS3-617152
Unit 454 - Auto Trans Oil
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 102.48
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.73
Fleet Brake InventoryS3-617501
Fleet Brake Inventory
511.000.77.548.68.34.40 101.70
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.40 9.68
Fleet Brake InventoryS3-621247
Fleet Brake Inventory
511.000.77.548.68.34.40 276.85
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.40 26.32
Unit 135 - SensorS3-622133
Unit 135 - Sensor
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 74.54
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 7.09
Unit 135 - SensorS3-622233
Unit 135 - Sensor
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 23.70
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 2.25
Unit 891 - Master Break CylinderS3-634591
Unit 891 - Master Break Cylinder
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 116.56
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 11.08
42Page:
Packet Page 68 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
43
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :1,026.482147786/11/2015 066964 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC
214779 6/11/2015 074911 SEATTLE HEALTHY POOLS 296 YOST POOL INSTALL SENSORS AND SUPPLIES
LABOR AND TRAVEL
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 332.50
SENSORS AND SUPPLIES
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1,039.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.41.00 31.59
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00 98.80
Total :1,502.88
214780 6/11/2015 061135 SEAVIEW CHEVROLET 268228 Unit 891 - Parts
Unit 891 - Parts
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 54.94
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.22
Unit 36 - Hose268494
Unit 36 - Hose
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 73.50
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.98
Total :140.64
214781 6/11/2015 074997 SEITEL SYSTEMS, LLC 26681 14108-SUPPORT MAY 2015 WORK COMPLETED
14108-Support May 2015 work completed
001.000.31.518.88.41.00 1,912.50
Total :1,912.50
214782 6/11/2015 073574 SERVICE PLUMBING & HEATING BLD20150531 DUPLICATE. PLUMBING ON MAIN PERMIT
DUPLICATE. PLUMBING ON MAIN PERMIT
001.000.257.620 205.00
Total :205.00
214783 6/11/2015 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2001-2487-3 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W / METER 1
43Page:
Packet Page 69 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
44
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214783 6/11/2015 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W / METER
111.000.68.542.64.47.00 63.31
HUMMINGBIRD PARK 1000 EDMONDS ST / METER2003-2646-0
HUMMINGBIRD PARK 1000 EDMONDS ST /
001.000.64.576.80.47.00 32.98
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 MAIN ST / ME2004-2241-8
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 MAIN ST /
001.000.66.518.30.47.00 2,094.37
TRAFFIC LIGHT 23800 FIRDALE AVE / METER2011-0356-1
TRAFFIC LIGHT 23800 FIRDALE AVE / METER
111.000.68.542.64.47.00 57.59
TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WAY / METER 102015-6343-4
TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WAY / METER
111.000.68.542.64.47.00 47.56
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 100TH AVE W /2017-0375-8
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 100TH AVE W
111.000.68.542.64.47.00 48.91
STREET LIGHTING (183 LIGHTS @ 150W) / NO2017-1178-5
STREET LIGHTING (183 LIGHTS @ 150W) /
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 899.55
9TH/CASPER LANDSCAPE BED / METER 10004452022-5063-5
9TH/CASPER LANDSCAPE BED / METER
001.000.64.576.80.47.00 32.98
STREET LIGHTING (303 LIGHTS @ 200W) / NO2025-2918-6
STREET LIGHTING (303 LIGHTS @ 200W) /
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 2,731.89
STREET LIGHTING (13 LIGHTS @ 400W) / NOT2025-2920-2
STREET LIGHTING (13 LIGHTS @ 400W) /
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 116.09
STREET LIGHTING (2029 LIGHTS @ 100W) / N2025-7615-3
STREET LIGHTING (2029 LIGHTS @ 100W) /
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 14,688.92
STREET LIGHTING (58 LIGHTS @ 250W) / NOT2025-7948-8
STREET LIGHTING (58 LIGHTS @ 250W) /
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 337.50
44Page:
Packet Page 70 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
45
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214783 6/11/2015 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
WWTP ENERGY MANAGEMENT SERVICE / NOT MET2025-7952-0
WWTP ENERGY MANAGEMENT SERVICE / NOT
423.000.76.535.80.47.61 9.07
CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST / METER 102042-9221-3
CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST / METER
111.000.68.542.64.47.00 112.23
STREET LIGHTING (1 LIGHT @ 150W) / NOT M2047-1489-3
STREET LIGHTING (1 LIGHT @ 150W) / NOT
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 4.08
STREET LIGHTING (18 LIGHTS @ 200W) / NOT2047-1492-7
STREET LIGHTING (18 LIGHTS @ 200W) /
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 90.63
STREET LIGHTING (5 LIGHTS @ 400W) / NOT2047-1493-5
STREET LIGHTING (5 LIGHTS @ 400W) / NOT
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 47.75
STREET LIGHTING (2 LIGHTS @ 100W) / NOT2047-1494-3
STREET LIGHTING (2 LIGHTS @ 100W) / NOT
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 12.13
STREET LIGHTING (26 LIGHTS @ 250W) / NOT2047-1495-0
STREET LIGHTING (26 LIGHTS @ 250W) /
111.000.68.542.63.47.00 164.81
Total :21,592.35
214784 6/11/2015 072776 SNOHOMISH CONSERVATION DIST 1873 Storm - Conservation Education for
Storm - Conservation Education for
422.000.72.531.90.51.00 225.00
Total :225.00
214785 6/11/2015 067609 SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITIES 06042015 SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITIES
May 2015 SCC dinner meeting
001.000.21.513.10.49.00 35.00
Total :35.00
214786 6/11/2015 070167 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER May 2015 Crime Victims Court Remittance
Crime Victims Court Remittance
45Page:
Packet Page 71 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
46
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214786 6/11/2015 (Continued)070167 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER
001.000.237.140 785.11
Total :785.11
214787 6/11/2015 069844 SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS PLLC I150512-4 Water - SCADA System Tech Support for
Water - SCADA System Tech Support for
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 675.00
Total :675.00
214788 6/11/2015 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
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 MAIN ST103585
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 MAIN ST
001.000.66.518.30.47.00 674.47
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST103586
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST
001.000.66.518.30.47.00 555.23
PARKS MAINT GARBAGE AND RECYCLING103587
PARKS MAINT GARBAGE AND RECYCLING
001.000.64.576.80.47.00 798.32
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N103588
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N
001.000.66.518.30.47.00 459.89
Total :3,038.59
214789 6/11/2015 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 2089435-01 Sewer - Work Jeans (5) D Leader
Sewer - Work Jeans (5) D Leader
423.000.75.535.80.24.00 236.25
9.2% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.24.00 21.74
Total :257.99
214790 6/11/2015 071585 STERICYCLE INC 3003043323 INV#3003043323 CUST#6076358 - EDMONDS PD
MINIMUM MONTHLY CHARGE
001.000.41.521.80.41.00 10.00
46Page:
Packet Page 72 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
47
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214790 6/11/2015 (Continued)071585 STERICYCLE INC
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.80.41.00 0.36
Total :10.36
214791 6/11/2015 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 11452350 Storm - Supplies - Tote Strapping,
Storm - Supplies - Tote Strapping,
422.000.72.531.40.31.00 1,244.37
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.40.31.00 118.22
Fleet Shop Supplies11453327
Fleet Shop Supplies
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 8.81
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.20 0.84
Total :1,372.24
214792 6/11/2015 075139 THE LOUIS BERGER GROUP INC 78286 E5FC.SERVICES THRU 05/22/15
E5FC.Services thru 05/22/15
422.000.72.594.31.41.20 16,123.42
E4FE.SERVICES THRU 5/22/1578450
E4FE.Services thru 5/22/15
422.000.72.594.31.41.20 7,148.50
Total :23,271.92
214793 6/11/2015 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR 3001854846 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SENIOR CENTER
ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SENIOR CENTER 220
001.000.66.518.30.48.00 250.66
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.48.00 23.81
ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEUM3001855691
ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEUM 118 5TH AVE
001.000.66.518.30.48.00 346.04
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.48.00 32.87
ELEVATOR PHONE MONITORING SENIOR CENTER3001855816
47Page:
Packet Page 73 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
48
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214793 6/11/2015 (Continued)038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR
ELEVATOR PHONE MONITORING SENIOR CENTER
001.000.66.518.30.48.00 15.44
ELEVATOR PHONE MONITORING CIVIC CENTER3001856152
ELEVATOR PHONE MONITORING CIVIC CENTER
001.000.66.518.30.48.00 51.31
Total :720.13
214794 6/11/2015 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 40135 Unit 29 - Keys
Unit 29 - Keys
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.86
Total :9.86
214795 6/11/2015 068407 TROUT UNLIMITED 19910 BEG FISHING 19910 BEGINNING FISHING FOR KIDS INSTRUC
19910 BEGINNING FISHING FOR KIDS
001.000.64.571.22.41.00 242.00
Total :242.00
214796 6/11/2015 073310 UNISAFE INC 694450 WWTP - SUPPLIES, OPERATIONS
TopGrip Ultimate heavy duty powder free
423.000.76.535.80.31.11 899.00
Total :899.00
214797 6/11/2015 068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WA 0608694-WA Storm - D Screen
Storm - D Screen
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 64.00
Total :64.00
214798 6/11/2015 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 5050123 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION CENTER
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION CENTER
421.000.74.534.80.41.00 77.05
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION CENTER
422.000.72.531.90.41.00 77.05
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION CENTER
48Page:
Packet Page 74 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
49
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214798 6/11/2015 (Continued)044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR
423.000.75.535.80.41.00 79.39
Total :233.49
214799 6/11/2015 068259 WA ST CRIMINAL JUSTICE 20115288 INV 20115288 EDMONDS PD - LIM SNIPER BAS
LIM - SNIPER BASIC - 5/17-5/22/15
001.000.41.521.40.49.00 670.00
Total :670.00
214800 6/11/2015 075155 WALKER MACY LLC P3089.01-6 MARINA BEACH MASTER PLAN SD AND IMPLEMEN
MARINA BEACH MASTER PLAN SD AND
125.000.64.594.75.41.00 27,396.03
Total :27,396.03
214801 6/11/2015 075154 WALTER E NELSON CO 488599 WWTP - SUPPLIES, FACILITIES
paper supplies
423.000.76.535.80.31.23 60.87
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.31.23 5.78
Total :66.65
214802 6/11/2015 065035 WASHINGTON STATE PATROL I15008806 INV#I15008806 EDM301 - EDMONDS PD
BACKGROUND CHECKS - MAY 2015
001.000.237.100 103.25
INV T1500080 ACCT EDM301 SACKVILLE - COLT1500080
TECHNICAL COLLISION INVEST - SACKVILLE
001.000.41.521.40.49.00 522.80
28 MEALS @ STATE PATROL ACADEMY
001.000.41.521.40.43.00 224.00
COURSE MATERIALS
001.000.41.521.40.49.00 30.00
INV T1500090 ACCT EDM301 MCCLURE PIO CLAT1500090
FACILITY SURCHARGE FEE ($5.97/DAY) FOR
001.000.41.521.40.43.00 17.91
Total :897.96
214803 6/11/2015 075283 WAVE BROADBAND 102-261607 FIBER HIGH SPEED INTERNET SERVICE
49Page:
Packet Page 75 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
50
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
214803 6/11/2015 (Continued)075283 WAVE BROADBAND
High Speed Internet service 04/30/15 -
001.000.31.518.87.42.00 2,659.20
Total :2,659.20
214804 6/11/2015 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 6693 INV#6693 - EDMONDS PD
PRINTING 6 NEW CARDS
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 115.00
SET UP OF 6 NAMES
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 72.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.10.31.00 17.77
Utility Billing - 5000 Pink Letter6699
Utility Billing - 5000 Pink Letter
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 83.33
Utility Billing - 5000 Pink Letter
422.000.72.531.90.31.00 83.33
Utility Billing - 5000 Pink Letter
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 83.34
9.5% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.31.00 7.92
9.5% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.31.00 7.92
9.5% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.31.00 7.91
Total :478.52
214805 6/11/2015 051050 WYATT, ARTHUR D 38 LEOFF 1 Medical Reimbursement
LEOFF 1 Medical Reimbursement
009.000.39.517.20.23.00 91.96
Total :91.96
Bank total :276,296.03144 Vouchers for bank code :usbank
276,296.03Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report144
50Page:
Packet Page 76 of 680
06/11/2015
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
51
9:41:43AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
51Page:
Packet Page 77 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STM 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 E0AA
STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave)c424 E3DC
STM 190th Pl SW Wall Construction c428 E3FF
STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA
WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA
STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB
WtR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA
STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE
SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA
SWR 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/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 E3FB
SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA
WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA
STR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB
STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA
STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD
STR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA
WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC
WTR 2014 Waterline Replacement Program c422 E4JA
STM 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC
STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E5FA
STR 2015 Overlay Program c463 E5CA
SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA
STR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 E5AB
WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 E5CB
WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4JB
WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC
SWR 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA
WTR 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA
STR 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk c421 E3DA
STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 78 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013)c418 E3JB
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
WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB
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
SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP)c390 E2GB
WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA
STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA
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 E8GD
STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM
PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA
STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)c472 E5FC
STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE
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 E0LA
FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB
WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating c473 E5KA
STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA
PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA
FAC Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades c393 E3LA
STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)c405 E2AD
STR Interurban Trail c146 E2DB
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 79 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD
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 E8GA
STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA
WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK
PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB
STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA
STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE
STM NPDES m013 E7FG
SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB
WTR OVD Watermain Improvements (2003)c141 E3JB
STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN
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 E1FD
FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E4LA
STR School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant c420 E3AA
PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA
FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB
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
General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA
UTILITIES Standard Details Updates s010 E5NA
STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF
STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG
STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH
STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 80 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA
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
STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA
STR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA
STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA
STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 E5FB
STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 81 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
STM E0AA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade
STM E0FC c326 Stormwater GIS Support
WTR E0IA c324 AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements
WTR E0JA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program
FAC E0LA c327 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project
FAC E0LB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs
STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
STR E1AB c343 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming
STR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements
General E1EA c372 SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing
STM E1FD c339 Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades
STM E1FF c341 Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects
STM E1FH c349 Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)
STM E1FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
STM E1FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
SWR E1GA c347 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement
SWR E1GB c370 Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update
WtR E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program
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
WTR E1JE c340 2012 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR E1JK c375 Main Street Watermain
STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update
STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project
STR E2AC c404 Citywide Safety Improvements
STR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)
WTR E2CA c388 2012 Waterline Overlay Program
STR E2CB c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair
STR E2CC c399 5th Ave Overlay Project
STR E2DB c146 Interurban Trail
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
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 82 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
STM E2FE 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 Pl 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 E3LA 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 E4FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 83 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
SWR E4GA c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project
SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I
SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring
WTR E4JA c422 2014 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR E4JB c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR E4JC c460 2016 Water Comp Plan Update
FAC E4LA c444 Public Safety Controls System Upgrades
PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park
FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
STR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System
STR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming
STR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program
WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays
STR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project
STM E5FA c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects
STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects
STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)
SWR E5GA c469 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects
WTR E5JA c468 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects
WTR E5KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating
UTILITIES E5NA s010 Standard Details Updates
STR E6DA c245 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project
STR E6DB c256 Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project
General E6MA c238 SR99 Enhancement Program
STR E7AA c265 Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements
STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
STR E7CB c268 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road
STM E7FG m013 NPDES
PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza
SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)
SWR E8GD c301 City-Wide Sewer Improvements
PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking
STR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program
STR E9DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 84 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
STM E9FB c307 Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation
SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design
PM E9MA c321 Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 85 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
WTR E3JB 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 E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking
STR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program
SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)
SWR E8GD 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 E0IA c324 AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements
STM E0FC c326 Stormwater GIS Support
FAC E0LA c327 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project
STM E0AA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade
FAC E0LB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs
WtR E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program
STM E1FD c339 Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades
WTR E1JE c340 2012 Waterline Replacement Program
STM E1FF 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 Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement
STM E1FH c349 Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 86 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements
WTR E0JA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program
STR 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 E1EA c372 SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing
STM E1FM 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
STR E2CB c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair
SWR E2GB c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP)
STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update
STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project
FAC E3LA c393 Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades
WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program
SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
STR E2CC c399 5th Ave Overlay Project
STR E2AC c404 Citywide Safety Improvements
STR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)
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
PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park
WTR E3JB c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013)
FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project
STR E3AA c420 School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant
STR E3DA c421 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 87 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
WTR E4JA c422 2014 Waterline Replacement Program
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
STR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study
STM E3FF c428 190th Pl SW Wall Construction
STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th
STM E3FH c430 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements
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
STR 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
STR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals
WTR E4CC c452 2014 Waterline Overlays
STR E4DA c453 Train Trench - Concept
STR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid-Block Crossing
STM E4FE 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
STR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project
STR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program
STM E5FA 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 6/11/2015 Packet Page 88 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
STR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System
STR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming
STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)
WTR E5KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating
STR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project
WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays
STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
STM E7FG m013 NPDES
UTILITIES E5NA s010 Standard Details Updates
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 89 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB
FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 E0LA
FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB
FAC Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades c393 E3LA
FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E4LA
FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB
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 E8MA
PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB
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 E0AA
STM 190th Pl 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 E5FA
STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM
STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave)c472 E5FC
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 E1FN
STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC
STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1FD
STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 90 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG
STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH
STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC
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 E5FB
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 E5CA
STR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 E5AB
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 E5DA
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
STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA
STR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB
STR School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant c420 E3AA
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 91 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB
STR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB
STR SR104/City Park Mid-Block Crossing c454 E4DB
STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA
STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA
STR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA
STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA
SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA
SWR 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA
SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA
SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA
SWR 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA
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 E8GD
SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC
SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)c298 E8GA
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 s010 E5NA
WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA
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 E5CB
WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4JB
WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC
WTR 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA
WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013)c418 E3JB
WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB
WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA
WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 92 of 680
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating c473 E5KA
WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK
WTR OVD Watermain Improvements (2003)c141 E3JB
WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD
WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA
Revised 6/11/2015 Packet Page 93 of 680
AM-7806 3. C.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted By:Linda Hynd
Department:City Clerk's Office
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Shirley Olsen ($867.24).
Recommendation
Acknowledge receipt of the Claim for Damages by minute entry.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Shirley Olsen
114 Second Avenue S.
#201
Edmonds, Wa 98928
Attachments
Olsen Claim for Damages
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Mayor Dave Earling 06/10/2015 03:23 PM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/11/2015 11:15 AM
Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 06/10/2015 02:40 PM
Final Approval Date: 06/11/2015
Packet Page 94 of 680
Packet Page 95 of 680
Packet Page 96 of 680
Packet Page 97 of 680
Packet Page 98 of 680
Packet Page 99 of 680
Packet Page 100 of 680
Packet Page 101 of 680
Packet Page 102 of 680
Packet Page 103 of 680
AM-7810 3. D.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted For:Patrick Doherty Submitted By:Cindi Cruz
Department:Community Services
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Reappointment of Mike Popke to the Edmonds Public Facilities Board
Recommendation
Previous Council Action
Narrative
On June 19, 2001, the Edmonds City Council approved the appointment of a five-member Public
Facilities District (PFD) board. Ordinance No. 3358 states that all board members are to serve four-year
staggered terms. On May 24, 2011 the City Council appointed Mike Popke to complete a four-year term.
On June 30, 2015, Mr. Popke's term will expire.
On May 28, 2015, the Board of Directors of the Edmonds Public Facilities (EPFD) voted unanimously to
recommend Mike Popke for re-appointment to the EPFD Board for a standard four-year term beginning
July 1, 2015.
Attachments
Letter recommending Mike Popke for reappointment to EPFD Board
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
City Clerk Scott Passey 06/12/2015 05:54 AM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/12/2015 08:10 AM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/12/2015 09:04 AM
Form Started By: Cindi Cruz Started On: 06/11/2015 03:32 PM
Final Approval Date: 06/12/2015
Packet Page 104 of 680
Memorandum
To: Edmonds City Council
Cc: Mayor Dave Earling
From: Edmonds Public Facilities District
Date: May 28, 2015
Re: Recommending Mike Popke for Re-Appointment to the Edmonds
Public Facilities District Board
Per the Interlocal Agreement between Edmonds Public Facilities District and the City of
Edmonds, approval of Edmonds City Council is required for appointment to the Edmonds
PFD Board, and/or renewal of Board terms.
On Thursday, May 28, 2015, the Board of Directors of Edmonds Public Facilities District
(EPFD) voted unanimously to recommend Mike Popke for re-appointment to the EPFD
Board for a standard four-year term.
The Members of the Edmonds Public Facilities District Board of Directors
respectfully request that the Edmonds City Council re-appoint Mike Popke to the
EPFD Board, Position #2, and that the appointment be effective July 1, 2015.
The current term for Position #2 is scheduled to expire June 30, 2015.
The additional members of the Edmonds PFD Board currently include:
Mr. Bob Rinehart - President
Ms. Marla Miller - Vice President
Mr. Mike Popke
Ms. Susan Loreen
Mr. Larry Ehl
Mr. Scott James, Finance Director, City of Edmonds – Ex Officio – Treasurer*
We wish to thank the Edmonds City Council for your continued support of Edmonds
Public Facilities District and Edmonds Center for the Arts.
*Per the Interlocal Agreement between Edmonds Public Facilities District and the City
of Edmonds, the City’s Finance Director, by virtue of his/her position, serves as an Ex-
Officio Member and Treasurer of the EPFD Board.
Packet Page 105 of 680
AM-7808 3. E.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted By:Brian Tuley
Department:Finance
Type: Forward to Consent
Information
Subject Title
Renew Snohomish County ILA for IT equipment
Recommendation
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Edmonds has IT equipment in the County data center. This renews an expired IT ILA with Snohomish
County for placement of that equipment with little change.
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
City Clerk Scott Passey 06/11/2015 10:29 AM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/11/2015 10:32 AM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/11/2015 11:15 AM
Form Started By: Brian Tuley Started On: 06/11/2015 10:19 AM
Final Approval Date: 06/11/2015
Packet Page 106 of 680
AM-7801 3. F.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted For:Mike DeLilla Submitted By:Megan Luttrell
Department:Engineering
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Authorization for Mayor to sign a Professional Services Agreement with Murray, Smith & Associates for
the 2016-2017 Waterline Replacement Program
Recommendation
Authorize Mayor to sign the Professional Services Agreement.
Previous Council Action
On June 9, 2015, staff presented the Professional Services Agreement with Murray, Smith & Assciates to
full Council and they forwarded the item to the June 16, 2015 consent agenda.
Narrative
The City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in February 2015 to hire a consultant to provide
design engineering services for the 2016 and 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects. The City received
statements of qualifications from seven engineering firms and the selection committee selected Murray,
Smith & Associates (MSA) to provide design engineering services for the 2016 and 2017 Waterline
Replacement Projects. The design engineering for the 2016 Waterline Replacement Project is expected
to be complete by March 2016, with construction expected to begin in May of 2016. If services are
required for the 2017 Waterline Replacement Project, a separate scope and fee will be drafted in 2016 and
submitted to City Council for approval.
In total, the 2016 plus the 2017 Waterline Replacement Project will upgrade/replace portions of the
City’s potable water network by replacing approximately 14,000 linear feet of existing waterlines and
associated appurtenances at various locations within the City. The 2016 Waterline Replacement Project
will replace approximately 7,000 linear feet of watermain.
The selection of the sites will be determined using the data supplied in the 2010 Comprehensive Water
System Plan dated August 2010, coordinating with upcoming road, sanitary sewer, and storm drain
projects, and input from Public Works. Upgrade projects will focus on upsizing and/or looping portions
of the existing network to improve flow and pressure. Replacement projects will remove and replace
pipes that are near the end of their life cycle and are requiring additional maintenance.
Attachments
MSA Professional Services Agreement
Project Location Map
Packet Page 107 of 680
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Engineering (Originator)Robert English 06/11/2015 02:27 PM
Public Works Phil Williams 06/11/2015 03:13 PM
City Clerk Scott Passey 06/11/2015 03:22 PM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/11/2015 03:40 PM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/12/2015 05:57 AM
Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 06/10/2015 10:50 AM
Final Approval Date: 06/12/2015
Packet Page 108 of 680
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into between the City of Edmonds, hereinafter
referred to as the "City", and Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. hereinafter referred to as the
"Consultant";
WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the professional services and assistance of a
consulting firm to provide design services with respect to the 2016-2017 Waterline
Replacement Project;
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
$345,282.
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.
Packet Page 109 of 680
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 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 to the extent caused by the
negligent 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. Consultant’s defense
obligation under this paragraph shall include only the reimbursement of reasonable defense costs
to the extent of Consultant’s actual, proportional indemnity obligation as determined by a court
of law.
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
Packet Page 110 of 680
insurance with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner
pursuant to Title 48 RCW.
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 not exceed 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
Packet Page 111 of 680
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.
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 contractor 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.
Packet Page 112 of 680
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
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:
Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.
2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 1110
Everett, WA 98201-3566
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 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.
By By
David O. Earling, Mayor
Its
ATTEST:
________________________________
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
Office of the City Attorney
Packet Page 113 of 680
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 114 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 1 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF WORK
CITY OF EDMONDS
2016 WATERLINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
ENGINEERING SERVICES
BACKGROUND AND APPROACH
Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. (MSA) was retained by the City of Edmonds (City) to provide
engineering services for the 2016-2017 Waterline Replacement project, which includes ten
project sites identified by the City. The two-year program will be accomplished through two
separate design-bid-build packages with the first set of projects constructed in 2016 (Phase 1)
and the second set of projects constructed in 2017 (Phase 2). This scope includes engineering
services for the 2016 projects (Phase 1) only, but also includes preliminary alignment
development for the 2017 projects (Phase 2).
Waterline replacement locations identified by the City for both the 2016 and 2017 project sets
are listed below and shown schematically on the attached figure.
• Project #1 – Elm Street, from 6th Avenue South to 8th Avenue South (approximately
4,600 ft of 6 to 12 inch diameter water main)
• Project #2 – 217th Street SW and 88th Avenue West (approximately 800 ft of 8-inch
diameter water main)
• Project #3 – Aloha Way and 6th Avenue North (approximately 1,200 ft of 8-inch diameter
water main)
• Project #4 – Between Sierra Street and 12th Avenue North (approximately 300 ft of 6-
inch diameter water main to be abandoned)
• Project #5 – 87th Avenue West south of 202nd Street SW (approximately 525 ft of 8-inch
diameter water main)
• Project #6 – Northstream Lane west of 9th Avenue North (approximately 850 ft of 8-inch
diameter water main); Potential geotechnical and permitting services required, most
likely to be included in the 2017 design package under Phase 2.
• Project #7 – 93rd Place West near 192nd Street SW (approximately 400 ft of 8-inch
diameter water main)
• Project #8 – 81st Place West, 80th Place West and Sierra Drive (approximately 1,700 ft of
6 to 8 inch diameter water main)
• Project #9 – 186th Street SW and 80th Avenue West (approximately 4,000 ft of 6 to 12
inch diameter water main)
• Project #10 – 182nd Place SW east of 72nd Avenue West (approximately 360 ft of 8-inch
diameter water main)
MSA has developed the scope of work herein and accompanying fee estimate based on our
understanding of the project and discussions with City staff. For estimating the level of effort in
developing the fee estimate, it is anticipated that Phase 1 will consist of approximately half of the
total length of all waterline replacement projects listed above. This scope includes preliminary
alignment development for both 2016 and 2017 projects, design of 2016 projects, and support
Packet Page 115 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 2 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
services to assist the City on an as-needed basis for permitting, easement acquisition, bidding and
construction management. The City will take the lead on accomplishing all environmental,
permitting, easement acquisition, bidding and construction management. The City has
determined that geotechnical engineering services are not necessary for the projects based on
known suitable soil conditions for the project sites, except for Project #6, which is expected to
have geotechnical investigation and environmental needs and will be deferred to Phase 2 for
construction in 2017. Therefore, geotechnical engineering services are not included in this scope
for Phase 1.
SCOPE OF WORK
MSA’s proposed work program is detailed below.
Task 1 - Project Management and Coordination
This task provides for management of the project and coordination with the project team.
Elements of this task will include:
1.1 Correspondence and Coordination with City - All communication will be coordinated
through the City’s Project Manager. Correspondence with the City Project Manager via
phone conversations and e-mail will include the communication of project decisions,
project status, work activities, and issues requiring City input.
1.2 Budget, Schedule, Invoices and Progress Reports - MSA’s Project Manager will
monitor project costs, manage budget and project schedule, including preparation and
submission of monthly invoices and progress reports.
1.3 Staff and Subconsultant Management – MSA’s Project Manager will manage project
staff and subconsultants to ensure all services are in conformance with the scope of
services, fee estimate, and schedule.
1.4 Kick-off and Project Coordination Meetings - Prepare for and conduct project kick-off
meeting with City staff and key team members to discuss project, review project schedule
and discuss key elements of the project. Prepare for and conduct project coordination or
review meetings with City staff to discuss project elements during design. Prepare
meeting agenda and record meeting summary to document items discussed and transmit
to City.
1.5 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) – Coordinate and perform in-house quality
assurance reviews of all deliverables.
Assumptions:
• MSA will prepare for and attend one (1) kick-off meeting and up to four (4) project
coordination or review meetings.
City Responsibilities:
• Attend kick-off meeting and project coordination meetings
Packet Page 116 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 3 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
MSA Deliverables to City:
• Correspondence, e-mails and other documentation
• Monthly billing statements and activity reports
• Meeting agendas and minutes
Task 2 – Data Gathering and Utility Coordination
This task consists of data gathering and utility coordination work. Elements of this task will
include:
2.1 Data Collection and Review - Work under this subtask includes gathering and reviewing
all relevant data to complete the preliminary engineering tasks. A number of documents
and reports will be requested and reviewed as part of this task, including record drawings
and previous studies or reports. MSA will develop a formal “Request for Information”
process and coordinate with the City during data collection to ensure all necessary
information is gathered for the project.
2.2 Utility Coordination and Analysis - Acquire utility system mapping, perform a utility
conflict analysis and identify potential utility conflicts. Develop a list of potential
conflict locations to obtain specific utility information, including dimensions, location
and depth, utilizing potholing techniques on an as-needed basis. MSA’s subconsultant
APS will conduct potholing as necessary to verify potential utility conflicts.
Assumptions:
• If determined by the utility conflict analysis, MSA’s subconsultant APS to perform up to
ten (10) potholes on an as-needed basis under Task 8.
City Responsibilities:
• City to provide all available as-built documents for City facilities.
MSA Deliverables to City:
• Electronic copy of formal “Request for Information”
• Documentation of utility conflict analysis and potholing results.
Task 3 – Preliminary Design
This task provides for preliminary engineering design services for the proposed waterline
replacement project and includes the following elements:
3.1 Preliminary Alignment and Site Visit with City Staff – Develop preliminary alignment
for all Phase 1 and Phase 2 projects after design survey is complete and meet with City
Engineering and Operations staff in the field to review the preliminary alignment of each
site and gather input. Conduct workshop after site visit to further discuss alignment,
priorities, permitting, and grouping of projects into two separate bid packages. Also
Packet Page 117 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 4 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
discuss construction sequencing to minimize service disruptions and maintain service and
fire flow during construction. Projects will be prioritized and distributed between two
construction contracts, one for construction during 2016 and the other during 2017, based
on criteria including but not limited to funding, permitting needs, easement or right-of-
entry approvals, coordination with other projects, pavement restoration scheduling, etc.
It is anticipated that Phase 1 will consist of approximately half of the total length of all
waterline replacement projects.
3.2 Plans (50% Design Completion Level) - Using the project information developed in the
previous tasks, prepare preliminary design drawings to the 50% design completion level
for the 2016 projects. Preliminary drawings will show plan and profile views and major
project elements. Drawings will be developed at 1-inch = 20-feet scale in AutoCAD
electronic format. The drawings will be prepared and submitted to the City for review
and comment.
3.3 Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Construction Cost - A preliminary engineer’s opinion
of probable construction cost to 50% design completion level will be developed and
include a schedule of estimated quantities, unit prices, and total preliminary construction
cost for each project site.
Assumptions:
• The complete Project Contract Document package (front end, specifications, appendices,
etc.) will not be prepared for the preliminary design phase.
• Detailed water main connection details will be developed and submitted for review
during the final design phase.
• MSA will follow the City’s cost estimating policy in preparing the Engineer’s Opinion of
Probable Construction Cost.
• Approximately half of the total length of all waterline replacement projects for 2016-
2017 will be designed for 2016 construction. MSA will submit a separate scope to the
City for design of the remaining projects, which will be constructed in 2017.
City Responsibilities:
• Complete review of the preliminary design drawings, engineer’s opinion of probable
construction cost and all supporting documentation with verbal or written comments.
City review period is assumed to be 2 weeks.
• Participate in review meetings, site visits and workshops.
• City will take the lead in assessing project specific requirements, specifically for
geotechnical, environmental, and permitting elements.
• All required easements will be obtained by the City.
MSA Deliverables to City:
• One (1) electronic copy in PDF format of the 50% preliminary design drawings.
• One (1) electronic copy of engineer’s opinion of probable construction cost, detailed to
provide a cost per site.
• Electronic copy of 50% preliminary design drawings in the City’s latest version of
AutoCAD format.
Packet Page 118 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 5 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
Task 4 – Final Design
This task will produce final plans for projects scheduled for construction in 2016, based on
comments from the City’s review of the preliminary design. Final design plans will be presented
at the 90% completion level for review by the City. Final bid ready plans at the 100%
completion level will incorporate all prior review comments and will be suitable for bidding.
Elements of this task will include:
4.1 Plans, Specifications and Estimate (PS&E) - 90% Design Completion Level
A. The preliminary design drawings (50% design completion level) will be revised
and further developed to incorporate comments from the City’s review of the
preliminary design. Develop design plans and engineer’s opinion of probable
construction cost estimate to approximately the 90% design completion level.
B. MSA will prepare technical specifications and appendices to support the design
and will include in the project Contract Documents. Specifications will be
prepared based on the City’s standard technical specifications and WSDOT 2014
Standard Specifications. The City's front-end specifications will be reviewed to
ensure consistency between technical specifications and contractual documents.
C. An engineer’s opinion of probable construction cost will be developed and will
include a schedule of estimated quantities, unit prices, and total construction cost
for each project site.
D. Submit 90% design package, including complete plan set, specifications, project
schedule and engineer’s opinion of probable construction cost, to the City for
review and comment.
4.2 Final 100% Bid Ready Plans and Specifications
A. The 90% design package will be revised and further developed to incorporate
comments from the City’s review of the 90% design. Develop design plans,
project schedule and engineer’s opinion of probable construction cost that are
ready for bidding. Revise bid proposal quantities to reflect a bid-ready design
package.
B. Submit stamped and signed bid-ready Contract Documents to City for
distribution.
4.3 Constructability Review - Provide a limited constructability review of the proposed
improvements in support of the City’s constructability review and identify issues that
could affect the construction of the improvements as designed or the construction
schedule.
Packet Page 119 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 6 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
4.4 Permitting Support (As Needed) - Provide assistance as required in developing figures,
preliminary plans, information and supporting graphic documentation for permits
prepared and submitted by the City.
Assumptions:
• MSA shall apply a Washington Professional Engineer’s stamp with signature and date on
the final bid-ready edition of the design plans and specifications.
• City will take the lead in preparing permits and coordinating project elements with key
stakeholders, including WSDOT, WDFW, franchised utilities and public as affected by
the project.
• Review comments will be received in a complete, single submittal. Multiple rounds of
review comments on the same design completion submittal are not anticipated.
• MSA’s support services for permitting will be performed up to the extent of the fee
estimate for the permitting support task, unless otherwise approved in advance by the
City through a budget amendment or authorization to invoice against the Unanticipated
Task Reserve budget.
• Contractor shall be responsible for the development of traffic control and erosion control
plans.
• City to coordinate and submit bid-ready contract documents to Builders Exchange or
similar service.
• No Critical Areas Study is required.
• MSA will follow the City’s cost estimating policy in preparing the Engineer’s Opinion of
Probable Construction Cost.
• Attend design review meeting at the 90% completion level.
City Responsibilities:
• Complete technical review of the documents at 90% design completion level with verbal
or written comments. City review period for the submittal is 2 weeks.
• Provide electronic files, and periodic updates, of text, forms, schedules and other
components of the contract documents, including preferred front-end sections.
• City will provide latest standard technical specifications and “front-end” documents to be
incorporated into the contract documents.
• City to provide AutoCAD drawings of standard details to be incorporated into the
contract documents.
• City to provide a constructability review of the proposed improvements.
• City will take the lead in coordinating all State and Federal permits.
• City to prepare and submit any required SEPA permit and if needed, JARPA to
Department of Ecology or Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
MSA Deliverables to City:
• Submission for 90% design packages include an electronic copy in PDF format of plan
set, specifications (also in MS Word), project schedule, and engineer’s opinion of
probable construction cost (also in MS Excel) on CD or USB Drive.
• Submission for 100% includes final stamped design plans, specifications, and engineer’s
final construction cost estimate in PDF, MS Word, MS Excel, as applicable.
Packet Page 120 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 7 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
• Electronic copy of 90% and 100% design drawings in the City’s latest version of
AutoCAD and PDF formats.
Task 5 – Bidding Assistance (As Needed)
This task includes supporting the City on an as-needed basis in providing assistance during
bidding of the projects scheduled for construction in 2016. Anticipated elements of this task
include:
5.1 Bidder Inquiries and Addenda - Respond to questions from bidders, subcontractors,
equipment suppliers and other vendors regarding the project, plans and specifications.
Maintain a written record of communications during the bidding process. Prepare and
issue any addenda as necessary to clarify the contract documents.
5.2 Pre-Bid Conference - Attend a pre-bid conference, if held, for the project and provide
support to the City for specific agenda items.
Assumptions:
• The City will take the lead in tasks associated with printing bid documents, document
distribution, bid advertisement, addenda distribution, plan holder administration, bid
evaluation, bid tabulation etc.
• MSA’s support services during bidding will be performed up to the extent of the fee
estimate for the Bidding Support task, unless otherwise approved in advance by the City
through a budget amendment or authorization to invoice against the Unanticipated Task
Reserve budget.
• Bidding support services will only consist of the 2016 projects defined under Task 3.
MSA Deliverables to City:
• Draft addenda as required for the City to distribute to plan holders.
Task 6 – Construction Management Assistance (as needed)
This task represents minimal involvement by MSA during construction of 2016 projects in
support of the City’s on-site inspector and construction management staff. MSA’s services will
be provided on an as-needed basis and will be limited to the tasks below, all at the written
notification of the City. Anticipated elements of this task will include:
6.1 Clarifications and Changes - At the request of the City, MSA will assist with issuing
clarifications to the contractor and producing design changes if necessary, including
review of requests for information (RFIs) and change orders.
6.2 Record Drawings (As-built Drawings) - Prepare record drawings in AutoCAD to
indicate changes made during construction, based on notes and sketches provided by the
City.
Packet Page 121 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 8 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
Assumptions:
• MSA will not be involved in the preconstruction conference, construction meetings, on-
site construction observation/inspection, submittal review and other construction
administration/ management activities not identified above.
• MSA’s support services during construction will be performed up to the extent of the fee
estimate for the Construction Management Assistance task, unless otherwise approved in
advance by the City through a budget amendment or authorization to invoice against the
Unanticipated Task Reserve budget.
• For the purpose of developing this scope of work and associated fee estimate, two (2)
clarifications and one (1) design change is anticipated.
• Geotechnical monitoring and compaction testing services during construction will be
provided by a firm retained by the City.
City Responsibilities:
• City will provide the initial review of all requests for information.
• City will provide full-time on-site inspection and will take the lead in administrating and
managing the construction contract and communicating with the construction contractor.
• City will provide a single copy of complete and fully-coordinated construction markups
for production of record drawings.
MSA Deliverables to City:
• Submittal review forms in response to contractor submittals
• Written clarifications and design plan modifications, as requested
• One (1) electronic copy in PDF format of record drawings
• Electronic copy of record drawings in AutoCAD Civil3D 2012 format
Task 7 – Surveying Services (Subconsultant Services)
This task will provide surveying and base mapping services by a licensed professional surveyor
for both 2016 and 2017 projects and will be used by MSA to develop design plans. Surveying
will be conducted by MSA’s subconsultant Duane Hartman & Associates, Inc. (DHA). MSA
will coordinate the extent of the survey and review and provide comment on the base mapping to
the surveyor. This task includes the following elements:
7.1 Control - Horizontal control (NAD 83/91) and vertical control (NAVD 88) shall be
established from the nearest approved City control monument for each of the various
project sites. Control monument selection and survey methodology to be used shall be
coordinated with and approved by the City prior to beginning the control survey. All
survey control work shall be recorded in a field book.
7.2 Utility Locates - Order and perform design locates (surface markings) of all known
underground conductible utilities in the field, and incorporate those locations into the
base maps. All other underground utility lines and services to be approximated based on
painted surface markings and/or existing record as-built drawings obtained.
7.3 Survey Scope - Show all known utilities including individual service lines, water meters,
curb stops, water and gas valves, manholes, catch basins, power poles, buried power
Packet Page 122 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 9 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
lines, etc. Survey the painted utility locate marks and coordinate the survey with utility
locate personnel. Provide invert elevations of pipes, swales, ditches, or other
conveyances for surface runoff, and lid and invert elevations for catch basins and
manholes. Show right-of-way, centerline, property boundaries and easements on plans.
Locate and map all private structures within City right-of-way and easements. Show
property lines and field check street addresses.
7.4 Base Mapping - The preliminary survey base map will be submitted electronically for
review in PDF format. Base mapping will be provided at a scale of 1-inch = 20-feet and
topographic contours at 2-foot intervals. Provide full-size hard copies of the final survey
control drawing for project use.
Assumptions:
• Right-of-way limits will be shown using available GIS and AutoCAD information
• Surveyor will provide private utility locator to perform locating services.
• It is anticipated no additional easements will be required for survey.
City Responsibilities:
• Review electronic copy of base map and provide written comments
• Coordinate right-of-entry for surveying on private property
MSA Deliverables to City:
• Base mapping at scale of 1-inch =20-feet and topographic contours at 2-foot intervals
• Copies of field notes, field book with survey control data, computer listings and computer
readable files of the survey data points
• Survey control drawing that is stamped and signed by a professional land surveyor
Task 8 – Potholing Services (Subconsultant Services, As Needed)
MSA will coordinate with Applied Professional Services (APS) to conduct Potholing services on
an as-needed basis. Services under this task will include conducting field investigations utilizing
air vacuum excavation test-holes, defining existing utility locations and sizes, and documenting
findings in a data sheet. APS will provide the appropriate traffic control measures. MSA will
coordinate the extent of the potholing and will review and provide comment on field notes/data
sheets.
Assumptions:
• No temporary or permanent easements will be required.
• Potholing services will be scheduled to allow City to provide adequate notification to
public.
• APS will conduct up to ten (10) test holes (approximately two holes per site) to an
approximate depth of 10-feet to verify potential utility conflicts.
• Test holes will be backfilled with 5/8” select, sand or pea gravel and temporary pavement
EZ-street patch cap as approved by the City.
• APS will prepare and submit to the City traffic control plans and permit applications
needed for all lane closures or detours.
Packet Page 123 of 680
June 1, 2015 MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. City of Edmonds
Page 10 Engineers/Planners 2016 Waterline Scope
City Responsibilities:
• Provide right-of-way use permit for potholing services.
• Review proposed pothole locations and confirm proposed program
MSA Deliverables to City:
• PDF copies of field notes and data sheets.
Task 9 – Unanticipated Task Reserve (As Needed)
A reserve budget amount has been included in the fee estimate for work under this task, which
may include additional unanticipated labor or expenses not specifically identified in the scope of
work tasks defined above. Such work items will be undertaken only after written authorization
from the City.
PRELIMINARY ESTIMATED SCHEDULE
MSA shall begin work immediately upon receipt of Notice to Proceed from the City and proceed
according to the preliminary estimated schedule presented below, which reflects the City's desire
to complete all design and construction work for Phase 1 by the end of 2016. MSA will proceed
according to the work program shown below, however the schedule may change due to the
grouping and phasing of projects that will be determined by MSA and the City early in the
project. Factors beyond MSA’s control may also require schedule modifications.
Notice to Proceed June 2015
Survey, Preliminary Alignments & Project Phasing June - August 2015
Phase 1 (2016 Construction)
50% Complete Submittal November 2015
90% Complete Submittal February 2016
100% Bid-Ready Documents Submittal March 2016
Bidding and Award April 2016
Construction May - September 2016
Record Drawings October 2016
Packet Page 124 of 680
LA
B
O
R
C
L
A
S
S
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
(
H
O
U
R
S
)
ESTIMATED FEES
Pr
i
n
c
i
p
a
l
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
I
V
Pr
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
V
I
I
Pr
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
V
I
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
De
s
i
g
n
e
r
I
I
I
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
De
s
i
g
n
e
r
I
Te
c
h
n
i
c
i
a
n
IV
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
ve
I
Ho
u
r
s
Total
$2
0
6
$
1
6
1
$
1
5
2
$
1
2
7
$
1
1
0
$
1
2
7
$
7
7
TC
L
M
G
M
C
E
B
S
M
T
M
Y
H
2
H
C
M
J
R
APS
Ta
s
k
1
-
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
Ta
s
k
1
.
1
-
Co
r
r
e
s
p
o
n
d
e
n
c
e
a
n
d
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
C
i
t
y
30
6
6
42
8,
0
5
8
$
-$ 8,058 $
Ta
s
k
1
.
2
-
Bu
d
g
e
t
,
S
c
h
e
d
u
l
e
,
I
n
v
o
i
c
e
s
a
n
d
P
r
o
g
r
e
s
s
R
e
p
o
r
t
s
10
5
5
6
26
4,
0
8
7
$
70 $ 4,157 $
Ta
s
k
1
.
3
-
St
a
f
f
a
n
d
S
u
b
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
10
4
4
2
20
3,
4
6
6
$
50 $ 3,516 $
Ta
s
k
1
.
4
-
Ki
c
k
-
o
f
f
&
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
M
e
e
t
i
n
g
s
(
u
p
t
o
5
)
15
25
25
2
67
11
,
0
6
9
$
250 $ 11,319 $
Ta
s
k
1
.
5
-
Qu
a
l
i
t
y
A
s
s
u
r
a
n
c
e
/
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
(
Q
A
/
Q
C
)
24
6
6
36
6,
8
2
2
$
-$ 6,822 $
Ta
s
k
1
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
89
46
46
0
0
0
10
19
1
33
,
5
0
2
$
-
$
-$ -$ 370 $ 33,872 $
Ta
s
k
2
-
Da
t
a
G
a
t
h
e
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
U
t
i
l
i
t
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
Ta
s
k
2
.
1
-
Da
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
R
e
v
i
e
w
3
6
6
30
12
57
7,
6
2
6
$
120 $ 7,746 $
Ta
s
k
2
.
2
-
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
5
5
24
8
2
44
5,
7
4
7
$
36 $ 5,783 $
Ta
s
k
2
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
3
11
11
54
20
2
0
10
1
13
,
3
7
3
$
-
$
-$ -$ 156 $ 13,529 $
Ta
s
k
3
-
Pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
D
e
s
i
g
n
Ta
s
k
3
.
1
-
Pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
A
l
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
&
S
i
t
e
V
i
s
i
t
w
i
t
h
C
i
t
y
S
t
a
f
f
10
20
20
40
50
20
16
0
21
,
4
4
0
$
385 $ 21,825 $
Ta
s
k
3
.
2
-
Pl
a
n
s
(
5
0
%
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
i
o
n
L
e
v
e
l
)
12
30
30
80
90
12
0
36
2
47
,
1
6
2
$
2,320 $ 49,482 $
Ta
s
k
3
.
3
-
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
’
s
O
p
i
n
i
o
n
o
f
P
r
o
b
a
b
l
e
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
C
o
s
t
2
4
4
8
10
28
3,
7
8
0
$
-$ 3,780 $
Ta
s
k
3
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
24
54
54
12
8
15
0
14
0
0
55
0
72
,
3
8
2
$
-
$
-$ -$ 2,705 $ 75,087 $
Ta
s
k
4
-
Fi
n
a
l
D
e
s
i
g
n
Ta
s
k
4
.
1
-
90
%
P
S
&
E
A.
P
l
a
n
s
12
45
45
90
10
0
95
38
7
51
,
0
5
2
$
1,870 $ 52,922 $
B.
S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
5
5
5
10
10
8
43
5,
5
8
1
$
110 $ 5,691 $
C.
O
p
i
n
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
s
t
2
6
6
8
12
34
4,
6
2
6
$
-$ 4,626 $
Ta
s
k
4
.
2
-
10
0
%
F
i
n
a
l
B
i
d
R
e
a
d
y
P
S
&
E
A.
P
l
a
n
s
3
10
10
25
25
40
11
3
14
,
7
5
3
$
880 $ 15,633 $
B.
S
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
3
3
3
5
5
4
23
3,
0
5
0
$
110 $ 3,160 $
C.
O
p
i
n
i
o
n
o
f
C
o
s
t
1
4
5
6
6
22
3,
0
3
2
$
-$ 3,032 $
Ta
s
k
4
.
3
-
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
R
e
v
i
e
w
9
3
3
15
2,
7
9
3
$
-$ 2,793 $
Ta
s
k
4
.
4
-
Pe
r
m
i
t
t
i
n
g
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
(
A
s
N
e
e
d
e
d
)
1
2
2
3
3
4
15
2,
0
5
1
$
72 $ 2,123 $
Ta
s
k
4
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
36
78
79
14
7
16
1
13
9
12
65
2
86
,
9
3
8
$
-
$
-$ -$ 3,042 $ 89,980 $
Ta
s
k
5
-
Bi
d
d
i
n
g
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
(
A
s
N
e
e
d
e
d
)
Ta
s
k
5
.
1
-
Bi
d
d
e
r
I
n
q
u
i
r
i
e
s
a
n
d
A
d
d
e
n
d
a
2
4
8
8
2
2
26
3,
3
2
4
$
36 $ 3,360 $
Ta
s
k
5
.
2
-
Pr
e
-
B
i
d
C
o
n
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
4
4
8
1,
4
3
2
$
25 $ 1,457 $
Ta
s
k
5
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
6
0
8
8
8
2
2
34
4,
7
5
6
$
-
$
-$ -$ 61 $ 4,817 $
Ta
s
k
6
-
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
(
A
s
N
e
e
d
e
d
)
Ta
s
k
6
.
1
-
Cl
a
r
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
(
U
p
t
o
2
)
1
6
12
4
23
2,
9
4
6
$
72 $ 3,018 $
Ta
s
k
6
.
2
-
Re
c
o
r
d
D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
(
A
s
-
b
u
i
l
t
D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
)
2
4
6
8
25
1
46
5,
9
1
4
$
620 $ 6,534 $
Ta
s
k
6
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
3
0
10
6
20
29
1
69
8,
8
6
0
$
-
$
-$ -$ 692 $ 9,552 $
Ta
s
k
7
-
Su
r
v
e
y
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
(
S
u
b
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
)
4
8
8
20
2,
6
4
0
$
81,882 $ 194 $ 84,716 $
Ta
s
k
7
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
0
0
4
8
0
8
0
20
2,
6
4
0
$
-
$
-$ 81,882 $ 194 $ 84,716 $
Ta
s
k
8
-
Po
t
h
o
l
i
n
g
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
(
S
u
b
c
o
n
s
u
l
t
a
n
t
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
A
s
N
e
e
d
e
d
)
2
2
2
6
81
2
$
7,917 $ -$ -$ 8,729 $
Ta
s
k
8
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
0
0
2
2
0
2
0
6
81
2
$
-
$
7,917 $ -$ -$ 8,729 $
Ta
s
k
9
-
Un
a
n
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
T
a
s
k
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
(
A
s
N
e
e
d
e
d
)
Ta
s
k
9
S
u
b
t
o
t
a
l
25
,
0
0
0
$
25,000 $
T
O
T
A
L
-
A
L
L
T
A
S
K
S
16
1
1
8
9
2
1
4
3
5
3
3
5
9
3
2
2
2
5
1
6
2
3
2
4
8
,
2
6
3
$
-
$
7
,
9
1
7
$
8
1
,
8
8
2
$
7,220$ 345,282$
FE
E
E
S
T
I
M
A
T
E
20
1
6
W
A
T
E
R
L
I
N
E
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
P
R
O
J
E
C
T
EX
H
I
B
I
T
B
MSA Expenses Subconsultants
Ge
o
D
H
A
MS
A
L
a
b
o
r
6/
1
/
2
0
1
5
CI
T
Y
O
F
E
D
M
O
N
D
S
Ci
t
y
o
f
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
Mu
r
r
a
y
,
S
m
i
t
h
&
A
s
s
o
c
i
a
t
e
s
,
I
n
c
.
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
s
/
P
l
a
n
n
e
r
s
Page 1 Packet Page 125 of 680
MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Engineers/Planners
EXHIBIT C
BILLING RATES
Personnel:
Labor will be invoiced by staff classification at the following hourly rates.
Principal Engineer VI $220.00 – 233.00
Principal Engineer V 212.00 – 225.00
Principal Engineer IV 206.00 – 218.00
Principal Engineer III 198.00 – 210.00
Principal Engineer II 191.00 – 202.00
Principal Engineer I 184.00 – 195.00
Professional Engineer IX 177.00 – 188.00
Professional Engineer VIII 169.00 – 179.00
Professional Engineer VII 161.00 – 171.00
Professional Engineer VI 152.00 – 161.00
Professional Engineer V 144.00 – 153.00
Professional Engineer IV 135.00 – 143.00
Engineering Designer IV 135.00 – 143.00
Professional Engineer III 127.00 – 135.00
Engineering Designer III 127.00 – 135.00
Engineering Designer II 119.00 – 126.00
Engineering Designer I 110.00 – 117.00
Technician IV 127.00 – 135.00
Technician III 115.00 – 122.00
Technician II 102.00 – 108.00
Technician I 88.00 – 93.00
Administrative III 95.00 – 101.00
Administrative II 87.00 – 92.00
Administrative I 77.00 – 82.00
Project Expenses:
Expenses incurred in-house that are directly attributable to the project will be invoiced at actual cost.
These expenses include the following:
CADD Hardware/Software $18.00/hour
Modeling and GIS Hardware/Software $10.00/hour
Mileage Current IRS Rate
Postage and Delivery Services At Cost
Printing and Reproduction At Cost
Travel, Lodging and Subsistence At Cost
Outside Services:
Outside technical, professional and other services will be invoiced at actual cost plus
10 percent to cover administration and overhead.
Packet Page 126 of 680
Packet Page 127 of 680
AM-7802 3. G.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted By:Don Anderson
Department:Police Department
Type: Forward to Consent
Information
Subject Title
Renewal of Interlocal agreement with the Snohomish County Regional Drug & Gang Task Force
2015-2016.
Recommendation
Staff requests and recommends approval via consent agenda at the June 16, 2015 Council meeting.
Previous Council Action
Item was approved for consent agenda at the June 9th study session of council.
Narrative
Since January 1988, the Snohomish County Sheriffs Office, the City of Edmonds, and numerous other
Snohomish County cities have been participants in the Snohomish Regional Drug Gang Task Force
(SRDGTF) with offices located in Marysville. Edmonds was one of the original participants, contributing
a detective and equipment to the unit. In more recent years, Edmonds, Lynnwood, and Mountlake Terrace
established the South Snohomish County Narcotics Task Force (SSCNTF). Since the creation of the
SSCNTF, Edmonds, Lynnwood, and Mountlake Terrace have chosen to continue their support of the
SRDGTF through financial contribution alone. Edmonds presently has a detective assigned to the
SSCNTF. The SRDGTF receives the majority of its funding through a U.S. Department of Justice grant.
The grant amount is based on the number and population of municipalities that participate in the
SRDGTF. The required matching funds for the federal grant come from Snohomish County and the
participating municipalities. For fiscal year 2015-2016, the Snohomish County Sheriffs Office, twenty
municipalities, DSHS Child Protective Services,the Washington State Patrol, and Snohomish Health
District, are pledging matching funds to the SRDGTF. Edmonds’ share for July 1, 2015 through June 30,
2016 is $10,548, an increase of $4 over the last contract term. Funding for this item is included in the
2015 Edmonds Police budget. The interlocal agreement and the funding received from participating
entities, is set forth in the operational framework for the SRDGTF, and has been so since 1988. The
SRDGTF and SSCNTF work very closely and assist each other with staffing and equipment, as needed.
For example, should we encounter a drug lab locally the SRDGTF can be called out to dismantle the lab.
This assistance can literally save us thousands of dollars in overtime, training, hazardous materials and
equipment expenses. A more frequent area of cooperation and assistance occurs with investigations in
which the two task forces may assist each other with investigations involving mutual suspects. We
request that the Council approve this matter authorizing the Mayor to sign the FY 2015-2016 interlocal
agreement with SRDGTF. The ILA has been approved by the City Attorney as to form.
Packet Page 128 of 680
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2015-2016
Revenue:
Expenditure:
Fiscal Impact:
For fiscal year 2015-2016, the Snohomish County Sheriffs Office, twenty municipalities, DSHS Child
Protective Services,the Washington State Patrol, and Snohomish Health District, are pledging matching
funds to the SRDGTF. Edmonds’ share for July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016 is $10,548, an increase
of $4 over the last contract term. Funding for this item is included in the 2015 Edmonds Police budget.
Attachments
2015-2016 Task Force ILA
SRDGTF ILA Signature Page
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
City Clerk Scott Passey 06/11/2015 10:29 AM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/11/2015 10:31 AM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/11/2015 11:15 AM
Form Started By: Don Anderson Started On: 06/10/2015 11:54 AM
Final Approval Date: 06/11/2015
Packet Page 129 of 680
Packet Page 130 of 680
Packet Page 131 of 680
Packet Page 132 of 680
Packet Page 133 of 680
Packet Page 134 of 680
Packet Page 135 of 680
Packet Page 136 of 680
Packet Page 137 of 680
Packet Page 138 of 680
Packet Page 139 of 680
Packet Page 140 of 680
Packet Page 141 of 680
Packet Page 142 of 680
Packet Page 143 of 680
Packet Page 144 of 680
Packet Page 145 of 680
EXHIBIT D
SRDGTF Executive Board
Chief of Everett (Asst Chair), Chief of Lynnwood, Snohomish County Sheriff (Chair),
Snohomish County Prosecutor, City of Everett Attorney, SRDGTF Commander
Commander
Operations Lt.
SCSO
Operations Sgt
EPD
4 EPD Det.
1 SCSO Det
DOC Agent
Reserve Det
P/T SCSO
FBI Agent
Gang
Liason
Officer
(GLO)
Operations Sgt
SCSO
3 SCSO Det. 1 WSP Det.
1 Tech Det -
SCSO Volunteer P/T
WA State
Gambling Det -
P/T
ICE Agent
1 Criminal
Deputy
Prosecutor
Legal Secretary
Admin Assistant
EPD
Admin Lt.
EPD
Admin Sgt
SCSO
1 Financial Det -
Everett PD
CPS/DEC
Invest - P/T
Educational
Deputy - SCSO
National Guard
Analyst
LE Secretary -
SCSO
Educational
Officer/ K9
Arlington PD
IRS Agent
Health District
Community Mobilization / Sno
Co Drug Action Team
Sno County Gang Community
Response Team (G-CRT)
Lab Team
Drug Take Back
Packet Page 146 of 680
ATTEST:
APPROVED AT THE DIRECTION OF THE PARTICIPATING JURISDICTION:
________________________________ Dated
Title___________________________ Jurisdiction of
ATTEST:
________________________________
Jurisdiction Clerk Dated
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
Jurisdiction Attorney Dated
Packet Page 147 of 680
AM-7803 3. H.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted For:Rob English Submitted By:Robert English
Department:Engineering
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Authorization for Mayor to sign a Supplemental Agreement with KPG, Inc for the 238th St SW Walkway
and Drainage Improvements project
Recommendation
Authorize Mayor to sign the Supplemental Agreement.
Previous Council Action
On June 9, 2015, staff presented the Supplemental Agreement with KPG, Inc. to full Council and
they forwarded the item to the June 16, 2015 consent agenda.
On January 21, 2014, City Council authorized the Mayor to sign a Professional Service Agreement with
KPG for the design of the 238th St SW Walkway Project.
Narrative
The City was awarded a Safe Routes to School grant in 2013 to fund the design and construction of a
walkway on 238th St. between 100th Ave and 104th Ave. The walkway project was combined with the
previously planned stormwater improvements on 238th St. The stormwater improvements will be paid by
the Stormwater Utility Fund 422 and the pavement overlay on 238th St. will be paid by Fund 422 and
Puget Sound Energy.
The supplement will provide engineering support services during construction. The scope of
work includes attending the pre-construction meeting, on-call field support, review of submittals and
request for information (RFI’s), review of change orders and record drawings at the end of the project.
The fee for the supplemental agreement is $26,024 and will be funded by Fund 422, the Safe Routes to
School grant and Puget Sound Energy.
Attachments
KPG Supplemental Agreement
Project Map
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Packet Page 148 of 680
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Engineering (Originator)Robert English 06/11/2015 03:14 PM
Public Works Phil Williams 06/11/2015 04:23 PM
City Clerk Scott Passey 06/12/2015 05:54 AM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/12/2015 08:11 AM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/12/2015 09:04 AM
Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 06/10/2015 12:34 PM
Final Approval Date: 06/12/2015
Packet Page 149 of 680
SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
238th Street SW Walkway with Stormwater Project
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, Washington, hereinafter referred to as the “City”, and
KPG, P.S., hereinafter referred to as the “Consultant”, entered into an underlying agreement for
design, engineering and consulting services with respect to a project known as 238th Street SW
Walkway with Stormwater Project, dated December 12, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the consultant will provide support on the final design and construction of
the project; NOW, THEREFORE,
In consideration of mutual benefits occurring, it is agreed by and between the parties
thereto as follows:
1. The underlying Agreement of December 12, 2014 between the parties,
incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth, is amended in, but only in, the
following respects:
1.1 Scope of Work. The Scope of Work set forth in the underlying agreement
shall be amended to include the additional services and material necessary to accomplish the
stated objectives as outlined in the attached Exhibit A incorporated by this reference as fully as if
herein set forth.
1.2 The $177,201.44 amount set forth in paragraph 2A of the underlying
Agreement and stated as an amount which shall not be exceeded, is hereby amended to include
an additional not to exceed amount of $26,024.28 for the additional scope of work identified in
Exhibit A to this supplemental agreement. As a result of this supplemental agreement, the total
contract amount is increased to a new total not-to-exceed amount of $203,225.72 ($177,201.44
plus $26,024.28).
1.3 Exhibit B to the underlying agreement consisting of the rate and cost
reimbursement schedule is hereby amended to include the form set forth on the attached
Exhibit B to this addendum, incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set forth.
2. In all other respects, the underlying agreement between the parties shall remain in
full force and effect, amended as set forth herein, but only as set forth herein.
DONE this day of , 20 .
Packet Page 150 of 680
CITY OF EDMONDS KPG, P.S.
By: By:
Mayor David O. Earling Title:
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
Scott Passey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Office of the City Attorney
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)ss
COUNTY OF )
On this day of , 20____, before me, the under-signed, 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 151 of 680
Exhibit A
City of Edmonds
238th Street SW Walkway with Stormwater Project
Supplement No. 1
Construction Engineering Support
Scope of work
June 4, 2015
This supplement is provided for the following work in support of final design and construction of the
238th Street SW Walkway with Stormwater Project:
Task 9: Geotechnical Coordination
The Consultant shall coordinate with the City’s on call geotechnical engineer (Shannon and
Wilson) to obtain field infiltration rates for final design of the rain gardens. The current design is
based on recommendations provided by Shannon and Wilson on nearby infiltration facilities of 2-
inches per hour. Shannon and Wilson will perform additional site specific infiltration testing
required to meet City Stormwater Code and validate the design facility sizing.
Assumptions:
• Infiltration testing is being provided to meet code requirements and verify design sizing. It is
not anticipated that results of field infiltration rates will affect sizing or require re-design of
engineered rain gardens that have been developed to date.
Deliverables:
Items to be provided by the Consultant:
• Final Stormwater Technical Memorandum incorporating verified infiltration rates.
Task 10: On call Construction Engineering
The Consultant shall provide on-call Construction Engineering support services for the 238th Street
SW Walkway with Stormwater Project. All effort on this project will be as requested by the City. It
is anticipated that budgets between Tasks will be adjusted as required to provide the requested
services. The Consultant shall provide notification and receive written approval prior to exceeding
the approved total project budget. The scope of services and associated cost of services (Exhibit
B-1) are based upon the assumptions outlined below.
A. The Consultant shall provide project management of consultant staff and prepare progress
reports to be included with the monthly invoices.
B. Prepare for and attend pre-construction conference with the City, Contractor, and affected
utilities. Meeting arrangements will be by the City.
C. The Consultant shall provide the on-call field support to the City inspector for the duration of
construction. The level of effort for field support time is estimated at 4 site visits.
Packet Page 152 of 680
D. The Consultant shall review material submittals and RFI’s provided by the Contractor as
requested by the City. Submittals pertaining to contractor means, methods, and
sequencing (traffic control, erosion control, etc.) will be reviewed by the City.
E. The Consultant shall review change conditions as they arise and make recommendation to
the City for field changes/change orders.
F. Prepare Record Drawings for the 238th Street SW Walkway with Stormwater Project based
on redline drawings provided by the City.
Deliverables:
Items to be provided by the Consultant:
• Documentation from site meetings, change conditions, and field directives.
• Change orders, if required.
• Full size Record Drawing .pdf
Packet Page 153 of 680
EX
H
I
B
I
T
B
-
1
HO
U
R
A
N
D
F
E
E
E
S
T
I
M
A
T
E
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
:
C
i
t
y
o
f
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
23
8t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
S
W
W
a
l
k
w
a
y
w
i
t
h
S
t
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
Su
p
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
1
-
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
Ju
n
e
4
,
2
0
1
5
Total Fee
Pr
o
j
E
n
g
r
De
s
i
g
n
e
n
g
r
Se
n
i
o
r
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Se
n
.
U
r
b
D
e
s
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
Su
r
v
e
y
Ta
s
k
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Ma
n
a
g
e
r
Pr
o
j
.
S
u
r
v
e
y
o
r
Su
r
v
e
y
o
r
c
r
e
w
Te
c
h
n
i
c
i
a
n
Cl
e
r
i
c
a
l
Di
r
e
c
t
O
v
e
r
h
e
a
d
P
r
o
f
i
t
E
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
i
e
r
64
.
9
0
$
5
6
.
5
6
$
40
.
1
3
$
34
.
6
2
$
50
.
6
5
$
2
8
.
8
5
$
2
1
.
6
3
$
H
o
u
r
s
L
a
b
o
r
C
o
s
t
1
4
1
.
4
5
%
3
0
%
2
.
7
1
4
5
Wo
r
k
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
9
-
G
e
o
t
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
A.
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
w
i
t
h
S
h
a
n
n
o
n
a
n
d
W
i
l
s
o
n
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
4
1
9
3
2
7
4
5
8
524.90 $
Re
i
m
b
u
r
s
a
b
l
e
e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
-$
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
4
1
9
3
274
58 524.90 $
Wo
r
k
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
1
0
-
O
n
c
a
l
l
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
A.
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
a
n
d
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
4
4
0
0
0
0
4
1
2
5
7
2
8
1
0
1
7
2
1,553.67 $
B.
P
r
e
p
a
r
e
f
o
r
a
n
d
a
t
t
e
n
d
p
r
e
c
o
n
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
0
4
4
0
0
0
0
8
3
8
7
5
4
7
1
1
6
1,049.81 $
C.
O
n
c
a
l
l
f
i
e
l
d
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
2
8
1
6
4
0
0
0
3
0
1
,
3
6
3
1
,
9
2
8
4
0
9
3,699.21 $
D.
S
u
b
m
i
t
t
a
l
R
e
v
i
e
w
/
R
F
I
r
e
s
p
o
n
s
e
s
2
1
2
4
0
2
4
0
4
6
8
8
3
,
4
9
0
4
,
9
3
6
1
,
0
4
7
9,472.46 $
E.
F
i
e
l
d
r
e
v
i
e
w
s
/
c
h
a
n
g
e
o
r
d
e
r
s
4
8
1
0
4
`
4
2
3
2
1
,
4
1
0
1
,
9
9
5
4
2
3
3,828.72 $
F.
P
r
e
p
a
r
e
R
e
c
o
r
d
D
r
a
w
i
n
g
s
0
2
8
8
0
3
2
0
5
0
1
,
6
3
4
2
,
3
1
2
4
9
0
4,436.25 $
G.
R
e
i
m
b
u
r
s
a
b
l
e
E
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
Mi
l
e
a
g
e
120.00 $
Re
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
100.00 $
12
38
78
40
0
40
12
22
0
2,
6
8
4
3,529
805 24,260.13 $
12
4
0
8
0
4
0
0
4
0
1
2
2
2
4
2
8
7
8
3
8
0
3
8
6
3
$
2
4
,
7
8
5
.
0
3
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
R
e
s
e
r
v
e
(
5
%
)
$
1
,
2
3
9
.
2
5
To
t
a
l
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
d
F
e
e
$
2
6
,
0
2
4
.
2
8
Ta
s
k
T
o
t
a
l
s
T OT
A
L
H
O
U
R
S
A
N
D
E
S
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
F
E
E
La
b
o
r
H
o
u
r
E
s
t
i
m
a
t
e
Ta
s
k
T
o
t
a
l
s
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
Ci
t
y
o
f
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
Pa
g
e
1
o
f
1
KPG 6/11/2015 Packet Page 154 of 680
PROJECT AREA
E
D
M
O
N
D
S
W
A
Y
(
S
R
-
1
0
4
)
1 0 0 T H A V E W
1 0 4 T H A V E W
238TH ST SW
238TH ST WALKWAY AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
Packet Page 155 of 680
AM-7804 3. I.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted For:Bertrand Hauss Submitted By:Megan Luttrell
Department:Engineering
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Authorization for Mayor to sign the 2015-2019 Commute Trip Reduction Agreement
Recommendation
Authorize Mayor to sign the 2015-2019 Commute Trip Reduction Agreement.
Previous Council Action
On June 9, 2015, staff presented the 2015-2019 Commute Trip Reduction Agreement to full Council and
they forwarded the item to the June 16, 2015 consent agenda.
On August 16, 2011, City Council approved the interlocal agreement with Community Transit for
Commute Trip Reduction 2011-2015.
Narrative
The Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) interlocal agreements are the mechanism through which State
money flows to local jurisdictions to cover the expenses of administering CTR programs. In Snohomish
County, the jurisdictions have agreed to provide 100% of that funding to Community Transit (CT) to
provide the employer outreach and CTR marketing for all "worksites" (defined as employers with 100 or
more employees). In Edmonds, (3) worksites exist (City of Edmonds, Swedish Hospital, and Edmonds
Family Medicine Clinic). On an annual basis, a total of $5,250 is provided to CT to administer this
program (based on $1,750/worksite annual contribution from the State). The main tasks associated with
administering the CTR programs are writing and amending ordinances, reviewing employer annual
reports and program descriptions, and coordinating with the jurisdictions.
This year Edmonds, along with seven other cities and Snohomish County, has opted to again have CT as
the lead agency responsible for implementing and administering the County’s and Cities’ CTR plans and
programs. The funds received from the Washington State Department of Transportation to support the
CTR base plans and programs for all participating jurisdictions will be provided to and managed by CT.
The County and cities will assist CT through the enforcement of their respective CTR ordinances. The
proposed interlocal agreement, Exhibit 1, is a four-year agreement for the period July 1, 2015 to June 30,
2019. The agreement is the same as the one previously approved by Council for 2011-2015. This
proposed agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney’s office.
Attachments
CTR 2015-2019 Interlocal Agreement
Packet Page 156 of 680
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Engineering (Originator)Robert English 06/11/2015 01:29 PM
Public Works Phil Williams 06/11/2015 03:13 PM
City Clerk Scott Passey 06/11/2015 03:22 PM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/11/2015 03:42 PM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/12/2015 05:57 AM
Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 06/10/2015 12:54 PM
Final Approval Date: 06/12/2015
Packet Page 157 of 680
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ADMINISTERING
COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION (CTR) PLANS AND PROGRAMS
This AGREEMENT, entered into by and between Snohomish County Public Transit
Benefit Area (hereinafter referred to as COMMUNITY TRANSIT), and City of
Arlington, City of Bothell, City of Edmonds, City of Lynnwood, City of Marysville, City
of Mukilteo, City of Monroe, City of Mountlake Terrace, (hereinafter referred to as the
CITIES), and hereinafter collectively referred to as the PARTIES, WITNESS THAT:
WHEREAS, RCW 70.94.527 requires counties containing urban growth areas
and cities and towns with “major employers,” that are located within urban
growth areas with a state highway segment exceeding the threshold of one
hundred person hours of delay to develop ordinances, plans and programs to
reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV)
commute trips, and thereby reduce vehicle-related air pollution, traffic congestion
and energy use, and
WHEREAS, COMMUNITY TRANSIT worked in partnership with the CITIES
to develop a common CTR plan and ordinance that has been adopted into law by
the CITIES; and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES believe that it is more efficient and effective to
implement the plans and programs in a common manner and to designate
COMMUNITY TRANSIT as the lead agency responsible for coordinating the
development and implementation of the CTR plans and programs for the CITIES;
and
WHEREAS, the PARTIES agree that the CITIES will assist COMMUNITY
TRANSIT through the enforcement of their respective CTR ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the CITIES have determined that the funds to support the CTR base
plans and programs for the CITIES from the Washington State Department of
Transportation (hereinafter referred to as WSDOT) will be provided to and
managed by COMMUNITY TRANSIT to support the implementation and
administration of the CTR plans and programs within the CITIES; and
WHEREAS, the CITIES determine that it is within the best interest of the public
to enter into an interlocal agreement with COMMUNITY TRANSIT, whereby
COMMUNITY TRANSIT will be the lead agency responsible for implementing
and administering the CITIES' CTR plans and programs; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of covenants, conditions, performances and
promises hereinafter contained, the PARTIES hereto agree as follows:
Packet Page 158 of 680
1. RECITALS: The recitals set forth above, constituting a basis of the agreement of
the PARTIES, are incorporated herein by references as if fully set forth.
2. SERVICE PROVISIONS: THE PARTIES shall perform the services specified in
the “STATEMENT of WORK” attached as Exhibit A, which is made a part of
this AGREEMENT by this reference.
3. FUNDING: COMMUNITY TRANSIT shall receive all funds provided by the
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) allocated for the
CITIES to support the administration of the CTR base plans and programs.
4. CHANGE IN FUNDING: This AGREEMENT is contingent upon
COMMUNITY TRANSIT's receipt of funds from the WSDOT. If the WSDOT
funds for CTR are reduced or eliminated, the PARTIES shall review this
AGREEMENT to determine the course of future CTR activities in Snohomish
County and any amendments to this AGREEMENT that may be required.
5. AGREEMENT PERIOD: This AGREEMENT is effective for COMMUNITY
TRANSIT and each individual PARTY as of the date signed by COMMUNITY
TRANSIT and each individual PARTY regardless of the signatures of the other
parties to the agreement. The term of this AGREEMENT shall be from the
effective date until June 30, 2019.
6. TERMINATION: The CITIES and/or COMMUNITY TRANSIT may terminate
this AGREEMENT by providing written notice of such termination, specifying
the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days prior to such date.
Reimbursement for services performed by COMMUNITY TRANSIT, and not
otherwise paid for by WSDOT prior to the effective date of such termination shall
be paid as a pro rate portion of the applicable WSDOT allocation amount by
WSDOT.
7. SEVERABILITY: One or more of the CITIES may withdraw from this
AGREEMENT by providing written notice of such intent, specifying the effective
date thereof, at least thirty (30) days prior to such date. Such a withdrawal shall
not affect other terms or conditions of this AGREEMENT between the remaining
PARTIES. To this end, a withdrawal by a City from this AGREEMENT is
declared severable.
8. AGREEMENT MODIFICATIONS: Any party may request changes to this
AGREEMENT. Any such changes that are mutually agreed upon shall be
incorporated herein by written amendment of this AGREEMENT. No variation
or alteration of the terms of this AGREEMENT shall be valid unless made in
writing and signed by the PARTIES hereto.
Packet Page 159 of 680
9. NONDISCRIMINATION: The PARTIES, in performance of this
AGREEMENT, shall comply with all applicable local, state, and/or federal laws
and ordinances, and agree that they shall not discriminate against any person who
is paid, for work completed, by funds indicated in this AGREEMENT or against
any applicant for such employment on the grounds of race, color, religion,
national origin, age, veteran status, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or
physical disability. The PARTIES shall make reasonable accommodations to the
sensory, mental, or physical disabilities of applicants and employees throughout
the personnel process. In determining the extent of reasonable accommodation,
the following factors will be considered: the safe and efficient operation of the
organization; feasible financial costs and expenses; and the overall type and size
of the organization's operation.
10. INDEMNIFICATION:
A. COMMUNITY TRANSIT shall protect, hold harmless, indemnify, and
defend, at its own expense, the CITIES and their elected and appointed officials,
officers, employees and agents, from any loss or claim for damages of any nature
whatsoever, arising out of the performance of Community Transit of this
Agreement, including claims by the state, COMMUNITY TRANSIT's employees
or third parties, except for those damages solely caused by the negligence or
willful misconduct of the CITIES or their elected and appointed officials, officers,
employees or agents.
The CITIES shall protect, hold harmless, indemnify, and defend, at their own
expense, COMMUNITY TRANSIT, its elected and appointed officials, officers,
employees and agents, from any loss or claim for damages of any nature
whatsoever, arising out of the performance of the indemnifying party, City of this
Agreement, including claims by the state, the CITIES’ employees or third parties,
except for those damages solely caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of
COMMUNITY TRANSIT, its elected and appointed officials, officers,
employees or agents.
B. It is understood and agreed that this AGREEMENT is solely for the benefit of
the PARTIES hereto and gives no right to any other party. No joint venture or
partnership is formed as a result of this AGREEMENT.
C. This indemnification clause shall also apply to any and all causes of action
arising out of performance of work activities under this AGREEMENT. Each
contract for services or activities utilizing funds provided in whole or in part by
this AGREEMENT shall include a provision that the PARTIES are not liable for
damages or claims for damages arising from any subcontractor's performance or
activities under the terms of the contracts.
Packet Page 160 of 680
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City of Arlington, City of Bothell, City of Edmonds, City of
Lynnwood, City of Marysville, City of Mukilteo, City of Monroe, City of Mountlake
Terrace and Community Transit have executed this AGREEMENT as of the date and
year written below.
COMMUNITY TRANSIT CITY OF ARLINGTON
__________________________ ________________________
Authorized Signature Authorized Signature
Emmett Heath Barbara Tolbert
Chief Executive Officer Mayor
__________________________ __________________________
Date Date
CITY OF BOTHELL CITY OF EDMONDS
__________________________ ________________________
Authorized Signature Authorized Signature
Robert Stowe David Earling
City Manager Mayor
__________________________ __________________________
Date Date
CITY OF LYNNWOOD CITY OF MARYSVILLE
__________________________ ________________________
Authorized Signature Authorized Signature
Nicola Smith Jon Nehring
Mayor Mayor
__________________________ __________________________
Date Date
Packet Page 161 of 680
CITY OF MONROE CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE
__________________________ __________________________
Authorized Signature Authorized Signature
Geoffrey Thomas Jerry Smith
Mayor Mayor
__________________________ __________________________
Date Date
CITY OF MUKILTEO
__________________________
Authorized Signature
Jennifer Gregerson
Mayor
__________________________
Date
Packet Page 162 of 680
EXHIBIT "A"
Statement of Work
ADMINISTERING COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION PLANS
1. INTRODUCTION
The Cities of Arlington, Bothell, Edmonds, Lynnwood, Marysville, Mukilteo,
Monroe and Mountlake Terrace (CITIES) have all adopted a similar CTR
ordinance.
This STATEMENT OF WORK is incorporated into the Interlocal Agreement
titled "INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR ADMINISTERING COMMUTE
TRIP REDUCTION (CTR) PLANS” and outlines the tasks and responsibilities
for each of the PARTIES.
COMMUNITY TRANSIT TASKS
2. GENERAL TASKS
2.1 Maintain and administer the CITIES' CTR Plans and programs according
to the provisions of RCW 70.94.521-551.
2.2 Provide Washington State Department of Transit (WSDOT) with a public
hearing notice and copies of any proposed amendments to the CITIES'
CTR ordinance, plan, and/or administrative guidelines within the first
week of the public review period, and final copies of such action within
one (1) month of adoption.
2.3 Establish and maintain books, records, documents, and other evidence and
accounting procedures and practices, sufficient to reflect properly all
direct and indirect costs of whatever nature claimed to have been incurred
and anticipated to be incurred solely for the performance of this
AGREEMENT. To facilitate the administration of the work described in
this AGREEMENT, separate accounts shall be established and maintained
within COMMUNITY TRANSIT'S existing accounting system or set up
independently. Such accounts are referred to herein collectively as the
“CTR Account”. All costs charged to the CTR Account, including any
approved services contributed by the CITIES shall be supported by
properly executed payrolls, time records, invoices, contracts, vouchers, or
products evidencing in proper detail the nature and propriety of the
charges.
Packet Page 163 of 680
3. SERVICES PROVIDED TO EMPLOYERS
Provide affected employers with access to information and services, which will enable
them to plan, implement, and manage Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) programs in a
way that implements the CITIES’ CTR plans and ordinances and meets individual
employer goals.
3.1 Organize the content and format of a comprehensive CTR educational
program for employers and jurisdictions.
3.2 Ensure that the comprehensive CTR educational program in Snohomish
County is consistent with that developed by the Washington State
Technical Assistance Team.
3.3 Each of the CITY ordinances requires employers to appoint an Employee
Transportation Coordinator (ETC) who will coordinate the CTR program
at that employment site. Personalized assistance to and on-site
presentations will be provided to ETCs, managers and employees.
3.4 Offer free to affected employers complete ETC training at least once every
six months with priority given to designated ETCs.
3.5 Provide opportunities for ETCs to network with the ETCs of other
affected employers.
3.6 Continue to provide outreach assistance to affected employers, new
affected employers, and potential affected employers.
3.7 Provide information and technical assistance to affected employers in
preparing and revising individual trip reduction programs. Explain legal
requirements and assist with initial survey and plan development.
3.8 Work with CITIES to develop new transportation demand management
(TDM) programs to implement CTR Plans such as Telework, Alternative
Work Hours, Subsidy/Incentives, and Parking Management.
3.9 Coordinate and facilitate employer networking, employer peer
reinforcement and employer recognition programs.
3.10 Produce two annual rideshare campaigns and distribute campaign
materials.
3.11 Plan, promote and implement employer transportation events, including
customized worksite carpool and vanpool events, and provide event
prizes.
3.12 Design and distribute CTR marketing materials, including new employee
orientation materials, which employers may use or copy to implement,
promote and manage CTR programs.
3.13 Provide employers with access to information, materials and programs that
will enable them to adequately promote CTR programs. Produce
customized marketing materials for employees upon request.
Packet Page 164 of 680
3.14 Be available to attend at least one rideshare fair or employer promotion
per year for each affected employer. Encourage employers to work
together and hold joint events.
3.15 Support CTR programs by offering supplemental services including a
regional ride matching program, vanpool program and Guaranteed Ride
Home program.
3.16 Take the lead in coordinating the survey process for employers. Provide
survey workshops to employers during measurement years. Distribute and
collect the state “CTR Employee Questionnaires” (survey forms). Work
with the appropriate agencies to coordinate the processing of the employer
surveys. Ensure that employers timely receive their survey results. Offer
survey follow-up meetings to all employers. Return processed surveys to
employers.
3.17 Send or deliver employer surveys for processing as instructed by WSDOT.
Prior to sending or delivering any surveys, notify WSDOT of the name of
the worksite(s) and the employer identification code(s) for any surveys
being submitted for processing. The notification should be submitted via
electronic mail, fax, or U.S. Postal Services.
4. ANNUAL EMPLOYER REPORTING & PROGRAM REVIEW
4.1 Notification of Newly Affected Sites as defined by CITY ordinance
4.1.1 Identify list of potential new sites and contact person and send
notification inquiry to determine if affected.
4.1.2 Confirm status and secure state ID code.
4.1.3 Create timeline and legal file.
4.2 Site Analysis and Program Review
4.2.1 Notify affected employers when quarterly and/or annual program
reports are due and provide affected employers with limited direct
assistance in preparing written program submissions.
4.2.2 Review program reports for completeness for new sites and for
sites that made progress toward goal.
4.2.3 For sites that didn’t make progress, review survey results and
recent program data and evaluate the potential for progress toward
single occupant vehicle (SOV)/vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
reduction.
4.2.4 Make recommendations to CITIES for program improvements for
sites that did not make progress.
4.2.5 Generate approval/non-approval letter for CITIES signature.
4.2.6 Follow up with employers whose programs have not been
approved and assist in modifying CTR program.
Packet Page 165 of 680
4.3 Exemptions & Modification
4.3.1 Receive employer requests for exemptions or modifications and
send copy of request to CITIES.
4.3.2 Copy request to WSDOT for comment.
4.3.3 Review and analyze request and provide comments to CITIES;
CITIES reviews analysis and provides directions to
COMMUNITY TRANSIT.
4.3.4 Generate and send response if directed so by CITIES.
4.4 Records Maintenance
4.4.1 Maintain database and master file records on all affected worksites.
4.4.2 Provide WSDOT with electronic or hard copy of each employer
program report approved within the quarter.
5. COORDINATION
5.1 Serve as a liaison between WSDOT and the CITIES for the purposes of
RCW 70.94.521-551.
5.2. Coordinate CTR outreach and marketing efforts with the CITIES and
other transit agencies (including Metro CTR and Metro Rideshare) in
order to create a comprehensive CTR program.
5.3 Collaborate directly with the CTR planning coordinators from the CITIES
in working with affected employers to facilitate the timely development,
submission, implementation, and revision of affected employer programs.
5.4 Coordinate and facilitate CTR coordinator’s group meetings consisting of
the CTR planning coordinators from CITIES as needed. This group
functions as an information, coordination, and collaboration group for
CTR activities.
5.5 Attend jurisdiction and regional meetings representing CITIES’ issues.
5.6 Work with CITIES to develop and fund new TDM programs to implement
CTR Plans such as Telework, Alternative Work Hours,
Subsidy/Incentives, and Parking Management.
5.7 Help jurisdictions monitor the progress of affected employers after CTR
programs are implemented.
5.8 Meet at least annually with the each CITY to discuss employer CTR
programs in each jurisdiction.
Packet Page 166 of 680
6. REPORTING
6.1 With an invoice voucher, submit to WSDOT quarterly progress reports in
a format approved by WSDOT, that adequately and accurately assess the
progress made by the CITIES in implementing RCW 70.94.521-551.
These quarterly reports shall be submitted within forty-five (45) days of
the end of each quarter for the first seven (7) quarters and within fifteen
(15) days of the end of the final quarter.
6.2 Provide at least quarterly to WSDOT, updated employer information in
the electronic format provided by WSDOT to satisfy the jurisdictions’
reporting requirement.
6.3 Provide the CITIES with quarterly progress reports including narrative
summary of tasks performed.
CITIES TASKS
7. GENERAL TASKS
7.1 Provide COMMUNITY TRANSIT with copies of any proposed
amendments to the CTR Plan and Ordinance.
7.2 Notify COMMUNITY TRANSIT of potential CTR-affected sites. Send
notification letter to new sites. COMMUNITY TRANSIT will generate
letter for CITIES signature.
7.3 Review business license procedure for ways that the CITIES can more
effectively and efficiently provide Community Transit with information on
potential newly affected employers.
7.4 Attend CTR coordinator group meetings when scheduled.
7.5 Meet with COMMUNITY TRANSIT at least annually to discuss
employer CTR programs.
7.6 Sign annual employer report approval/disapproval letters.
7.7 Attend mediation meetings with employers during program review process
if necessary.
7.8 Review employer exemption/modification requests from analysis
submitted by COMMUNITY TRANSIT. Provide direction to
COMMUNITY TRANSIT draft response to employer (if desired by
CITIES).
7.9 Report to COMMUNITY TRANSIT, at least annually, all activities made
to implement the CTR Plan or Ordinance with an estimation of costs.
Packet Page 167 of 680
AM-7811 3. J.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:Consent
Submitted For:JoAnne Zulauf Submitted By:Megan Luttrell
Department:Engineering
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Sprint Master Use Agreement and Site Use Agreement for installation, operation and maintenance of
wireless equipment in City Rights-of-Way.
Recommendation
Approve Sprint Master Use Agreement and Site Use Agreement.
Previous Council Action
On May 12, 2015, staff presented the proposed documents to the City Council.
On January 27, 2015, staff presented the proposed documents to the City Council.
Narrative
This item was presented at the City Council study session on January 27, 2015. During the discussion, a
question was raised as to whether the proposed MUA would change or prevent the land use code from
applying to Sprint's new wireless sites in City rights-of-way. To address this concern, the City Attorney
has added the language “requirements of Chapter 20.50 ECDC and the” to Section 2, "Authority
Granted" on page 3 of the MUA.
Attached is a proposed Master Use Agreement (MUA) with Sprint Spectrum (Sprint) to allow installation,
operation and maintenance of wireless communication equipment in the City’s rights-of-way. This
agreement is consistent in form with other MUA’s previously executed with AT&T, T-Mobile and
Clearwire. The terms and conditions of the MUA were negotiated by staff with assistance from Michael
Bradley, of Lighthouse Law Group. In addition, Mr. Bradley recommended raising the fee structure to
the following rates to be more consistent with the marketplace:
Old Fee New Fee
New structure/equipment in ROW $5,000 $12,000
New structure/no equipment in ROW $3,000 $11,000
Existing/replaced structure/equipment in ROW $2,000 $10,000
Existing/replaced/no equipment in ROW $2,000 $9,000
Packet Page 168 of 680
The MUA includes a boilerplate Site Use Agreement (Exhibit B) that will be executed for each site
installed within the City. The purpose of this agreement is to formalize the date, location and fee for new
installations. The Site Use Agreement is a new procedure that is being implemented with this MUA to
further document the wireless communication sites that are installed within City right-of-way.
The second attachment is a Site Use Agreement for Sprint’s wireless facilities at 8730 Main St. The City
issued Sprint a building permit to install an antenna on a Snohomish PUD pole on October 8, 2013. The
Agreement addresses the back payment ($11,250) due for the time the facilities were installed to
finalization of the proposed MUA.
If the City Council has no further changes to the documents, then a notice regarding the
ordinance will need to be published before it is adopted by the City Council in accordance with
RCW 35A.47.040.
Attachments
Exhibit A - Sprint Master Use Agreement
Exhibit B - Sprint Site Use Agreement
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Public Works Phil Williams 06/12/2015 09:54 AM
City Clerk Scott Passey 06/12/2015 09:56 AM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/12/2015 10:26 AM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/12/2015 10:43 AM
Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 06/12/2015 09:33 AM
Final Approval Date: 06/12/2015
Packet Page 169 of 680
ORDINANCE NO.
________
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, GRANTING TO SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P.,
A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, ITS MEMBER, A
MASTER USE AGREEMENT, TO INSTALL, OPERATE, AND
MAINTAIN WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
WITHIN A CERTAIN DESIGNATED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-
WAY OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, STATE OF
WASHINGTON, PRESCRIBING CERTAIN RIGHTS, DUTIES,
TERMS, AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO, AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Sprint Spectrum L.P., (“Sprint” or “Permittee”) has requested that the City
of Edmonds (“City”) grant it the right to install, operate, and maintain wireless communication
facilities (“Communication Facilities,” as further defined hereunder) within the public ways of
the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council has found it desirable for the welfare of the City and
its residents that a master use agreement (“Master Use Agreement” or “Agreement”) to address
the installation of multiple Communication Facilities in the public ways be granted to Sprint; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has the authority under RCW 35A.47.040 to grant such
Master Use Agreement and any appropriate installation and maintenance permits (“Permits,” as
further defined hereunder) as may be required to address the installation and maintenance of
specific Communication Facilities in the streets and other public properties of the City; and
WHEREAS, the City is willing to grant the rights requested subject to certain terms and
conditions, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Definitions. For the purposes of this Master Use Agreement, the following
Packet Page 170 of 680
terms, phrases, words, and abbreviations shall have the meanings ascribed to them below. When
not inconsistent with the context, words used in the present tense include the future tense, words in
the plural number include the singular number and words in the singular number include the plural
number.
a. “Affiliate” means an entity which owns or controls, is owned or controlled by, or is
under common ownership with the Permittee.
b. “City” means the City of Edmonds, Washington.
c. “Communication Service” shall mean any telecommunications services,
telecommunications capacity, or dark fiber, provided by the Permittee using its Communication
Facilities, either directly or as a carrier for its subsidiaries, or Affiliates, including, but not limited
to, the transmission of voice, data or other electronic information, facsimile reproduction, burglar
alarm monitoring, meter reading and home shopping, or other subsequently developed technology
which carries an electronic signal over fiber optic cable. However, Communications Service shall
not include the provision of cable television, open video, or similar services, as defined in the
Communications Act of 1934, as amended, for which a separate permit and franchise would be
required.
d. “Communication Facilities” or “Facilities” shall mean only the Permittee’s
wireless communications installations and attendant structures constructed and operated
within the City’s Public Way (as defined below), and shall include all cables, wires, conduits,
ducts, pedestals, and any associated converter, equipment, or other facilities within the City’s
Public Way, designed and constructed for the purpose of providing Communication Service.
This definition shall include such facilities as currently installed and any additional facilities as
are approved pursuant to Chapter 20.50, Wireless Communications Facilities, of the Edmonds
Community Development Code and which are allowed pursuant to an associated Right- of-Way
Construction Permit, as defined immediately below.
e. “Right-of-Way Construction Permit” or “Permit” shall mean that permit required
of Sprint by the City in order to (i) install new Facilities, (ii) perform routine maintenance
activities as to existing Facilities, or (iii) to acknowledge Permittee’s access to its Facilities after
the fact, immediately following resolution of emergencies having necessitated Permittee’s
immediate access of its existing Facilities, within the public ways of the City, pursuant to EMC
Chapter 18.60. Each Permit, issued by the City shall be attached to this Agreement as Exhibit
“B.”
f. “FCC” means the Federal Communications Commission or any successor federal
governmental entity hereto.
g. “Permittee” means Sprint Spectrum L.P., or the lawful successor, transferee, or
assignee thereof.
h. “Person” means an individual, partnership, association, joint stock company, trust,
corporation, or governmental entity.
Packet Page 171 of 680
i. “Public Way” shall mean the surface of, and any space above or below, any
public street, highway, freeway, bridge, path, alley, court, boulevard, sidewalk, parkway, lane,
drive circle, or other public right-of-way, including, but not limited to, public utility easements,
utility strips, or rights-of-way dedicated for compatible uses and any temporary or permanent
fixtures or improvements located thereon now or hereafter held by the City in the Service Area
which shall entitle the City and the Permittee the use thereof for the purpose of installing,
operating, repairing, and maintaining the Communication Facilities. Public Way also shall mean
any easement now or hereafter held by the City within the Service Area for the purpose of public
travel, or for utility or public service use dedicated for compatible uses, and shall include other
easements or rights-of-way as shall within their proper use and meaning entitle the City and the
Permittee to the use thereof for the purposes of installing or transmitting the Permittee’s
Communication Service over poles, wires, cable, conductors, amplifiers, appliances, attachments,
and other property as may be ordinarily necessary and pertinent to the Communication Facilities.
Section 2. Authority Granted. The City hereby grants to the Permittee, its heirs,
successors, legal representatives, and assigns, subject to the requirements of Chapter 20.50 ECDC
and the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, the right, privilege, and authority to construct,
reconstruct, upgrade, expand, operate, maintain, replace, and use all necessary equipment thereto
necessary for the operation of Permittee’s Communication Facilities. However, only the
Permittee is authorized to place its Communications Facilities in, under, on, across, over,
through, along, or below the Public Way of the City described in a separate Site Use Agreement,
which will be attached as Exhibit “A” hereto.
Section 3. Construction Right-of-Way Use Permits Required
A. Prior to site-specific location and installation of any portion of its Communication
Facilities within a public way, the Permittee shall apply for and obtain a Construction Right-of-
Way Permit ECDC Chapter 18.60. In some situations, new or replacement structures may be
required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit depending on their size and location.
B. Unless otherwise provided in said Permit, the Permittee shall give the City at least
forty-eight (48) hours notice of the Permittee’s intent to commence work in the Public Ways.
The Permittee shall file plans or maps with the City showing the proposed location of its
Communication Facilities and pay all duly established Right-of-Way Construction Permit and
inspection fees associated with the processing of the Right-of-Way Use Permit. In no case shall
any work commence within any public way without said Permit, except as otherwise provided in
this Master Use Agreement.
Section 4. Grant Limited to Occupation. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to
grant or convey any right, title, or interest in the Public Ways of the City to the Permittee, nor shall
anything contained herein constitute a warranty of title.
Section 5. Term of Master Use Agreement. The term of this Master Use Agreement
shall be for a period of Five (5) years from the date of acceptance as set forth in Section 32,
Packet Page 172 of 680
unless sooner terminated (“Initial Term”). The Master Use Agreement shall automatically renew
for three (3) additional five (5) year terms based upon the terms and conditions herein (each a
“Renewal Term”). Provided, however, that either party may notify the other of its desire to
renegotiate any of the terms set forth herein or of its desire to add to or delete any such terms no
later than one hundred eighty (180) days prior to the expiration of the Initial Term hereof or any
subsequent Renewal Terms. If either party makes such a request, this Master Use Agreement shall
not renew unless and until the City and Permittee reach an agreement on said modification,
addition, and or deletions, and said agreement is approved by ordinance of the City Council. In the
event that agreement cannot be reached, this Master Use Agreement shall terminate at the end of
the then current term. Nothing in this Section prevents the parties from reaching agreement on
renewal earlier than the time periods indicated.
Section 6. Non-Exclusive Grant. This Agreement shall not in any manner prevent the
City from entering into other similar agreements or granting other or further Master Use
Agreements, Right-of-Way Use Permits, or Franchise Agreements in, under, on, across, over,
through, along or below any of said Public Ways of the City. However, the City shall not
permit any such future Permittee or Franchisee to physically interfere with the Permittee’s
Communication Facilities. In the event that such physical interference or disruption occurs, the
Public Works Director may assist the Permittee and such subsequent Permittee or Franchisee in
resolving the dispute. Further, this Agreement shall in no way prevent or prohibit the City from
using any of its Public Ways or affect its jurisdiction over them, or any part of them, and the City
shall retain power to make all necessary changes, relocations, repairs, maintenance,
establishment, improvement, dedication of the same as the City may deem fit, including the
dedication, establishment, maintenance, and improvement of all new Public Ways, and in
compliance with Section 7, below.
Section 7. Relocation of Communication Facility.
A. The Permitee agrees and covenants, at its sole cost and expense, to protect, support,
temporarily disconnect, relocate, or remove from any public way any portion of its
Communication Facilities when so required by the Public Works Director by reason of traffic
conditions, public safety, dedications of new Public Ways and the establishment and improvement
thereof, widening and improvement of existing Public Ways, street vacations, freeway
construction, change or establishment of street grade, or the construction of any public
improvement or structure by any governmental agency acting in a governmental capacity; provided
that the Permittee shall in all cases have the privilege to temporarily relocate, in the authorized
portion of the same or similar public way upon approval by the Public Works Director, any
section of cable or any other facility required to be temporarily disconnected or removed.
Upon the reasonable request and prior written notice, in non-emergency situations at least
sixty (60) days notice, by the Public Works Director and in order to facilitate the design of City
street and right-of-way improvements, the Permittee agrees to, at its sole cost and expense,
locate, and if reasonably determined necessary by the City, to excavate and expose portions of its
Communication Facilities for inspection so that the location of same may be taken into account in
the improvement design, PROVIDED that, Permittee shall not be required to excavate and expose
Packet Page 173 of 680
its Facilities unless the Permittee’s as-built plans and maps of its Facilities submitted pursuant to
Section 9 of this Agreement are reasonably determined by the Public Works Director to be
inadequate for purposes of this paragraph. The decision to require relocation of said Facilities in
order to accommodate the City’s improvements shall be made by the Public Works Director upon
review of the location and construction of the Permittee’s Facilities.
If the Public Works Director determines that the project necessitates the relocation of the
Permittee’s then existing Facilities, the City shall:
1. Within a reasonable time, which shall be no less than thirty (30) days ,
prior to the commencement of such improvement project, provide the Permittee
with written notice requiring such relocation. In the event that such relocation
requires land use approvals by the City, such notice period shall be extended by an
additional ninety (90) days. Provided, however, that in the event an
emergency posing a threat to public safety, health or welfare, or in the event of an
emergency beyond the control of the City and which will result in severe
financial consequences to the City, the City shall give the Permittee written
notice as soon as practicable; and
2. Provide the Permittee with copies of information for such improvement project
and a proposed location for the Permittee’s Facilities so that the Permittee may
relocate its Facilities in other Public Ways in order to accommodate such
improvement project.
3. The Permittee shall complete relocation of its Facilities at no charge or expense to
the City so as to accommodate the improvement project at least ten (10) days
prior to commencement of the project. In the event of an emergency as described
herein, the Permittee shall relocate its Facilities within a reasonable time period
specified by the Public Works Director.
The Permittee may, after receipt of written notice requesting a relocation of its Facilities,
submit to the City written alternatives to such relocation. The City shall evaluate such alternatives
and advise the Permittee in writing if one or more of the alternatives are suitable to accommodate
the work which would otherwise necessitate relocation of the Facilities. If so requested by the
City, the Permittee shall submit additional information to assist the City in making such evaluation.
The City shall give each alternative proposed by the Permittee full and fair consideration, within
a reasonable time, so as to allow for the relocation work to be performed in a timely
manner. In the event the City ultimately determines that there is no other reasonable alternative,
the Permittee shall relocate its Facilities as otherwise provided in this Section.
The provisions of this Section shall in no manner preclude or restrict the Permittee from
making any arrangements it may deem appropriate when responding to a request for relocation
of its Facilities by any person or entity other than the City, where the Facilities to be constructed
by said person or entity are not or will not become City-owned, operated or maintained Facilities
provided that such arrangements do not unduly delay a City construction project.
Packet Page 174 of 680
B. Except as provided in Section 16 (E), the Permittee will indemnify, hold
harmless, and pay the costs of defending the City against any and all claims, suits, actions,
damages, or liabilities for delays on City construction projects caused by or arising out of the
failure of the Permittee to relocate its Facilities in a timely manner; provided, that the Permittee
shall not be responsible for damages due to delays caused by the City or circumstances beyond
the control of the Permittee.
C. The parties understand that the relocation of Facilities placed in the right-of-way
is partially governed by RCW 35.99, et al., and to the extent that the provisions of this section
are not in compliance with the terms of RCW 35.99 et.al. (or successor statute), the provisions of
the statute shall control and the terms of this section shall be amended to be in conformance
thereto.
Section 8. The Permittee’s Maps and Records. After construction is complete, the
Permittee shall provide the City with accurate copies of all as-built plans and maps in a form and
content prescribed by the Public Works Director. These plans shall be provided at no cost to
the City, and shall include hard copies and digital copies in a format specified by the Public Works
Director.
Section 9. Work in Public Ways. During any period of relocation, construction, or
maintenance, all surface structures, if any, shall be erected and used in such places and positions
within said Public Ways and other public properties so as to interfere as little as possible with the
free passage of traffic and the free use of adjoining property. The Permittee shall at all times
post and maintain proper barricades and comply with all applicable safety regulations during
such period of construction as required by the ordinances of the City or the laws of the State of
Washington, including RCW 39.04.180 for the construction of trench safety systems.
During the progress of the work, the Permittee shall not unnecessarily obstruct the
passage of proper use of the Public Ways, and all work by the Permittee in the area covered by this
Agreement and as described in this Section shall be performed in accordance with City of
Edmonds Public Works Construction Standards and warranted for a period of two (2) years.
If either the City or the Permittee shall at any time after the initial installation of the
Facilities plan to make excavations in areas covered by this Agreement and as described in this
Section, the party planning such excavation shall afford the other, upon receipt of written request
to do so, an opportunity to share such an excavation. PROVIDED THAT:
A. Such joint use shall not unreasonably delay the work of the party causing the
excavation to be made or unreasonably increase its costs; and
B. Such joint use shall be arranged and accomplished on terms and conditions
satisfactory to both parties; and
C. Either party may deny such request for safety reasons or if their respective uses of
the trench are incompatible; and
Packet Page 175 of 680
D. Such joint use shall not interfere with the operation of the Communication
Facility.
The joint use provisions of this Section shall apply only to joint use by the City and the
Permittee. Nothing in this Section is intended to require the Permittee to afford other similar
users the opportunity to share the Permittee’s excavations.
Section 10. Restoration after Construction. The Permittee shall, after installation,
construction, relocation, maintenance, removal, or repair of its Communication Facilities within
the Public Ways, restore the surface of said Public Ways and any other City-owned property which
may be disturbed by the work, to at least the same condition the public way or City-owned
property was in immediately prior to any such installation, construction, relocation, maintenance,
or repair, reasonable wear, and tear excepted. The Public Works Department shall have final
approval of the condition of such Public Ways and City-owned property after restoration, all in
accordance with the Edmonds City Code and Public Works Construction standards. All survey
monuments which are to be disturbed or displaced by such work shall be referenced and restored,
as per WAC 332-120, as the same now exists or may hereafter be amended, and all pertinent
federal, state and local standards and specifications. The Permittee agrees to promptly complete
all restoration work and to promptly repair any damage caused by such work to the Public Ways
or other affected area at its sole cost and expense according to the time and terms specified in the
Construction Right-of-Way Permit issued by the City, all in accordance with the applicable
provisions of the Edmonds City Code, as the same now exists or as it may hereafter be amended or
superseded. All work and restoration by the Permittee pursuant to this Section shall be performed
in accord with City of Edmonds Public Works Construction standards and warranted for a period
of two (2) year.
Section 11. Emergency Work – Right-of-Way Use Permit Waiver. In the event of any
emergency in which any of the Permittee’s Communication Facilities located in, above, or under
any public way breaks, are damaged, cease to provide service, or if the Permittee’s construction
area is otherwise in such a condition as to immediately endanger the property, life, health, or safety
of any individual, the Permittee shall immediately take the proper emergency measures to repair
its Facilities, to cure or remedy the dangerous conditions for the protection of property, life,
health, or safety of individuals without first applying for and obtaining a Right-of-Way
Construction Permit as required under this Agreement. However, this shall not relieve the
Permittee from the requirement of notifying the City of the emergency work and obtaining any
Permits necessary for this purpose after the emergency work. The Permittee shall notify the
City by telephone immediately upon learning of the emergency and shall apply for all required
Permits not later than the second succeeding day during which the Edmonds City Hall is open for
business.
Section 12. Dangerous Conditions, Authority for City to Abate. Whenever construction,
installation, or excavation of the communication Facilities authorized by this Agreement has
caused or contributed to a condition that appears to substantially impair the lateral support of the
adjoining public way, street, or public place, or endangers the public, street utilities, or City-
Packet Page 176 of 680
owned property, the Public Works Director may reasonably require the Permittee, at the
Permittee’s own expense, to take action to protect the public, adjacent public places, City-owned
property, streets, utilities, and Public Ways. Such action may include compliance within a
prescribed time.
In the event that the Permittee fails or refuses to promptly take the actions directed by the
City, or fails to fully comply with such directions, or if emergency conditions exist which require
immediate action, the City may enter upon the property and take such actions as are necessary to
protect the public, the adjacent streets, utilities, Public Ways, to maintain the lateral support
thereof, or actions regarded as necessary safety precautions; and the Permittee shall be liable to the
City for the reasonable costs thereof and any fines accrued pursuant to ECDC Chapter 20.110.
Section 13. Recovery of Costs. The Permittee shall be subject to all and Right-of-Way
Use Permit fees associated with activities undertaken through the authority granted in this
Agreement or under the laws of the City. Where the City incurs costs and expenses for review,
inspection, appraisal, audit, or supervision of activities undertaken through the authority granted in
this Agreement, or any ordinances relating to any subject not addressed in this Agreement, the
Permittee shall reimburse the City directly for any and all reasonable costs, after receipt of an
itemized bill.
In addition to the above, the Permittee shall promptly reimburse the City for any and all
reasonable costs the City i ncurs in response to any emergency involving the Permittee’s
Communication Facilities, after receipt of an itemized bill.
The time of City employees shall be charged at their respective rate of salary, including
overtime if applicable, plus benefits. All billings will be itemized as to specifically identify the
costs and expenses for each project for which the City claims reimbursement. The billing may
be on an annual basis, but the City shall provide the Permittee with the City’s itemization of
costs at the conclusion of each project for information purposes.
Section 14. Annual Consideration for Use of the Right-of-Way under this Master Use
Agreement:
A. For the purposes of this section, “New Support Structure(s)” means a monopole,
or similar structure erected solely for the purpose of installation of wireless antennas in
the Right-of-Way where previously no similar structure had existed.
B. For the purposes of this section, "Existing Support Structure(s)" means existing
utility poles, light poles or other similar approved structures that exist in the Right-of-
Way that can be used to support wireless antennas. Buildings are considered Existing
Support Structure(s) when used to support wireless antennas that encroach into or over the
Right of Way.
C. For the purposes of this section, "Replacement Structure(s)" means a structure
that is similar to an Existing Support Structure, but either taller and/or stronger than an
Existing Support Structure, and which replaces an Existing Support Structure for
purposes of placement of wireless antennas.
Packet Page 177 of 680
D. The compensation provided for in Subsection “F,” below, shall be adjusted
annually, each year of the first five-year term, by an increase of five percent (5%). An
appraisal and site audit shall be conducted by the City and the parties shall meet in the
fourth (4th) year and prior to each renewal anniversary thereafter, to revisit the provisions
of this section and Section 17, Insurance, to establish levels of compensation, annual
adjustments thereto, and insurance, consistent with that charged by comparable local
jurisdictions. Neither party shall unreasonably withhold its acceptance and approval of a
reasonable adjustment to the level of compensation so proposed by the other party under
this section. Permittee shall pay annual compensation prior to the 15th of January of each
year of this Agreement.
E. In the event that the Permittee’s Facilities are out of service due to a relocation
under the provisions of Section 7 for the convenience of the City, a credit equal to the
prorated value of the time the Facilities are out of service shall be provided on the
subsequent year’s compensation.
F. In consideration for each Site Use Agreement and the use of the Right-of-Way
described therein, Permittee shall commit to providing an annual payment for each
approved Facility reflected in each Site Use Agreement, all of which shall be attached as
Exhibit “A.” The amount of the annual payment for the first five-year term shall be as
follows:
1. Antennas placed on a New Support Structure, equipment cabinets are in the
Right of Way, annual payment is Twelve Thousand Dollars ($12,000.00).
2. Antennas placed on a New Support Structure, where no equipment cabinets
are in the Right of Way, annual payment is Eleven Thousand Dollars ($11,000.00)
3. Antennas placed on an Existing Support Structure or Replacement Structure,
with equipment cabinet or other associated equipment located within the
public Right-of-Way, annual payment is Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00).
4. Antennas placed on an Existing Support Structure or Replacement
Structure, where no equipment cabinet or other associated equipment is
located within the public Right-of-Way, annual payment is Nine Thousand Dollars
($9,000.00).
Consideration to the City under this Section for all sites constructed by Permittee shall be
memorialized in each Site Use Agreement and attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and is in addition to
any Construction Right-of-Way Permit fees.
Section 15. Grant Fee. As additional consideration for the right and privileges granted
hereunder, the Permittee agrees to pay, at the time of acceptance of this Agreement, a one-time
grant fee of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) to defray the City’s legal and administrative costs and
expenses associated with negotiating and approving this Master Use Agreement, provided that
such expenses shall not be included in the reimbursement provisions set forth in Section 14 of this
Agreement.
Packet Page 178 of 680
Section 16. Indemnification and Waiver.
A. Permittee hereby releases, covenants not to bring suit and agrees to indemnify,
defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, agents and representatives
from any and all claims, costs, judgments, awards or liability to any person arising from
injury, sickness, or death of any person or damage to property:
1. For which the negligent acts or omissions of Permittee, its agents,
servants, officers or employees in performing the activities authorized by
this Master Use Agreement are the proximate cause;
2. By virtue of the Permittee’s exercise of the rights granted herein;
3. By virtue of the City’s permitting Permittee’s use of the City’s Public
Ways or other public property that are the subject of this Agreement;
4. Based on the City’s inspection or lack of inspection of work performed by
Permittee, its agents and servants, officers or employees in connection
with work authorized on the Public Ways or property over which the City
has control pursuant to this Agreement or pursuant to any other site-
specific Permit or other approval issued in connection with this
Agreement;
5. Arising as a result of the negligent acts or omissions of Permittee, its
agents, servants, officers or employees in barricading, instituting trench
safety systems or providing other adequate warnings of any excavation,
construction, or work upon the Public Ways, in any public way, or other
Agreement.
B. The provisions of Subsection “A” of this Section shall apply to claims by
Permittee’s own employees and the employees of the Permittee’s agents, representatives,
contractors, and subcontractors to which Permittee might otherwise be immune under
Title 51 RCW. This waiver of immunity under Title 51 RCW has been mutually
negotiated by the parties hereto, and Permittee acknowledges that the City would not
enter into this Agreement without Permittee’s waiver thereof.
C. Inspection or acceptance by the City of any work performed by the Permittee at
the time of completion of construction shall not be grounds for avoidance of any of these
covenants of indemnification. Provided that Permittee has been given prompt written
notice by the City of any such claim, said indemnification obligations shall extend to
claims which are not reduced to a suit and any claims which may be compromised with
Permittee’s consent prior to the culmination of any litigation or the institution of any
litigation. The City has the right to defend or participate in the defense of any such
claim, and has the right to approve any settlement or other compromise of any such
Packet Page 179 of 680
claim, provided that Permittee shall not be liable for such settlement or other compromise
unless it has consented thereto.
D. In the event that Permittee refuses the tender of defense in any suit or any claim,
said tender having been made pursuant to this Section, and said refusal is subsequently
determined by a court having jurisdiction (or such other tribunal that the parties shall
agree to the matter), to have been a wrongful refusal on the part of the Permittee, then
Permittee shall pay all of the City’s costs for defense of the action, including all
reasonable expert witness fees, reasonable attorney’s fees , and the reasonable costs and
fees to City associated with recovering under this Subsection.
E. The obligations of Permittee under the indemnification provisions of this Section
shall apply regardless of whether liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to
persons or damages to property were caused or contributed to by the City, its officers,
agents, employees or contractors except to the extent that such claims, actions, damages,
costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees were caused by the negligence or any willful or
malicious action on the part of the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors. In
the event that a court of competent jurisdiction determines that this Agreement is subject
to the provisions RCW 4.24.115, the parties agree that the indemnity provisions
hereunder shall be deemed amended to conform to said statute and liability shall be
allocated as provided therein.
F. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section, Permittee assumes the risk
of damage to its Communication Facilities located in the Public Ways and upon City-
owned property from such activities conducted by the City, its officers, agents,
employees and contractors, except to the extent any such damage or destruction is caused
by or arises from the negligence or any willful or malicious action on the part of the City,
its officers, agents, employees or contractors. Permittee releases and waives any and all
such claims against the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors. Permittee
further agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City against any claims for
damages, including, but not limited to, business interruption damages and lost profits,
brought by or under users of Permittee’s Facilities as the result of any interruption of
service due to damage or destruction of Permittee’s Facilities caused by or arising out of
activities conducted by the City, its officers, agents, employees or contractors, except to
the extent any such damage or destruction is caused by or arises from the negligence or
any willful or malicious actions on the part of the City, its officers, agents, employees or
contractors.
Section 17. Insurance. The Permittee shall procure and maintain insurance against
claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with
the exercise of the rights, privileges and authority granted hereunder to the Permittee, its agents,
representatives or employees. The Permittee shall provide to the City an insurance certificate
naming the City as an additional insured for its inspection prior to the commencement of any
work or installation of any Facilities pursuant to this Agreement. Such insurance certificate shall
evidence:
Packet Page 180 of 680
A. Comprehensive general liability insurance, written on an occurrence basis,
including contractual liability coverage, with limits not less than:
(1) $3,000,000.00 for bodily injury or death to each person; and
(2) $3,000,000.00 for property damage resulting from any one
accident.
B. Automobile liability for owned, non-owned and hired vehicles with a limit of
$3,000,000.00 for each person and $3,000,000.00 for each accident.
C. Worker’s compensation within statutory limits and employer’s liability insurance
with limits of not less than $1,000,000.00.
The liability insurance policies required by this Section shall be maintained by the
Permittee throughout the term of this Agreement, and such other period of time during which the
Permittee is operating without a Right-of-Way Construction Permit hereunder, or is engaged in
the removal of any of its Communication Facilities in the right of way. Payment of deductibles
and self-insured retentions shall be the sole responsibility of the Permittee. The insurance
certificate required by this Section shall contain a clause stating that the coverage shall apply
separately to each insured against whom a claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to
the limits of the insurer’s liability. The Permittee’s insurance shall be primary insurance with
respect to the City. Any insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees,
consultants, agents, and volunteers shall be in excess of the Permittee’s insurance and shall not
contribute with it.
In addition to the coverage requirements set forth in this Section, the insurance certificate
required by this Section shall contain language which provides that the policy may not be
cancelled, reduced in coverage, nor the intention not to renew be stated until at least thirty (30)
days after receipt by the City of written notice of the same via U.S. mail. Within fifteen (15)
days after receipt by the City of said notice, and in no event later than five (5) days prior to said
cancellation or non-renewal, the Permittee shall obtain and furnish to the City replacement
insurance certificate(s) meeting the requirements of this Section
Section 18. Abandonment and Removal of the Permittee’s Communication Facilities.
Upon the expiration, termination, or revocation of the rights granted under this Agreement, the
Permittee shall remove all of its Communications Facilities from the Public Ways of the City
within ninety (90) days of receiving notice from the Public Works Director. Provided,
however, that the City may permit the Permittee’s improvements to be abandoned and replaced
in such a manner as the parties shall agree, subsequent always to the City’s standard construction
requirements for Right-of-Way use. Upon permanent abandonment, and Permittee’s agreement
to transfer ownership of any Communication Facilities to the City, the Permittee shall submit to the
City a proposal and instruments for transferring ownership to the City. Any such Facilities
abandoned in place without City’s consent and not removed within ninety (90) days of receipt of
Packet Page 181 of 680
notice thereof shall automatically become the property of the City, unless Permittee is prevented
from removing its Facilities by causes beyond its reasonable control including, but not limited to,
acts of God, war, or governmental restrictions. In such case, Permittee’s time for performance of
its obligations under this section will be extended by a reasonable period of time, not to exceed
an additional thirty (30) days in any event, without City’s consent thereto. Provided, however,
that nothing contained within this Section shall prevent the City from compelling the Permittee
to remove any such Facilities through judicial action when the City has not consented to the
Permittee’s abandonment of said Facilities in place.
Section 19. Construction Bond. Before undertaking any of the work, installation,
improvements, construction, repair, relocation or maintenance authorized by this Agreement, the
Permittee shall furnish a Right-of-Way Construction bond written by a corporate surety
acceptable to the City equal to at least 125% of the estimated cost of restoring the Public Ways
of the City to the pre-construction condition required by Section 11 of this Agreement. Said
bond shall be required to remain full force until sixty (60) days after completion of the
construction of Permittee's Communication Facilities and other improvements from the Public
Ways of the City, and said bond, or separate bond acceptable to the City, shall warrant all such
restoration work for a period of two (2) years. In the event that a bond issued to meet the
requirements of this Section is canceled by the surety, after proper notice and pursuant to the
terms of said bond, Permittee shall, prior to expiration of said bond, be responsible for
obtaining a replacement bond which complies with the terms of this Section.
Section 20. Modification. The City and the Permittee hereby reserve the right to alter,
amend or modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement upon the written agreement of both
parties to such alteration, amendment or modification. Said modifications shall be approved by the
City by ordinance and accepted by the Permittee consistent with Section 32 hereof.
Section 21. Forfeiture and Revocation. If the Permittee willfully violates or fails to
comply with any of the material provisions of this Agreement within thirty (30) days following
receipt of written notice of such violation or failure, or through willful misconduct or gross
negligence fails to heed or comply with any written notice given the Permittee by the City under
the provisions of this Agreement within thirty (30) days following receipt of such notice, then the
Permittee shall, at the election of the City Council, forfeit all rights conferred hereunder and this
Agreement may be revoked, terminated or annulled by the City Council after a hearing held upon
reasonable written notice to Permittee. The City Council may decide, after consideration of the
reasons for the Permittee’s failure to comply with this Agreement, to allow the Permittee additional
time to cure before such termination or revocation. The City may elect, in lieu of the above, and
without prejudice to any of its other legal rights and remedies, to obtain an order from the
superior court having jurisdiction compelling the Permittee to comply with the provisions of this
Agreement and to recover its reasonable, documented damages and costs incurred by the City as a
direct result of the Permittee’s failure to comply with the terms of this Agreement.
Section 22. City Ordinances and Regulations. Nothing herein shall be deemed to direct
or restrict the City’s ability to adopt and enforce all necessary and appropriate ordinances
regulating the performance of the conditions of this Agreement, including any valid ordinance
Packet Page 182 of 680
made in the exercise of its police powers in the interest of public safety and for the welfare of the
public. The City shall have the authority at all times to control by appropriate regulations the
locations, elevation, manner or construction and maintenance of any Facilities by the Permittee,
and the Permittee shall promptly conform with all such regulations, unless compliance would
cause the Permittee to violate other requirements of the law.
Section 23. Survival. All of the provisions, conditions, and requirements of this
Agreement shall be in addition to any and all other obligations and liabilities the Permittee may
have to the City at common law, by statute, or by contract. The provisions, conditions, and
requirements of Sections 7, Relocation of Communication System; 9, Work in Public Ways; 10,
Restoration after Construction; 12, Dangerous Conditions, Authority for City to Abate; 16,
Indemnification and Waiver; 17, Insurance; and 18, Abandonment and Removal of the Permittee’s
Communication Facilities, shall survive the expiration or termination of this Master Use
Agreement, and any renewals or extensions thereof, and remain effective until such time as the
Permittee removes its Communication Facilities from the Public Ways, transfers ownership of
said Facilities to a third-party, or abandons said Facilities in place, all as provided herein. All of
the provisions, conditions, regulations and requirements contained in this Agreement shall further
be binding upon the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, legal representatives and assigns
of the Permittee; and all privileges, as well as all obligations and liabilities of the Permittee
shall inure to its heirs, successors, and assigns equally as if they were specifically mentioned
wherever the Permittee is named herein.
Section 24. Severability. In any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Agreement
should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Agreement.
Section 25. Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned or transferred without the
written approval of the City, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed, except
that the Permittee may freely assign this Agreement, in whole or part, to any parent, subsidiary,
or affiliated corporation, or as part of any corporate financing, reorganization, or refinancing. In
the case of transfer or assignment as security by mortgage or other security instrument in whole
or in part to secure indebtedness, such consent shall not be required unless and until the secured
party elects to realize upon the collateral. The Permittee shall provide prompt, written notice to the
City of any such assignment.
Section 26. Notice. Any notice or information required or otherwise provided as
between the parties under this Agreement shall be sent to the following addresses unless
otherwise specified by the parties:
City:
City of Edmonds
Engineering Division
121 5th Avenue N.
Packet Page 183 of 680
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 771-0220
Fax: 425-771-0221
Permittee:
Sprint Property Services
Mailstop: KSOPHT0101-Z2650
6391 Sprint Parkway
Overland Park, KS 66251-2650
with a mandatory copy to:
Sprint Law Department
Mailstop: KSOPHT0101-Z2020
6391 Sprint Parkway
Overland Park, KS 66251-2020
Attn: Real Estate Attorney
Notice shall be deemed provided upon receipt in the case of personal delivery, three (3) days
after deposit in the United States Mail in the case of regular mail, or the next day in the case of
overnight delivery.
Section 27. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding and
agreement between the parties hereto as to the subject matter herein and no other agreements or
understandings, written or otherwise, shall be binding upon the parties upon approval and
acceptance of this Agreement.
Section 28. Attorneys Fees. If any suit or other action is instituted in connection with
any controversy arising under this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all
of its costs and expenses including such sum as the court may judge reasonable for attorneys
fees, including fees upon appeal of any judgment or ruling.
Section 29. Non-waiver. Failure of the City to declare any such breach or default
immediately upon the occurrence thereof, or delay in taking any action in connection therewith,
shall not waive such breach or default, but the City shall have the right to declare any such
breach or default at any time. Failure of the City to declare one breach or default does not act as a
waiver of the City’s right to declare another breach or default.
Section 30. Governing Law/Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed
in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. The venue and jurisdiction over any
dispute related to this Agreement shall be with the Snohomish County Superior Court.
Section 31. Acceptance. Within sixty (60) days after the passage and approval of this
ordinance, this Agreement may be accepted by Permittee by its filing with the City Clerk an
Packet Page 184 of 680
unconditional written acceptance thereof. Failure of the Permittee to so accept this Agreement
within said period of time shall be deemed a rejection thereof, and the rights and privileges
herein granted shall, after the expiration of the sixty (6 0) day period, absolutely cease and
determine, unless the time period is extended by ordinance duly passed for that purpose.
Section 32. 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 the passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title.
CITY OF EDMONDS
MAYOR DAVE EARLING
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK SCOTT PASSEY
APPROVED AS TO FROM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
By:
JEFF TARADAY
Packet Page 185 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
17
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
SIGNED BY THE MAYOR:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.:
Packet Page 186 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
18
SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO.
____________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the day of , 20 , 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, GRANTING TO Sprint Spectrum L.P.,
A MASTER USE AGREEMENT, TO INSTALL, OPERATE, AND MAINTAIN WIRELESS
COMMUNICATION FACILITIES WITHIN A CERTAIN DESIGNATED PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OF
THE CITY OF EDMONDS, STATE OF WASHINGTON, PRESCRIBING CERTAIN RIGHTS, DUTIES,
TERMS, AND CONDITIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO, AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this day of , 201__.
SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLERK
Packet Page 187 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
19
"PERMITTEE"
Sprint Spectrum L.P.
By: Sprint Spectrum L.P.
By:
Print Name:
____________________
Its: _________________________
Date:
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF )
) ss
COUNTY OF )
I CERTIFY that on , 20 , (name of signor) personally came
before me and this person acknowledged under oath to my satisfaction, that:
(a) this person signed, sealed and delivered the attached document as (signors title) for
(company) the limited liability company named in this document;
(b) this document was signed and delivered by the corporation as its voluntary act
and deed, as the member of the limited liability company, on behalf of said limited liability
company.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
Packet Page 188 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
20
EXHIBIT “A”
SITE USE AGREEMENT(S)
Packet Page 189 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
21
EXHIBIT “B”
PERMIT(S)
Packet Page 190 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
22
SITE USE AGREEMENT
This Site Use Agreement ("SUA"), entered into this ______ day of _____________, 20__ (“SUA Effective
Date”) between CITY OF EDMONDS, hereinafter designated as “City” and SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P. a Delaware
Limited Partnership, hereinafter designated as “Permittee.” Each may be called a “Party,” or collectively they may be
called the “Parties.”
1. This SUA is pursuant to Section 14, “Annual Compensation for Use of the Right of Way under this Master
Use Agreement,” of that certain Ordinance No. __________/Master Use Agreement between City and Permittee dated
_________________, 20__ ("MUA"). All of the terms and conditions of the MUA are incorporated herein by this
reference and made a part hereof without the necessity of repeating or attaching the MUA. In the event of a
contradiction, modification or inconsistency between the terms of the MUA and this SUA, the terms of the MUA shall
govern. Capitalized terms used in this SUA shall have the same meaning described for them in the MUA unless
otherwise indicated herein.
2. Site No. and Name (if applicable): CITY: _________________________________________
PERMITTEE:
3. Permittee has established a Communications Facilities at ________________________________ where the
antennas and associated equipment are located on a Snohomish PUD utility pole in City’s Right of Way as shown on
Attachment A attached hereto and incorporated herein, with the associated radio cabinets located on adjacent private
property.
4. In accordance with the MUA, Permittee shall pay to the City an annual fee to collocate on an Existing Support
Structure, where no equipment cabinet or other associated equipment is located within the public Right-of-Way,
in the annual amount of _________________________________($________)(“Annual Fee”) to commence as of
____________________ (“Commencement Date”). Permittee shall make the Annual Fee payment to the City on or
before January 15th of each year beginning on _____________________and each January 15th thereafter. In
accordance with Section 14, for the first five (5) years of this SUA, the Annual Fee shall be increased by five (5)
percent, such escalation to occur on the anniversary of the Commencement Date. The Parties shall determine in the
fifth (5th) year of the MUA what the reasonable compensation level should be under this SUA commencing at the
beginning of the sixth (6th) year.
5. The term of this SUA shall be as set forth in Section 5 of the MUA
6. Notice Addresses:
City, address for rent and notice:
City of Edmonds
Engineering Division
121 5th Avenue N.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 771-0220
Fax: 425-771-0221
Permittee:
Sprint Property Services
Mailstop: KSOPHT0101-Z2650
6391 Sprint Parkway
Overland Park, KS 66251-2650
with a mandatory copy to:
Packet Page 191 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
23
Sprint Law Department
Mailstop: KSOPHT0101-Z2020
6391 Sprint Parkway
Overland Park, KS 66251-2020
Attn: Real Estate Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and affixed their respective seals the day and year first
above written.
City:
CITY OF EDMONDS:
BY: _________________________________
WITNESS__________________ PRINT NAME: ___________________________
TITLE: __________________________________
DATE: __________________________________
Permittee:
SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P.:
BY: ___________________________________
WITNESS PRINT NAME: ____________________________
TITLE: ___________________________________
DATE: ___________________________________
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Site Plan of Communications Facilities
***NOTARIZATIONS FOLLOW ON THE NEXT PAGE***
Packet Page 192 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
24
STATE OF )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the person who appeared before me, and said person
acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument
and acknowledged it as the of to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in
the instrument.
Dated: ________________________
Notary Public
Print Name
My commission expires
(Use this space for notary stamp/seal)
STATE OF )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the person who appeared before me, and said person
acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument
and acknowledged it as the of to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the
instrument.
Packet Page 193 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
25
Dated: ________________________
Notary Public
Print Name
My commission expires
(Use this space for notary stamp/seal)
Packet Page 194 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
26
ATTACHMENT 1
SITE PLAN OF COMMUNICATION FACILITIES UNDER THIS SUA
Packet Page 195 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
1
SITE USE AGREEMENT
This Site Use Agreement ("SUA"), entered into this ______ day of _____________, 2015 (“SUA Effective
Date”) between CITY OF EDMONDS, hereinafter designated as “City” and SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P. a Delaware
Limited Partnership, hereinafter designated as “Permittee.” Each may be called a “Party,” or collectively they may be
called the “Parties.”
1. This SUA is pursuant to Section 14, “Annual Compensation for Use of the Right of Way under this Master
Use Agreement,” of that certain Ordinance No. __________/Master Use Agreement between City and Permittee dated
_________________, 2015 ("MUA"). All of the terms and conditions of the MUA are incorporated herein by this
reference and made a part hereof without the necessity of repeating or attaching the MUA. In the event of a
contradiction, modification or inconsistency between the terms of the MUA and this SUA, the terms of the MUA shall
govern. Capitalized terms used in this SUA shall have the same meaning described for them in the MUA unless
otherwise indicated herein.
2. Site No. and Name (if applicable): CITY: _________________________________________
PERMITTEE: SE63XC212.A, Pine Ridge
3. Permittee has established a Communications Facilities at 8730 Main Street, Edmonds, WA 98020 where the
antennas and associated equipment are located on a Snohomish PUD utility pole in City’s Right of Way as shown on
Attachment A attached hereto and incorporated herein, with the associated radio cabinets located on adjacent private
property.
4. In accordance with the MUA, Permittee shall pay to the City an annual fee to collocate on an Existing Support
Structure, where no equipment cabinet or other associated equipment is located within the public Right-of-Way,
in the annual amount of NINE THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($9,000.00) (“Annual Fee”) to commence as
of January 1, 2014 (“Commencement Date”). Permittee shall make the Annual Fee payment to the City on or before
January 15th of each year beginning retroactively on January 15, 2014 and each January 15th thereafter. In accordance
with Section 14 of the MUA, commencing on January 1, 2015 and on each January 1 thereafter for the first five (5)
years of this SUA, the Annual Fee shall be increased by five percent (5%) (“Escalator”). The Parties shall determine
in the fifth (5th) year of the MUA what the reasonable compensation level should be under this SUA commencing at the
beginning of the sixth (6th) year.
5. Back Fee Payment for 2013 and 2014: Notwithstanding the foregoing in Section 4 of this SUA, the Parties
agree that payment of a fee is due from the date of the original installation of the facility on October 1, 2013 through
December 31, 2013 at the rate of $750.00 per month as well as the Annual Fee for 2014. Within forty-five (45) days of
the full execution of this SUA, Permittee shall make a one-time payment of ELEVEN THOUSAND TWO
HUNDRED FIFTY AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($11,250.00) which represents back rent for this Communications
Facilities for the period from October 1, 2013 through December 31, 2014 (“Back Fee Payment”). No penalties or
interest shall be due and payable so long as payment is received within such forty-five (45) day period. Once the Back
Fee Payment is received, City shall waive any claims to back rent for this site for the period from October 1, 2013
through December 31, 2014.
6. Annual Fee for 2015: Notwithstanding the foregoing in Section 4 of this SUA, within forty-five (45) days of
the full execution of this SUA, Permittee shall make a one-time payment in the amount of NINE THOUSAND FOUR
HUNDRED FIFTY AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($9,450.00) which represents the 2015 Annual Fee for the period from
January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015 and includes the Escalator (“2015 Annual Fee”). No penalties or interest
shall be due and payable so long as payment is received within such forty-five (45) day period. Once the 2015 Annual
Fee is received, City shall waive any claims to back rent for this site for the period from January 1, 2015 through
December 31, 2015. (Note: the 2016 Annual Fee shall be due by January 15, 2016 as required by Section 4 of the SUA
and shall be calculated with the Escalator utilizing the 2015 Annual Fee. The 2016 Annual Fee will therefore be
$9,922.50).
Packet Page 196 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
2
7. Grant Fee: Pursuant to Section 15 of the MUA, within thirty (30) days following the full execution of this
SUA, Sprint shall pay to City a one-time grant fee of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) to defray the City’s
legal and administrative costs and expenses with negotiating and approving the MUA.
8. The term of this SUA shall be as set forth in Section 5 of the MUA
9. Notice Addresses:
City, address for rent and notice:
City of Edmonds
Engineering Division
121 5th Avenue N.
Edmonds, WA 98020
425 771-0220
Fax: 425-771-0221
Permittee:
Sprint Property Services
Mailstop: KSOPHT0101-Z2650
6391 Sprint Parkway
Overland Park, KS 66251-2650
with a mandatory copy to:
Sprint Law Department
Mailstop: KSOPHT0101-Z2020
6391 Sprint Parkway
Overland Park, KS 66251-2020
Attn: Real Estate Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and affixed their respective seals the day and year first
above written.
City:
CITY OF EDMONDS:
BY: _________________________________
WITNESS__________________ PRINT NAME: ___________________________
TITLE: __________________________________
DATE: __________________________________
Permittee:
SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P.:
BY: ___________________________________
WITNESS PRINT NAME: ____________________________
TITLE: ___________________________________
DATE: ___________________________________
ATTACHMENTS:
Packet Page 197 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
3
Attachment 1: Site Plan of Communications Facilities
***NOTARIZATIONS FOLLOW ON THE NEXT PAGE***
STATE OF )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the person who appeared before me, and said person
acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument
and acknowledged it as the of to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in
the instrument.
Dated: ________________________
Notary Public
Print Name
My commission expires
(Use this space for notary stamp/seal)
Packet Page 198 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
4
STATE OF )
) ss.
COUNTY OF )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that is the person who appeared before me, and said person
acknowledged that he/she signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument
and acknowledged it as the of to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the
instrument.
Dated: ________________________
Notary Public
Print Name
My commission expires
(Use this space for notary stamp/seal)
Packet Page 199 of 680
{WSS531638.DOC;1/00006.900000/
5
ATTACHMENT 1
SITE PLAN OF COMMUNICATION FACILITIES UNDER THIS SUA
Packet Page 200 of 680
AM-7800 5.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/16/2015
Time:75 Minutes
Submitted For:Shane Hope, Director Submitted By:Shane Hope
Department:Development Services
Type: Information
Information
Subject Title
Public Hearing on Proposed 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update
Recommendation
Review information, ask any questions, and consider comments given at the public hearing
Previous Council Action
No final decisions but: (1) Direction on overall process; (2) Review and direction during past year for
each draft element.
Narrative
JUNE 16 MEETING/PUBLIC HEARING
The City Council's June 16 meeting will include a presentation on the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update
and a public hearing, where public comments may be given. The City Council may have clarifying
questions and some discussion but will not make any final decisions on this topic.
BACKGROUND
Edmonds, like other cities and counties in our region, must review and update its Comprehensive Plan by
the state deadline of mid-2015. As part of this process, the City Council is conducting a June 16 public
hearing on the proposed update.
Comprehensive plans provide the framework to plan for a community’s future needs. They address local
priorities and issues at a broad level, while being consistent with the Growth Management Act and other
requirements. They are implemented through more detailed decisions by the local government regarding
policies, regulations, and budget.
SUMMARY OF 2015 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
The Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, as last amended in 2014, already addresses many local needs and
state requirements. However, as part of the current major update, the data must be refreshed and the
planning horizon extended into the next twenty years -- meaning the period of 2015 through 2035, rather
than the last period (2005-2025). Based on early direction by the City Council, the update has focused on
“general clean-up” and streamlining (including the insertion of new data and not retaining directly within
the Plan some older non-required documents), as well as the addition of several performance measures.
For a high level overview, which will be part of the June 16 presentation, see Attachment 1.
To view the actual proposed Comprehensive Plan Update, see Attachments 2 and 3. Attachment 2 shows
Packet Page 201 of 680
the proposed Plan with most tracked changes from the existing version, but not including the
Transportation Element, which is separately shown as Attachment 3. Note: Attachment 3 consists of the
main Transportation Plan document, showing key tracked changes (without the latest revised
figures), plus appendices, followed by a section that has the latest current figures (maps, etc.) being
proposed. Ultimately, the draft Transportation Plan/Element will directly include all revised figures and
become part of the final complete Comprehensive Plan. Finally, Attachment 4 is the draft updated Street
Tree Plan, proposed as an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan. (This minor update revises the tree
species in a few locations.)
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Opportunities for public involvement, including many public meetings, have been built into the
Comprehensive Plan Update process. See Attachment 5. Written comments received as of noon, July 11,
are included as Attachment 6.
PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Board has reviewed and provided input on the 2015 Comprehensive Plan Update process
during the last year. This has included numerous meetings and, on June 10, a public hearing on the entire
draft Plan. After considering public comments at the hearing and following discussion and further
direction for minor changes to the draft Plan, the Planning Board recommended moving the Plan forward
for City Council action. (Note: At the time this agenda memo was developed, a draft of the June 10
minutes was not available. It will be provided in the next City Council packet on the update.) A
summary of the June 10 public comments and Planning Board discussion will be part of the June 16
presentation.
NEXT STEPS
Expected next steps for the Update include:
--June 16 public hearing by the City Council
--June 23 discussion by the City Council
--July 7 decision by the City Council on adoption of the updated Comprehensive Plan by ordinance
--Preparation of a clean final document (to be posted on the City website) and submittal to the state and
other agencies as needed.
Attachments
Att. 1 Comp Plan Presentation
Att. 2: Draft Comp. Plan - edit version
Att. 3: Comp Plan. Transportation Plan Fact Sheet
Att. 4: Draft Updated Tree Plan - edits version
Att. 5: Comp. Plan public process
Att. 6 Comp Plan Comments
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
City Clerk Scott Passey 06/12/2015 05:54 AM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/12/2015 08:10 AM
Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 06/12/2015 09:04 AM
Form Started By: Shane Hope Started On: 06/09/2015 11:00 AM
Final Approval Date: 06/12/2015
Packet Page 202 of 680
June 16th, 2015
City Council
Packet Page 203 of 680
Comprehensive plans provide framework for how
communities grow & plan for future needs
Under state GMA, most cities and counties must
complete major review & update plans at least
every 8 years
Current deadline is mid-2015.
Edmonds’ Comp Plan must comply with state laws
& be consistent with regional planning policies
(Vision 2040 thru PSRC) & countywide planning
policies (thru Snohomish County & SCT process)
Background
Packet Page 204 of 680
PUBLIC PROCESS:
•31 public meetings
•10 public hearings
•2 open house events
•Discussion at additional
board/commission meetings
•City newsletter information
Process Overview
Packet Page 205 of 680
Notices published in newspaper & posted in
usual places:
City Hall, Edmonds Library, & Public Safety Building
Public meetings/hearings broadcast on EdTV,
Available on both Frontier & Comcast cable systems
Background materials & draft documents
available online
Thru City’s website: www.edmondswa.gov,
(E.g., front page and by searching “Comprehensive Plan”)
Press releases issued & articles published
Process Overview
(cont’d)
Packet Page 206 of 680
Process Overview
Packet Page 207 of 680
Elements Overview
Elements of the
Comprehensive Plan
Packet Page 208 of 680
Community Sustainability Element
Update
Elements Overview
•Few substantive changes are proposed
•Changes center on adding text for energy
efficiency & waste reduction at city facilities
•Performance measure & key implementation
action is added
Packet Page 209 of 680
Community Sustainability
Elements Overview
Performance Measure:
Annually report on energy usage within the City, both by City
government and by the larger Edmonds Community
Implementation Action: Due 2017
Update the City’s Hazard Mitigation Plan to reference emerging risks
and hazards related to climate change, such as rising sea levels and
ocean acidification
Packet Page 210 of 680
Elements Overview
Land Use Update
•Updates to this element focused on new data,
including population data for next planning period
•With addition of new data, rewriting of some
narrative sections & replacement of outdated
figures were needed
•Section on design guidelines was moved to Urban
Design Element.
•Other changes included reformatting text
Packet Page 211 of 680
Elements Overview
Housing Element Update
•Used new Census data & updated housing targets,
consistent with countywide planning policies
•Removed outdated section on County’s Housing
Affordability Strategy
•Noted new partnership with Alliance for
Housing Affordability
•Reformatted goals & policies + minor re-wording
•Added Performance Measure & key
“Implementation Action”
Packet Page 212 of 680
Housing
Elements Overview
Performance Measure:
Report the number of residential units permitted each year with a
goal of reaching 21,168 units by 2035, or approximately 112
additional dwelling units annually from 2011 to 2035.
Implementation Action: Due 2019
Develop a strategy for increasing the supply of affordable housing
and meeting diverse housing needs.
Packet Page 213 of 680
Elements Overview
Economic Development Element Update
•Much of background narrative was rewritten to
account for outdated information
•Policies were modestly revised, e.g., to address
tourism
•Info on Strategic Action Plan was added
•Performance measure was added
Packet Page 214 of 680
Elements Overview
Economic Development
Performance Measure:
Report the number of jobs within the City each year with a goal of
reaching 13,948 jobs, excluding jobs within the resource and
construction sectors, by 2035. This would require adding
approximately 95 jobs annually from 2011 to 2035.
Packet Page 215 of 680
Elements Overview
Community Culture & Urban Design Update
•Added narrative to recognize significance of arts &
historic preservation
•Simplified Urban Design goals & policies
•Moved Urban Design Goals & Objectives from Land
Use Element to Urban Design Element
•Added new section: “Streetscape and Street Trees”
•Made data, housekeeping, & format updates
Packet Page 216 of 680
Elements Overview
Implementation Action 1: Due 2016
Develop an update to the Street Tree Plan.
Implementation Action 2: Due 2017
Develop an Urban Forest Management Plan
Community Culture & Urban Design Update
Packet Page 217 of 680
Elements Overview
Utilities Update
•Few changes are proposed for this element
because detailed info is included in separate
functional plans of each utility
•New performance measure is added:
Performance Measure:
Lineal feet of old water, sewer, and stormwater mains replaced or
rehabilitated both annually and Program-to-Date.
Packet Page 218 of 680
Elements Overview
Capital Facilities
•Added inventory maps & list of capital
facilities
•Added text for “concurrency management”
•Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) included several
minor changes to project list
•Data, housekeeping, & format updates were
made
Packet Page 219 of 680
Elements Overview
Capital Facilities
Performance Measure:
Project delivery, based on comparison of expected results from the
approved Capital Facilities Plan to the actual results.
Could be reworded to say:
Project delivery results—based on comparing projects in the
Capital Facilities Plan to what was actually done on the
projects
Packet Page 220 of 680
Elements Overview
Transportation Element Update
•Narrative & formatting was updated
•Policies were consolidated/ streamlined
•Changes included Planning Board/City Council
direction
•Project list was updated
Performance Measure:
Number of linear feet of sidewalk renovated or added to the City's
sidewalk network.
Packet Page 221 of 680
Elements Overview
Other Documents
Proposed for Adoption by Reference
•Shoreline Master Program
•Stevens Memorial Hospital Master Plan
•Community Cultural Plan (2014)
•Parks, Recreation, & Open Space Plan (2014)
Packet Page 222 of 680
Elements Overview
Proposed Appendices
•Streetscape Plan (2006) with updated Street Tree
Plan (2015)
•Proposed changes to Street Tree Plan (2015) include
minor updates to tree species list & Street Tree Plan
Poor performing species were removed from list
& replaced with other species (as discussed by
Tree Board, et. al.)
Packet Page 223 of 680
Current Process
PB Public Hearing & Recommendation:
After public comments & discussion, Planning Board
made various minor amendments (included in
current Plan update) & recommended that draft
Plan, as revised, move forward to City Council for
action
Additional Changes to Draft Comp Plan Update:
•Staff may make technical corrections to text, format,
etc. & add graphics to cover page
•City Council may direct specific changes
Packet Page 224 of 680
Anticipated Next Steps
Planning
Board
•June 10th – Public Hearing &
recommendation
City Council
•June 16th - Public Hearing
•June 23rd – Discussion
•July 7th – Decision on adoption
Packet Page 225 of 680
City of Edmonds
Comprehensive Plan
2015
Adopted ____, 2015
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 226 of 680
Mayor: Dave Earling
City Council:
Joan Bloom
Diane Buckshnis
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas
Kristiana Johnson
Strom PetersonThomas Mesaros
Mike Nelson
Lora Petso
Planning Board:
Neil TibbottTodd Cloutier, Chair
Philip LovellValerie Stewart, Vice-Chair
Matt Cheung
Todd Cloutier
Carreen Nording Rubenkonig
Daniel RoblesPhilip Lovell
Valerie StewartNeil Tibbott
William EllisNathan Moore
(Alternate)
City Staff:
Patrick Doherty, Community Services/Economic Development Director
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Scott James, Finance Director
Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Pamela Randolph, Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager
Robert English, City Engineer
Bertrand Hauss, Traffic Engineer
Robert Chave, Planning Manager
Diane Cunningham, Administrative Assistant
On the Cover:
Do you recognize the public art on the cover? Not quite sure where they are?
To find out, visit the Edmonds website at: http://www.edmondswa.gov/public-art.html
Photographs by Bruce Coxley and City Staff.
City of Edmonds
Comprehensive Plan
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 227 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 228 of 680
Table of Contents
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1
SCOPE 1
PURPOSE 1
EFFECT OF PLAN 2
GROWTH MANAGEMENT 2
STATE AND REGIONAL CONTEXT 4
STATE FRAMEWORK GOALS 4
REGIONAL GOALS 5
GENERAL BACKGROUND 8
PLANNING AREA 8
LAND USE PATTERN 8
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT 10
POPULATION 11
ECONOMIC FACTORS 14
HOUSING 16
TRANSPORTATION 17
NEIGHBORHOODS 19
PUBLIC PROCESS 19
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - ELEMENTS 21
ELEMENTS ADOPTED 21
COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY ELEMENT 22
BACKGROUND:CLIMATE CHANGE, COMMUNITY HEALTH, AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 22
SUSTAINABILITY FRAMEWORK 23
CLIMATE CHANGE 27
COMMUNITY HEALTH 31
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 34
IMPLEMENTING SUSTAINABILITY 36
IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES 38
LAND USE ELEMENT 39
LAND USE MAP 39
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 229 of 680
LAND CAPACITY 41
ACTIVITY CENTERS 49
DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT ACTIVITY CENTER 52
MEDICAL/HIGHWAY 99 ACTIVITY CENTER AND HIGHWAY 99 CORRIDOR 82
MASTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 92
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 93
COMMERCIAL LAND USE 98
INDUSTRIAL LAND USE 103
OPEN SPACE 104
SOILS AND TOPOGRAPHY 105
VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE 109
AIR POLLUTION 111
NOISE POLLUTION 112
URBAN GROWTH AREAS 113
HOUSING ELEMENT 115
STRATEGIES TO PROMOTE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 126
HOUSING PRODUCTION & PRESERVATION PROGRAMS 128
HOUSING FINANCING STRATEGIES 129
GOALS AND POLICIES 129
IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES 133
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 134
INTRODUCTION AND DISCUSSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 134
THE EDMONDS ECONOMY 135
POPULATION 135
EMPLOYMENT 137
RETAIL SALES 140
CITY REVENUES AND SUSTAINABILITY 143
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND POLICIES 145
GOALS AND POLICIES 148
IMPLEMENTATION 152
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 154
COMMUNITY CULTURE AND URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT 155
COMMUNITY CULTURE 155
URBAN DESIGN 158
STREETSCAPE AND STREET TREES 168
GOALS AND POLICIES 169
IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS 170
UTILITIES ELEMENT 172
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 230 of 680
WATER 172
SANITARY SEWER 172
STORM AND SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT 173
SOLID WASTE 175
OTHER UTILITIES 176
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 177
CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 178
BACKGROUND 178
PERFORMANCE MEASURES 185
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 231 of 680
List of Tables
Table 1: Existing Land Use_______________________________________________________9
Table 2: Historical and Projected Growth 1940 to 2035 _______________________________11
Table 3: Selected Housing Statistics _______________________________________________15
Table 4: City of Edmonds Land Supply – 2014 ______________________________________39
Table 6: City of Edmonds Existing and Projected Growth ______________________________43
Table 7: City of Edmonds Housing Growth ___________________ Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 8: Average Rent and Affordability by Size _____________________________________85
Table 9: Distribution of Rent Affordability by Size ___________________________________85
Table 10: Projected Housing Housing Need, City of Edmonds __________________________86
List of Figures
Eixisting Land Use ____________________________________________________________10
City of Edmonds Historical and Projected Growth ___________________________________12
Age Distribution of Edmonds Residents ____________________________________________13
Covered Employment Estimate for Edmonds ________________________________________14
Percent Change in Covered Employment Estimates, Post-Recession 2010 to 2013 __________15
Taxable Retail Sales per Capita (all NAICS), 2013 ___________________________________16
Selected Housing Statistics ______________________________________________________17
Edmonds-Kingston Ferry Average Daily Ridership ___________________________________18
Example of Process Coordination ________________________________________________37
City of Edmonds Land Supply Data _______________________________________________42
Summary of 2012 Buildable Lands Report __________________________________________42
General Zoning Categories by percent of City Land Area ______________________________44
Edmonds Historic Growth vs. Projected Growth _____________________________________47
Edmonds Existing and Projected Growth ___________________________________________47
Integration of the Remaining Ferry Pier Structure into Surrounding Parks ________________58
Edmonds Crossing "Preferred Alternative" from the 2004 FEIS _________________________60
Downtown Design Concepts _____________________________________________________61
Highway 99 Corridor Themes ___________________________________________________86
Highway 99 Corridor Focus Areas________________________________________________89
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 232 of 680
City of Edmonds Housing Growth _______________________________________________115
Age Distribution of Housing Stock, City of Edmonds and Snohomish County ______________116
Population Pyramid, 2000-2010 _________________________________________________118
Population Growth of Children 14 years of Age and Younger, 2000 to 2010 ______________118
Average Rent and Affordability (housing plus utilities) by Size _________________________120
Distribution of Rent Affordability by Size __________________________________________120
Home Sales Affordability, 2008-2012 _____________________________________________121
Projected Housing Need _______________________________________________________124
Percentage of Residents Listed as "White" in US Census _____________________________136
Percentage of Owner-Occupied Households _______________________________________136
Jobs per Persons in Civilian Labor Force _________________________________________138
Edmonds Employment by Sector _________________________________________________138
Percentage of Jobs in Service Sector _____________________________________________139
Top Retail Sectors in Edmonds, 2013 _____________________________________________140
Taxable Retail Sales per Capita in 2013 __________________________________________141
Edmonds Actual Aggregate Retail Sales as a Percentage of Potential Sales _______________142
Edmonds Actual Retail Sales by Category as Percentage of Potential Sales _______________142
Edmonds General Revenues by Source ____________________________________________144
Percentage Contribution of Sales and Property Tax _________________________________144
Public Capital Facilities Map ___________________________________________________179
School Facilities Map _________________________________________________________180
List of Publicly-owned Capital Facilities __________________________________________181
List of Maps
Comprehensive Plan Map 38
City of Edmonds Urban Growth Area 80
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 233 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 234 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 235 of 680
Comprehensive Plan - Purpose and Scope
Scope
The Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds consists of all of the elements specifically adopted
as part of this plan, including both text and maps, and those specific plans adopted by reference (see
the section entitled Comprehensive Plan – Elements, page 15).
Purpose
The Comprehensive Plan has the following purposes:
• To provide a framework for moving the Edmonds community toward a sustainable future that
integrates and responds to environmental, economic, and social needs in a way which “meets
the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs.”i
• To promote the public health, safety, and welfare consistent with the values of the
community.
• To serve as the basis for municipal policy on land use and development and to provide
guiding principles and objectives for the development of regulations and programs that
support sustainable development within the city while seeking to conserve, protect, and
enhance the community’s assets and natural resources.
• To anticipate and influence the orderly and coordinated development of land and building use
of the city and its environs, and conserve and restore natural beauty and other natural
resources.
• To encourage coordinated development and discourage piecemeal, spot or strip zoning and
inharmonious subdividing.
• To facilitate adequate provisions for public services such as transportation, police and fire
protection, water supply, sewage treatment, and parks.
• To facilitate the provision of sustainable public services consistent with the community’s
values and needs.
i Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, U.N. General Assembly
Plenary Meeting, December 11, 1987.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 236 of 680
Effect oOf Plan
• Development Regulations -. Development regulations adopted by the City of Edmonds shall
be consistent with and implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
• Development Projects -. The goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan shall serve as a
guide for all development projects – both public and private – within the city. The
development regulations adopted to implement the Comprehensive Plan shall apply to all
public and private development projects. Accordingly, each and every development
application shall comply with the Comprehensive Plan.
• Programs and Implementation -. The City shall strive to develop programs and actions that
implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and that are reflected in its
short-range, strategic, and long-range decision-making.
Growth Management
General. Growth management is intended to provide a long-range strategy guiding how communities
develop and how services are provided. State, regional and local jurisdictions undertaking growth
management planning are adopting plans and implementation strategies that form a coordinated
approach to actively plan for the future. A community such as Edmonds, with attractive natural
features, a pleasant residential atmosphere and proximity to a large urban center, is subject to constant
growth pressures.
Edmonds’ 2000 2010 population was 39,51539,709. As part of the cooperative planning process for
the region, Edmonds has established a population planning target of 44,88045,550 for the year
20252035. This represents an average annual increase of less than one percent per year (0.5
percent%), and is similar to the growth rate experienced by the city during the past two decades. In
part, this moderate growth rate reflects Edmonds’ status as a mature community with a small supply
of vacant, developable land. Because current and future development will increasingly occur as
redevelopment or infill, the general philosophy expressed in the Comprehensive Plan is to maintain
the character of the community while strategically planning for change in specific areas.
It is envisioned that the Comprehensive Plan will be implemented with a broad-based set of
implementation actions. Implementation measures will range from tying plan goals and policies to
budgeting and infrastructure decisions, to making sure that regulations are coordinated and targeted to
achieve expressed policies, to working with both public and private entities to jointly achieve
community goals. However, implementation approaches must be designed to address not only the
differences between neighborhoods in the city, but also the variation in different situations over time.
While general decisions on how the region will grow are made collaboratively at a regional level, it is
up to each community to determine how to implement this vision and the desired growth level at the
local level. In addition, it is up to the government, particularly local elected officials, to implement
the desired policies.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 237 of 680
Growth Management Goal A. Growth management policies should einsure that as a residential
community, Edmonds continues to be heralded as “The Gem of Puget Sound,” in accordance with
the following policies:
A.1. Decisions affecting the growth pattern of the community should be made with a
maximum of citizen participation.
A.2. The Comprehensive Plan and its implementation measures should be developed
and maintained in such a manner to assure that there are sufficient resources to
einsure established levels of community services and that ample provisions are
made for necessary open space, parks and other recreation facilities.
A.3. The role of commercial and industrial enterprises, the attendant tax base and
provision for consumer needs, should be considered as a supporting part of
achieving a sustainable community and maintaining the residential nature of the
area rather than as the dominant activity of the community
A.4. Any growth or development should strive to preserve for itself and its neighbors
the following values:
A.4.a. Light (including direct sunlight)
A.4.b. Privacy
A.4.c. Public views, open spaces, shorelines and other natural features.
A.4.d. Freedom from air, water, noise and visual pollution.
A.5. Any residential growth should be designed to accommodate and promote a
balanced mixture of income and age groups.
A.6. Edmonds should cooperate with surrounding communities to ensure that the
regional growth policy is consistent with the stated local policy and help ensure a
coordinated implementation of the regional growth strategy.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 238 of 680
State and Regional Context
State and regional goals have been adopted to provide a framework for developing local
comprehensive plans and implementation strategies. By addressing these goals, local governments
can be assured that they are also addressing some of the important issues facing the state and other
local governments in the Puget Sound region.
State Framework Goals
• Urban growth -: Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and
services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner.
• Reduce sprawl -: Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling,
low-density development.
• Transportation -: Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that are based on
regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans.
• Housing -: Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the
population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and
encourage preservation of existing housing stock.
• Economic development -: Encourage economic development throughout the state that is
consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens
of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, and encourage growth
in areas experiencing Insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's
natural resources, public services, and public facilities.
• Property rights -: Private property shall not be taken for public use without just
compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from
arbitrary and discriminatory actions.
• Permits -: Applications for both state and local government permits should be processed in a
timely and fair manner to ensure predictability.
• Natural resource industries -: Maintain and enhance natural resource-based Industries,
Including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries Industries. Encourage the
conservation of productive forest lands and productive agricultural lands, and discourage
incompatible uses.
• Open space and recreation -: Encourage the retention of open space and development of
recreational opportunities, conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural
resource lands and water, and develop parks.
• Environment -: Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life,
Including air and water quality, and the availability of water.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 239 of 680
• Citizen participation and coordination -: Encourage the involvement of citizens in the
planning process and encourage coordination between communities and jurisdictions to
reconcile conflicts.
• Public facilities and services -: Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to
support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development
is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally
established minimum standards.
• Historic preservation-: Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and
structures that have historical or archaeological significance.
• The goals and policies of the Shoreline Management Act as set forth in RCW 90.58.020.
Regional Goals
The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) is a Regional Transportation Planning Organization
under chapter 47.80 RCW. In its major planning document, Vision 2040, the PSRC is described as:
“…an association of cities, towns, counties, ports, and state agencies that serves
as a forum for developing policies and making decisions about regional growth
management, environmental, economic, and transportation issues in the four-
county central Puget Sound region of Washington state.”2
Vision 2040 establishes the regional vision and sets the Regional Growth Strategy for jurisdictions
planning in the Puget Sound region:
“VISION 2040 is a shared strategy for how and where the central Puget Sound
region can grow to a forecast 5 million people and 3 million jobs by the year
2040. The Regional Growth Strategy looks at how the region can distribute
forecast growth, primarily within the designated urban growth area. The strategy
is a description of a preferred pattern of urbanization that has been designed to
minimize environmental impacts, support economic prosperity, promote
adequate and affordable housing, improve mobility, and make efficient use of
existing infrastructure. The strategy provides regional guidance for counties,
cities, and towns to use as they develop new local population and employment
growth targets and update local comprehensive plans. The Regional Growth
Strategy describes a pattern of vibrant urban areas and healthy rural and natural
resource landscapes that reflects the region’s commitment to people, prosperity
and planet.
“VISION 2040 is a shared strategy for moving the central Puget Sound region
toward a sustainable future. The combined efforts of individuals, governments,
organizations and the private sector are needed to realize this vision. As the
region has continued to grow and change, its residents have stepped up to ensure
that what is most valued about this place remains timeless. Positive centers-
oriented development trends in recent years are a cause for optimism. Yet
2 Vision 2040, page ii. http://www.psrc.org/assets/366/7293-V2040.pdf
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 240 of 680
VISION 2040 recognizes that "business as usual" will not be enough. As a result,
VISION 2040 is a call for personal and institutional change.
VISION 2040 recognizes that local, state, and federal governments are all
challenged to keep up with the needs of a growing and changing population.
VISION 2040 is designed to guide decisions that help to make wise use of
existing resources – and ensure that future generations will have the resources
they need.”3
Vision 2040 sets a framework for the region to provide for a sustainable future that:
“
The concept of people, prosperity and planet provides a central theme for
VISION 2040. It describes what is referred to as the triple bottom line approach
of capturing an expanded spectrum of values when planning for the future and in
measuring results. It signals that the region uses an approach to public decision-
making that produces social, cultural, economic, and environmental benefits.
The phrase conveys that the people of the region, our economic prosperity, and
our relationship to the planet are tied together in a mutually supportive and
interdependent way. Social and environmental goals cannot be achieved without
economic prosperity — and achieving prosperity is highly related to social well-
being and environmental quality.…ensures the well-being of all living things,
carefully meshing human activities with larger patterns and systems of the
natural world. This translates into avoiding the depletion of energy, water, and
raw natural resources. A sustainable approach also prevents degradation of land,
air, and climate, while creating built environments that are livable, comfortable,
safe and healthy, as well as promote productivity.”4
To implement this vision, VISION 2040 contains the following Overarching Goals:
• Environment -. The region will care for the natural environment by protecting and restoring
natural systems, conserving habitat, improving water quality, reducing greenhouse gas
emissions and air pollutants, and addressing potential climate change impacts. The region
acknowledges that the health of all residents is connected to the health of the environment.
Planning at all levels should consider the impacts of land use, development patterns, and
transportation on the ecosystem.
• Development Patterns -. The region will focus growth within already urbanized areas to
create walkable, compact, and transit-oriented communities that maintain unique local
character. Centers will continue to be a focus of development. Rural and natural resource
lands will continue to be permanent and vital parts of the region.
• Housing -. The region will preserve, improve, and expand its housing stock to provide a
range of affordable, healthy, and safe housing choices to every resident. The region will
continue to promote fair and equal access to housing for all people.
3 Vision 2040, page 313. http://www.psrc.org/assets/366/7293-V2040.pdf
4 Vision 2040, page 7iv. http://www.psrc.org/assets/366/7293-V2040.pdf
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 241 of 680
• Economy -. The region will have a prospering and sustainable regional economy by
supporting businesses and job creation, investing in all people, sustaining environmental
quality, and creating great central places, diverse communities, and high quality of life.
• Transportation. - The region will have a safe, cleaner, integrated, sustainable, and highly
efficient multimodal transportation system that supports the regional growth strategy, and
promotes economic and environmental vitality, and contributes to better public health.
• Public Services -. The region will support development with adequate public facilities and
services in a coordinated, efficient, and cost-effective manner that supports local and regional
growth planning objectives.
In addition, Vision 2040 includes a Regional Growth Strategy to implement this vision. Components
of the Regional Growth Strategy include:
• Da. designation of geographic areas for regional growth centers, manufacturing and industrial
centers, as well as other centers such as town centers and activity hubs in Urban Growth
Areas and cities;
• Pb. planning for multi-modal connections and supportive land uses between centers and
activity hubs;
• Pc. promotion of sustainability in all decision-making; and
• d. Aallocation of population and employment growth to regional geographies in Snohomish
County.
In addition to these statements, the city recognizes a desire to create a regional system of central
places framed by open space.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 242 of 680
General Background
Planning Area
The City of Edmonds is located in south Snohomish County on the western shores of Puget Sound
approximately 14 miles north of Seattle (Figure 1). Situated within the urbanized Puget Sound region,
the city encompasses approximately 8.9 square miles (5,700 acres) in area, including 5 lineal linear
miles (26,240 feet) of marine shoreline. Roughly triangular in shape, the city is bounded by Puget
Sound on the west; Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace on the east; unincorporated Snohomish County
on the north; and the town of Woodway, unincorporated Snohomish County (the Esperance area), and
King County on the souththe City of Shoreline on the south.
Land Use Pattern
Single-family residential uses are relatively evenly dispersed throughout the city and occupy the
majority of the city's land use base. Approximately 3,1003,272 acres, or 55 56.9 percent of the City's
city's area, is developed for single-family residential uses. Higher density residential development
(including apartments and condominiums) is primarily located south and north of the downtown; in
the vicinity of the Edmonds-Woodway High School site and Stevens Swedish-Edmonds Hospital; and
adjacent to 196th Street, 76th Avenue and Highway 99. Together, single-family and multi-family
residential units comprise approximately 3,4003,453 acres (nearly 60 percent of the total land in the
city).
Commercial activity is concentrated in two principal areas -- the Downtown/Waterfront and the
Highway 99 corridor (which includes the retail and medical development in the vicinity of Stevens
Swedish-Edmonds Hospital). There are several Smaller smaller commercial nodes of varying sizes
that help to primarily serve adjacent neighborhoods, such as are located at the intersection of
Edmonds Way (SR104) and 100th Avenue/9th Avenue (Westgate) and at 212th Street/84th Avenue
(5 Corners)Westgate, Five Corners, Firdale, Perrinville, and Puget Drive.
The Port of Edmonds is located in the southern portion of the city's waterfront. The Port owns and
manages 33 upland acres as well as a small boat harbor and marina, with space for 1,000 boats
(approximately 11 acres). A variety of services and marine-related businesses are located on The the
Port's propertiesy is occupied by approximately 80 businesses including office uses located in Harbor
Square.
Approximately 258 acres of parks and open space lands are owned or operated by the City, while
there are another 229 acres of County-owned parks and open space land in the Edmonds area.
Regional parks and beaches figure prominently in the Citycity, including Brackett’s Landing North
and South, the Edmonds Fishing Pier, Edmonds Memorial Cemetery, Edmonds Underwater Park,
Marina Beach Park, Olympic Beach Park, local tidelands, and the South CountyEdmonds Senior
Center. The Edmonds Marsh is a significant City-owned open space (23 acres), while Yost Memorial
Park is the largest community park owned by the City (48 acres). The largest County resources are
Southwest County Park (120 acres) and Meadowdale Beach County Park (95 acres). All together,
parks, recreation, and open space lands account for 6.8 percent of City land.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 243 of 680
Overall, approximately 96 percent of the city is developed. Table 1 and the accompanying Figure 1
Figure 1summarizes existing land uses in the city.y.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 244 of 680
Figure 1: Eixisting Land Use
Source: Edmonds Planning Division.
Historical Development
% of Total Acres
Single-Family 56.3%3272.3
Streets/Parking/Driveways 18.8%1093.9
Parks/Recreation/Open Space 6.5%375.4
Vacant 4.0%230.3
Commercial 3.6%209.7
Multi-Family 3.1%181.0
Schools 3.0%171.5
Tidelands/Bays/Lagoons/Water Retention 1.4%80.1
Religious 0.7%41.6
Medical 0.7%40.8
Mixed Use 0.7%39.3
Industrial 0.6%32.2
Retirement/Special Needs 0.3%16.9
Government 0.2%14.0
Utilities 0.2%13.8
Total 100.0%5812.8
Source: City of Edmonds GIS, Nov-2014
Total Acres by Use
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 245 of 680
The earliest documented inhabitants of the area were semi-sedentary likely nomadic bands of
Native American tribess. As European exploration and settlement in the Pacific Northwest
increased, settlers began homesteading and logging activities in the general area of the present-
day city. The community that became the City of Edmonds grew out of a homestead and logging
operation started by George Brackett in 1876. Logging and shingle-splitting were the dominant
economic activities in the community during the 1880's and 1890's. The town continued to grow
as other industries including box making, pulp mill, a cigar factory, and increased waterfront
activities developed.
The Great North Railroad reached the town in 1891 and for many years provided access for goods
and passenger travel to Everett and Seattle as well as to the eastern part of the state. Although
fires destroyed many of the waterfront mills, shingle production continued to be the primary
industry in the city into the 1940s. Ferry service to Kingston began in 1923 when a ferry terminal
was built near the location of the existing ferry dock. The present ferry terminal was built in the
early 1950's after acquisition of the ferry system by the State of Washington.
The city continued to grow during the 1940's and 50's, resulting in a more active role of the
municipality in providing water, sewer and streets for the residential and commercial expansion.
The Port District was formed in 1948 and began waterfront improvements. Commercial and retail
businesses within the downtown provided a wide range of services to the community. Completion
of Interstate 5 and increased growth in the Puget Sound region led to a gradual change in the
character of city with more emphasis on residential development and a decline in the retail
importance of the downtown. The Although the city is now primarily a residential community; , it
also provides many amenities for residents and visitors, including restaurants, and specialized
shopping as well as a long list of festivals and cultural events such as the annual art festival.
The City of Edmonds was incorporated in 1890 with the original town site encompassing
approximately 550 acres. The original town site is now occupied primarily by the downtown and
adjacent residential areas. The city has expanded in area through annexations to approximately
8.99.18.9 square miles.
Population
The rate of population growth has been relatively stable over the years with major increases
occurring primarily
as a result of
annexations in
during the 1950s,
and 1960s, and
1990s. The
population growth
during these
decades was 289.7
percent, 195.5
percent, and 28.5
percent
respectively. Maps
detailing the
annexation timeline
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 246 of 680
for Edmonds are shown below. The growth rate was marginal between 2000-2010 at 0.5 percent..
Population growth since 1980 has occurred at a relatively slow rate. Between 1980 and 1990, the
population increased 11.1 percent (approximately 1 percent per year) to 30,744. Since 1990, this
slow growth trend has continued, with the city reaching a population of 39,515 in 2000 (an annual
increase of 2.5% per year during the 1990s). Even this relatively modest increase during the
1990s was largely due to annexations in the southern portion of the city’s urban growth area
(Esperance).
Figure 2: City of Edmonds Historical and Projected Growth
Year Edmonds
Population
Percent
Increase
Avg. Annual
Increase
Snohomish
County
Percent
Increase
Avg. Annual
Increase
1940 1,288 88,754
1950 2,057 59.7% 4.8% 111,580 25.7% 2.3%
1960 8,016 289.7% 14.6% 172,199 54.3% 4.4%
1970 23,684 195.5% 11.4% 265,236 54.0% 4.4%
1980 27,679 16.9% 1.6% 337,720 27.3% 2.4%
1990 30,744 11.1% 1.1% 465,642 37.9% 3.3%
2000 39,515 28.5% 2.5% 606,024 30.1% 2.7%
2010 39,709 0.5% 0.05% 713,335 17.7% 1.6%
2035 (proj.)45,550 14.7% 0.6% 955,280 33.9% 3.0%
Source: US Census
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 247 of 680
Figures 2 and 3 on the previous page summarize tThe phe recent population trends in Edmonds
and the surrounding areaare summarized in Figure 2 above. Figure 3 makes it clear that while the
city’s population showed a relatively higher degree of growth in the 1990s due to annexations,
population growth in the overall Edmonds area has remained at a low level. As of 20042013,
Edmonds is the 2nd 3rd largest most populous city in Snohomish County, and the 22nd 26th
largest most populous city in the state. The city ranks 8th 7th in overall population density state-
wide, with a 2004 2013 estimated population density of 4,3824,418 people per square mile
(Office of Financial Management, 2013).
The city has a higher percentage of retired persons and senior citizens than its neighboring cities
and Snohomish County as a whole (see Figure 3 below). The median age of the population in
2013 was 48.1 years, up from 42.0 years in 2000 and 38.3 years in 1990. The population was 79.8
percent Caucasian, approximately 9 percent Asian/Pacific Islander, 2.4 percent African
American, 0.9 percent Native American/Alaskan Native, and 3.3 percent mixed race (American
Community Survey 3-year data, 2011-2013). In addition, 2.5 percent of the population identify
with the Hispanic or Latino ethnic groups.
Figure 3: Age Distribution of Edmonds Residents
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 248 of 680
Figure 4
Economic Factors
During the first decade of the 21st century, covered employment in Edmonds grew at a modest
average annual growth rate (AGR) of 0.56 percent (compared to Snohomish County at 1.53
percent AGR and King County -0.32 percent AGR). These figures are based on the Puget Sound
Regional Council’s Covered Employment estimates and consist of all employment covered by the
Washington Unemployment Insurance Act except jobs in the resource, mining, and construction
fields which were excluded to remain consistent with Snohomish County Tomorrow’s (SCT)
long-term employment targets that do not consider resource, mining, and construction fields into
their projections.
From 2010 to 2013, Edmonds experienced significant growth in employment as the economy
recovered from the global recession. During this period, overall employment grew at 2.46
percent AGR with the most notable rise in service fields (professional services, waste
management, private sector educational services, healthcare and social services, arts and
entertainment, accommodation and food services) at 18.5 percent AGR. Figure 4 shows how the
employment mix in Edmonds changed over time. Figure 5 shows the percent change of specific
industries from 2010 to 2013. In 2013, the Edmonds’ total Covered Employment was 12,638. The
SCT’s 2035 employment target for Edmonds is 13,948, representing an AGR of 0.47 percent.
Source: Puget Sound Regional Council
Figure 4: Covered Employment Estimate for Edmonds
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 249 of 680
Over the last decade, employment within the city has grown somewhat faster than population.
Between 1980 and 1990, employment increased approximately 2.7 percent per year. In 1990, the
city had an estimated 9,263 jobs with the largest portion of those (38 percent) in finance,
insurance, real estate and services. Retail trade and government accounted for 27 percent and 23
percent respectively. The remaining 12 percent of the jobs were in manufacturing (5 percent);
wholesale trade, transportation, communication and utilities (4 percent); and education (3
percent). By the 2000 census, employment growth had slowed to just under one percent per year,
reaching a total employment of 10,154. As in 1990, the largest sector of employment (39.5
percent) was in finance, insurance, real estate and services. Retail trade and government
accounted for 26 percent and 14 percent respectively. The remaining 20.5 percent of the jobs
were in construction (7.6 percent), manufacturing (1.6 percent); wholesale trade, transportation,
communication and utilities (5.5 percent); and education (5.8 percent).
Source: Puget Sound Regional Council
.
Source: Puget Sound Regional Council.
Note: WTU refers to Wholesale Trade, Transportation, and Utilities. FIRE refers to Finance, Insurance, and Real
Estate.
Figure 5: Percent Change in Covered Employment Estimates, Post-Recession 2010 to 2013
Note: WTU refers to Wholesale Trade, Transportation, and Utilities. FIRE refers to Finance, Insurance, and Real
Estate.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 250 of 680
According to the 2011-2000 2013 CensusACS, , the Edmonds’ median household income was
$67,228 per year, compared with a Snohomish Countywide average of $67,192 and a King
Countywide average of $70,998.
eeRetail trade is a significant employer in the city. However, on a per capita basis, taxable retail
sales in the City of Edmonds are relatively lower than Edmonds’ neighbors and other cities of
similar size, as shown in Figure 6Figure 5, and roughly the same as Snohomish County as a
whole. The City’s location amidst densely populated areas suggests that Edmonds has the
potential to attract higher retail sales comparable to other cities its size.
Source: Department of Revenue
Figure 6: Taxable Retail Sales per Capita (all NAICS), 2013
Housing
The city is primarily residential with single-family residences as the predominant land use. Of the
17,51918,378 dwelling units in 20002010 Census, 11,39111,685 were single-family (65.5
percent63.6 percent of the total) and 6,0386,664 were multi-family (34.5 percent36.3 percent of
the total). As shown in Figure 7 Table 4, multi family is continuing to increase its share of total
housing stock. In 19902000, 65.3 percent68 percent of all housing units were owner-occupied;
this increased to just over 69 percent 8 percent by 20002010. Average household size continues to
decrease over time, from 2.59 persons per household in 1980 to 2.322.26 persons in 20002010..
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 251 of 680
Source: U.S. Census, 2000.
Figure 7: Selected Housing Statistics
Transportation
The existing transportation system consists of a network of principal arterials, minor arterials,
collectors and local streets. Three major arterials link together state routes or connect the state
route system to major centers and to the ferry system; - SR-104, SR-524/196th Street SW and
SR-99. SR-104 serves east-west travel on the south end of the city and provides access to the
Edmonds-Kingston ferry and Interstate 5; SR; SR-524/196th Street SW extends bordering
through the east side of the city. SR-99 carries the highest volume of traffic in Edmonds.
The Burlington Northern Railroad runs adjacent to the city's shoreline and links Edmonds with
Everett to the north and Seattle to the south. The rail line is currently used for freight and
AMTRAK and Sound Transit commuter rail passenger rail service; approximately;
approximately 37 trains a day pass through the city. Bus service is provided by Community
Transit with 3 regular bus routes (with service to Mill Creek, Lynnwood, and Alderwood) and 4
peak period only commute bus routes (with service to the University of Washington and
downtown Seattle). In 2009, the Swift bus rapid transit was launched, servicing a 17-mile stretch
from Shoreline to Everett.
The Edmonds-Kingston Ferry connects south Snohomish County and north King County with the
northern Kitsap Peninsula and points west on the Olympic Peninsula via the Hood Canal Bridge.
The Edmonds-Kingston ferry route is the fastest-growingremains on of the busiest routes in the
state’s ferry system. Figure 8Figure 6 shows historical growth in passenger and vehicle demand
from 1980 to 20100. Ridership more than doubled during the 1980s, increasing from nearly 1,950
vehicles and more than 4,250 persons daily in 1980 to over 4,500 vehicles and 9,200 persons
daily in 1990. Ridership also increased appreciably in the 1990s, growing by more than 40
percent percent to over 6,750 vehicles and 13,000 persons daily during 2000. The 1992 Cross
Sound Transportation Study (Booz-Allen and Hamilton Study Team, 1992) concluded that there
was no reasonable alternative to the ferry service to meet the projected increases in travel
demand. The PSRC based its Transportation Element of Vision 2020 on the Edmonds- Kingston
ferry service growing to support the allocation of population within the region. PSRC Destination
2030 identifies the Edmonds Crossing project as a ferry project on the Metropolitan
1980 1990 2000 2010
SF Housing Units 7,529 8,550 11,391 11,685
MF Housing Units 3,072 4,165 6,038 6,664
Mobile Homes 101 230 90 29
Total Housing Units 10,702 12,945 17,519 18,378
% Single Family 71.3% 67.8% 65.5% 63.6%
% Multi Family 28.7% 32.2% 34.5% 36.3%
Avg Household Size 2.59 2.41 2.32 2.26
Avg Persons/Unit 2.59 2.37 2.26 2.16
Selected Housing Statistics
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 252 of 680
Transportation System and thus a crucial element to the mobility needs and economic vitality of
the region.
Source: Source: Washington State Ferries, Ferry Traffic Statistics Rider Segment ReportEdmonds Crossing Final EIS,
November, 2004.
Figure 8: Source: Washington State Ferries, Ferry Traffic Statistics Rider Segment
ReportEdmonds-Kingston Ferry Average Daily Ridership
Figure 6
Historical Edmonds Daily Ferry Ridership
In response to this need, the Edmonds Crossing project is being developedhas been proposed to
provide a long-term solution to current operations and safety conflicts between ferry, rail,
automobile, bus, and pedestrian traffic in downtown Edmonds. The Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration [FTA]), the Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (including Washington State Ferries [WSF]), and the
City of Edmonds, in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Corps], the U.S. Coast
Guard, the Suquamish Tribe, the Tulalip Tribe, the Lummi Nation, the Swinomish Tribe, and the
Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe propose to relocate the existing state ferry terminal from Main
Street in downtown Edmonds to another site farther from the downtown core at Point Edwards. In
the process, a multimodal center would be established that would integrate the ferry, rail, and
transit services into a single complex. Access would be provided by a realigned State Route (SR)
104 from its current intersection with Pine Street. The new complex would provide an upgraded
ferry terminal designed to meet the operational requirements for accommodating forecast ferry
ridership demand; a new rail station designed to meet intercity (Amtrak) passenger service and
commuter rail loading requirements; a transit center that would meet local bus system and
regional transit system loading requirements; facilities for accommodating both vehicular
commuters and walk-on passengers of the available transportation modes (parking, drop-off
areas, retail and concessionaire space, and waiting areas); and a system linking these facilities to
allow for the safe movement of users
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 253 of 680
Attributes of the CommunityNeighborhoods
The City of Edmonds was a well-established community by the turn of the twentieth century and
the present urban form preserves many characteristics of its historic origins. The community’s
location on the west facing slopes of Puget Sound provides many amenities including extensive
views of the water and Olympic Mountains, access to beaches and waterfront parks, and a
compact downtown area. The city provides a wide variety of parks and recreational facilities. An
active arts and cultural community contributes to the strong sense of civic pride widely shared in
the community. There are numerous well-kept residential neighborhoods, a viable economic base,
and an active, involved citizenry.Edmonds has a variety of neighborhoods, big and small, named
and unnamed. Some neighborhoods, such as in the Highway 99 area, the “Bowl,” Firdale, Five
Corners and Perrinville, include commercial activities. (Note: The Bowl refers to the downtown
area and vicinity; it comprises about 17% of the City’s population.) Many neighborhood areas,
such as Seaview or Sherwood, include schools, parks, trails and other amenities that help identify
them or add to their unique character.
Each neighborhood is valuable and contributes to the community as a whole. Recognizing this
character and value, while still allowing for positive changes in neighborhoods over time, is an
important concept.
Public Process
Public Participation Goal A. It is the goal of the City of Edmonds to provide early and
continuous public notice for the proposed comprehensive plan amendments in advance of all
opportunities to comment on the proposals, and to allow those who express an interest in any of
the amendments to be able to track their progress through the legislative decision process.
A.1. Use a variety of methods to provide early and ongoing public notice of the
proposed amendments, including such things as publication in news outlets,
advertising on local public access television, placing notices in a City
newsletter, compiling a list of interested parties, and/or providing information
on the City’s website.
A.2. Information provided by the City of Edmonds as part of this public
participation process will be designed to:
A.1.a. Use plain understandable language.
A.1.b.2. Provide broad dissemination of information regarding the proposals.
A.1.c.3. Provide early and continuous notification.
A.1.d.4. Provide opportunities for commenting in a variety of ways –
verbally, in writing, and via email.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 254 of 680
A.3. In addition to providing early and continuous information on the plan
amendment proposals, the City of Edmonds will provide a formal adoption
process with public hearing(s) and opportunities for public comment and input.
The public process for the 2004 comprehensive plan update included numerous public
workshops, open houses, and televised work sessions both at the Planning Board and City
Council. Three public hearings were held at the Planning Board and two public hearings were
held at the City Council. Interested parties were provided the option to be informed of upcoming
events and hearings via U.S. mail or email, and could track the process online at a special section
of the City’s website.
An initial public open house was held on May 26, 2004 to inform the public about the process
and issues related to updates of the comprehensive plan and critical areas regulations. Initial work
sessions were conducted with the City Planning Board and City Council on June 22 and 23, 2004,
respectively, to familiarize each entity with the update process and the primary issues involved.
All Planning Board and City Council meetings were publicized and open to the public, with City
Council sessions recorded and broadcast on the local public access television channel.
Throughout the process, the City continually updated its website regarding Comprehensive Plan
and critical areas revisions, including posting of background materials and draft and final
documents. In addition, over 600 letters of notification were sent to property owners who had
streams on or adjacent to their property, these being the residents most likely to be impacted by
new critical areas regulations. Over 800 letters were sent to property owners in areas of existing
“large lot” zoning where it had been determined that the plan and zoning designations could be
changed to higher density urban designations. These mailings were in addition to the newspaper
ads, news releases, and other forms of public notice employed during the process.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 255 of 680
Comprehensive Plan - Elements
Elements Adopted
The Comprehensive Plan consists of the following the remaining chapters of this titlenine plan
elements., and the following additional elements of the plan which are hereby adopted by
reference:Most of the goals and policies of the various elements are included in the main
comprehensive plan document (this document). Some elements also have additional specific plans
adopted by reference (these areas indicated below). The exception is the Parks, Recreation and Open
Space (PROS) plan, which is an entirely separate document adopted by reference.
Plan Element Additional Plan(s) Adopted by Reference
1. Community Sustainability
2. Land Use Shoreline Master Program
Stevens Memorial Hospital Master Plan
3.
Housing
4. Economic Development
5. Community Culture and Urban Design Community Cultural Plan (2014)
6. Utilities
7. Capital Facilities
8. Transportation
9. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan (2014)
(Note that this is an entirely separate
document)Repeal
Appendices Streetscape and Street Tree Plan
or modification of the text of the original ordinances or resolutions adopting and/or amending any of
the foregoing plans or maps shall not affect the validity of said plans or maps which are hereby
readopted. Said plans or maps subsequently may be repealed or amended by ordinance or resolution
making specific reference to said maps or plans.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 256 of 680
Community Sustainability Element
Background: Climate Change, Community Health, and Environmental
Quality
Introduction. A relatively recent term, “sustainability” has many definitions. A commonly cited
definition is one put forward by the Brundtland Commission1 in a report of the World
Commission on Environment and Development (December 11, 1987). The Commission defined
sustainable development as development that “meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” Not focused solely on
environmental sustainability, the Commission’s report emphasized the inter-related nature of
environmental, economic, and social factors in sustainability. One of the keys to success in
sustainability is recognizing that decision-making must be based on an integration of economic
with environmental and social factors.
The City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan contains a number of different elements, some
mandated by the Growth Management Act, and others included because they are important to the
Edmonds community. A requirement of the Growth Management Act is that the various
comprehensive plan elements be consistent with one another. This Community Sustainability
Element is intended to provide a framework tying the other plan elements together, illustrating
how the overall plan direction supports sustainability within the Edmonds community. A key
aspect of this approach is also to provide more direct linkages between long term planning and
shorter-term strategic planning and policy review which guide the use of city resources and
programs, especially budgeting. For example, a new emphasis on life cycle efficiency may take
precedence over simple least-cost analytical methods.
The City of Edmonds is gifted with unique environmental assets, such as the shoreline on Puget
Sound, the Edmonds Marsh, urban forests, diverse streams and wetlands, Lake Ballinger and a
range of parks and open spaces. In addition, the city has the benefit of an established, walkable
downtown served by transit, a framework of neighborhood commercial centers providing local
access to business services, and the potential to see significant economic development in the
Highway 99 activity center. Recently, the City has also experienced the beginnings of new
economic initiatives, such as a new fiber-optic infrastructure and locally-based businesses and
organizations supporting local sustainability and greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction approaches.
Combined with local government initiatives, such as the Mayor’s Citizens Committee on U.S.
Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement and a series of resolutions adopted by the Edmonds City
Council, there is a growing recognition and harnessing of the power of citizen knowledge to
encourage and support changes in City policies and operations which are making the City a leader
in environmental stewardship.
Given this combination of assets and knowledge, the City of Edmonds has a compelling
responsibility to utilize these capabilities to address the challenges of climate change, community
health and environmental quality.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 257 of 680
Sustainability Framework
This section describes the general goals and principles underlying the City’s approach to
community sustainability. Three important guiding principles central to a successful approach
are:
• Flexible – In an environment where what we understand and can predict is still
developing and will be uncertain for some time to come, providing ways to monitor,
assess, adapt, and to be flexible in our responses will be critical. Climate change is but
one example; the uncertainties acknowledged in that subject area should be instructive in
helping us understand that a flexible approach is necessary when addressing all areas of
sustainability.
• Holistic – The components of sustainability – in terms of both its inputs and outputs –are
complex and synergistic. No single action will result in a sustainable result, and
sustainable initiatives taken in one area don’t necessarily lead to sustainability in another.
For example, sustainable land use practices don’t necessarily result in a sustainable
transportation or health system. A holistic approach is required that includes all levels of
governance and encompasses planning, funding, evaluation, monitoring, and
implementation.
• Long-term – Focusing on short-term, expedient solutions will only make actions
necessary to support sustainability more difficult to take in the future. For example, in the
areas of environmental issues and climate change, deferred action now will only make the
cumulative effects more difficult to resolve in the future. The familiar GMA-based 20-
year planning timeframe will not be sufficient – planning for sustainability must take an
even longer view.
Sustainability Goal A. Develop land use policies, programs, and regulations designed to
support and promote sustainability. Encourage a mix and location of land uses designed to
increase accessibility of Edmonds residents to services, recreation, jobs, and housing.
A.1 Adopt a system of codes, standards and incentives to promote development
that achieves growth management goals while maintaining Edmonds’
community character and charm in a sustainable way. Holistic solutions should
be developed that employ such techniques as Low Impact Development (LID),
transit-oriented development, “complete streets” that support multiple modes
of travel, and other techniques to assure that future development and
redevelopment enhances Edmonds’ character and charm for future generations
to enjoy.
A.2 Include urban form and design as critical components of sustainable land use
planning. New tools, such as form-based zoning and context-sensitive design
standards should be used to support a flexible land use system which seeks to
provide accessible, compatible and synergistic land use patterns which
encourage economic and social interaction while retaining privacy and a
unique community character.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 258 of 680
A.3 Integrate land use plans and implementation tools with transportation, housing,
cultural and recreational, and economic development planning so as to form a
cohesive and mutually-supporting whole.
A.4 Use both long-term and strategic planning tools to tie short term actions and
land use decisions to long-term sustainability goals. City land use policies and
decision criteria should reflect and support sustainability goals and priorities.
Sustainability Goal B. Develop transportation policies, programs, and regulations designed
to support and promote sustainability and resiliency. Take actions to reduce the use of fuel
and energy in transportation, and encourage various modes of transportation that reduce
reliance on automobiles and are supported by transportation facilities and accessibility
throughout the community.
B.1 Undertake a multi-modal approach to transportation planning that promotes an
integrated system of auto, transit, biking, walking and other forms of
transportation designed to effectively support mobility and access.
B.2 Actively work with transit providers to maximize and promote transit
opportunities within the Edmonds community while providing links to other
communities both within and outside the region.
B.3 Explore and support the use of alternative fuels and transportation operations
that reduce GHG emissions.
B.4 When undertaking transportation planning and service decisions, evaluate and
encourage land use patterns and policies that support a sustainable
transportation system.
B.5 Strategically plan and budget for transportation priorities that balances ongoing
facility and service needs with long-term improvements that support a
sustainable, multi-modal transportation system.
B.6 Strategically design transportation options – including bike routes, pedestrian
trails and other non-motorized solutions – to support and anticipate land use
and economic development priorities.
Sustainability Goal C. Promote seamless transportation linkages between the Edmonds
community and the rest of the Puget Sound region.
C.1 Take an active role in supporting and advocating regional solutions to
transportation and land use challenges.
C.2 Local transportation options should be designed to be coordinated with and
support inter-city and regional transportation programs and solutions.
C.3 Advocate for local priorities and connections and the promotion of system-
wide flexibility and ease of use in regional transportation decisions.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 259 of 680
Sustainability Goal D. Develop utility policies, programs, and maintenance measures
designed to support and promote sustainability, resilience, and energy efficiency. Maintain
existing utility systems while seeking to expand the use of alternative energy and sustainable
maintenance and building practices in city facilities.
D.1 Balance and prioritize strategic and short-term priorities for maintenance and
ongoing infrastructure needs with long-term economic development and
sustainability goals.
D.2 Strategically program utility and infrastructure improvements to support and
anticipate land use and economic development priorities.
D.3 Explore and employ alternative systems and techniques, such as life-cycle cost
analysis, designed to maximize investments, minimize waste, and/or reduce
ongoing maintenance and facilities costs.
D.4 Include sustainability considerations, such as environmental impact, green
infrastructure (emphasizing natural systems and processes), and GHG
reduction, in the design and maintenance of facilities and infrastructure.
Sustainability Goal E. Develop economic development policies and programs designed to
support and promote sustainability and energy efficiency. Encourage the co-location of jobs
with housing in the community, seeking to expand residents’ ability to work in close
proximity to their homes. Encourage and support infrastructure initiatives and land use
policies that encourage and support home-based work and business activities that supplement
traditional business and employment concentrations.
E.1 Economic development should support and encourage the expansion of locally-
based business and employment opportunities.
E.2 Land use policies and implementation tools should be designed to provide for
mixed use development and local access to jobs, housing, and services.
E.3 Regulatory and economic initiatives should emphasize flexibility and the
ability to anticipate and meet evolving employment, technological, and
economic patterns.
E.4 Land use and regulatory schemes should be designed to encourage and support
the ability of local residents to work, shop, and obtain services locally.
E.5 Land use and economic development programs should provide for appropriate
scale and design integration of economic activities with neighborhoods while
promoting patterns that provide accessibility and efficient transportation
options.
Sustainability Goal F. Develop cultural and recreational programs designed to support and
promote sustainability. Networks of parks, walkways, public art and cultural facilities and
events should be woven into the community’s fabric to encourage sense of place and the
overall health and well being of the community.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 260 of 680
F.1 Cultural and arts programs should be supported and nourished as an essential
part of the City’s social, economic, and health infrastructure.
F.2 Recreational opportunities and programming should be integrated holistically
into the City’s infrastructure and planning process.
F.3 Cultural, arts, and recreational programming should be an integral part of City
design and facilities standards, and should be integrated into all planning,
promotion, and economic development initiatives.
Sustainability Goal G. Develop housing policies, programs, and regulations designed to
support and promote sustainability. Support and encourage a mix of housing types and styles
which provide people with affordable housing choices geared to changes in life style. Seek to
form public and private partnerships to retain and promote affordable housing options.
G.1 Land use and housing programs should be designed to provide for existing
housing needs while providing flexibility to adapt to evolving housing needs
and choices.
G.2 Housing should be viewed as a community resource, providing opportunities
for residents to choose to stay in the community as their needs and resources
evolve and change over time.
G.3 Support the development of housing tools, such as inclusionary zoning
incentives and affordable housing programs, that promote a variety of housing
types and affordability levels into all developments.
1 Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, U.N. General
Assembly Plenary Meeting, December 11, 1987. DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 261 of 680
Climate Change
Introduction. The quality of the environment we live in is a critical part of what people often
describe as the “character” of Edmonds. Even if it is not something we overtly think about, it is
an intrinsic part of our everyday experience, whether at work, at rest or at play. Until relatively
recently, environmental quality has often been thought of in terms of obvious, easily observable
characteristics – such as the visible landscape, the quality of the air, the presence and variety of
wildlife, or the availability and character of water in its various forms. However, recent evidence
on climate change 2 points to the potential fragility of our assumptions about the environment and
the need to integrate and heighten the awareness of environmental issues as they are inter-related
with all community policies and activities.
Recognizing the importance of addressing the issues surrounding the environment and climate
change, in September 2006, the City of Edmonds formally expressed support for the Kyoto
Protocol 3 and adopted the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement 4 by Resolution No. 1129,
and joined the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)5 by Resolution
No. 1130.
Scientific evidence and consensus continues to strengthen the idea that climate change is an
urgent threat to the environmental and economic health of our communities. Many cities, in this
country and abroad, already have strong local policies and programs in place to reduce global
warming pollution, but more action is needed at the local, state, and federal levels to meet the
challenge. On February 16, 2005 the Kyoto Protocol, the international agreement to address
climate change, became law for the 141 countries that have ratified it to date. On that day, Seattle
Mayor Greg Nickels launched an initiative to advance the goals of the Kyoto Protocol through
leadership and action by at least 141 American cities.
The State of Washington has also been taking steps to address the issues surrounding climate
change. For example, in March, 2008, the state legislature passed ESSHB 2815, which included
monitoring and reporting mandates for state agencies along with the following emission reduction
targets:
Sec. 3. (1)(a) The state shall limit emissions of greenhouse gases to achieve the
following emission reductions for Washington state:
(i) By 2020, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases in the state to
1990 levels;
(ii) By 2035, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases in the state to
twenty-five percent below 1990 levels;
(iii) By 2050, the state will do its part to reach global climate stabilization
levels by reducing overall emissions to fifty percent below 1990 levels, or
seventy percent below the state's expected emissions that year.
The City of Edmonds has formally approved the U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement
which was endorsed by the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors meeting, Chicago, 2005.
Under the Agreement, participating cities committed to take three sets of actions:
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 262 of 680
1. Urge the federal government and state governments to enact policies and programs to
meet or beat the target of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below
1990 levels by 2012, including efforts to: reduce the United States’ dependence on fossil
fuels and accelerate the development of clean, economical energy resources and fuel-
efficient technologies such as conservation, methane recovery for energy generation,
waste to energy, wind and solar energy, fuel cells, efficient motor vehicles, and biofuels.
2. Urge the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legislation that 1)
includes clear timetables and emissions limits and 2) a flexible, market-based system of
tradable allowances among emitting industries
3. Strive to meet or exceed Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution by
taking actions in our own operations and community.
Given this background, the City of Edmonds recognizes that global climate change brings
significant risks to our community as a shoreline city. At the same time, the City understands that
we have a responsibility to play a leadership role both within our own community as well as the
larger Puget Sound region. To that end, the City establishes the following goals and policies
addressing climate change.
Climate Change Goal A. Inventory and monitor community greenhouse gas emissions,
establishing carbon footprint baselines and monitoring programs to measure future progress
and program needs.
A.1 Establish baselines for greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint for both
Edmonds city government and the broader Edmonds community.
A.2 Establish a monitoring program for consistently updating estimates on City and
community greenhouse gas emissions. The monitoring program should be
designed so as to enable a comparison between measurement periods.
A.3 The monitoring program should include assessment measures which (1)
measure progress toward greenhouse gas reduction goals and (2) evaluate the
effectiveness of or need for programs to work toward these goals.
Climate Change Goal B. Establish targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and
promoting sustainability for both city government and the Edmonds community. Regularly
assess progress and program needs, identifying opportunities and obstacles for meeting
greenhouse gas emission targets and sustainability.
B.1 City government should take the lead in developing and promoting GHG
emissions reduction for the Edmonds community.
B.2 Establish and evaluate targets for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions for
both Edmonds city government and the broader Edmonds community. Targets
should be set for both short- and long-range evaluation.
B.2.a. By 2020, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases to 1990 levels;
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 263 of 680
B.2.b. By 2035, reduce overall emissions of greenhouse gases to twenty-five
percent below 1990 levels;
B.2.c. By 2050, Edmonds will do its part to reach global climate stabilization
levels by reducing overall emissions to fifty percent below 1990 levels,
or seventy percent below the expected emissions that year.
B.3 Establish measures for evaluating the degree of sustainability of Edmonds city
government and the broader Edmonds community.
B.4 Annually assess the status and progress toward emissions reduction goals.
Climate Change Goal C. Assess the risks and potential impacts on both city government
operations and on the larger Edmonds community due to climate change. The assessment of
risk and potential responses – both in terms of mitigation and adaptation – should evaluate the
full range of issues, paying particular attention to those arising from the city’s location on
Puget Sound.
C.1 Develop a climate change risk assessment and impact analysis for city
government facilities and operations.
C.2 Develop a climate change risk assessment and impact analysis for the Edmonds
community which considers the potential long-term impacts to economic, land
use, and other community patterns as well as the risks associated with periodic
weather or climate events.
Climate Change Goal D. Work with public and private partners to develop strategies and
programs to prepare for and mitigate the potential impacts of climate change, both on city
government operations and on the general Edmonds community.
D.1 Develop a strategic plan that will help guide and focus City resources and
program initiatives to (1) reduce greenhouse gas production and the carbon
footprint of City government and the Edmonds community, and, (2) reduce and
minimize the potential risks of climate change. The strategic plan should be
coordinated with and leverage state and regional goals and initiatives, but
Edmonds should look for and take the lead where we see opportunities unique
to the Edmonds community.
D.2 Build on and expand the strategic action plan to include programs that can
involve both public and private partners.
D.3 Undertake a policy review of City comprehensive, strategic and specific plans
to assure that City policies are appropriately targeted to prepare for and
mitigate potential impacts of climate change. These reviews may be done to
correspond with scheduled plan updates, or accelerated where either a higher
priority is identified or the next update is not specifically scheduled.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 264 of 680
Climate Change Goal E. Develop mitigation strategies that can be used by both the public
and private sectors to help mitigate the potential impacts of new and ongoing development
and operations. Develop programs and strategies that will encourage the retrofitting of
existing development and infrastructure to mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change.
E.1 Develop policies and strategies for land use and development that result in
reduced greenhouse gas emissions for new development as well as
redevelopment activities.
E.2 Develop mitigation programs and incentives that both public and private
development entities can use to reduce or offset potential greenhouse gas
emissions associated with both new development and redevelopment.
E.3 Develop programs and incentives that encourage existing land use, buildings,
and infrastructure to reduce their carbon footprint. Demonstration programs
and other cost-efficient efforts that do not rely on long-term government
subsidies are preferred, unless dedicated funding sources can be found to
sustain these efforts over time.
2 For example, see IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II
and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team,
R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.the Fourth Assessment Report;
Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, February 2007.
3 The Kyoto Protocol was adopted at the third Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in Kyoto, Japan, on 11, December 1997, and established
potentially binding targets and timetables for cutting the greenhouse-gas emissions of industrialized countries.
The Kyoto Protocol has not been ratified by the U.S. government. 4 The U.S. Mayors Climate Protection Agreement is as amended by the 73rd Annual U.S. Conference of Mayors
meeting in Chicago in 2005. 5 ICLEI was founded in 1990 as the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives following the World
Congress of Local Governments for a Sustainable Future, held at the United Nations in New York. DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 265 of 680
Community Health
Introduction. Community health as it is used here means the overall aspects of public facilities
and actions that can have an effect on the health and welfare of the community’s citizens. The
focus here is on the public realm, understanding that public actions and policies can have an
impact on the well-being of Edmonds citizens. The idea is that whenever possible, government
should be an enabler, supporting the expansion of opportunities for people so that they can be as
self-sustaining as possible, thereby reducing the potential need for intervention from government,
community-based or privately-derived services – services which are becoming increasingly costly
and difficult to provide.
Community health is closely linked to land use, transportation, public service delivery, and
environmental quality. Clean water and clean air are a basic necessity when seeking to keep
people healthy. In addition, there are certain land use and other actions that Edmonds can take to
help foster healthy lifestyles throughout the community. Government also has a role in providing
basic services, such as police and fire protection, while encouraging access to affordable housing
and opportunities to live, work, and shop close to home.
Transportation systems, development patterns, community design, and planning decisions can
have profound effects on health and wellbeing. All citizens should be able to live, work, and play
in environments that facilitate physical activity and offer healthy choices.
Community Health Goal A. Develop a reporting and monitoring system of indicators
designed to assess Edmonds’ progress toward sustainable community health.
A.1 Develop community indicators designed to measure the City’s progress toward
a sustainable community.
A.2 Use these community indicators to inform long-term, mid-term (strategic), and
budgetary decision-making.
Community Health Goal B. Develop and maintain ongoing City programs and
infrastructure designed to support sustainable community health.
B.1 Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting diversity in
culture and the arts.
B.2 Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting access to
recreation and physical activity.
B.3 Integrate land-use, transportation, community design, and economic
development planning with public health planning to increase opportunities for
recreation, physical activity and exposure to the natural environment. Promote
a healthy community by pOne example is planning for and implementing a
connected system of walkways and bikeways which will provide alternative
forms of transportation while also encouraging recreation, and physical
activity and exposure to the natural environment.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 266 of 680
B.4 Promote a healthy community by seeking to protect and enhance the natural
environment through a balanced program of education, regulation, and
incentives. Environmental programs in Edmonds should be tailored to and
reflect the unique opportunities and challenges embodied in a mature, sea-side
community with a history of environmental protection and awareness.
B.5 Develop and encourage volunteer opportunities in community projects that
promote community health. Examples of such programs include beach clean-
ups, walk-to-school groups, and helpers for the elderly or disabled.
B.6 Increase access to health-promoting foods and beverages in the community.
Form partnerships with organizations or worksites, such as health care facilities
and schools, to encourage healthy foods and beverages.
Community Health Goal C. Promote a healthy community by encouraging and supporting a
diverse and creative education system, providing educational opportunities for people of all
ages and all stages of personal development, including those with special needs or
disabilities.
C.1 City regulatory and planning activities should be supported by education
programs which seek to explain and encourage progress toward desired
outcomes rather then relying solely on rules and penalties.
C.2 The City should partner with educational and governmental organizations to
encourage community access to information and education. Examples include
the Edmonds School District, Edmonds Community College, Sno-Isle Library,
the State of Washington (including the Departments of Ecology and Fish and
Wildlife), and the various private and public educational programs available to
the Edmonds community.
C.3 Encourage and support broad and flexible educational opportunities, including
both traditional and new or emerging initiatives, such as technology-based
solutions. Education should be flexible in both content and delivery.
Community Health Goal D. Promote a healthy community through supporting and
encouraging the development of economic opportunities for all Edmonds’ citizens.
D.1 Sustainable economic health should be based on encouraging a broad range of
economic activity, with an emphasis on locally-based businesses and economic
initiatives which provide family-supporting wages and incomes.
D.2 Encourage the provision of a variety of types and styles of housing that will
support and accommodate different citizens’ needs and life styles. The
diversity of people living in Edmonds should be supported by a diversity of
housing so that all citizens can find suitable housing now and as they progress
through changes in their households and life stages.
D.3 Encourage the development and preservation of affordable housing.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 267 of 680
D.4 Develop programs and activities that promote and support a diverse population
and culture, encouraging a mix of ages and backgrounds.
Community Health Goal E. Support a healthy community by providing a full range of
public services, infrastructure, and support systems.
E.1 Recognize the importance of City services to local community character and
sustainability by planning for and integrating public safety and health services
into both short- and long-term planning and budgeting. Strategic planning
should be a regular part of the decision-making process underlying the
provision of these services to the community.
E.2 Reduce energy consumption and maximize energy efficiency by promoting
programs and educational initiatives aimed at a goal to “reduce, re-use, and
recycle” at an individual and community-wide level. Reduce material
consumption, waste generation, and resource depletion.
E.3 Future planning and budgeting should be based on full life-cycle cost analysis
and facility maintenance needs, as well as standards of service that best fit
clearly articulated and supported community needs.
Community Health Goal F. Support a healthy and resilient community by providing for
community health care and disaster preparedness.
F.1 Plan for and prepare disaster preparedness plans which can be implemented as
necessary to respond effectively to the impacts of natural or man-induced
disasters on Edmonds residents.
F.2 Prepare and implement hazard mitigation plans to reduce and minimize, to the
extent feasible, the exposure of Edmonds citizens to future disasters or hazards.
F.3 Promote food security and public health by encouraging locally-based food
production, distribution, and choice through the support of home and
community gardens, farmers or public markets, and other small-scale,
collaborative initiatives.
F.4 Support food assistance programs and promote economic security for low
income families and individuals.
F.5 Promote and support community health by supporting national, state and local
health programs and the local provision of health services.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 268 of 680
Environmental Quality
Introduction. The environmental quality and beauty of the City of Edmonds is largely reflected
through its natural resources, and especially its location on the shores of Puget Sound. The city’s
watersheds – including Lake Ballinger, a well-known landmark – and streams that flow into the
Sound provide a rich and diverse water resource. The beaches, wetlands, wetlands, and streams
provide habitat for diverse wildlife including many species of migrating and resident birds which
adds to the aesthetic and pleasing quality of the environment.
As Edmonds has grown and developed, what were once abundant native forestwere once
abundant native forests and wetland habitats have now become increasingly scarce. Nonetheless,
our parks, open spaces, and the landscaped areas of our neighborhoods integrate pleasing vistas
and differentiation necessary to provide relief in a highly developed landscape. Throughout the
city, woodlands, streams, wetlands and marine areas contain native vegetation that provide food
and cover for a diverse population of fish and wildlife. Preserving and restoring these natural
resources through environmental stewardship remains a high priority for the Edmonds
community. Healthy ecosystems are the source of many less tangible benefits that humans derive
from a relationship with nature such as providing a sense of well-being and sites for nature trails
and other educational and recreational opportunities. Some ecological services that native plants
and trees provide are stabilizing slopes and reducing erosion, replenishing the soil with nutrients
and water, providing barriers to wind and sound, filtering pollutants from the air and soil, and
generating oxygen and absorbing carbon dioxide. Our city beaches and the near-shore
environment also represent unique habitats for marine organisms.
So interconnected are the benefits of a functioning ecosystem, that non-sustainable approaches to
land development and management practices can have effects that ripple throughout the system.
The combination of marine, estuarine, and upland environments should be seen as an integrated
and inter-dependent ecosystem supporting a variety of wildlife valuable to the entire Edmonds
community.
Environmental Quality Goal A. Protect environmental quality within the Edmonds
community through the enforcement of community-based environmental regulations that
reinforce and are integrated with relevant regional, state and national environmental
standards.
A.1 Ensure that the city’s natural vegetation, especially native vegetation,
associated with its urban forests, wetlands, and other wildlife habitat areas are
protected and enhanced for future generations.
A.2 City regulations and incentives should be designed to support and require
sustainable land use and development practices, including the retention of
urban forest land, native vegetation, and wildlife habitat areas. Techniques
such as tree retention and low impact stormwater development methods should
be integrated into land use and development codes.
A.3 Provide for clean air and water quality through the support of state and regional
initiatives and regulations.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 269 of 680
A.4 Coordinate land use and transportation plans and implementation actions to
support clean air and water.
Environmental Quality Goal B. Promote the improvement of environmental quality within
the Edmonds community by designing and implementing programs based on a system of
incentives and public education.
B.1 The City should promote and increase public awareness and pride in its natural
areas and wildlife heritage. Special emphasis should be directed toward
preserving natural areas and habitats (forests, wetlands, streams and beaches) ,
especially those with native vegetation, that support a diversity of wildlife.
B.2 Education and recreation programs should be designed and made available for
all ages.
B.3 Environmental education should be coordinated and integrated with other
cultural, arts, and tourism programs.
B.4 To encourage adherence to community values and goals, education programs
should be designed to help promote understanding and explain the reasons
behind environmental programs and regulations.
Environmental Quality Goal C. Develop, monitor, and enforce critical areas regulations
designed to enhance and protect environmentally sensitive areas within the city consistent
with the best available science.
C.1 Critical areas will be designated and protected using the best available science
pursuant to RCW 36.70A.172.
C.2 In addition to regulations, provide incentives that encourage environmental
stewardship, resource conservation, and environmental enhancement during
development activities.
Environmental Quality Goal D. Develop, implement, and monitor a shoreline master
program, consistent with state law, to enhance and protect the quality of the shoreline
environment consistent with the best available science.
D.1 Adopt a Shoreline Master Program that meets the requirements of state law and
is consistent with community goals while being based on the best available
science
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 270 of 680
Implementing Sustainability
Introduction. One of the reasons for adopting this Community Sustainability Element as part of
the City’s Comprehensive Plan is to provide a positive conceptual framework for coordinating
and assessing the community’s progress toward sustainability. For that to happen, there must be a
tie between long-range comprehensive planning, mid-range strategic planning, and short-term
implementation decisions embodied in budgeting and operations.
There are a number of important principles to keep in mind when linking these sets of plans and
actions.
• Engage and educate. Connect with the community and provide ways to access and share
information and ideas.
• Integrate. Be holistic in approach, recognizing linkages and seeking to expand problem-
solving and solutions beyond traditional or institutional boundaries.
• Innovate. Go beyond conventional approaches; be experimental.
• Be adaptive. Be flexible, discarding or modifying approaches that don’t work and
shifting resources where or when needed. Rigid rules will not always work or result in the
most effective solution.
• Be strategic. Target and prioritize actions to be effective and gain community support
and momentum. Acknowledge limitations, but be creative and persistent in seeking
solutions.
• Be a leader. Lead by example, and by forming partnerships that effect decision-making
while providing ways to address differing views and perspectives.
• Measure and assess. Set benchmarks to monitor progress and provide feedback to policy
development and decision-making.
A key to being successful in applying these principles to sustainability will be the need to apply
an adaptive management approach to planning and resource allocation. A passive approach can
emphasize predictive modeling and feedback, with program adjustments made as more
information is learned. A more active approach will emphasize experimentation – actively trying
different ideas or strategies and evaluating which produces the best results. Important for both
approaches is (a) basing plans and programs on multi-scenario uncertainty and feedback, and (b)
integrating risk into the analysis. Either of these approaches can be used, as appropriate in the
situation or problem being addressed.
Implementation Goal A. Develop benchmarks and indicators that will provide for
measurement of progress toward established sustainability goals.
A.1 Benchmarks and indicators should be both understandable and obtainable so
that they can be easily explained and used.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 271 of 680
A.2 Establish both short- and long-term benchmarks and indicators to tie long-term
success to interim actions and decisions.
A.3 Develop a reporting mechanism and assessment process so that information
can be gathered and made available to the relevant decision process at the
appropriate time.
Implementation Goal B. Provide mechanisms to link long-range, strategic, and short-term
planning and decision-making in making progress toward community sustainability.
B.1 Schedule planning and budgeting decision processes to form a logical and
linked progression so that each process builds on and informs related decisions.
B.2 Long-range, strategic, and short-term planning should acknowledge the other
time frames, decisions, and resources involved. For example, short-term
budgetary and regulatory decisions should be designed to effect strategic and
long-term goals.
Figure 9: Example of Process Coordination
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 272 of 680
Implementation Actions and Performance Measures
Implementation Actions and Performance Measures. Implementation actions are steps
that are intended to be taken within a specified timeframe to address high priority
sustainability goals. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan contains a small number
performance measures (no more than one per element) that can be used to monitor and
annually report on the implementation and effectiveness of the Comprehensive Plan.
Performance measures, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, are specific, meaningful, and
easily obtainable items that relate to sustainability and can be reported on an annual basis.
They are intended to help assess progress toward achieving the goals and policy direction of
each major Comprehensive Plan element. {Note: The measure identified below is specifically
called out as matching the above criteria and being important toImplementation actions are
steps that are intended to be taken within a specified timeframe to address high priority
sustainability goals. Performance measures are specific, meaningful, and easily obtainable
items that can be reported on an annual basis. These are intended to help assess progress
toward achieving the goals and policy direction of this element. The actions and measures
identified here are specifically called out as being important, but are not intended to be the
only actions or measures that may be used by the City. community sustainability goals and
will be reported annually, along with performance measures for other Comprehensive Plan
elements. It is not intended to be the only measure that the City may use for community
sustainability purposes.
Implementation Action 1: By 2017, update the City’s Hazard Mitigation Plan to
reference emerging risks and hazards related to climate change, such as rising
sea levels and ocean acidification.
Performance Measure 1: Annually report on energy usage within the City, both by
City government and by the larger Edmonds community.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 273 of 680
Land Use Element
ScopeLand Use Map
Whenever there are references in this plan to categories of land use, they shall apply to areas
shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map as follows:
Plan Map Designation Land Use Type Compatible Zoning
Classifications
Density
Units/Acre
Activity Center Mix of uses; refer to specific
plan designations within activity
center
See appropriate category below;
also refer to specific activity center
discussion in plan
Corridor Development Mixed use development
corridor; refer to specific plan
designations within corridor
See appropriate category below;
also refer to specific corridor
discussion in plan
Designated Park or School Site Public Facility P-zone or appropriate R-zone
compatible with neighborhood.
Single Family, Resource
Single Family, Urban 3
Single Family, Urban 2
Single Family, Urban 1
Single family RSW-12, RS-12, RS-20
RS-10
RS-8
RS-6, RS-8
< 4
< 4.4
< 5.5
5-8
Multi Family - High Density
Multi Family – Medium Density
Multi family RM-1.5, RM-2.4
RM-2.4, RM-3.0
18-30
< 18
Mixed Use Commercial
Community Commercial
Neighborhood Commercial
Highway 99 Corridor
Edmonds Way Corridor
Westgate Corridor (Planned
Business)
Commercial Mixed Use Commercial or mixture
of zones
WMU, BC, BN, or equivalent
BN or equivalent based on
neighborhood plan
CG, CG2; transitional zones as
appropriate
BP, BN, BC, or similar commercial
zone; RM zones
BP, BN
Hospital / Medical Special Use District Hospital or Medical zone
Master Plan Development Master Plan Master Plan Overlay or equivalent
classification
Public Use or Park/Open Space Public or Parks P, OS, or equivalent classification
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 274 of 680
Comprehensive Plan Map
(The adopted Comprehensive Plan Map is filed with the City Clerk. Copies can be obtained
from the Edmonds Planning Division, 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, 425-
771-0220.
A reduced version of the official map is contained in an envelope at the back of this book)
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 275 of 680
Land Capacity
Background
The Growth Mangement Act (GMA) provides the framework for planning at all levels in
Washington State. Under the mandate of the GMA (RCW 36.70A.215), local governments are
required to evaluate the density and capacity for Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). Edmonds has
been allocated population, housing, and employment growth targets through County Planning
Policies. Population projections are based on the official 20-year population projections for
Snohomish County from the Office of Financial Management and distributed as represented in
Puget Sound Regional Council’s Vision 2040 Regional Growth Strategy.
Edmonds is considered a Larger City for regional growth strategy purposes. The Larger City
designation is applied to cities that have a combined population and employment total over
22,500. Currently, eighteen cities are grouped in the Larger City designation. As a group, these
cities are expected to accommodate 14 percent of the region’s projected population growth and 12
percent of the regional projected employment growth. The 2035 population target for Edmonds is
45,550 persons, up 14.4 percent from the 2011 population estimate of 39,800. To accommodate
the targeted growth, Edmonds will require approximately 2,772 new housing units and 2,269 new
jobs by 2035. To maintain consistency with the 2012 Buildable Lands Report, the 2011
population, housing, and employment estimates are referenced in the Land Capacity Element.
The estimated 2013 population is 40,381. Figure 10Table 5 summarizes available GIS data on
land supply in Edmonds as it existed in 19942014. Developed acres include the entire parcel
boundaries that contained development, not just the building footprint. The Edmonds Marsh
accounted for all vacant acres listed under Parks & Open Space. Data on residential and
commercial development in 1994 are shown in Table 6.
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Space Before:
12 pt
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 276 of 680
Figure 10: City of Edmonds Land Supply Data
Overall, approximately nearly 95 4 percent percent of the City’s landcity was vacantdeveloped in
19942014. Approximately 75 79.3 percent percent of the remaining undevelopedvacant lands
(approximately 173 226.4 acres) was were designated for residential uses: 71 percent69.2 percent
for single-family residences and 4 percent10.1 percent for multi-family residences. Of the
remaining vacant lands, 25 percent10.4 percent of undeveloped land waswas designated for
commercial and industrial usesmixed use development and 10.3 percent represents the Edmonds
Marsh.
For a more in-depth study, the 2012 Buildable Lands Report (BLR) developed Capacity build-out
capacity estimates were developed for vacant and under-developed parcels. Using a process
developed by Snohomish County Tomorrow, the BLR was prepared in 2012 and adopted by the
Snohomish County Council in June 2013. This report provided the city with the necessary
information to complete a development capacity analysis.
Figure 11: Summary of 2012 Buildable Lands Report
As indicated in Table 6, when the city’s first GMA-mandated comprehensive plan was adopted in
1995, development of currently vacant parcels was expected to provide capacity for
approximately 762 additional residential units and an additional 1.35 million square feet of
commercial space.
Acres % of Total
Acres Acres % of Total
Acres
Residential
Single-Family 3428.9 3272.3 56.9%156.6 2.7%
Multi-Family 203.9 181.0 3.1%
22.9 0.4%
Retirement/Special Needs 16.9 16.9 0.3%
Business
Commercial 209.7 209.7 3.6%
Industrial 32.2 32.2 0.6%
Medical 40.8 40.8 0.7%
Mixed Use 62.8 39.3 0.7%
23.5 0.4%
Public Facilities
Government 14.0 14.0 0.2%
Schools 171.5 171.5 3.0%
Parks & Open Space 416.7 393.3 6.8% 23.4 0.4%
Religious 41.6 41.6 0.7%
Streets/Parking/Driveways 1093.9 1093.9 19.0%
Utilities 13.8 13.8 0.2%
Total 5746.7 5520.3 96.1% 226.4 3.9%
Source: City of Edmonds GIS data, Nov-2014
Land Use Total
Acres
Developed Lands Vacant Lands
SF MF Sr. Apts Total SF MF Sr. Apts Total SF MF Sr. Apts Total
Buildable Lands Report 561 2,381 484 3,424 444 1,868 334 2,646 1,236 3,437 393 5,065 2,820
Additional Housing Unit Capacity
(before reductions)
Additional Housing Unit Capacity
(after reductions)
Additional Population Capacity
(after reductions)
Additional
Population
Capacity (after
reductions)DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 277 of 680
Given the limited supply of vacant land within the city, capacity estimates were not calculated
strictly on the amount of vacant buildable land, but also on increased densities and intensity of
redevelopment within various areas of the city. Two Different methods of development were
targeted to provide additional residential capacity.: For example, accessory dwelling units
(ADUs) were one method of attempting to supplement capacity in single family neighborhoods,
while encouraging and mixed use development in commercial areas provided for additional
capacity in areas already experiencing a higher level of activity. Planned Residential
Developments (PRDs) were also targeted as a way of assuring maximum buildout of single-
family-zoned areas while maintaining the character of the city.
Following adoption of the 1995 comprehensive plan, the city embarked on an implementation
program to achieve the goals identified in the plan. Many of these implementation measures are
described in the Housing Element under the discussion of “reasonable measuresstrategies to
promote affordable housing.” These measures were taken by the city to address issues related to
both capacity and affordable housing.
A key feature of Edmonds’ ccomprehensive plan is its emphasis on mixed use development,
which includes both commercial and residential uses on a single lot or combination of lots. For
example, a mixed use development could include a two-story development with residential
dwelling units on the second floor and offices, shops or other commercial uses on the ground
floor, or it could consist of a mixture of uses arranged in proximity to each other. Edmonds is
unique in relying to a significant degree on mixed use development as a land use pattern designed
to address potential capacity. Mixed use development is allowed in both of the city’s Activity
Centers, and in the Corridor development areas. In the 1995 comprehensive plan, mixed use
development was to be allowed under all the alternatives considered, but would only be
encouraged under the adopted “Designed Infill” alternative. The encouragement of mixed use
development continues as a basic assumption underlying the current comprehensive plan. This
basic approach is embodied in much of the development that has occurred in recent years. The
importance of mixed use in the city’s land use pattern can be seen in Figure 12Figure 7.
Comment [A1]: This sentence was left
incomplete on previous versions of the comp
plan. I am am not sure of the intent.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 278 of 680
Source: City of Edmonds GIS, Nov-14
Figure 12: General Zoning Categories by percent of City Land Area
Current Population and Employment Capacity
An updated county-wide capacity analysis was completed as part of the Buildable Lands Report
for Snohomish County, completed in November 2002. This analysis showed a population
capacity for Edmonds of 45,337 and an employment capacity of 12,041. These capacity figures
indicate that with an estimated 2004 population of 39,460, Edmonds can accommodate an
additional 5,877 people and 1,887 jobs. The 2012 Buildable Lands Report (BLR) showsed an
Edmonds to have an additional housing capacity of an additional 2,646 units through the year
2035, which would be needed to accommodate a total population of 45,550 residents. Since the
BLR was finalized in 2012, some of the assumptions regarding buildable lands have changed.
During the 2015 Comprehensive Plan update, city staff considered how these changes affected
capacity projections.
For example, recent plans by the City to encourage mixed-use development in the Neighborhood
Business zoned areas of Westgate and Five Corners, plus the removal of restrictions on first and
second floor residential development in CG and CG2 zones along the Highway 99 corridor,
should provide the city with additional housing, employment, and population capacities not
considered in the 2012 BLR. In total, the City conservatively estimates these actions can increase
the land capacity by approximately 267 additional net housing units by applying the same
methodology used in the Buildable Lands Report.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 279 of 680
With these adjustments, the City estimates a total capacity of 3,039 additional housing units by
the year 2035. The projected housing need to accommodate the targeted population growth is
2,772 housing units as determined by the Countywide Planning Policies. This represents a 15
percent increase from the 2011 estimate of 18,396 housing units.The land capacity analysis,
combined with the goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan, indicate that the 2035 targets
for population and employment can be accommodated by the City. However, the jobs capacity
does not take into account any new implementation actions proposed in the Highway 99 area.
Discussions of land capacity methodology generally acknowledge that an oversupply of land is
needed in growth management systems using urban/rural growth boundaries (DCD, 1992).
Reasons are generally related to operation of urban land markets, changes in availability over
time, and a need to avoid constraining land supply and causing increases in land cost. The
amount of the oversupply needed is not known with certainty. Too little urban land relative to
targeted needs could increase land cost and housing prices and shift growth pressure to adjacent
areas or jurisdictions.
In order to ensure adequate availability of urban land at all times, some growth management
planning systems have provided for a “safety factor” of land in addition to projected urban area
land requirements. Factors of 1.25 to 2.5 have been used in some growth management systems
(Whatcom County/Bellingham Planning Departments, 1993; Beaton, 1982; Department of
Community Development (DCD), 1992). For the 2002 capacity analysis, reduction factors were
applied to provide a “safety factor” for estimated future capacity. A 15% market availability
reduction factor was applied to vacant land, and at a 30% market availability reduction factor was
used for partially-used and redevelopable land. In addition, an additional 5% reduction was made
for uncertainty related to future infrastructure needs (roads, drainage facilities, etc.).
One adjustment to the capacity analysis completed in 2002 is necessary. Development plans for
the large master-planned multi family development (developed by Triad) at Point Edwards
indicate that nearly 300 dwelling units will be built there, adding approximately 80 dwelling units
to the capacity estimate at that location (the initial capacity estimate was for 220 units).
The specific studies undertaken by the city to update the plans for the Downtown Waterfront
Activity Center and the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center and related Highway 99 Corridor
have been targeted at clarifying and improving implementation rather than increasing capacity in
those areas.
Relationship to 2025 Population and Employment Targets
The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires that jurisdictions plan to accommodate housing
and employment forecasts for the next 20 years within the Urban Growth Area. Snohomish
County and its cities have worked together with the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) to
arrive at forecasts that each city will use to accommodate its fair share of regional growth. The
City of Edmonds’ share of regional growth by the year 2025 is 5,420 additional residents
(approximately 3,079 residential units). By 2025, total population is expected to reach 44,880
residents. A comparison summary of additional population capacityhistorical growth and the
2025 2035 population and housing targets is presented in Figure 13Figure 8 and Figure 14Table
6. The city is able to consider a planning target within a range (shown as the “high” vs. “low”
growth lines in Figure 8). Based on historical trends, the “low” target appears to be the most
reasonable for Edmonds – particularly in light of the relatively high land values in the city. The
land capacity analysis, combined with the goals and policies in the comprehensive plan, indicates
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 280 of 680
that both the projected targets for population and employment can be accommodated by the city
through 2025.
The adopted 2035 employment target for Edmonds is 13,948 jobs. whichThis
representsrepresents an increase of 2,269 above19.4 percent from the 2011 estimate of 11,679
people employedjobs within the City in the City in 2011. The 2012 Buildable Lands analysis
showsed a potential increased capacitycapacity increase of 2,820 employees by 2035, which has
been increased to 3,522 using the same analysis employed in reviewing the housing and
population capacity discussed above. The 2013 employment estimate was 13,232.
The City should consider using incentives to achieve redevelopment and infill goals and zoning
incentives or other measures to ensure that land adjacent to infrastructure facilities is utilized to
maximize the economic and environmental benefits of that infrastructure. Improvements that
encourage redevelopment along the Highway 99 Corridor are of interest to the City.
The land capacity analysis indicates that there is sufficient capacity to accommodate forecasted
residential and employment growth under the Proposed Action and each of the land use
alternatives. Given the extent to which future land use policies, regulations, demographics, and
market forces could affect land capacity estimates, however, it is important that development
trends and remaining land supply within the city is regularly monitored in order to ensure the
continued supply of adequate urban land throughout the 20-year GMA planning horizon.
Implementation strategies should include development of a long-term program to monitor the
city's progress towards goals contained in the Comprehensive Plan. As part of the monitoring
process, the city should work with the public, environmental and business leaders, interest
groups, cities and other agencies to develop detailed monitoring criteria or "benchmarks" that
could be used to measure progress and identify the need for corrective action.
Specific implementation measures should seek to reduce barriers or impediments to development.
For example, measures that reduce the regulatory compliance burden of the private sector, if
successful, would reduce the cost imposed by such regulations. Similarly, implementation
measures that are designed to encourage flexibility could also help reduce compliance costs – at
least on a case-by-case basis. Specific measures could include: provision of flexible development
standards; density bonuses for site designs that provide public benefits; and fee waivers or
expedited review that lower financial development risks
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 281 of 680
Source: US Census; Puget Sound Regional Council.
Figure 13: Edmonds Historic Growth vs. Projected Growth
Source: US Census; Puget Sound Regional Council
1 Gross Density = number of households per gross acre of land, city-wide. Note that this includes non-
residential land, so the density per gross residential acre is significantly higher.
Figure 14: Edmonds Existing and Projected Growth
2 Net Density = number of households per net acre of land, after critical areas and rights-
of-way are deducted. Note that this is includes non-residential land, so the density per net
residential acre is significantly higher.
1990 2000 2010
2035
(Plan
Target)
Population 30,744 39,515 39,709 45,550
Nominal Change -8,771 194 5,841
% Change -28.50% 0.49% 14.71%
Annual % Change -2.50% 0.05% 0.55%
Housing Units 12,945 17,508 18,378 21,168
Nominal Change -4,563 870 2,790
% Change -35.20% 4.97% 15.18%
Avg HH Size 2.41 2.32 2.26 2.2
Avg Persons/Unit 2.37 2.26 2.16 2.15
Gross Density 1 2.7 3.1 3.16 3.64DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 282 of 680
Source: U.S. Census, 2000, and Edmonds Planning Division, 2004.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 283 of 680
Land Use Concepts
The VISION 2020 regional plan establishes a
Activity Centers
Introduction. The VISION 2040 regional plan establishes a growth management, transportation,
environmental, and economic strategy for the Puget Sound region of central placesurban growth
areas (UGAs) framed by open space and linked by efficient, high capacity transit. While the
history and character of development in Edmonds does not support its designation as one of these
regional centers, Tthe concepts developed in VISION 2020 2040 are supported in the Edmonds
Comprehensive Plan. The approach proposed in Edmonds is to strategically plan for future
development in two activity centers located within the community, the Medical/Highway 99
Activity Center and the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center. based on the “Activity Clusters”
described in VISION 2020:
“These central places are smaller than the subregional and metropolitan centers and are not
necessarily located on, or directly served by, the regional rapid transit system. They are not
designated to receive a major share of the region’s employment growth, although they will
certainly continue to see some new employment and residential development. Transit service will
focus on connecting these places to the regional rapid transit system and to the adjacent
metropolitan or subregional centers. In contrast with the subregional centers, the growth in
employment in an activity cluster is for services oriented to serving the local residential
community. In contrast with the small towns, activity clusters are part of the urban/suburban
landscape; they are not separated from other areas by open space, agricultural lands or water.”
[Vision 2020, October 1990, page 24]
Activity Centers in Edmonds are intended to address the following framework goals:
• Pedestrian-oriented - Provide a pedestrian-oriented streetscape environment for
residential and commercial activity.
• Mixed-use - Encourage mixed-use development patterns that provide a variety of
commercial and residential opportunities, including both multi-family and small-lot
single family development.
• Community character - Build on historical character and natural relationships, such as
historic buildings, slopes with views, and the waterfront.
• Multimodal -Encourage transit service and access.
• Balanced (re)development - Strategically plan for development and redevelopment that
achieves a balanced and coordinated approach to economic development, diverse
housing, and along with cultural and environmental goals.
• Concurrency -Coordinate the plans and actions of both the public and private sectors.
• Urban design - Provide a context for urban design guidelines that maximize
predictability while assuring a consistent and coherent character of development.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 284 of 680
• Adaptive reuse - Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to
redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these resources.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 285 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 286 of 680
Downtown/ Waterfront Activity Center
A. Plan Context. A number of public plans and projects have been taking shape in recent years,
and these will have a profound impact on the future of the city’s downtown/ waterfront area.
Some of these ongoing activities include:
• Increased concern about conflicts and safety issues related to the interaction of rail,
ferry, vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
• Transportation planning and the Edmonds Crossing multimodal project which will
move the existing ferry terminal at the base of Main Street to a new multimodal
transportation center at Pt. Edwards.
• Continued development of the city’s waterfront parks and walkways into an
interconnected necklace of public spaces.
• The South CountyEdmonds Senior Center is undertaking strategic planning to look at
its facilities, programs, and services.
• Public access to the water and the natural beauty of the waterfront figures
prominently in the Port of Edmonds’ plans, including new plazas, improved
walkways and public art. Public pedestrian/bicycle access across the railroad tracks
to the waterfront, in the vicinity of the south end of the marina, near Marina Beach
Park, should remain a high priority.
• Arts plans continue to be implemented throughout the downtown, including such
projects as the Edmonds Center for the Arts, the Artworks facility, and the continued
expansion of downtown festivals and events.
• Edmonds Community College has expanded its downtown presence through new
initiatives with the Edmonds Conference Center (formerly the Edmonds Floral
Conference Center) and is working with the Edmonds Center for the Arts to enhance
overall operations.
B. Downtown/Waterfront Vision. Taken together, the goals and policies for the Downtown/
Waterfront Activity Center present a vision for Edmonds downtown/ waterfront. By actively
pursuing the ferry terminal’s relocation, the City has set upon an ambitious and exciting course.
It is a course that holds promise for the downtown/ waterfront, but it is one that will require
concerted action by the entire community, including local, state and federal public officials,
business groups and citizens. While the challenges presented in this effort are substantial, the
possible rewards are even greater, for with its existing physical assets, future opportunities and
the energy of its citizens, Edmonds has the potential to create one of the region’s most attractive
and vital city centers in the midst of a magnificent shoreline setting.
Components of the overall vision for the downtown/ waterfront area include:
• The Edmonds Crossing multimodal transportation center provides convenient
transportation connections for bus, ferry, rail, auto and bicycle riders and makes
Edmonds an integrated node in the regional transportation system. The new terminal
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 287 of 680
reduces negative impacts to downtown Edmonds while still providing a link between
the terminal and downtown Edmonds. The project provides the community with
varied transportation resources and an economic stimulus to the larger community.
• Downtown is extended westward and connected to the shoreline by positive mixed-
use development as well as by convenient pedestrian routes. Redevelopment of the
holding lanes and SR-104 is pursued after the ferry terminal relocates to Point
Edwards.
• The shoreline features a full spectrum of recreational activities, park settings, marina
facilities, and supporting uses.
• There is a more efficient transportation system featuring commuter and passenger
trains, increased bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes, and adequate streets and
parking areas. Transportation conflicts and safety issues involving the interaction of
rail, ferry, vehicular and pedestrian traffic are resolved.
• There is a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment and
associated businesses supported by both nearby residents and the larger Edmonds
community, and that attracts visitors from throughout the region.
• The downtown supports a mix of uses, including traditional commercial and multi
family development with new mixed-use development types. Single family
neighborhoods are a part of this mix of uses, and contribute to the choice of housing
and character of downtown.
• Opportunities for new development and redevelopment reinforce Edmonds’
attractive, small town pedestrian-oriented character. Pedestrian-scale building height
limits are an important part of this quality of life, and remain in effect.
• Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to redevelopment of
historic structures in order to preserve these resources.
• Auto traffic is rerouted to minimize impact to residential neighborhoods.
• The City takes advantage of emerging technology and service innovations, such as
electric vehicle charging stations, bicycle sharing, and WiFi or fiber communications
systems.
Downtown/Waterfront Goals and Plan Policies. The following goals and policies are intended
to achieve the framework goals for the downtown/waterfront area:
C. Goals for the Downtown/ Waterfront Area Goal A. To achieve this vision, goals for the
Downtown Waterfront Activity Center include:
Promote downtown Edmonds as an attractive setting for retail, office, entertainment and
associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community, and as a
destination for visitors from throughout the region.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 288 of 680
A.1 Ensure that the downtown/waterfront area continues – and builds on – its
function as a key identity element for the Edmonds community.
A.2 Enhance Edmonds’ visual identity by continuing its pedestrian-scale of
downtown development, enhancing its shoreline character, and protecting and
building on the strong visual quality of the “5th and Main” core.
A.3 Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment
and associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger
Edmonds community, downtown commercial activity and visitors from
throughout the region.
A.4 Enhance shoreline features to include a full spectrum of recreational activities,
park settings, natural features (such as the Edmonds Marsh), and marina
facilities. Improve public access to the shoreline and link waterfront features
by establishing a continuous esplanade along the shoreline. The esplanade will
be constructed over time through public improvements and Shoreline Master
Program requirements placed on private development.
A.5 Support the development and retention of significant public investments in the
downtown/waterfront area, including government and cultural facilities that
help draw residents and visitors to downtown.
A.6 Provide greater residential opportunities and personal services within the
downtown, especially to accommodate the needs of a changing population.
Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal B. Continue to plan for and implement improvements in the
downtown/waterfront area that resolve safety conflicts while encouraging multi-modal
transportation and access to the waterfront.
B.1. Future development along the waterfront should support the continuation and
compatible design of three regional facilities: Edmonds Crossing at Pt.
Edwards; the Port of Edmonds and its master plan; and the regional parks,
beaches and walkways making up the public shoreline.
B.2. Plan for improvements to resolve transportation and safety conflicts in the
downtown/waterfront area.
B.63. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring improved bus service,
pedestrian and bicycle routes, and adequate streets and parking areas.
Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal BC. Continue to plan for and implement the Edmonds
Crossing multimodal transportation center at Pt. Edwards – pursuing the design, permitting, land
acquisition and development of the project. The completion of Edmonds Crossing will help
address the competing needs of three regional facilities (transportation, parks and open space –
including the Edmonds Marsh, and the Port of Edmonds) while providing opportunities for
redevelopment and linkage between downtown Edmonds and its waterfront.B.1. Future
development along the waterfront should support the continuation and compatible design of three
regional facilities: Edmonds Crossing at Pt. Edwards; the Port of Edmonds and its master plan;
and the regional parks, beaches and walkways making up the public shoreline.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 289 of 680
B.2C.1 Utilize the Point Edwards site to its best community and regional
potential by developing a multimodal transit center with compatible
development in the surrounding area. In addition to the regional benefits
arising from its multi modal transportation function, an essential community
benefit is in removing intrusive ferry traffic from the core area which serves to
visually and physically separate downtown from the waterfront.
B.3.C.2. Establish a Point Edwards multimodal transportation center which
provides convenient transportation connections for bus, ferry, rail, auto,
pedestrians and bicycle riders and makes Edmonds an integrated node in the
regional transportation system. The new terminal should be planned to reduce
negative impacts to downtown Edmonds – such as grade separation/safety
concerns and conflicts with other regional facilities – while providing the
community with unique transportation resources and an economic stimulus to
the larger community.
B.4.C.3. Extend Downtown westward and connect it to the shoreline by
encouraging mixed-use development and pedestrian-oriented amenities and
streetscape improvements, particularly along Dayton and Main Streets.
Development in this area should draw on historical design elements found in
the historic center of Edmonds to ensure an architectural tie throughout the
Downtown Area. Pursue redevelopment of SR-104 and the existing holding
lanes once the ferry terminal moves to Point Edwards.
B.5.C.4. Improve traffic conditions by removing ferry traffic impacts from the
downtown core.B.6. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring
improved bus service, pedestrian and bicycle routes, and adequate streets and
parking areas.
Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal D. Define the downtown commercial and retail core along
streets having the strongest pedestrian links and pedestrian-oriented design elements, while
protecting downtown’s identity.
D.1 Encourage opportunities for new development and redevelopment which
reinforce Edmonds’ attractive, small town pedestrian oriented character.
Provide incentives to encourage adaptive reuse as an alternative to
redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these resources. These
historic structures are a key component of the small town character of
Edmonds and its economic viability. Height limits that reinforce and require
pedestrian-scale development are an important part of this quality of life, and
should be implemented through zoning regulations and design guidelines.
D.2 Gradually remove large and inadequately landscaped paved areas and provide
for green infrastructure.
D.3 Provide pedestrian-oriented amenities for citizens and visitors throughout the
downtown/waterfront area, including such things as:
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 290 of 680
• Weather protection,
• Street trees and flower baskets,
• Street furniture,
• Public art and art integrated into private developments,
• Pocket parks,
• Signage and other way-finding devices,
• Restrooms.
D.4 Strive for the elimination of overhead wires and poles whenever possible.
D.5 Coordinate new building design with old structure restoration and renovation.
D.6 Develop sign regulations that support the pedestrian character of downtown,
encouraging signage to assist in locating businesses and public and cultural
facilities while discouraging obtrusive and garish signage which detracts from
downtown pedestrian and cultural amenities.
D.7 Provide lighting for streets and public areas that is designed to promote
comfort, security, and aesthetic beauty while being appropriate for its location.
D.8 Building design should discourage automobile access and curb cuts that
interfere with pedestrian and bicycle activity and break up the streetscape.
Encourage the use of alley entrances and courtyards to beautify the back alleys
in the commercial and mixed use areas in the downtown area.
Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal E. Identify supporting arts and mixed use residential and
office areas which support and complement downtown retail use areas. Provide for a strong
central retail core at downtown’s focal center while providing for a mixture of supporting
commercial and residential uses in the area surrounding this retail core area. Emphasize and plan
for links between the retail core and these supporting areas.
E.1 Support a mix of uses downtown which includes a variety of housing,
commercial, and cultural activities.
Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal F. Focus development between the commercial and retail
core and the Edmonds Center for the Arts on small-scale retail, service, and multi-family
residential uses.
Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal G. Develop gateway/entrance areas into downtown which
serve complementary purposes (e.g. convenience shopping, community activities).
Downtown/Waterfront Area Goal H. Explore alternative development opportunities in the
waterfront area, such as specifically encouraging arts-related and arts-complementing uses.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 291 of 680
H.1 Improve and encourage economic development opportunities by providing
space for local businesses and cottage industries and undertaking supporting
public improvement projects. Of particular significance is the enhancement of
economic development opportunities resulting from the Edmonds Crossing
project and the enhancement of Edmonds as an arts and water-oriented
destination.
Multi-modal D. Transportation. Primary goals of the City’s Downtown Waterfront Plan
include integrating the downtown core with the waterfront, improving pedestrian access and
traffic circulation, and encouraging mixed-use development. Current conditions limit the city's
ability to achieve these plan goals by making it difficult to move between the two areas, thereby
minimizing the value of the shoreline as a public resource and amenity while adversely affecting
the potential for redevelopment.
A number of studies and public involvement projects have been completed to determine how to
meet the variety of transportation needs that converge within Downtown Edmonds. Following an
initial 1992 Ferry Relocation Feasibility Study and a visioning focus group convened by
Edmonds’ Mayor in April 1992, the importance of the conflicting transportation needs
culminated in the City of Edmonds, Washington State Ferries, and Community Transit signing a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in November 1993. The MOU called for the cooperative
development of solutions to the conflicts between the City’s growth plans and ferry traffic in
particular. In response to that agreement, preliminary engineering and environmental analysis of
alternatives began in late 1993.
In 1994, the Edmonds City Council held public hearings on the possibility of relocating the
existing ferry terminal and incorporating a new terminal within a larger multimodal project. As a
result of the hearings, the Council expressed support for a regional multimodal facility. The
Council also approved the 1994 Edmonds Downtown Waterfront Plan which specifically
supported the facility’s location at Pt. Edwards.
Further environmental review and facility definition resulted in a recommendation that an
alternative site (other than the existing Main Street location) should be developed as a multimodal
facility serving ferry, rail, bus, pedestrian, and bicycle travel needs.
Several alternative sites for the relocated ferry terminal and the proposed multimodal center were
evaluated as part of the early environmental screening process. During this screening process,
federal, state, regional, and local regulatory agencies—including affected Tribes— provided input
regarding issues that could impact selecting reasonable alternatives.
Based on this extensive screening process, two alternatives were recommended for further
analysis in the Environmental Impact Statement process. A Draft Environmental Impact
Statement (DEIS) was issued on February 25, 1998, and the Final EIS was issued on November
10, 2004. Pt. Edwards is the preferred alternative for a multimodal terminal site.
In addition to the transportation benefits of moving the existing ferry terminal, a number of
redevelopment opportunities will result within the downtown waterfront area. These range from
park and public access improvements to opportunities for significant redevelopment and
connections between the waterfront and downtown.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 292 of 680
Figure 15: Integration of the Remaining Ferry Pier Structure into Surrounding Parks
Edmonds Crossing. Edmonds Crossing is a multimodal transportation center proposed to be
constructed at Point Edwards, the former UNOCAL oil storage facility south of the Edmonds
Marina. This multimodal transportation center will provide the capacity to respond to growth
while providing improved opportunities for connecting various forms of travel, including rail,
ferry, bus, bicycle, walking and ridesharing.
The project is supported by local, regional, and state plans, including the Puget Sound Regional
Council’s Destination 2030 Metropolitan Transportation and VISION 2020 2040 plan;
Washington State Ferries’ (WSF) System Plan for 1999-2018; Snohomish County’s countywide
Transportation Plan; the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan; and the Port of Edmonds
Strategic Plan and Master Plan
Edmonds Crossing will provide:
• Intersection improvements at Pine Street and SR-104;
• Interconnection of Amtrak service to Chicago and Vancouver, B.C., Sounder
commuter rail service between Everett and Seattle, and other regional transportation
modes;
• Connections to the regional transit system with direct bus service to communities
throughout the urban growth area;
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 293 of 680
• Enhanced ability for people to rideshare, bicycle and walk to connect with travel
opportunities at the multimodal center;
• Improved safety and travel on Edmonds local streets and along SR-104 between the
ferry terminal and I-5.
• Linkage between Navy facilities at Everett and on the Kitsap peninsula.
Linkage between Navy facilities at Everett and on the Kitsap peninsula.
Figure 11.
Edmonds Crossing “preferred alternative” from the 2004 FEIS.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 294 of 680
Figure 16: Edmonds Crossing "Preferred Alternative" from the 2004 FEIS
The project includes:
• A ferry terminal;
• A train station;
• A transit center for bus and regional transit, as well as the opportunity for riders to
connect to downtown businesses via a local circulator service;
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 295 of 680
• The flexibility to operate the facility to respond to changing travel demands;
• Safety features including grade separation of train traffic from other modes of travel,
designated vehicle parking and holding areas, and improved passenger waiting areas.
While the Edmonds Crossing project will directly benefit the transportation system, the project
will also provide significant benefits to downtown Edmonds. Completion of the project provides
an opportunity to redevelop the existing ferry terminal facilities and the related holding lanes in
the downtown area. Providing a connection from the new multimodal terminal to downtown
Edmonds will potentially bring more visibility and visitors to the downtown area
.
E. Plan Policies and Implementation Strategy. The vision and goals for Downtown Waterfront
Activity Center are designed to present a coherent vision for future development in the area. To
implement this vision, a series of policies and an implementation strategy are intended to guide
future public and private actions.
Implementation Strategy. Key issues tied to the viability and health of the downtown
waterfront area include using the Edmonds Crossing project to help resolve transportation issues,
linking downtown with the waterfront, and taking advantage of redevelopment opportunities
arising from emerging trends and public investments.
The largest single factor affecting the downtown waterfront area is the timing and construction of
the Edmonds Crossing project. Because of this, a two-phased downtown waterfront
redevelopment strategy is envisioned. The first phase includes actions taken before the existing
ferry terminal is relocated to the Pt. Edwards site, and is intended to include actions taken to
support ongoing redevelopment and arts-related improvements downtown. This phase will also
set the framework for subsequent redevelopment after the terminal’s relocation. The second phase
Figure 17: Downtown Design Concepts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 296 of 680
is aimed at comprehensive redevelopment to link the downtown with the waterfront, better utilize
shoreline resources, increase economic viability and provide the setting for a broad range of
community functions.
Short Term Actions. Short term actions are those actions that can take place prior to construction
of the Edmonds Crossing project, generally in the next 5-7 years.
1. Develop a short term plan and strategy to address transportation conflicts and safety
issues involving the interaction of rail, ferry, vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the waterfront
area.
12. Plan for the Edmonds Crossing project at Pt. Edwards which includes relocation of the
existing ferry terminal. Planning should also include reuse of the current ferry terminal and
related holding area.
23. Improve the existing downtown rail station between Dayton and Main Streets in order to
better accommodate inter-city passenger and commuter rail service, including provisions for bus
and commuter traffic as well as pedestrian connections to the waterfront and downtown. During
the short term planning period, evaluate the feasibility and benefits of retaining a commuter rail
and transit presence downtown after the construction of Edmonds Crossing.
34. Plan for future joint public/private development of the area between SR-104 and the
railroad tracks. Planning activities could potentially include infrastructure planning, property
acquisition, parking management, development incentives and guidelines or modifications to land
use regulations (such as zoning or master planning). Although Amtrak and commuter rail service
will be included as a part of the Edmonds Crossing project, the City and transit service providers
should examine whether a commuter rail stop can be retained between Dayton and Main Streets
in order to provide improved service and stimulate potential redevelopment of the surrounding
area.
45. Upgrade secondary downtown streets for pedestrians. Implement the city’s public urban
design plan and street tree plan while expanding public amenities and streetscape improvements
in areas where these do not already exist. These improvements are particularly needed along
Main and Dayton Streets in the area between downtown and the waterfront in order to improve
pedestrian connections between downtown and the waterfront area. Pedestrian improvements
should be combined with traffic improvement projects where applicable.
56. Continue to promote sustainabile shoreline management and public access to the city’s
beaches, parks, and walkways.
67. Continue implementing a continuous shoreline walkway (boardwalk/esplanade) from
Brackett’s Landing North to Point Edwards. Work with the Port of Edmonds to integrate
recreation and marina functions into the long term plan.
78. Work with the Senior Center to plan for long term needs for the senior center facilities
and programs.
89. Encourage a variety of housing to be developed as part of new development and
redevelopment of downtown properties. Housing should be provided to serve a diverse
community, including single family homes, multi family apartments and condominiums, housing
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 297 of 680
as part of mixed use developments, and housing connected with live/work developments that
could also encourage an arts-oriented community in the downtown area. A special focus for arts-
supporting live/work arrangements could be in the corridor and nearby residential areas linking
downtown with the Edmonds Center for the Arts.
910. Begin improvements to mitigate ferry terminal traffic (and other traffic) increases, as
envisioned in the Edmonds Crossing project and the transportation element of the comprehensive
plan.
1011. Develop “gateways” at key entrances to the downtown area which enhance the identity
and sense of place for downtown. Gateways should signal that visitors are entering downtown
Edmonds, and should include elements such as public art, landscaping, signage and directional
(“way-finding”) aids.
Long Term Actions. Long term actions are those actions that can take place during or after
construction of the Edmonds Crossing project, generally in the next 7-20 years.
1. Complete a multi modal transportation center at Point Edwards for:
• Rail (inter-city and commuter)
• Ferry
• Park & Ride/Auto
• Bus
• Pedestrian and shuttle connections to other features and amenities.
2. Complete redevelopment of the Point Edwards site consistent with an overall master plan
that provides for commercial or mixed use development compatible with the Edmonds Crossing
project.
3. Coordinate circulation and public parking with Port development.
4. Continue to protect and enhance existing wetlands and continue to develop supporting
non-intrusive interpretive trails and exhibits to help educate local citizens and visitors about
Edmonds’ unique ecosystems and natural and cultural history.
5. Continue development of a “necklace” of shoreline parks with improvements, focusing
on missing links in the park and walkway system. Retain and expand existing parks, providing
linkages whenever property acquisitions or easements become available for public use.
6. Encourage the development of centralized parking facilities as part of redevelopment
projects. Under the right circumstances, these types of facilities can provide an efficient
mechanism for consolidating expensive parking improvements while freeing up land for more
intensive and desirable uses that support local housing, commercial, and pedestrian activities.
Public/private partnerships should be explored when the opportunity arises, both in private and
public projects (e.g. the commuter rail station downtown). Centralized parking facilities could be
built as part of a master-planned mixed-use development.
7. Redevelop the existing ferry terminal site at the base of Main Street according to a master
plan after the existing ferry terminal has been relocated to Point Edwards. This is a unique
location, situated in the midst of a continuous park and beach setting, and provides opportunities
for public/private partnerships. Ideas to be pursued include public “festival” entertainment or
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 298 of 680
activity space, visitor moorage, park and public walkways, and other uses that would encourage
this as to become a destination drawing people from south along the waterfront and eastward up
into downtown. Redevelopment of this area should be done in a manner that is sensitive to and
enhances the views down Main Street and from the adjoining parks and public areas.
8. Redevelop the area from the east side of SR-104 to the railroad tracks, from Harbor
Square to Main Street, according to a mixed use master plan. This area could provide a significant
opportunity for public/private partnerships. Under the right circumstances, consolidated parking
or a pedestrian/bicycle crossing to the waterfront could be possible as part of a redevelopment
project. Every opportunity should be taken to improve the pedestrian streetscape in this area in
order to encourage pedestrian activity and linkages between downtown and the waterfront. Uses
developed along public streets should support pedestrian and bicycle activity and include
amenities such as street trees, street furniture, flowers and mini parks. Main and Dayton Streets
should receive special attention for public art or art integrated into private developments to
reinforce the visual arts theme for downtown. Redevelopment of this area should also take
advantage of the ability to reconfigure and remove the ferry holding lanes paralleling SR-104
once the Edmonds Crossing project is developed.
9. Support redevelopment efforts that arise out of planning for the long term needs of the
senior center. These plans should reinforce the center’s place in the public waterfront, linking the
facility to the walkways and parks along the shoreline.
10. New development and redevelopment in the downtown waterfront area should be
designed to meet overall design objectives and the intent of the various “districts” described for
the downtown area.
Downtown Waterfront Plan Policies. The following policies are intended to achieve the goals
for the downtown waterfront area:
E.1. Ensure that the downtown waterfront area continues – and builds on – its function as a
key identity element for the Edmonds community.
E.2. Future development along the waterfront should support the continuation and compatible
design of three regional facilities: Edmonds Crossing at Pt. Edwards; the Port of Edmonds and its
master plan; and the regional parks, beaches and walkways making up the public shoreline.
E.3. Utilize the Point Edwards site to its best community and regional potential by developing
a multimodal transit center with compatible development in the surrounding area. In addition to
the regional benefits arising from its multi modal transportation function, an essential community
benefit is in removing intrusive ferry traffic from the core area which serves to visually and
physically separate downtown from the waterfront.
E.4. Establish a Point Edwards multimodal transportation center which provides convenient
transportation connections for bus, ferry, rail, auto, pedestrians and bicycle riders and makes
Edmonds an integrated node in the regional transportation system. The new terminal should be
planned to reduce negative impacts to downtown Edmonds – such as grade separation/safety
concerns and conflicts with other regional facilities – while providing the community with unique
transportation resources and an economic stimulus to the larger community.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 299 of 680
E.5. Extend Downtown westward and connect it to the shoreline by encouraging mixed-use
development and pedestrian-oriented amenities and streetscape improvements, particularly along
Dayton and Main Streets. Development in this area should draw on historical design elements
found in the historic center of Edmonds to ensure an architectural tie throughout the Downtown
Area. Pursue redevelopment of SR-104 and the existing holding lanes once the ferry terminal
moves to Point Edwards.
E.6. Enhance Edmonds’ visual identity by continuing its pedestrian-scale of downtown
development, enhancing its shoreline character, and protecting and building on the strong visual
quality of the “5th and Main” core.
E.7. Improve traffic conditions by removing ferry traffic impacts from the downtown core.
E.8. Improve and encourage economic development opportunities by providing space for local
businesses and cottage industries and undertaking supporting public improvement projects. Of
particular significance is the enhancement of economic development opportunities resulting from
the Edmonds Crossing project and the enhancement of Edmonds as an arts and water-oriented
destination.
E.9. Enhance shoreline features to include a full spectrum of recreational activities, park
settings, natural features (such as the Edmonds Marsh), and marina facilities. Improve public
access to the shoreline and link waterfront features by establishing a continuous esplanade along
the shoreline. The esplanade will be constructed over time through public improvements and
Shoreline Master Program requirements placed on private development.
E.10. Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring improved bus service, pedestrian
and bicycle routes, and adequate streets and parking areas.
E.11. Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, entertainment and
associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community,
downtown commercial activity and visitors from throughout the region.
E.12. Support a mix of uses downtown which includes a variety of housing, commercial, and
cultural activities.
E.13. Support the development and retention of significant public investments in the downtown
waterfront area, including government and cultural facilities that help draw residents and visitors
to downtown.
E.14. Encourage opportunities for new development and redevelopment which reinforce
Edmonds’ attractive, small town pedestrian oriented character. Provide incentives to encourage
adaptive reuse as an alternative to redevelopment of historic structures in order to preserve these
resources. These historic structures are a key component of the small town character of Edmonds
and it’s economic viability. Height limits that reinforce and require pedestrian-scale development
are an important part of this quality of life, and should be implemented through zoning
regulations and design guidelines.
E.15. Provide greater residential opportunities and personal services within the downtown,
especially to accommodate the needs of a changing population.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 300 of 680
E.16. Provide for the gradual elimination of large and inadequately landscaped paved areas.
E.17. Provide pedestrian-oriented amenities for citizens and visitors throughout the downtown
waterfront area, including such things as:
Weather protection,
Street trees and flower baskets,
Street furniture,
Public art and art integrated into private developments,
Pocket parks,
Signage and other way-finding devices,
Restrooms.
E.18. Strive for the elimination of overhead wires and poles whenever possible.
E.19. Coordinate new building design with old structure restoration and renovation.
E.20. Develop sign regulations that support the pedestrian character of downtown, encouraging
signage to assist in locating businesses and public and cultural facilities while discouraging
obtrusive and garish signage which detracts from downtown pedestrian and cultural amenities.
E.21. Provide lighting for streets and public areas that is designed to promote comfort, security,
and aesthetic beauty.
E.22. Building design should discourage automobile access and curb cuts that interfere with
pedestrian activity and break up the streetscape. Encourage the use of alley entrances and
courtyards to beautify the back alleys in the commercial and mixed use areas in the downtown
area.
Downtown/ Waterfront Districts. In addition to the goals and policies for the downtown/
waterfront area, the Comprehensive Plan Map depicts a number of districts in the downtown/
waterfront area. These districts are described below.
Retail Core. The area immediately surrounding the fountain at 5th and Main and extending
along Main Street and Fifth Avenue is considered the historic center of Edmonds and
building heights shall be pedestrian in scale and compatible with the historic character of this
area. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should be designed with adequate
ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial uses and the entry situated at
street level. Uses are encouraged to be retail-compatible (i.e. retail or compatible service –
e.g. art galleries, restaurants, real estate sales offices and similar uses that provide storefront
windows and items for sale to the public that can be viewed from the street). The street front
façades of buildings must provide a high percentage of transparent window area and
pedestrian weather protection along public sidewalks. Design guidelines should provide for
pedestrian-scale design features, differentiating the lower, commercial floor from the upper
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 301 of 680
floors of the building. Buildings situated around the fountain square must be orientated to the
fountain and its associated pedestrian area.
Arts Center Corridor. The corridor along 4th Ave N between the retail core and the Edmonds
Center for the Performing Arts. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should
be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial
uses, with commercial entries being located at street level. Building design and height shall
be compatible with the goal of creating a pedestrian oriented arts corridor while providing
incentives for the adaptive reuse of existing historic structures. Building entries for
commercial buildings must provide pedestrian weather protection. Design guidelines should
provide for pedestrian-scale design features, differentiating the lower floor from the upper
floors of the building. The design of interior commercial spaces must allow for flexible
commercial space, so that individual business spaces can be provided with individual
doorways and pedestrian access directly to the public sidewalk. The streetscape should
receive special attention, using trees, landscaping, and public art to encourage pedestrian
activity. Private development projects should also be encouraged to integrate art into their
building designs. Where single family homes still exist in this area, development regulations
should allow for “live-work” arrangements where the house can accommodate both a
business and a residence as principal uses. Uses supporting the arts center should be
encouraged – such as restaurants, cafés, galleries, live/work use arrangements, and B&Bs.
Downtown Mixed Commercial. To encourage a vibrant downtown, first floor spaces should
be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of retail and commercial
uses., with commercial entries at street level. Buildings can be built to the property line.
Building heights shall be compatible with the goal of achieving pedestrian scale development.
The first floor of buildings must provide pedestrian weather protection along public
sidewalks. Design guidelines should provide for pedestrian-scale design features,
differentiating the lower, commercial floor from the upper floors of the building. The design
of interior commercial spaces must allow for flexible commercial space, so that individual
business spaces can be provided with individual doorways and pedestrian access directly to
the public sidewalk. When the rear of a property adjoins a residentially-designated property,
floor area that is located behind commercial street frontage may be appropriate for residential
use. Where single family homes still exist in this area, development regulations should allow
for “live-work” arrangements where the house can accommodate both a business and a
residence as principal uses.
Downtown Mixed Residential. In this area, commercial uses would be allowed but not
required (i.e. buildings could be entirely commercial or entirely residential, or anything in
between). Height and design of buildings shall conform to the standards of the Downtown
Mixed Commercial District. Buildings facing the Dayton Street corridor should provide a
pedestrian-friendly streetscape, providing pedestrian amenities and differentiating the ground
floor from upper building levels.
Downtown Master Plan. The properties between SR-104 and the railroad, including Harbor
Square, the Edmonds Shopping Center (former Safeway site), and extending past the
Commuter Rail parking area up to Main Street. This area is appropriate for design-driven
master planned development which provides for a mix of uses and takes advantage of its
strategic location between the waterfront and downtown. The location of existing taller
buildings on the waterfront, and the site's situation at the bottom of “the Bowl,” could enable
a design that provides for higher buildings outside current view corridors. Any redevelopment
in this area should be oriented to the street fronts, and provide pedestrian-friendly walking
areas, especially along Dayton and Main Streets. Development design should also not ignore
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 302 of 680
the railroad side of the properties, since this is an area that provides a “first impression” of the
city from railroad passengers and visitors to the waterfront. Art work, landscaping, and
modulated building design should be used throughout any redevelopment project.
Shoreline Commercial. The waterfront, west of the railroad tracks between the public
beaches and the Port (currently zoned CW). Consistent with the City's Shoreline Master
Program, this area should allow a mix of public uses, supporting commercial uses, and water-
oriented and water-dependent uses. Building heights shall be compatible with the goal of
achieving pedestrian scale development while providing incentives to encourage public view
corridors. Roof and building forms should be an important consideration in design guidelines
for this area, because of its high sensitivity and proximity to public open spaces.
Redevelopment should result in singular, landmark buildings of high quality and sustainable
design which take advantage of the visibility and physical natural environment of their
location, and which contribute to the unique character of the waterfront. Pedestrian amenities
and weather protection must be provided for buildings located along public walkways and
street fronts.
Master Plan Development. The waterfront area south of Olympic Beach, including the Port
of Edmonds and the Point Edwards and multi modal developments. This area is governed by
master plans for the Port of Edmonds, Point Edwards, and the Edmonds Crossing project as
described in an FEIS issued on November 10, 2004. These areas are also developed
consistent with the City's Shoreline Master Program, as it applies.
Downtown Convenience Commercial. This is the south end of 5th Ave, south of Walnut.
Commercial uses would be required on the first floor, but auto-oriented uses would be
permitted in addition to general retail and service uses. To encourage a vibrant downtown,
first floor spaces should be designed with adequate ceiling height to accommodate a range of
retail and commercial uses. Weather protection would still be required, but to a lesser degree
than the retail core and only when the building was adjacent to the sidewalk. Height and
design of buildings shall conform to the standards of the Downtown Mixed Commercial
District. When the rear of a property adjoins a residentially-designated property, floor area
that is located behind the commercial street frontage may be appropriate for residential use.
Planned Residential-Office. Several properties lie along the railroad on the west side of
Sunset Ave between existing commercial zoning and Edmonds Street. This area is
appropriate for small-scale development which provides for a mix of limited office and
residential uses which provide a transition between the more intensive commercial uses along
Main Street and the residential uses along Sunset Ave. Because the area of this designation is
located adjacent to commercial development to the south, the railroad to the west, and is near
both multiple family and single-family residential development, this area should act as a
transition between theses uses. Building design for this area should be sensitive to the
surrounding commercial, multiple family and single-family character.
Downtown Design Objectives. As a companion to the districts outlined above, general
design objectives are included for the downtown waterfront area. These objectives are
intended to encourage high quality, well designed projects to be developed in the downtown/
waterfront area that reflect the values of the citizens of Edmonds. These design objectives can
be found in the Urban Design Element.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 303 of 680
1. Site Design
The development of parking lots, pedestrian walkways and landscaping
features is an integral part of how a building interacts with its site and its
surrounding environment. Good design and site planning improves
access by pedestrians, bicycles and automobiles, minimizes potential
negative impacts to adjacent development, reinforces the character and
activities within a district and builds a more cohesive and coherent
physical environment.
Vehicular Access and Parking
a. Minimize the number of driveways (curb cuts) in order to improve
pedestrian, bicycle and auto safety by reducing the number of potential
points of conflict. When alleys are present, these are the preferred
method of providing vehicular access to a property and should be used
unless there is no reasonable alternative available.
b. Design site access and circulation routes with pedestrians’ comfort
and ease of access in mind.
c. Provide adequate parking for each development, but keep cars from
interfering with the pedestrian streetscape.
d. In the Retail Core, adopt a “park and walk” policy to reinforce
pedestrian safety and ease of access. Within the Retail Core, new curb
cuts should be discouraged and there should be no requirement to
provide on-site parking.
e. Create parking lots and building service ways that are efficient and
safe for both automobiles and pedestrians, but that do not disrupt the
pedestrian streetscape.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 304 of 680
f. Provide safe routes for disabled people.
Pedestrian Access and Connections
a. Improve streetscape character to enhance pedestrian activity in
downtown retail, general commercial, and residential areas.
b. Improve pedestrian access from the street by locating buildings close
to the street and pedestrian sidewalks, and defining the street edge. Cross
walks at key intersections should be accentuated by the use of special
materials, signage or paving treatments.
c. In all of the retail and commercial downtown districts, pedestrian
access to buildings should be maximized, enabling each retail or
commercial space at street level to be directly accessed from the
sidewalk.
d. Encourage the use of mass transit by providing easy access to pleasant
waiting areas.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 305 of 680
Building Entry Location
a. Create an active, safe and lively street-edge.
b. Create a pedestrian friendly environment.
c. Provide outdoor active spaces at the entry to retail/commercial uses.
d. Commercial building entries should be easily recognizable and
oriented to the pedestrian streetscape by being located at sidewalk grade.
Building Setbacks
a. Provide for a human, pedestrian-friendly scale
for downtown buildings.
b. Create a common street frontage view with enough repetition to tie
each site to its neighbor.
c. Provide enough space for wide, comfortable and safe pedestrian
routes to encourage travel by foot.
d. Create public spaces to enhance the visual attributes of the
development and encourage outdoor interaction.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 306 of 680
Building/Site Identity
a. Do not use repetitive, monotonous building forms and massing in
large mixed use or commercial projects.
b. Improve pedestrian access and way-finding by providing variety in
building forms, color, materials and individuality of buildings.
c. Retain a connection with the scale and character of the Downtown
Edmonds through the use of similar materials, proportions, forms,
masses or building elements.
d. Encourage new construction to use design elements tied to historic
forms or patterns found in downtown.
Weather Protection
a. Provide a covered walkway for
pedestrians traveling along public
sidewalks in downtown.
b. Protect shoppers and residents from rain or snow.
c. Provide a covered waiting area and walkway for pedestrians entering
a building, coming from parking spaces and the public sidewalk.
Lighting
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 307 of 680
a. Provide adequate illumination in all areas used by pedestrians,
including building entries, walkways, bus stops, parking areas,
circulation areas and other open spaces to ensure a feeling of security.
b. Special attention should be paid to providing adequate public lighting
to encourage and support nighttime street activity and safety for
pedestrians.
c. Minimize potential for light glare to reflect or spill off-site.
d. Create a sense of welcome and activity.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 308 of 680
Signage
a. Protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered.
b. Minimize distraction from the overuse of
advertisement elements.
c. Provide clear signage to identify each distinct property or business
and to improve orientation and way-finding downtown.
d. Use graphics or symbols to reduce the need to have large letters.
e. Lighting of signs should be indirect or minimally backlit to display
lettering and symbols or graphic design instead of broadly lighting the
face of the sign.
f. Signage and other way-finding methods should be employed to assist
citizens and visitors in finding businesses and services.
g. Signage should be given special consideration when it is consistent
with or contributes to the historic character of sites on the Edmonds
Register of Historic Places.
Site Utilities, Storage,
Trash and Mechanical
a. Hide unsightly utility boxes, outdoor storage of equipment, supplies,
garbage, recycling and composting.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 309 of 680
b. Minimize noise and odor.
c. Minimize visual intrusion.
d. Minimize need for access/paving to utility areas
Art and Public Spaces
a. Public art and amenities such as mini parks, flower baskets, street
furniture, etc., should be provided as a normal part of the public
streetscape. Whenever possible, these elements should be continued in
the portion of the private streetscape that adjoins the public streetscape.
b. Art should be integrated into the design of both public and private
developments, with incentives provided to encourage these elements.
c. In the Arts Center Corridor, art should be a common element of
building design, with greater design flexibility provided when art is
made a central feature of the design.
2. Building Form
Building height and modulation guidelines are essential to create
diversity in building forms, minimize shadows cast by taller buildings
upon the pedestrian areas and to ensure compliance with policies in the
city’s Comprehensive Plan. Protecting views from public parks and
building entries as well as street views to the mountains and Puget
Sound are an important part of Edmonds character and urban form.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 310 of 680
Height
a. Maintain the human, pedestrian scale and character of historic
Edmonds.
b. Create and preserve a human scale for downtown buildings. Unless
more specific provisions are contained in the descriptions for specific
downtown districts, buildings shall be generally two stories in exterior
appearance, design and character. However, incentives or design
standards may be adopted which are consistent with the pedestrian scale
of downtown Edmonds and which allow for additional height that does
not impact the generally two-story pedestrian-scale appearance of the
public streetscape. Note that the Downtown Master Plan district
described on pages 36-37 could allow a design which provides for
higher buildings outside current view corridors.
c. Preserve public view corridors along east-west downtown streets –
such as Main Street and Dayton Street – that afford views to the
mountains and Puget Sound to the west.
Massing
a. Large building masses shall be avoided in the downtown waterfront
activity center. Large building masses should be subdivided vertically
and/or horizontally to replicate the smaller scale streetscape elements
found along downtown’s pedestrian streets.
b. Require human scale elements in building design that reinforce the
difference between the pedestrian streetscape and the upper levels of a
building.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 311 of 680
c. Use combinations of other techniques, such as roof and wall
modulation or combinations of different wall materials with windows
and trim, to break up apparent building masses into smaller elements.
When the size or configuration of a site does not lend itself to varying
building mass, these alternative techniques should be employed to obtain
a pedestrian-friendly result.
Roof Modulation
a. Use combinations of roof types and decorative elements such as
parapets or architectural detailing to break up the overall massing of the
roof and add interest to its shape and form.
b. Create and reinforce the human scale of the building.
c. Use roof forms to identify different programs or functional areas
within the building.
d. Provide ways for additional light to enter the building.
e. Encourage alternate roof treatments that improve and add interest to
building design. Features such as roof gardens, terraces, and interesting
or unique architectural forms can be used to improve the view of
buildings from above as well as from the streetscape.
Wall Modulation
a. Create a pedestrian scale appropriate to Edmonds.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 312 of 680
b. Break up large building masses and provide elements that accentuate
the human scale of a facade.
c. Avoid blank, monotonous and imposing building facades.
d. Design the building to be compatible with the surrounding built
environment.
e. Encourage designs that let more light and air into the building.
3. Building Façade
Building facade guidelines ensure that the exterior of buildings, the
portion of buildings that defines the character and visual appearance of a
place, is of high quality and demonstrates the strong sense of place and
integrity valued by the residents of the City of Edmonds.
Facade Requirements
a. Improve the pedestrian environment in the Downtown
retail/commercial area by differentiating the pedestrian-oriented street
level of buildings from upper floors.
b. Ensure diversity in design.
c. Reinforce historic building patterns found in Downtown Edmonds.
d. Provide a human scale streetscape, breaking up long façades into
defined forms that continue a pattern of individual and distinct tenant
spaces in commercial and mixed use areas.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 313 of 680
e. Improve the visual and physical character and quality of Downtown
Edmonds.
f. Create individual identity in buildings.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 314 of 680
Window Variety and Articulation
a. Windows help define the scale and character of the
building. In the retail and mixed commercial districts,
building storefronts must be dominated by clear,
transparent glass windows that allow and encourage
pedestrians to walk past and look into the commercial space.
b. Upper floors of buildings should use windows as part of the overall
design to encourage rhythm and accents in the façade.
Building Façade Materials
A. The materials that make up the exterior facades of a building also
help define the scale and style of the structure and provide variation in
the facade to help reduce the bulk of larger buildings. From the
foundation to the roof eaves, a variety of building materials can reduce
the scale and help define a building’s style and allows the design of a
building to respond to its context and client’s needs. It is particularly
important to differentiate the lower, street level of a building from the
upper floors that are less in the pedestrian’s line of sight.
Accents/Colors/Trim DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 315 of 680
A. Applied ornament and architectural detail, various materials and colors applied to a façade as well as
various decorative trim/surrounds on doors and
windows provide variation in the scale, style and
appearance of every building facade. Awnings and
canopies also add to the interest and pedestrian scale of
downtown buildings. The objective is to encourage
new development that provides:
• Compatibility with the surrounding environment,
• Visual interest and variety in building forms,
• Reduces the visual impacts of larger building masses,
• Allows identity and individuality of a project within a neighborhood.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 316 of 680
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center and Highway 99 Corridor
Medical/Highway 99 Vision. The Medical/Highway 99 activity center is intended to encourage
the development of a pedestrian and transit oriented area focused on two master planned
developments, Stevens Swedish/Edmonds Hospital medical center and Edmonds-Woodway High
School, with a related high-intensity development corridor along Highway 99. Highway 99 is
characterized by a corridor of generally commercial development with less intense uses or
designed transitions serving as a buffer between adjacent neighborhoods. In contrast, the overall
character of the mixed use activity center is intended to be an intensively developed mixed use,
pedestrian-friendly environment, in which buildings are linked by walkways served by
centralized parking, and plantings and landscaping promote pedestrian activity and a park-like
atmosphere. In addition to the general goals for activity centers, the Medical/Highway 99 activity
center is intended to achieve the following goals:
Goals for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goals and Plan Policies. The following
goals and policies are intended to achieve the framework goals for the Medical/Highway 99
Activity Center.
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal A. To eExpand the economic and tax base of the
City of Edmonds by providing incentives for business and commercial redevelopment in a
planned activity center.
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal B. ;
Provide for an aesthetically pleasing business and residential community consisting of a mixed
use, pedestrian-friendly atmosphere of attractively designed and landscaped surroundings and
inter-connected development.
B.1 Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, and service
businesses, supported by nearby residents and visitors from other parts of the
region.
B.2 Provide street trees, buffers, and landscape treatments which encourage and
support an attractive mixed use pattern of development characterized by
pedestrian walkways and centralized parking. Use these same features, in
concert with site and building design, to provide a transition from higher-
intensity mixed use development to nearby single family residential areas.
B.3 Provide a pleasant experience for pedestrians and motorists along major streets
and in a planned activity center, and provide a gateway along 212th Street SW
into the City of Edmonds.;
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 317 of 680
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal C. Recognize and plan for the distinct difference in
opportunities and development character provided by the Highway 99 corridor versus the local
travel and access patterns on local streets.
C.1 Uses adjoining the Highway 99 Corridor should provide more intensive levels
of mixed use development, including higher building heights and greater
density. However, pedestrian linkages to other portions of the activity center –
and adjoining focus areas along the Highway 99 Corridor – should still be
provided in order to assist pedestrian circulation and provide access to transit.
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal D. Promote the development of a mixed use area
served by transit and accessible to pedestrians.
D.1 Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring increased bus service,
pedestrian and bicycle routes as well as adequate streets and parking areas.
Transit service should be coordinated by transit providers and take advantage
of links to future high-capacity transit that develops along corridors such as
Highway 99.
;
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal E.To provide a buffer between the high-intensity,
high-rise commercial areas along SR 99 and the established neighborhoods and public facilities
west of 76th Avenue West.
E.1 Support a mix of uses without encroaching into single family neighborhoods.
Uses adjoining single family neighborhoods should provide transitions
between more intensive uses areas through a combination of building design,
landscaping and visual buffering, and pedestrian-scale streetscape design.
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal F.;
To discourage the expansion of strip commercial development and encourage a cohesive and
functional activity center that allows for both neighborhood conservation and targeted
redevelopment that includes an appropriate mix of single family and multiple dwelling units,
offices, retail, and business uses, along with public facilities.
F.1 In some cases, heavy commercial development (e.g. wholesale or light
industrial uses) may still be appropriate where these uses are separated from
residential uses.
;
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 318 of 680
To provide a pleasant experience for pedestrians and motorists along major streets and in a
planned activity center, and provide a gateway along 212th Street SW into the City of
EdmondsMedical/Highway 99 Activity Center Goal G. ;
To provide an integrated network of pedestrian and bicycle circulation that connects within and
through the activity center to existing residential areas, the high school, the hospital, and transit
services and facilities.
G.1 Within the activity center, policies to achieve these goals include the
following:
Provide street trees, buffers, and landscape treatments which encourage and support
an attractive mixed use pattern of development characterized by pedestrian
walkways and centralized parking. Use these same features, in concert with site
and building design, to provide a transition from higher-intensity mixed use
development to nearby single family residential areas.
Provide a more efficient transportation system featuring increased bus service,
pedestrian and bicycle routes as well as adequate streets and parking areas.
Transit service should be coordinated by transit providers and take advantage
of links to future high-capacity transit that develops along corridors such as
Highway 99.
Development should be designed for both pedestrian and transit access.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 319 of 680
Encourage a more active and vital setting for new retail, office, and service businesses,
supported by nearby residents and visitors from other parts of the region.
Support a mix of uses without encroaching into single family neighborhoods. Uses adjoining
single family neighborhoods should provide transitions between more intensive uses areas
through a combination of building design, landscaping and visual buffering, and pedestrian-scale
streetscape design.
Uses adjoining the Highway 99 Corridor should provide more intensive levels of mixed use
development, including higher building heights and greater density. However, pedestrian linkages
to other portions of the activity center – and adjoining focus areas along the Highway 99 Corridor
– should still be provided in order to assist pedestrian circulation and provide access to transit.
In some cases, heavy commercial development (e.g. wholesale or light industrial uses) may still
be appropriate where these uses are separated from residential uses.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 320 of 680
Goals for the Highway 99 Corridor Vision.
Highway 99 occupies a narrow strip of retail and commercial uses bounded by residential
neighborhoods. Historically, the corridor has developed in a patchwork of uses, without a clear
focus or direction. To improve planning for the future of the corridor, the City established a task
force in 2003-2004, resulting in the Highway 99 Enhancement Report and a related economic
analysis. During this process, local residents were contacted and asked to participate in two focus
groups to identify current problems and future aspirations for the corridor. After this preliminary
survey with the residents, the City invited business owners to participate in two charrette
meetings to brainstorm ideas and evaluate possible ways to induce redevelopment in the area.
After concepts were developed, Berk & Associates, an economics consultant, performed a market
assessment of the enhancement strategy. The following diagram summarizes the general approach
that resulted from this work: a series of focus areas providing identity and a clustering of activity
along the corridor, providing opportunities for improved economic development while also
improving linkages between the corridor and surrounding residential areas.
Figure 18: Highway 99 Corridor Themes
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 321 of 680
Highway 99 Corridor Goals and Plan Policies. The following goals and policies are intended to
achieve the framework goals for the Highway 99 Corridor.
With this background in mind, specific goals for the Highway 99 Corridor include:
Highway 99 Corridor Goal A. Improve access and circulation. Access to businesses for both
pedestrians and automobiles is difficult along major portions of the corridor. The inability of
pedestrians to cross the street and for automobiles to make safe turns is a critical limitation on
enhanced development of the corridor into a stronger economic area. Better pedestrian crossings
are also needed to support transit use, especially as Highway 99 becomes the focus of future high
capacity transit initiatives.
A.1 Provide for pedestrian access and circulation within development focus areas,
while coordinating with high-capacity transit along the Highway 99 corridor.
A.2 Use traffic signals, access management, and rechannelization to facilitate
pedestrian, business, and residential access while maintaining traffic capacity
along SR 99. The City should work collaboratively with WSDOT on these
issues, and to develop a circulation management plan. In some cases the
impacts of the traffic signals can be enhanced by access management,
rechannelization and other measures.
A.3 Make the corridor more attractive and pedestrian-friendly (e.g., add trees and
landscaping) through a combination of development requirements and – when
available – public investment.
A.4 Route auto traffic to encourage efficient access to new and existing
development while minimizing impacts to surrounding residential
neighborhoods.
Highway 99 Corridor Goal B. The City should consider the different sections along the corridor
and emphasize their unique opportunities rather than view the corridor as an undifferentiated
continuum. Street improvements and, in some cases regulatory measures can encourage these
efforts. Focus on specific nodes or segments within the corridor. Identity elements such as
signage should indicate that the corridor is within the City of Edmonds, and show how
connections can be made to downtown and other Edmonds locations.
B.1 New development should be high-quality and varied – not generic – and
include amenities for pedestrians and patrons while encouraging sustainable
practices.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 322 of 680
B.2 The City will encourage the retention of commercial uses which provide high
economic benefit to the city, such as new auto dealerships, and encourage these
types of uses to locate within the Highway 99 Corridor. When these uses are
proposed to be located within one of the corridor focus areas, these uses should
also comply with the goals and policies outlined for each focus area.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 323 of 680
B.3 Provide a system of “focus areas” along the corridor which provide opportunities
for clusters of development, or themed development areas. Providing focus points for
development is intended to help encourage segmentation of the long Highway 99
corridor into distinct activity nodes which will encourage an Edmonds character and
identity for the corridor. Concepts for the different focus areas identified on the
previous pagein the “Highway 99 Corridor Vision” include the following:
\
The “Hospital Community and Family
Retail Center” would be positioned to take
advantage of its proximity to the many
hospital and related medical services in the
area and it would be easily reachable from
th I t b t il
The “Hospital Community and Family
Retail Center” would be positioned to take
advantage of its proximity to the many
hospital and related medical services in the
area and it would be easily reachable from
the Interurban trail.
The “Hospital Community and Family
The “Hospital Community and Family
Retail Center” would be positioned to take
advantage of its proximity to the many
hospital and related medical services in the
area and it would be easily reachable from
the Interurban trail.
The “Hospital Community and Family
Retail Center” would be positioned to take
advantage of its proximity to the many
hospital and related medical services in the
area and it would be easily reachable from
the Interurban trail.
Figure 19: Highway 99 Corridor Focus Areas
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 324 of 680
Highway 99 Corridor Goal C. Encourage development that is sensitive to surrounding
neighborhoods. During the City’s Highway 99 Task Force work, residents noted that they needed
a number of services that are not presently provided along the corridor. This can provide an
opportunity that might be part of a larger business strategy. At the same time, new development
should contribute to the residential quality of the adjacent neighborhoods.
C.1 Protect residential qualities and connect businesses with the local community.
Pedestrian connections should be made available as part of new development
to connect residents to appropriate retail and service uses.
C.2 New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the fullest
extent possible while assuring that the design quality and amenities provided
contribute to the overall character and quality of the corridor. Where intense
development adjoins residential areas, site design (including buffers,
landscaping, and the arrangement of uses) and building design should be used
to minimize adverse impacts on residentially-zoned properties
C.3 Provide adequate buffering between higher intensity uses and adjoining
residential neighborhoods
Highway 99 Corridor Goal D. Encourage a variety of uses and building types. A variety of uses
and building types is appropriate to take advantage of different opportunities and conditions. For
example, a tall hotel or large scale retail development may be an excellent addition to the south of
the corridor while some small restaurants and convenience shops might cater to hospital
employees, trail users and local residents near 216th Street SW. Where needed, the City should
consider zoning changes to encourage mixed use or taller development to occur.
D.1 Upgrade the architectural and landscape design qualities of the corridor.
Establish uniform signage regulations for all properties within the corridor area
which provide for business visibility and commerce while minimizing clutter
and distraction to the public.
D.2 Within the Corridor, highrise nodes should be located to provide for maximum
economic use of suitable commercial land. Highrise nodes should be:
D.2.a Supported by adequate services and facilities;
D.2.b Designed to provide a visual asset to the community through
the use of distinctive forms and materials, articulated
facades, attractive landscaping, and similar techniques.
D.2.c Designed to take advantage of different forms of access,
including automobile, transit and pedestrian access.
D.2.d Designed to provide adequate buffering from lower intensity
uses and residential neighborhoods.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 325 of 680
Use traffic signals, access management, and rechannelization to facilitate
pedestrian, business, and residential access while maintaining traffic
capacity along SR 99. The City should work collaboratively with
WSDOT on these issues, and to develop a circulation management plan.
In some cases the impacts of the traffic signals can be enhanced by
access management, rechannelization and other measures.
New development should be high-quality and varied – not generic – and
include amenities for pedestrians and patrons.
Protect residential qualities and connect businesses with the local
community. Pedestrian connections should be made available as part of
new development to connect residents to appropriate retail and service
uses.
New development should be allowed and encouraged to develop to the
fullest extent possible while assuring that the design quality and
amenities provided contribute to the overall character and quality of the
corridor. Where intense development adjoins residential areas, site
design (including buffers, landscaping, and the arrangement of uses) and
building design should be used to minimize adverse impacts on
residentially-zoned properties.
Make the corridor more attractive and pedestrian-friendly (e.g., add trees
and landscaping) through a combination of development requirements
and – when available – public investment.
Route auto traffic to encourage efficient access to new and existing
development while minimizing impacts to surrounding residential
neighborhoods.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 326 of 680
The City will encourage the retention of commercial uses which provide
high economic benefit to the city, such as new auto dealerships, and
encourage these types of uses to locate within the Highway 99 Corridor.
When these uses are proposed to be located within one of the corridor
focus areas, these uses should also comply with the goals and policies
outlined for each focus area.
Within the Corridor, highrise nodes should be located to provide for
maximum economic use of suitable commercial land. Highrise nodes
should be:
Supported by adequate services and facilities;
Designed to provide a visual asset to the community through the use of
distinctive forms and materials, articulated facades, attractive
landscaping, and similar techniques.
Designed to take advantage of different forms of access, including
automobile, transit and pedestrian access.
Designed to provide adequate buffering from lower intensity uses and
residential neighborhoods.
Master Planned Development
Master Planned Developments are areas dominated by a special set of circumstances which allow
for a highly coordinated, planned development, with phasing over time. These master plans
describe a special purpose and need for the facilities and uses identified, and provide a clear
design which fits with the character of their surroundings. The master plans describe the land use
parameters and relationships to guide future development on the sites (height, bulk, types and
arrangements of uses, access and circulation). All development within areas identified in each
master plan shall be consistent with the provisions of the master plan. When located within a
designated activity center, development within a master plan area shall be consistent with the
goals and policies identified for the surrounding activity center. The following Master Plans are
adopted by reference:
Edmonds-Woodway High School
Stevens Hospital
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 327 of 680
City Park
Pine Ridge Park
Southwest County Park
A. The Edmonds Crossing project, as identified in the Final EIS for Edmonds Crossing
issued on November 10, 2004.
In addition to the master plans listed above, mMaster plans can also be implemented through
zoning contracts or other implementation actions, rather than being adopted as part of the plan. In
these cases, the master plan must still be consistent with the comprehensive plan goals and
policies for the area.
Residential Development
General. The City of Edmonds is unique among cities in Washington stateState. It is Located
located on the shores of Puget Sound and has access to beautiful beaches, scenery and wildlife
while still being , it has been able to retain (largely through citizen input) a its small town, quality
atmosphere rare for cities so close to major urban centers. The people of Edmonds value these
amenities and have spoken often in surveys and meetings over the years. The geographical
location also influences potential growth of Edmonds. Tucked between Lynnwood, Mountlake
Terrace and Puget Sound, the land available for annexation and development is limited.
Living standards in Edmonds are high, and this combined with the limited development potential,
provides the opportunity for constructive policy options to govern future development. This will
ensure an even better quality of life for its citizens.
Edmonds consists of a mixture of people of all ages, incomes and living styles. It becomes a more
humane and interesting city as it makes room for and improves conditions for all citizens.
When the City’s first comprehensive plan completed under the State Growth Management Act
was adopted in 1995, the City adopted plan designations for single family areas that were based
in large measure on historical development patterns, which often recognized development
limitations due to environmentally sensitive areas (slopes, landslide hazards, streams, etc.).
In the years since the first GMA comprehensive plans were approved by local jurisdictions, there
have been a number of cases brought before the State’s GMA Hearings Boards. The direction
provided by the GMA and these subsequent “elaborations” via the Hearings Board challenges can
be summarized as:
1. The GMA requires 4 dwelling units per acre as the minimum urban residential
density in urban areas such as Edmonds.
2. All land within the urban area must be designated at appropriate urban
densities. Calculating average density across an entire subarea or city does not
meet this test – for example you cannot use higher-density multi family areas
in one part of a city to justify lower-density single family areas elsewhere in
the city.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 328 of 680
The GMA Hearings Board decision in Bremerton, et al. v. Kitsap County,
CPSGMHB Case #495-3-0039c (Final Decision and Order, October 6, 1995, p.35)
includes this statement:
The Board instead adopts as a general rule a “bright line” at four net
dwelling units per acre. Any residential pattern at that density, or higher, is
clearly compact urban development and satisfies the low end of the range
required by the Act. Any larger urban lots will be subject to increased
scrutiny by the Board to determine if the number, locations, configurations
and rationale for such lot sizes complies with the goals and requirements of
the Act, and the jurisdiction’s ability to meet its obligations to accept any
allocated share of county-wide population. Any new residential land use
pattern within a UGA that is less dense is not a compact urban development
pattern, constitutes urban sprawl, and is prohibited. There are exceptions to
this general rule. For example, 1- or 2.5-acre lots may be appropriate in an
urban setting in order to avoid excessive development pressures on or near
environmentally sensitive areas. However, this circumstance can be
expected to be infrequent within the UGA and must not constitute a pattern
over large areas.
With this as background, the City’s review and update of its comprehensive plan has
attempted to combine an assessment of its large lot zoning (RS-12, RSW-12 and RS-
20) with an update of its critical areas inventories and regulations. The inventories,
based on data available from City and other sources, were not available to the City
when the 1995 comprehensive plan was adopted. These inventories provide
information necessary to refine the City’s single family plan designations and
comprehensive plan map.
In 2004, the City refined its land use and zoning maps to more closely relate its large
lot zoning to existing critical areas patterns. In preparing its updated comprehensive
plan map, an overlay was done of the 2004 critical areas inventory with currently
designated large lot single family areas. City staff analyzed the pattern of critical
areas compared with land use designations, and applied the following logic to
identify areas that could and could not be justified for continuing to be designated for
large lot single family development. Land use and zoning designations were adjusted
during the 2004/2005 plan update process to provide for this increased level of
consistency.
1. Staff used the city’s GIS system to overlay the preliminary critical areas
inventory with existing zoning (which is consistent with the current
comprehensive plan).
2. In reviewing the existing large-lot plan and zoning designations (plan
designations of “Single Family – Large Lot” equate to RS-12, RSW-12, or
RS-20 zoning), the location of large-lot designations was compared to
patterns of critical areas.
3. Patterns of critical areas – i.e. where combinations of critical areas were
present (e.g. slopes and habitat, or streams and wetlands, etc.) or where
extensive areas were covered by critical areas – were considered sufficient
justification to continue large-lot single family designations. Larger lot sizes
provide more opportunity to avoid disturbance of existing natural features –
particularly vegetative cover – and provide an opportunity to maintain
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 329 of 680
linkages between critical areas and habitat. Larger lots sizes in areas subject
to landslide hazard also reduce the need to disturb existing vegetation and
slopes, and also reduce the probability that continued slide activity will harm
people or residences. This approach is consistent with the logic and analysis
contained in the City’s Best Available Science Report (EDAW, November
2004) accompanying the adoption of the City’s updated critical areas
regulations.
4. Small, isolated critical areas were not considered sufficient to justify
continued large-lot single family designations.
5. Lots where the designation is to be changed are grouped by subdivision or
neighborhood segment, so that streets or changes in lot pattern define the
boundaries.
6. In at least a couple of situations, areas were included for re-designation when
the development pattern indicated that a substantial number of lots already
existed that were smaller than 12,000 sq. ft. in area.
7. Where patterns of critical areas exist, at least a tier of lots (using similar
groupings as those used in #5 above) is maintained bordering the critical
areas. This is based on the following logic:
As the Best Available Science Report and updated critical areas regulations
indicate, the City’s intent is to take a conservative approach to protecting
critical areas. Relatively large buffers are proposed (consistent with the
science), but these are balanced by the ability of existing developed areas to
continue infill activity in exchange for enhancing critical areas buffers. The
goal is to obtain enhanced protection of resources within the city, while
recognizing infill development must continue to occur. However, a
conservative approach to resource protection implies that the City be
cautious in making wholesale changes in zoning that could result in more
development impacts to critical areas. This is particularly true since the
buffers proposed in the new regulations are substantial increases over
previous regulations; without larger lot sizes in areas that are substantially
impacted by critical areas, there would be little or no opportunity to mitigate
critical areas impacts – especially when surrounding areas have already been
developed.
Caution is also needed considering that the mapped inventory is based on
general sources from other agencies and is likely to underestimate the
amount of steep slopes, for example.
Following this work, a map of proposed changes was prepared which identified
single family large lot zones that could not be justified based on the presence of
critical areas. These areas (comprising over 500 acres) have been re-designated as
either Single Family – Urban 3 or Single Family Master Plan in the updated
comprehensive plan.
* RS-10 would be a new zoning classification, providing for a minimum lot size of 10,000 sq.
ft.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 330 of 680
The densities that correspond to these plan and zoning designations are summarized
in the following table:
The “Single Family – Urban Master Plan” designation would only apply to the area
lying along the south side of SR-104 north of 228th Street SW; properties seeking to
develop at the higher urban density lot pattern would need to be developed according
to a master plan (such as through a PRD) that clearly indicated access and lot
configurations that would not result in traffic problems for SR-104.
Residential Goal A. High quality residential development which is appropriate to the diverse
lifestyle of Edmonds residents should be maintained and promoted. The options available to the
City to influence the quality of housing for all citizens should be approached realistically in
balancing economic, social, and aesthetic and environmental considerations, in accordance with
the following policies:.
A.1 Encourage those building custom homes to design and construct homes with
architectural lines which enable them to harmonize with the surroundings,
adding to the community identity and desirability.
A.2 Protect neighborhoods from incompatible additions to existing buildings that
do not harmonize with existing structures in the area.
A.3 Minimize encroachment on view of existing homes by new construction or
additions to existing structures.
A.4 Support retention and rehabilitation of older housing within Edmonds
whenever it is economically feasible.
A.5 Protect residential areas from incompatible land uses through the careful
control of other types of development and expansion based upon the following
principles:
A.5.a Residential privacy is a fundamental protection to be upheld by local
government.
A.5.b Traffic not directly accessing residences in a neighborhood must be
discouraged.
A.5.c Stable property values must not be threatened by view, traffic or land
use encroachments.
A.5.d Private property must be protected from adverse environmental
impacts of development including noise, drainage, traffic, slides, etc.
A.6 Require that new residential development be compatible with the natural
constraints of slopes, soils, geology, drainage, vegetation and drainagehabitat.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 331 of 680
Residential Goal B.Goal. A broad range of housing types and densities should be encouraged in
order that a choice of housing will be available to all Edmonds residents, in accordance with the
following policies:
B.1 Planned Residential Development. Provide options for planned residential
development solutions for residential subdivisions.
B.1.a Encourage single-family homes in a PRD configuration where
significant benefits for owner and area can be demonstrated (trees,
view, open space, etc.).
B.1.b Consider attached single-family dwelling units in PRD's near
downtown and shopping centers as an alternative to multiple-family
zoning.
B.2 Multiple. The City's development policies encourage sustainable high quality
site and building design to promote coordinated development and to preserve
the trees, topography and other natural features of the site. Stereotyped, boxy
multiple unit residential (RM) buildings are to be avoided.
B.2.a Location Policies.
B.2.a.i. RM uses should be located near arterial or collector streets.
B.2.b Compatibility Policies.
B.2.b.iRM RM developments should preserve the privacy and view
of surrounding buildings, wherever feasible.
B.2.b.ii The height of RM buildings that abut single family
residential (RS) zones shall be similar to the height
permitted in the abutting RS zone except where the existing
vegetation and/or change in topography can substantially
screen one use from another.
B.2.b.iii The design of RM buildings located next to RS zones should
be similar to the design idiom of the single family residence.
B.2.c. General Design Policies.
B.2.c.i The nonstructural elements of the building (such as decks,
lights, rails, doors, windows and window easements,
materials, textures and colors) should be coordinated to
carry out a unified design concept.
B.2.c.ii SSite and building plans should be designed to preserve the
natural features (trees, streams, topography, etc.) of the site
rather than forcing the site to meet the needs of the imposed
plan.
B.3 Mobile Homes. Update design standards to ensure quality parks heavily
landscaped both for screening exterior and for appearance of interior.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 332 of 680
Commercial Land Use
General. Past and present commercial development in the City of Edmonds has been oriented
primarily to serving the needs of its citizens. It also has attempted to offer a unique array of
personalized and specialty type shopping opportunities for the public. In the downtown area, the
Milltown shopping arcade is an excellent example of this type of development. It is essential that
future commercial developments continue to harmonize and enhance the residential small town
character of Edmonds that its citizens so strongly desire to retain. By the same token, the City
should develop a partnership with business, citizens and residents to help it grow and prosper
while assisting to meet the various requirements of the City's codes and policies.
The Highway 99 arterial has been recognized historically as a commercial district which adds to
the community's tax and employment base. Its economic vitality is important to Edmonds and
should be supported. Commercial development in this area is to be encouraged to its maximum
potential.
Commercial Development Goals and Plan Policies. The following sections describe the general
goals and policies for all commercial areas (commercial, community commercial, neighborhood
commercial, Westgate Corridor, Edmonds Way Corridor, and sexually oriented businesses),
followed by the additional goals and policies that specific commercial areas must also meet.
Goals for Commercial Development Goal A.: Commercial development in Edmonds shall be
located to take advantage of its unique locational opportunities while being consistent and
compatible with the character of its surrounding neighborhood. All commercial development
should be designed and located so that it is economically feasible to operate a business and
provide goods and services to Edmonds residents and tourists in a safe, convenient and attractive
manner, in accordance with the following policies:
A.1 A sufficient number of sites suited for a variety of commercial uses should be
identified and reserved for these purposes. The great majority of such sites
should be selected from parcels of land already identified in the comprehensive
plan for commercial use and/or zoned for such use.
A.2 Parcels of land previously planned or zoned for commercial use but which are
now or will be identified as unnecessary, or inappropriate for such use by
additional analysis, should be reclassified for other uses.
A.3 The proliferation of strip commercial areas along Edmonds streets and
highways and the development of commercial uses poorly related to
surrounding land uses should be strongly discouraged.
A.4 The design and location of all commercial sites should provide for convenient
and safe access for customers, employees and suppliers.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 333 of 680
A.5 All commercial developments should be carefully located and designed to
eliminate or minimize the adverse impacts of heavy traffic volume and other
related problems on surrounding land uses.
A.6 Special consideration should be given to major land use decisions made in
relation to downtown Edmonds.
Commercial Development Goal B. The Westgate Community Commercial Area. Westgate is
comprised of commercial development serving a dual purpose: services and shopping for both
local residents and regional traffic. The intent of the community commercial designation is to
recognize both of these purposes by permitting a range of business and mixed use development
while maintaining a neighborhood scale and design character.
B.1 Permit uses in Westgate that serve both the local neighborhood and regional
through-traffic.
B.2 Encourage mixed-use development, including offices and retail spaces in
conjunction with residential uses, in a walkable community center that includes
a variety of amenity and open spaces. The intent is to establish a connection
between neighborhoods; create a desirable center for local residents, while
being inviting to visitors; and unify the larger Westgate district with a
distinctive character.
B.3 Create mixed-use walkable, compact development tht is economically viable,
attractive and community-friendly.
B.4 Improve connectedness for pedestrian and bicycle users in a transit-friendly
environment.
B.5 Prioritize amenity spaces for informal and organized gatherings.
B.6 Emphasize green building construction, stormwater infiltration, and a variety
of green features.
B.7 Establish a flexible regulating system that creates quality public spaces by
regulating building placement and form.
B.8 Ensure civic and private investments contribute to increased infrastructure
capacity and benefit the surrounding neighborhoods and the community at
large.
B.9 Encourage the development of a variety of housing choices available to
residents of all economic and age segments.
Commercial Development Goal C. Goals for Neighborhood Commercial Areas. Neighborhood
Ccommercial areas are intended to provide a mix of services, shopping, gathering places, office
space, and housing for local neighborhoods. The scale of development and intensity of uses
should provide a middle ground between the more intense commercial uses of the Highway 99
Corridor/ Medical area and the Downtown Activity Area.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 334 of 680
Historically, many of the neighborhood commercial areas in Edmonds have developed as
classically auto-oriented commercial “strip malls” with one- and two-story developments
primarily including retail and service uses. Throughout the region, neighborhood commercial
areas are departing from this historical model by being redeveloped as appealing mixed-use
clusters, providing attractive new pedestrian-oriented development that expands the uses and
services available to local residents.
C.1
The neighborhood commercial areas share several common goals:
Neighborhood commercial development should be located at major arterial
intersections and should be designed to minimize interference with through
traffic.
C.2 Permit uses in neighborhood commercial areas that are intended to serve the
local neighborhood. Mixed use development should be encouraged within
neighborhood commercial areas.
C.3 Provide for transit and pedestrian access, with the provision of facilities for
local automobile traffic. Provide for pedestrian connections to nearby
residential neighborhoods.
C.4 Allow a variety of architectural styles while encouraging public art and
sustainable development practices that support pedestrian activity and provide
for appealing gathering places.
C.5 Significant attention should be paid to the design of ground level commercial
spaces, which must accommodate a variety of commercial uses, have street-
level entrances, and storefront facades that are dominated by transparent
windows.
C.6 Encourage neighborhood commercial areas to reflect the identity and character
of individual neighborhoods, thus strengtheningthus are strengthening their
importance as neighborhood centers. Neighborhood commercial areas may set
additional specific goals for their community in order to further refine the
specific identity they wish to achieve. Goals and policies for specific
neighborhood centers are detailed below.
C.6.a Five Corners
C.6.a.i In the Five Corners neighborhood commercial area,
development should be oriented to the street and respond to
the unique character of the intersection, including a planned
intersection improvement. Parking should be provided at the
rear of development, where possible, or underground.
C.6.a.ii Development shall not be more than four stories in height,
and the design should focus on breaking up the mass and
bulk of buildings by incorporating such features as setbacks,
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 335 of 680
varying rooflines, and landscaping into the design of the site.
The mix of uses should include not less than one quarter
commercial space.
C.6.a.iii At a minimum, commercial uses should be located on the
ground level of development. Commercial or residential uses
may occupy upper levels.
C.6.a.iv. As a major intersection, streetscape and way-finding design
should create an attractive “gateway” to the downtown and
other neighborhoods. (Link to streetscape plan update.)
Intersection and street design should accommodate and
encourage pedestrian connections throughout the
neighborhood commercial area.
C.6.b. Firdale Village
C.6.a.i In the Firdale Village commercial area, development should
include an attractive mix of uses that create a
“neighborhood village” pedestrian-oriented environment.
Commercial spaces shall be oriented toward the street in
order to maximize visibility, and parking should be primarily
accommodated either behind or underneath structures.
C.6.a.ii Development shall not be more than four stories in height,
and the design should focus on breaking up the mass and
bulk of buildings by incorporating such features as setbacks,
varying rooflines, and landscaping into the design of the site.
The mix of uses should include not less than one quarter
commercial space.
Commercial Development Goal D. Goals for the Westgate Corridor. The Westgate Corridor is
generally located between the 100th Avenue W (9th Avenue S)/Edmonds Way intersection and
where Edmonds Way turns north to enter the downtown area. By virtue of this location, this
corridor serves as both a key transportation corridor and as an entry into the downtown. Long-
established neighborhoods lie near both sides of the corridor. The plan for this corridor is to
recognize its multiple functions by providing opportunities for small-scale businesses while
promoting compatible development that will not intrude into established neighborhoods.
D.1 Development within the Westgate Corridor should be designed to recognize its
role as part of an entryway into Edmonds and the downtown. The overall effect
should be a corridor that resembles a landscaped boulevard and median. The
landscaped median along SR-104 should remain as uninterrupted as possible in
order to promote traffic flow and provide an entry effect.
D.2 Permit uses in planned business areas that are primarily intended to serve the
local neighborhood while not contributing significantly to traffic congestion.
D.3 Provide for transit and pedestrian access to development.
D.4 Use design review to encourage the shared or joint use of driveways and access
points by development onto SR-104 in order to support the movement of traffic
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 336 of 680
in a safe and efficient manner. Site access shall not be provided from
residential streets unless there is no feasible alternative.
D.5 Use design review to ensure that development provides a transition to adjacent
residential neighborhoods. For uses in transitional areas adjacent to single
family neighborhoods, use design techniques such as the modulation of
facades, pitched roofs, stepped-down building heights, multiple buildings, and
landscaping to provide designs compatible with single family development.
Commercial Development Goal E. Goals for the Edmonds Way Corridor. The Edmonds Way
Corridor consists of portions of Edmonds Way between the 100th Avenue West intersection and
Highway 99. This corridor serves as a key transportation corridor, and also provides a key link
between Edmonds and Interstate 5. Established residential areas lie on both sides of the corridor.
An established pattern of multiple family residential development lies along much of the corridor,
while small-scale businesses can be found primarily near intersections. A major concern is that
the more intensive development that occurs along the corridor should not interfere with the flow
of through traffic or intrude into adjoining established communities.
E.1 Permit uses in planned multiple family or small-scale business developments
that are designed to minimize contributing significantly to traffic congestion.
E.2 Provide for transit and pedestrian access to development.
E.3 Use design review to encourage the shared or joint use of driveways and access
points by development onto SR-104 in order to support the movement of traffic
in a safe and efficient manner. Site access should not be provided from
residential streets unless there is no feasible alternative.
E.4 Use design review to ensure that development provides a transition to adjacent
residential neighborhoods. For uses in transitional areas adjacent to single
family neighborhoods, use design techniques such as the modulation of
facades, pitched roofs, stepped-down building heights, multiple buildings, and
landscaping to provide designs compatible with single family development.
Make use of natural topography to buffer incompatible development whenever
possible.
Commercial Development Goal F. Goals for Sexually Oriented Businesses. These types
ofSexually Oriented Bbusinesses are regulated by specific licensing and operating provisions in
the City Code. However, land use and zoning regulations are also required to mitigate and reduce
the adverse secondary effects of these uses. These secondary effects are detailed in the findings
adopted by Ordinance No. 3117 on October 15, 1996. As commercial uses, sexually oriented
businesses should be limited to areas which can support the traffic and site requirements of these
businesses while also assuring that their adverse secondary effects are mitigated. The following
policies apply to sexually oriented businesses:
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 337 of 680
F.1 Provide for potential commercial locations within the City for sexually
oriented businesses which will provide at least a minimum separation and
buffering necessary to protect public health and safety.
F.2 Separate the location of sexually oriented businesses from uses that are
incompatible with the secondary effects associated with sexually oriented
businesses. These incompatible uses include residential uses and uses such as
public parks, public libraries, museums, public or private schools, community
centers, and religious facilities. They also include bars and taverns.
F.3 Adopt specific development regulations, such as lighting, parking, and access
provisions, that are designed to reduce or mitigate the secondary effects of
sexually oriented businesses.
F.4 Provide a mechanism to monitor, on an annual basis, the availability of
potential sites for the location of sexually oriented businesses.
Industrial Land Use
General. Interestingly, industrial development played a major role in the early development of
Edmonds. Sawmills, wharves, log ponds and other wood products industries lined the Edmonds
waterfront at the turn of the twentieth century. However, as time passed, Edmonds developed into
a very attractive residential community and its once thriving lumber industry faded into oblivion.
Today, Edmonds still retains much of its residential, small town charm despite the large amount
of urban development which has occurred in and around the City during the outward expansion of
the Seattle metropolitan area during the past twenty-five years.
Industrial development in the more traditional sense has not occurred in Edmonds to a significant
degree since its early Milltown days. Most new industry which has located in the community
since the 1950's has been largely of light manufacturing or service industry nature. Some
examples include furniture manufacturing, printing and publishing, electronic components
assembly and health care services.
Future industrial development should be carefully controlled in order to einsure that it is
compatible with the residential character of Edmonds. Small scale, business-park oriented light
industries and service related industries should be given preference over more intensive large
scale industries. Great care should be given to carefully siting and designing all new industrial
development in order to fully minimize or eliminate its adverse off-site impacts.
Industrial Land Use Goal A. A select number of industrial areas should be located and
developed which are reasonably attractive and contribute to the economic growth and stability of
Edmonds without degrading its natural or residential living environment, in accordance with the
following policies:
A.1 Light industrial uses should be given preference over heavy industrial uses.
A.2 The clustering of industrial uses in planned industrial parks should be required
when the site is adequate.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 338 of 680
A.3 Adequate buffers of landscaping, compatible transitional land uses and open
space should be utilized to protect surrounding land areas from the adverse
effects of industrial land use. Particular attention should be given to protecting
residential areas, parks and other public-institutional land uses.
A.4 All industrial areas should be located where direct access can be provided to
regional ground transportation systems (major State Highways and/or railroad
lines).
Open Space
General.ly Iin urban areas, a lack of open space has been one of the major causes of residential
blight. This lack has contributed to the movement of people from older densely developed
neighborhoods to peripheral areas still possessing open areas.
Open space is important in defining the character of the Edmonds area and should be preserved
and enhanced for enjoyment by current and future generations. Open space provides serves many
functions ranging from providing recreation to protecting aesthetics and biodiversitymany
benefits for people and natural systemsmust be reserved now for assurance that future settled
areas are relieved by significant open land, providing recreational opportunities as well as visual
appeal.
Not all vacant land in the City should be considered desirable or valuable for open space
classification. Therefore, the following set of criteria-standards haveset of criteria-standards has
been developed for determining those areas most important for this classification.
Goal.Open Space Goal A. Open space must be seen as an essential element determining the
character and quality of the urban and suburbanEdmonds environment, in accordance with the
following policies.
A.1 Undeveloped public property should be studied to determine its suitability and
appropriate areas designed as open space.
A.1.a No city-owned property should be relinquished until all possible
community uses have been explored.
A.2. All feasible means should be used to preserve the following open spaces:
A.2.a Lands which have unique scientific or educational values.
A.2.b Areas which have an abundance of wildlife, particularly where there
are linked wildlife corridors or habitats of rare or endangered
species.
A.2.c Natural and green belt areas adjacent to highways and arterials with
the priority to highways classified as scenic.
A.2.d Areas which have steep slopes or are in major stream drainage
ways, particularly those areas which have significance to Edmonds
residents as water sheds or natural drainage ways.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 339 of 680
A.2.e Land which can serve as buffers between residential and commercial
or industrial development.
A.2.f Bogs and wetlands.
A.2.g Land which can serve as buffers between high noise environments
and adjacent uses.
A.2.h Lands which would have unique suitability for future passive or
active recreational uses both passive and active.
A.2.i Areas which would have unique rare or endangered types of
vegetation. -
A.3 Open space should be distributed throughout the urban areas in such a manner
that there is both visual relief and variety in the pattern of development and
that there is sufficient space for active and passive recreation. Provide views
and open space in areas of high density or multiple housing by requiring
adequate setback space and separation between structures.
Open Space Goal B. Goal. Edmonds possesses a most unique and valuable quality in its location
on Puget Sound. The natural supply of prime recreational open space, particularly beaches and
waterfront areas, must be accessible to the public, in accordance with the following policies:
B.1 Edmonds saltwater shorelines and other waterfront areas should receive special
consideration in all future acquisition and preservation programs.
B.2 Wherever possible, Provide provide wherever possible, vehicular or
pedestrianpublic access to public bodies of water.
Soils and Topography
General. The natural topography of the city contributes to the environmental amenity character
of the community. Many of the remaining undeveloped areas of the city are located on hillsides
or in ravines where steep slopes have discouraged development. These are frequentlycan often be
areas where natural drainage ways and stands of trees or habitat exist and where the second
growth forest is still undisturbed. In some areas, soil conditions also exist which are severely
limited for urban certain kinds of development.
Based on soil, and slope, and geological analysis for the city, several areas may be identified as
potentially hazardous for urban specific types of development. (See report to Environmental
Subcommittee on Soils and Topography, February 3, 1975.)
Some areas which are limited for intensive development are may be desirable for public
recreation, open spaces, conservation of existing natural features, maintenance of valuable
biological communities, and protection of natural storm drainage systems.
In some hillside areas, changes in existing soil characteristics because of development, grading,
increased runoff and removal of vegetation may cause severe erosion, water pollution and
flooding with subsequent damage to public and private property.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 340 of 680
Soils and Topography Goal A. Future development in areas of steep slope and potentially
hazardous soil conditions should be based on site development which preserves the natural site
characteristics in accordance with the following policies:
A.1 Large lots or flexible subdivision procedures, such as PRD’s, should be used in
these areas to preserve the site and reduce impervious surfaces, cuts and fills.
A.2 Streets and access ways should be designed to conform to the natural
topography, reduce runoff and minimize grading of the hillsides.
Soils and Topography Goal B. Goal. Development on steep slopes or hazardous soil conditions
should preserve the natural features of the site, in accordance with the following policies:
B.1 Grading and Filling.
B.1.a Grading, filling, and tree cutting shall be restricted to building pads,
driveways, access ways and other impervious surfaces.
B.1.b Grading shall not jeopardize the stability of any slope, or of an
adjacent property.
B.1.c Only minimal amounts of cut and fill on hillsides exceeding 15%
slope should be permitted so that the natural topography can be
preserved. Fill shall not be used to create a yard on steeply sloped
property.
B.1.d Fill and excavated dirt shall not be pushed down the slope.
B.2. Building Construction.
B.2.a Buildings on slopes of 15 percent% or greater shall be designed to
cause minimum disruption to the natural topography.
B.2.b Retaining walls are discouraged on steep slopes. If they are used
they should be small and should not support construction of
improvements which do not conform to the topography.
B.2.c Water detention devices shall be used to maintain the velocity of
runoff at predevelopment levels.
B.3. Erosion Control.
B.3.a Temporary measures shall be taken to reduce erosion during
construction.
B.3.b Natural vegetation should be preserved wherever possible to reduce
erosion and stabilize slopes, particularly on the downhill property
line.
B.3.c Slopes should be stabilized with deep rooted vegetation and mulch,
or other materials to prevent erosion and siltation of drainage ways.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 341 of 680
Water Resources and Drainage Management
General. The environmental amenity of the City of Edmonds is greatly
enhanced by the numerous year round streams and the location of the
City on Puget Sound. Lake Ballinger, besides being a well-known
landmark, is an important environmental area because of its ecological
benefits and open space quality.
The storm drainage and stream systems in the Edmonds area are part of
the Cedar River Drainage Basin. There are two sub-basins in the area:
McAleer Creek, which drains to Lake Washington and the Upper Puget
Sound sub-basin which drains to Puget Sound.
Urban development in the past has interfered with natural storm
drainage systems and greatly increased the area of impermeable
surfaces. It has been necessary to install culverts, underground drainage
courses and other major structures to accommodate runoff water.
Because of climate, topography and soil conditions, severe erosion and
drainage to stream banks may occur with future development.
Urban runoff causes significant decreases in water quality because of the
quantity of pollutants in the runoff water.
The Urban Runoff and Basin Drainage Study conducted for the River
Basin Coordinating Committee of the Municipality of Metropolitan
Seattle indicates that future development in the Puget Sound and
McAleer sub-basins will overburden existing systems. The water quality
in Lake Ballinger is already an urgent and serious problem because the
lake is shallow, contains a high level of nutrients and has seasonal
oxygen deficiencies.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 342 of 680
The quality of water in Puget Sound is a less immediate problem but
must be considered in the long term. Both Edmonds and Lynnwood
dispose of effluent in the Sound which has received primary treatment
only. Increased recreational use of the waterfront will have water quality
impacts also. Some streams in the City have supported fish runs from the
Sound in the past and many people in the community would like to see a
restoration of these fisheries.
The high costs both financially and environmentally of installation of
structures and alteration of natural systems is an important consideration
in planning for environmental management. Because environmental
systems cross political boundaries a high degree of interlocal
cooperation will be necessary to fully utilize funds available through the
Water Pollution Control Act; however, the Act may provide substantial
funds in the future for planning and improvement of facilities.
Resources and Drain Management Goal A. The City should continue
to upgrade the public storm drainage system in order to protect the man-
made and natural environment. In the management of storm drainage
and urban runoff, the City should utilize the natural drainage system
where it is possible to do so without significantly altering the natural
drainage ways, in accordance with the following policies:
A.1 The natural drainage system (i.e., streams, ponds, and marshes)
shall not be filled or permanently culverted except where no other
alternative exists. Temporary culverting of streams shall be permitted
during construction where site conditions present no other alternative.
The natural condition should be restored immediately following
construction.
A.2 Earthmoving equipment shall not cause siltation or deterioration of
water quality. Rechanneling of streams is permitted only when the
stream bed location renders the site undevelopable.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 343 of 680
A.3 Imagination and care should be used in the design of retention
ponds and other drainage facilities so that they will blend into the natural
environment rather than detract from it.
A.4 Riprapping of stream banks and gravelling of stream beds is
permitted when the Engineering Department determines that stability or
sediment retention is necessary.
A.5 Decorative ponding, cascading, and building artificial waterfalls
are permitted except in those streams where it would present a barrier to
the migration of fish.
A.6 Building foundation and footings shall be no closer than 15 feet to
a stream bank and shall be sited to create minimum disruption to the
drainage system.
A.7 The quality and quantity of water leaving a site shall be the same
as that entering the site.
A.8 Retention basins and other devices shall be used to encourage on-
site runoff absorption and prevent overloading of existing drainage
systems except in those areas where it is necessary to remove water from
the site quickly due to unstable soil conditions to prevent earth slides
and subsequent danger to life and property.
A.9 Regional retention/detention is generally recognized as a more
efficient and practical method of runoff control and will be given first
consideration before individual on-site systems are allowed as part of
development projects. [Ord. 2527, 1985.]
Vegetation and Wildlife
General. As Edmonds has urbanized, the natural native vegetation has become increasingly
scarce. The city's woodlands, marshes and other areas containing natural vegetation provide an
important resource which should be preserved. Woodlands help stabilize soils on steep slopes,
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 344 of 680
and act as barriers to wind and sound. Natural Native vegetation provides habitat for wildlife.
Plants replenish the soil with nutrients. They generate oxygen and clean pollutants from the air.
The beauty of the natural growth, especially native vegetation, provides pleasing vistas and helps
to buffer one development from another. Areas where natural vegetation exists provide good sites
for nature trails and for other recreational and educational opportunities.
Wildlife is a valuable natural resource that greatly enhances the aesthetic quality of human life.
City beaches, breakwaters and pilings represent unique habitats for marine organisms. "People
pressure" continuecontinues to destroy many organisms and their habitats each year. The number
and species of organisms is diminishing yearly.
Streams, lakes and saltwater areas offer habitats for many species of migrating and resident bird
life.
Underdeveloped wWooded areas and city parks provide habitats for many birds and mammals.
Many birds and mammals are dependent upon both the upland and beach areas.
Vegetation and Wildlife Goal A. The city should ensure that its woodlands, marshes and other
areas containing natural vegetation are preserved, in accordance with the following policies:
A.1 Critical areas will be designated and protected using the best available science
pursuant to RCW 36.70A.172 (BAS).
A.2 The removal of trees should be minimized, particularly when they are located
on steep slopes or hazardous soils. Subdivision layouts, buildings and roads
should be designed so that existing trees are preserved.
A.3 Trees that are diseased, damaged, or unstable should be removed.
A.4 Grading should be restricted to building pads and roads only. Vegetation
outside these areas should be preserved.
Vegetation and Wildlife Goal B. Goal. The city should promote and increase public awareness
and pride in its wildlife heritage. Special emphasis should be directed toward preserving the
natural habitats (woodlands, marshes, streams and beaches) of the city's wildlife in accordance
with the following policies:
B.1 Establish and maintain a variety of educational and recreational programs and
activities for all age levels.
B.2 Erect and maintain an educational displays that identifies identify some of the
more common plants and animals and their ecosystems and habitats, including
at streams, beaches, abnd marshes. the ecology of major habitats, (i.e.e.g.,
sand, rock, piling and deepwater).
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 345 of 680
B.3 Prevent the unnecessary disturbance of native species and organisms from
beach and near-shore environments.their respective habitats. Establish and
publicize regulations prohibiting removal of non-food organisms from beach
areas without collecting permit; permit for educational and research use only.
B.4 Encourage landscaping and site improvement on city-owned property which
recognizes value of habitat in overall site design. the dependency of some
species upon certain types of vegetation for food and cover.
B.5. City park property which serves as a habitat for wildlife should be
left natural with minimum development for nature trail type of use.
Air Pollution
General. Air pollution is primarily a regional problem related to urbanization and meteorological
conditions in the Puget Sound Basin. It is the result of activities in which most citizens
participate. Air pollution can cause severe health effects and property damage under certain
conditions.
The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency adopted the following growth management and air quality
policies in 2007. These policies are intended to guide local growth management planning efforts.
• Implement air-friendly and climate friendly design, construction, and operation
practices;
• Promote cleaner travel choices;
• Reduce exposure to air pollution;
• Install clean fireplaces and stoves;
• Support environmental justice;
• Use the State Environmental Policy Act as a tool and safety net;
• Alternatives to driving alone – including carpooling, biking, telecommuting, and using
transit – are principal ways to improve air quality.(See Facts on Air Pollution - Regional
and Local: Report to Community Development Task Force.)
Air Pollution Goal A. Clean air is a right to all citizens of the City of Edmonds and should be
protected and maintained in accordance with the following policies:
A.1 Discourage expansion of arterials which will substantially increase line sources
of pollution.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 346 of 680
A.2 Encourage arrangementarrangements of activities which will generate the
fewest necessary automobile trip miles while avoiding undue concentration of
like uses.
A.3 Support, through political action, strong enforcement policies and ordinances
in the regional pollution control agency.
A.4 Support, by political action and financial participation, the establishment of
public transportation in the community as an alternative to dependence on
individual vehicles.
A.5 Encourage programs supporting commute trip reductionlocal referral center for
car pooling.
Noise Pollution
General. Although no area of human activity is free of sound, the modern urban environment is
increasingly suffering from an overload of sound in the form of noise. The effects of noise may
be severe. The most obvious effect is loss of hearing where levels of noise are very high and
sustained. A less documented effect is general environmental stress from the physiological and
psychological impacts of noise. Noise generally contributes to a loss of amenity and livability.
The Edmonds Community is free, to a large extent, from the worst kinds of noise pollution and
most residents believe that it is a quiet place to live. However, an environmental noise survey
taken by the Building Department in 1974 indicates that there are some areas of concern.
The mainNoise problems can come from general background sources, such as vehicular noise, or
periodic point source problems, such as particularly motorcycles. Some point source problems,
refrigeration equipment in stores near residential areas, have also occurred in the city. Impulsive,
high-intensity noises which occur only periodically may also be irritating in quiet suburban
neighborhoods. Examples are airplanes, electronically amplified music, sirens, etc.
Certain noise problems can be alleviated more easily than others. The noise of vehicular traffic,
particularly on arterial streets is difficult to control. Point sources can be more easily regulated by
requiring noise muffling equipment. Enforcement of noise standards can be a problem because of
the training and skill involved in taking noise measurements. Cost of enforcement may be
excessive if standards are too stringent.
The federal government has passed legislation to deal with major sources of noise in commerce
which require national conformity of treatment. The State Department of Ecology has adopted
Motor Vehicle Noise Performance Standards and Environmental Noise Levels guidelines.
Noise Pollution Goal A. Preserve the quiet residential environment of the city by limiting
increases in noise and reducing unnecessary noise where it now exists in accordance with the
following policies:
A.1 Studies should be made to determine the existing noise environment in order to
provide baseline data for assessment of the environmental impact of changes or
increases in noise.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 347 of 680
A.2 The unique areas of quiet in the city should be identified and appropriate
measures taken to preserve the quiet environment.
A.3 The city should update the existing noise standards to meet State Standards in
modest stages in order to maintain flexibility and benefit from improvements in
technology and experience. Increases in manpower or training to enforce
standards should be cautiously made as experience is gained in enforcement.
A.4 Existing vehicular standards related to noise should be enforced to the greatest
degree possible without excessive increases in manpower.
A.15 The city should partner with other jurisdictions in seeking to enforce
appropriate noise standards within the city. cooperate with adjacent cities in
sharing the costs of expensive noise equipment and training persons in the use
of the equipment.
A.6 Future street and arterial projects should be assessed for noise impacts, and
structures such as berms, fences and other devices utilized wherever possible to
reduce the noise impacts.
A.27 Any ordinances adopted by the city should recognize the variety and quality of
noise environments, including natural ecosystems. Excessive regulations
should not be imposed on areas of the city where higher noise levels are
normal or necessary for essential activities and do not create environmental
problems.
A.38 It is the policy of the city to minimize noise created by the railroad.
Urban Growth Areas
General. The accompanying Urban Growth Areas map shows the City’s urban growth area,
which encompasses unincorporated areas adjacent to the current city limits. In general,
development within the urban growth area is of interest to the City because the area will be
annexed to the City in the future and development in the area can be expected to have an impact
on the demand for and delivery of City services.
Urban Growth Area Goal A. Plan for the logical extension of services and development within
the City’s urban growth area.
A.1 Encourage the annexation of the City’s designated urban growth area into the
city.
A.2 To provide for orderly transitions, adopt comparable zoning and
comprehensive plan designations for areas annexing into the City.
A.3 Adopted plans and policies for the urban growth area shall be consistent and
compatible with the general comprehensive plan goals and policies for the
City.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 348 of 680
City of Edmonds Urban Growth Area Map
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 349 of 680
Housing Element
Introduction. This section looks at the character and diversity of housing in the City of
Edmonds. Part of this process includes looking at housing types and affordability. The goal of
this section is to provide the necessary information to anticipate housing needs.
General Background
Housing Stock and Type
According to the Office of Financial Management (OFM), there were an estimated 13,05418,378
housing units within the City of Edmonds in 19942010. This represents an increase of less than
one percent5 percent in the city's housing stock since 19902000, when there were 12,94517,508
dwelling housing units (1990 US Census).. In comparison, over the period 1980-19901990-2000,
the city's housing stock grew 21 percent35.2 percent, or approximately 1.9 percent3.5 percent per
year. Housing stock declined (less than 1%) between 1990 and 1992, but grew (approximately
1%) between 1992 and 1994.This increase is largely explained by annexations that occured
during the 1990s in the south and southwest portions of the city. Figure 20 Table 9 summarizes
recent growth trends and forecasts for the City of Edmonds.
Of the total stock of housing in 19942010, 8,67511,685 (66 percent63.5 percent) were single
family units, 4,2296,664 (32 percent36.3 percent) were multi-family units, and 150 29 (2
percent0.2 percent) were mobile homes or trailers. Compared with Snohomish County as a
whole, Edmonds has a lower percentage of single-family homes (63.6 percent vs. 66.9 percent,
respectively) and mobile homes (0.2 percent vs. 6.8 percent, respectively) and a higher proportion
of multi-family homes (36.3 percent vs. 26.4 percent, respectively). a higher percentage of single-
family homes and a lower proportion of multi-family and mobile homes/trailers.
Much of the existing housing stock was built between 1950 and 1969 (see Figure 21) as Edmonds
annexed lands east on Main Street, through Five Corners, and over to the western side of Lake
Ballinger. As part of the greater Seattle metropolitan area, Edmonds experienced growth earlier
than most in Snohomish County.
Source: US Census; Snohomish County Tomorrow
Figure 20: City of Edmonds Housing Growth
Housing
Units Increase Percent
Increase
Avg. Annual
Increase
Census: 1980 10,702
1990 12,245 1,543 21.0% 1.9%
2000 17,508 5,263 35.2% 3.1%
2010 18,378 870 5.0% 0.5%
Growth Target:2035 21,168 2,790 15.2% 0.6%
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 350 of 680
4 Source: City of Edmonds
Source: American Community Survey
Figure 21: Age Distribution of Housing Stock, City of Edmonds and Snohomish County
Between 1990 and 1994, the City annexed three parcels of land totaling approximately .059
square miles. The parcels included 64 housing units and 146 residents. These units accounted for
most of the growth (57%) in the city's housing stock since 1990.
Household Characteristics
In 2000, there were 17,508 housing units in Edmonds. This was an increase of over 35% in the
number of housing units in the city compared to 1990 (12,945). As noted earlier, this increase can
largely be explained by annexations. Over the same period, the average number of persons per
housing unit declined from 2.59 persons in 1980 to 2.37 persons in 1990, with a further decline to
2.26 persons in 2000 (US Census). The average household size showed a similar trend, falling to
2.32 persons per household by 2000. Compared with Snohomish County as a whole, Edmonds
had fewer people per household in 1990 (2.37 vs. 2.68, respectively) and in 2000 (2.32 vs. 2.65).
Average household size within the city is expected to decrease to approximately 2.26 people by
2025 (City of Edmonds, 2004).
Based on Census data, residents of Edmonds are older than those of Snohomish County, taken as
a whole. In 1990, the median age of Edmonds residents was 38.3 years, compared with 32.2
years countywide. By 2000, the median age in Edmonds had increased to 42.0 years. Within the
city, a large percentage of retired and elderly persons 62-years old and over reside in the
downtown area (census tracts 504 and 505).
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 351 of 680
At the time of the 2010 Census, the total number of occupied homes in the City of Edmonds was
17,381. The average household size has declined since 1990, when it was 2.37 persons, to 2.26
persons in 2010. The average household size within the city is expected to decrease to
approximately 2.2 persons by 2035 (Snohomish County Tomorrow, 2013).
Understanding how the City’s population is changing offers insight for planning housing types
that will be in demand (Figure 22). Based on Census data, residents of Edmonds are older than
those of Snohomish County, taken as a whole. In 2000, the median age of Edmonds residents was
42.0 years, compared with 34.7 years countywide. By 2010, the median age in Edmonds had
increased to 46.3 years, compared to 37.1 years countywide. During the same period, the
population of Edmonds residents, 14 years of age and younger, shrank in each age category
(Figure 23). A natural increase in population is likely to decline as the female population ages
beyond childbearing age. These trends are consistent with national trends.
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010
2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500
0 - 45 - 910 - 1415 - 1920 - 2425 - 29
30 - 3435 - 3940 - 4445 - 4950 - 5455 - 5960 - 64
65 - 6970 - 7475 - 7980 - 8485 - 8990 +
2010 2000
Male Female
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 352 of 680
Figure 22: Population Pyramid, 2000-2010
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010
Figure 23: Population Growth of Children 14 years of Age and Younger, 2000 to 2010
Household Income: In general, residents of Edmonds earn relatively more income than residents
of Snohomish County as a whole. Median 1990 household income in Edmonds was $40,515,
nearly 10 percent higher than the county's median level of $36,847 for the same period (1990 US
Census). By tThe 2000 census, Edmonds’ median household income was had increased to
$53,55267,228 according to the 2011-2013 American Community Survey 3-year data, but this
was nearly equivalent tosimilar to the County median of $53,06067,192 (Edmonds was less than
1% higher). This is in contrast to per capita income, which is substantially higher in Edmonds
compared to Snohomish County ($30,076 vs40,892 vs. $23,41731,049, respectively). These
figures reflect Edmonds’ relatively smaller household sizes.
Housing Ownership: According to the 1990 2000 Census, 65.3 percent68.1 percent of the
housing units within the city were owner-occupied and 32.1 percent31.9 percent were renter-
occupied. This represented a declinean increase in owner-occupancy from the 67.1 percent65.3
percent reported in the 1980 1990 Census. By 2000, thisThe trend had reversedcontinued into
2010, with 68.169 percent percent of the City’s housing being occupied by owners. The direction
of the trend in housing occupancy is similar for Snohomish County as a whole, although
ownership rates countywide were slightly lowerhigher in 19902010, at 66 percent67 percent.
Within Edmonds, ownership patterns vary significantly between neighborhoods; between 85 and
92 percent of homes along the waterfront were owner-occupied in 1990, compared with just over
50 percent east of Highway 99.
Housing Values: According to the 2011-1990 Census, housing values are considerably higher in
the City of Edmonds than in Snohomish County as a whole. In 1990,2013 ACS 3-year data, the
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 353 of 680
median value of owner-occupied units in Edmonds was $160,100, approximately 26 percent
higher than the countywide median of $127,200. By 2000, the median value of owner-occupied
housing had increased to $238,200 in Edmonds and $196,500 in Snohomish County, with
Edmonds approximately 21 percent higher than the countywide median. had increased to
$371,700 in Edmonds and $276,800 in Snohomish County, with Edmonds approximately 34.3
percent higher than the countywide median. Within Edmonds, median housing values vary
considerably between neighborhoods; the highest valued homes are found along the waterfront,
while the lowest values are found within interior neighborhoods and east of Highway 99.
Housing Affordability: For the purposes of calculating the housing affordability in Edmonds, this
document uses the median income for the Seattle-Bellevue HUD Fair Market Rent Area (HMFA)
instead of the Snohomish County Area Median Income (AMI). The Seattle-Bellevue AMI is used
as Edmonds is considered a suburb of Seattle, not Everett. The 2013 HMFA AMI for Seattle-
Bellevue is $86,700, which is the same as Snohomish County’s AMI at $86,700. The 2013
median household income for Edmonds is $67,192.
AMI is an important calculation used by many agencies to measure housing affordability.
Standard income levels are as follows:
• Extremely low income: <30 percent AMI
• Very Low Income: between 30 and 50 percent AMI
• Low Income: between 50 and 80 percent AMI
• Moderate income: between 80 and 95 percent AMI
• Middle Income: between 95 and 120 percent AMI
Using rental data obtained from Dupre and Scott by the Alliance for Housing Affordability
(AHA), Figure 24 provides a clearer view of what a household looking for a home in Edmonds
would expect to pay for rent and utilities. The data includes both single family and multifamily
rental units. Housing sizes and the corresponding minimum income required for a full time
worker to afford the home are listed. For example, a family of four searching for a 3 bedroom unit
could expect to pay on average $1,679 per month for rent and utilities. In order to afford housing,
the family would need an annual income of $67,160.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 354 of 680
Source: Dupree and Scott, 2013; National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2014
Figure 24: Average Rent and Affordability (housing plus utilities) by Size
Figure 25 shows the distribution of rent affordability at different income levels using the Seattle-
Bellevue AMI. “Yes” means that the average rent is affordable to a household at that income
level, adjusting for size, “Limited” means that the average rent is not affordable but there are
lower end affordable units, and “No” means that the entire rent range is not affordable. As seen
below, a four bedroom home is not affordable for persons with a household income at 80 percent
or below of the HFMA AMI.
Source: Dupree and Scott, 2013
Figure 25: Distribution of Rent Affordability by Size
Between 2008 and 2012, 85 percent of home sales in Edmonds were three or four bedrooms in
size according to County records. According to tax assessor data, the 2012 median sales price for
a single family home in Edmonds was $339,975. Assuming a 20 percent down payment and using
average rates of interest, taxes, utilities, and insurance as determined by the Federal Housing
Funding Board, the monthly payment for this home would be $1,895. For a family to not be cost
burdened, they would require an annual income of at least $75,796, which is above the City’s
median income.
Figure 26 shows that the percentage of home sales affordable to each income level has changed
between 2008 and 2012.
Studio 1 2 3 4+
Extrememly Low No No No No No
Very Low Limited limited Limited Limited No
Low Yes Yes Yes Limited No
Moderate Yes Yes Yes Yes Limited
Middle Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Number of BedroomsIncome Level
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 355 of 680
Source: Dupree and Scott, 2013
Figure 26: Home Sales Affordability, 2008-2012
State Housing Policy Act – In 1993, Washington State enacted a Housing Policy Act (SB 5584)
which is directed toward developing an adequate and affordable supply of housing for all
economic segments of the population. The Act establishes an affordable housing advisory board
that, together with the State Department of Community Trade and Economic Development
(DCTED), is required to prepare a five-year housing advisory plan. The plan must document the
need for affordable housing in the state; identify the extent to which the needs are being met
through public and private programs; facilitate development of plans to meet affordable housing
needs; and develop strategies and programs for affordable housing. DCTED is directed to
provide technical assistance and information to local governments to assist in the identification
and removal of regulatory barriers to the development of affordable housing. The Act also
requires that by December 31, 1994, all local governments of communities with populations over
20,000 must adopt regulations that permit accessory units in residential zones. The Act also
requires that communities treat special needs populations in the same manner as other households
living in single family units. Edmonds has updated its development regulations to comply with
both of these requirements.
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy – Jurisdictions receiving financial assistance from
the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are required to prepare a
Consolidated Housing and Community Development Plan. The plan must identify the
community’s housing, social service and community development needs for the next five years.
The plan describes how HUD funds will be used to address the identified needs. In addition, the
plan must be updated annually to include the most recent spending program and demonstrate that
funding decisions respond to the strategies and objectives cited in the five-year plan. The
Snohomish County Consortium, which includes Edmonds and 18 other cities and towns along
with unincorporated Snohomish County, is responsible for the plan, and through Snohomish
County’s Department of Housing and Community Development, also prepares a yearly report
called the Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER). This catalogs and
analyzes the status of Consolidated Plan goals and is published for public review on a yearly
basis. Key goals of the consolidated housing plan include:
1) Provide decent housing, including
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 356 of 680
• assisting homeless persons to obtain affordable housing;
• retaining affordable housing stock;
• increasing the availability of permanent housing that is affordable and available
without discrimination; and
• increasing supportive housing that includes structural features and services to
enable persons with special needs to live in dignity.
2) Provide a suitable living environment, including
• improving the safety and livability of neighborhoods;
• increasing access to quality facilities and services;
• reducing the isolation of income groups within areas by deconcentrating housing
opportunities and revitalizing deteriorating neighborhoods;
• restoring and preserving natural and physical features of special value for
historic, architectural, or aesthetic reasons; and
• conserving energy resources.
3) Expand economic opportunities, including
• creating jobs for low income persons;
• providing access to credit for community development that promotes long-term
economic an social viability; and
• assisting residents of federally assisted and public housing achieve self-
sufficiency.
The main purpose of the Consolidated Plan is to develop strategies to meet the identified housing
needs. These strategies are implemented through funding decisions which distribute HUD funds
to local housing programs. Strategies to achieve the goals and needs identified in the
Consolidated Plan include:
• Increase the number of subsidized rental apartments affordable to households
with incomes of up to 50% of area median income through (1) new construction,
(2) acquisition and/or rehabilitation of existing units, (3) provision of rent
subsidies, and (4) preservation of HUD Section 8 or similar subsidized housing
in non-profit ownership where there is the risk of converting these units to
market-rate housing.
• Provide support for operation of existing homeless shelters and construction of
needed shelters in under-served areas and for under-served populations. Increase
the inventory of transitional housing for households needing assistance to move
from homelessness to self-sufficiency.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 357 of 680
• Provide support for the operation and development of transitional and permanent
housing and service programs for people with special needs.
• Help low-income people to stay in their homes and maintain current housing
stock through home repair, rehabilitation, and weatherization services.
• Increase the incidence of home ownership using self-help construction,
manufactured housing, homebuyer education, and mortgage assistance programs.
• Improve the processes for utilizing grant funds allocated to the county.
• Enhance the resources that can be used for housing production.
• Utilized the expertise of housing providers who will create a stable and well-
maintained low-income housing stock to expand the subsidized housing
inventory in the community.
• Address the unmet public facility needs of low-income households and
neighborhoods.
• Address the unmet basic infrastructure needs of low-income households and
neighborhoods.
• Support programs that provide for the well-being of youth by providing services
such as case management, life-skills training, health care and recreation.
• Support programs that assist low-income elderly citizens, where appropriate and
cost-effective, to remain in their homes by providing housing repairs and
reasonable modifications to accommodate disabilities and by supporting
provision of supportive services.
• Support services which address the most urgent needs of low-income and
moderate-income populations and neighborhoods.
• Support eligible local planning and administration costs incident to operation of
HUD grant programs.
Housing Needs: Edmonds is targeted to grow from a 2013 population of 40,381 to 45,550 by
2035. This translates to an estimated need of 2,790 housing units in the city to accommodate the
targeted growth. The Buildable Lands Report for Snohomish County indicates that the majority of
this increase will be in redevelopment occurring on multifamily properties, including mixed use
projects.
Because the City of Edmonds does not construct housing itself, the housing targets are helpful in
assessing needs and providing a sense of the policy challenges that exist. Future housing needs
will be met by a combination of the housing market, housing authorities, and governmental
housing agencies. However, the City of Edmonds can do things to assist in accommodating
projected housing needs, such as adjusting zoning and land use regulations. The City may also be
able to assist in supporting the quality of housing through progressive building codes and
programs for healthy living.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 358 of 680
Forecasting future housing needs for specific populations and income ranges is difficult. One
method to arrive at an initial estimate of housing needs is to take the Edmonds’ housing target
(2,790) and apply the countywide breakdown for each income group. Data shown in Figure 27 is
based on household income from the 5-year American Community Survey in 2007-2011. The
City of Edmonds will take into account local population and housing characteristics when
determining housing targets.
Snohomish County calculates housing needs based on
households earning less than 95 percent of the county
median income and paying more than 30 percent of their
incomes for gross housing costs. Gross housing costs
include rent and utility costs for renters and principal,
interest, taxes, insurance, and any homeowner-fees for
owners. Countywide, in 1990, 36,888 households
countywide met the criteria for households in need; by
2000, this had increased to 55,361 households. There are
expected to be an additional 28,557 low- and moderate-
income households with housing needs by 2025
throughout the County. There were 2,601 households with
need in Edmonds in 1990, and this had increased to 3,951
by 2000. It is anticipated that this will increase to 4,395 by
2025.
Source: Snohomish County Tomorrow, “Housing Characteristics and Needs in Snohomish County,” 2014
Figure 27: Projected Housing Need
As previously mentioned, the median age of Edmonds residents is the highest in Snohomish
County at 46.3 years compared to 37.1 years countywide (2010 Census) and second highest of
Washington state cities with a population of 25,000 or more. In 2011, the first persons of the
Baby Boom generation turned 65 years of age and represent, what demographers project, the
fastest growing age group over the next 20 years. An older population will require specific needs
if they are to “age in place.” In Edmonds, the effects may be particularly strong. Developing
healthy, walkable communities with nearby retail and transit options will help an aging
population retain their independence.
Source: 2004 Supplement to Technical Report Fair Share Housing Allocation, Snohomish County Tomorrow
Jurisdiction
Total Projected
Housing Unit
Growth Need
Under 30% AMI
Housing Need
(11% of Total)
30-50% AMI
Housing Need
(11% of Total)
50-80% AMI
Housing Need
(17% of Total)
Edmonds 2,790 307 307 474
Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.75"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Space Before:
12 pt, After: 0 pt
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 359 of 680
Snohomish County and its cities, through countywide planning policies, has used an allocation
model to elaborate on the indicated level of need for affordable housing in the county. The county
applies two factors to the number of households in need to give areas credit for their existing
stock of low-cost housing and assign them responsibility to house a portion of low-wage
employees in the jurisdiction. The purpose of these factors is to provide indicators of the relative
housing need for jurisdictions based on the model’s assumptions. In 2000, Edmonds' adjusted
number of households in need was 5,322 households; this is projected to increase to 5,885 by
2025 – an increase of 564 households. Therefore, Edmonds has a continuing need to provide
affordable, low-cost housing within the city.
Assisted Housing Availability: In 1995 there were two HUD-assisted developments providing a
total of 87 units for low-income, elderly senior residents within the City of Edmonds. This was
more than doubled by a new development approved in 2004 for an additional 94 units. Since
1995, 167 assisted care living units have been built in the downtown area, specifically targeting
senior housing needs. Although the Housing Authority of Snohomish County did not operate any
public housing units within Edmonds prior to 1995, it purchased an existing housing complex
totaling 131 units in 2002. The Housing Authority continues to administer 124 Section 8 rent
supplement certificates and vouchers within the city. In addition, there are currently 36 adult
family homes providing shelter for 187 residents. This is a substantial increase from the 13 adult
family homes providing shelter for 66 residents in 1995.
Growth Management goals and policies contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan encourage
availability of resources to einsure basic community services and ample provisions made for
necessary open space, parks and other recreation facilities; preservation; preservation of light
(including direct sunlight), privacy, views, open spaces, shorelines and other natural features, and
freedom from air, water, noise and visual pollution; and; and a balanced mixture of income and
age groups. Land Use policies encourage strategic planning for development and redevelopment
that achieve a balanced and coordinated approach to economic development, housing and cultural
goals; and encourage a more active and vital setting for new businesses supported by nearby
residents, downtown commercial activity and visitors throughout the area. Policies encourage
identification and maintenance of significant public and private social areas, cultural facilities,
and scenic areas; and; and maintenance and preservation of historical sites. Commercial Land
Use policies encourage identification and reservation of sufficient sites suited for a variety of
commercial uses.
Housing goals are directed toward providing housing opportunities for all segments of the city's
households; supporting existing neighborhoods and preserving/rehabilitating the housing stock;
maintaining high quality residential environments; and providing assistance to developing
housing for elderly, disabled and low-income householdsfor special needs populations, such as
senior, disabled and low-income households. These goals are supported by policies which
include review of regulatory impediments to control of housing costs and affirmative measures to
support construction of housing for protected groups; encouraging expansion of the types of
housing available, including accessory dwelling units, mixed use, and multi-family housing;
flexible development standards; and review and revision of development regulations, including
assessing the feasibility of establishing time limits for permitting; consolidating permitting;
implementing administrative permitting procedures and instituting preapplication hearings.
Other measures to mitigate potential housing impacts include determining whether any public
land is available which could be used to help meet affordable housing targets; development;
development of a strategy plan, including target number of units and development timeline;
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 360 of 680
technical; technical assistance programs or information to encourage housing rehabilitation and
development of accessory units; and a strong monitoring program with mid-course correction
features (see the discussion below).
Strategies to Promote Affordable Housing.
In order to respond to the continuing need to provide affordable housing for the community, the
City has undertaken a series of reasonable measures to accomplish this goal, consistent with the
policy direction indicated by Snohomish County Tomorrow and the Countywide Planning
Policies. These reasonable measures or strategies to promote affordable housing include:
Land Use Strategies
• Upzoning. The City has upzoned a substantial area of previously large lot (12,000+
square foot lots) zoning to ensure that densities can be obtained of at least 4.0
dwelling units per acre. The City has also approved changes from single family to
multi family zoning in designated corridor areas to provide more housing units at
reduced cost to consumers.to its zoning codes to encourage more multifamily
development in mixed use areas, especially in corridors served by transit (e.g.
Highway 99 along the Swift high capacity transit corridor).
• Density Bonus. A targeted density bonus is offered for the provision of low income
senior housing in the City. Parking requirements are also reduced for this housing
type, making the density obtainable at lower site development cost.
• Cluster Subdivisions. This is accomplished in the city through the use of PRDs. In
Edmonds, a PRD is defined as an alternate form of subdivision, thereby encouraging
its use as a normal form of development. In addition, PRDs follow essentially the
same approval process as that of a subdivision.
• Planned Residential Development (PRD). The City has refined and broadened the
applicability of its PRD regulations. PRDs can still be used to encourage the
protection of environmentally sensitive lands; however, PRDs can also now be used
to encourage infill development and flexible housing types.
• Infill Development. The City’s principal policy direction is aimed at encouraging
infill development consistent with its neighborhoods and community character. This
overall plan direction has been termed “designed infill” and can be seen in the City’s
emphasis and continued work on streamlining permitting, revising codes to provide
more flexible standards, and improving its design guidelines. The City is also
continuing the process of developing new codes supporting mixed use development
in key locations supported by transit and linked to nearby neighborhoods.
• Conversion/Adaptive Reuse. The City has established a new historic preservation
program intended to support the preservation and adaptive reuse of existing
buildings, especially in the historic downtown center. Part of the direction of the
updated plans and regulations for the Downtown/ Waterfront area is to provide more
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 361 of 680
flexible standards that can help businesses move into older buildings and adapt old
homes to commercial or mixed use spaces. An example is the ability of buildings on
the Edmonds Register of Historic Places to get an exception for parking for projects
that retain the historic character of the site.
Administrative Procedures
• Streamlined approval processing. The City generally uses either a Hearing Examiner
or staff to review and issue discretionary land use decisions, thereby reducing
permitting timelines and providing some an increased degree of certainty to the
process. The City continues to provide and improve on an extensive array of
information forms and handouts explaining its permitting processes and standards.
The City has also established standards for permit review times, tailored to the type
and complexity of the project. For example, the mean processing time for processing
land use permits in 2003 2011 was 39 36 days, less than one-third of the 120-day
standard encouraged by the State’s Regulatory Reform act.
• Use-by-Right. The City has been actively reviewing its schedule of uses and how
they are divided between uses that are permitted outright vs. permitted by some form
of conditional use. The City has expanded this effort to include providing clearer
standards, potentially allowing more approvals to be referred to staff instead of the
Hearing Examiner hearing process.
• Impact mitigation payment deferral. The City’s traffic mitigation impact fees are
assessed at the time of development permit application, but are not collected until just
prior to occupancy. This provides predictability while also minimizing “carrying
costs” of financing.
Development Standards
• Front yard or side yard setback requirements. Some of the City’s zones have no front
or side yard setback requirements, such as in the downtown mixed use zones. In
single family zones, average front setbacks can be used to reduce otherwise required
front yard setbacks.
• Zero lot line. This type of development pattern can be achieved using the City’s PRD
process, which is implemented as an alternative form of subdivision.
• Street design and construction. Edmonds has adopted a ‘complete streets’ policy.
Street standards are reviewed and updated on a consistent basisperiodically, taking
advantage of new technologies whenever possible. A comprehensive review and
update of the city’s codes is underway.
• Alleys. The City has an extensive system of alleys in the downtown area and makes
use of these in both mixed use and residential developments.
• Off-street parking requirements. The City has substantially revised its off-street
parking standards, reducing the parking ratios required for multi familymultifamily
development and in some mixed use areas, thereby reducing housing costs and
encouraging more housing in areas that are walkable or served by transit.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 362 of 680
• . The City also simplified and streamlined its parking requirements for the downtown
mixed use area, thereby encouraging housing downtown.
• Sanitary Sewer, Water, and Stormwater systems. Innovative techniques are explored
and utilized in both new systems and in the maintenance of existing infrastructure.
Low-Cost Housing Types
• Accessory dwellings. The City substantially revised its accessory dwelling
regulations, providing clearer standards and streamlining their approval as a standard
option for any single family lot.
• Cottage housing developments. The City is exploring this option, although it would
be expected to have limited application.
• Mixed-use development. The City has strengthened and expanded its mixed use
development approach. Downtown mixed use development no longer has a density
cap, and this – combined other regulatory changes – has resulted in residential floor
space drawing even with commercial floor space in new developments in the
downtown area. Mixed use zoning was applied in the Westgate Corridor, and revised
mixed use development regulations have been updated and intensified in are being
prepared for application in the Hospital/Highway 99 Activity Center as well as along
Highway 99.
• Mobile/manufactured housing. The City’s regulation of manufactured homes has
been revised to more broadly permit this type of housing in single family zones.
Housing Production & Preservation Programs
• Housing preservation. The City provides strict enforcement of its building codes,
intended to protect the quality and safety of housing. The City has also instituted a
historic preservation program intended to provide incentives to rehabilitate and
restore commercial, mixed use, and residential buildings in the community.
Public housing authority / Public and nonprofit housing developers. The City supports the Housing
Authority of Snohomish County, as evidenced by its approval of the conversion of housing units to
Housing Authority ownership. Edmonds is also a participant in the Alliance for Housing
Affordability (AHA) in Snohomish County, which is a consortium of cities pooling resources to
collectively address housing needs in the county.
•
• For-profit housing builders and developers. Many of the strategies outlined above are
aimed at the for-profit building market. The City’s budget restrictions limit its ability
to directly participate in the construction or provision of affordable housing, so it has
chosen instead to affect the cost of housing by reducing government regulation,
providing flexible development standards, and otherwise minimize housing costs that
can be passed on to prospective owners or renters. However, as noted above, the City
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 363 of 680
is also a participant in the Alliance for Housing Affordability in Snohomish County,
which is intended to collaborate on housing strategies countywide.
Housing Financing Strategies
• State / Federal resourcesFederal resources. The City supports the use of State and
Federal resources to promote affordable housing through its participation in the
Snohomish County Consortium and the Community Development Block Grant
program. These are important inter-jurisdictional efforts to address countywide
needs.
Jurisdictions face challenges inThere will be difficulty meeting affordability goals or significantly
reducing the current affordable housing deficit. The cityEdmonds is a mature community with
limited opportunities for new development nearly fully developed and has limited powers and
resources to produce subsidized housing on its own. However, , it is hoped that Edmonds’
participation in joint planning and coordination initiatives, such as the Alliance for Affordable
Housing will point the way to new housing initiatives in the future.
funding projects (such as non-profit organizations funded by the cities of
Kirkland, Redmond and Bellevue) would help to mitigate these impacts.
Goals and Policies
Goal - Housing Goal AI. - Discrimination and Fair Housing - Goal 1. There should beEncourage
adequate housing opportunities for all families and individuals in the community regardless of
their race, age, sex, religion, disability or economic circumstances.
A.1 Consider opportunities for short-term housing that can meet local needs in case
of an emergency or disaster.
Housing Goal B.Goal - Housing I - Discrimination and Fair Housing - Goal 2. EInsure that past
attitudes do not establish a precedent for future decisions pertaining to public accommodation and
fair housing. in accordance with the following policy:
Housing Goal C. Provide for special needs populations – such as low income, disabled, or senior
residents – Goal - Housing II - Low Income, Elderly and Disabled Housing. to have aA decent
home in a healthy and suitable living environment, including through environment for each
household in accordance with the following policies:
C.1. Encourage the utilization of the housing resources of the state or federal
government to assist in providing adequate housing opportunities for the
special needs populations, such as low income, elderly and disabled, or senior
citizensresidents.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 364 of 680
C.2. The City should wWork with the Washington Housing ServiceAlliance for
Housing Affordability and other agencies to:
C.2.a. Provide current information on housing resources;
C.2.b. Determine the programs which will work best for the community.
C.2.c. Conduct periodic assessments of the housing requirements of special
needs populations to ensure that reasonable opportunities exist for all
forms of individual and group housing within the community.
Housing Goal D. Goal - Housing III - Housing Rehabilitation. Preserve and rehabilitate the stock
ofMaintain a valuable housing resource by encouraging preservation and rehabilitation of the
older housing stock in the community in order to maintain a valuable housing resource in
accordance with through the following policies:
D.1. Program should be developed which Support programs that offers free or low
cost minor home maintenance service toassistance to households in need, such
as units with low income, elderly or handicapped or senior
personshouseholders.
D.2. Building code enforcement should be utilizedEnforce building codes, as
appropriate, to conserve healthy neighborhoods and encourage rehabilitation of
those housing that showthat shows signs of deterioration.
D.3. Ensure that an adequate supply of housing exists to accommodate all
households that are displaced as a result of any community action.
D.4. Evaluate CCity ordinances and programs to determine if they prevent
rehabilitation of older buildings.
Housing Goal E. Provide opportunities for affordable housing (subsidized, if need be) for special
needs populations, such as disadvantaged, disabled, low income, and senior residents through the
following policies:
E.1. The City should aAggressively pursue support efforts to funds to the
construction of housing for elderlyseniors, disabled and low income, and other
special needs populations, while recognizing that u. Units should blend into the
neighborhood and/or be designed to be an asset to to the area and create pride
for inhabitants.
[Ord. 2527 §3, 1985.]
E.2. Aim for cCity zoning regulations should to expand, not limit, housing
opportunities for all special needs populations.
Housing Goal F. Goal: Provide for a variety of housing for all segments of the city that is
consistent and compatible withrespects the established character of the community.
F.1. Expand and promote a variety of housing opportunities by establishing land
use patterns that provide a mixture of housing types and densities.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 365 of 680
F.1.a. Provide for mixed use, multi familymultifamily and single family
housing that is targeted and located according to the land use patterns
established in the land use element.
F.2. Encourage infill development that is consistent with or enhances the character
of the surrounding neighborhood.
F.2.a. Within single family neighborhoods, encourage infill development
by considering innovative single family development patterns such
as Planned Residential Developments (PRDs).
F.2.b. Provide for accessory housing in single family neighborhoods that to
addresses the needs of extended families and encourages housing
affordability.
F.2.c. Provide flexible development standards for infill development, such
as non-conforming lots, when development in these situations will be
consistent with the character of the neighborhood and with the goal
to provide affordable single family housing.
Housing Goal G. Goal: Provide housing opportunities within Activity Centers consistent with
the land use, transportation, and economic goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
G.1. Promote development within Activity Centers that supports the centers’
economic activities and transit service.
G.1.a. Provide for mixed use development within Activity Centers.
G.1.b. Plan for housing that is located with easy access to transit and
economic activities that provide jobs and shopping opportunities.
G.1.c. Consider adjusting parking standards for housing within Activity
Centers to provide incentives for lower-cost housing when justified
by available transit service.
Housing Goal H. Goal: Government should rReview and monitor its permitting processes and
regulatory structures systems to assure that they promote housing opportunities and avoid, to the
extent possible, adding to the cost of housing.
H.1. Provide the maximum amount of certainty efficiency and predictability in
government permitting processes.
H.1.a. Consider a wide variety of measures to achieve this
objectivepredictability and efficiency, including such ideas as:
..…establishing time limits for permitting processes;
..…developing consolidated permitting and appeals processes;
..…implementing administrative permitting procedures;
..…using pre-application processes to highlight problems early.
H.2. Establish monitoring programs for permitting and regulatory processes.
H.2.a. Monitoring programs should be established to review the types and
effectiveness of government regulations and incentives, in order to
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 366 of 680
assess whether they are meeting their intended purpose or need to be
adjusted to meet new challenges.
Housing Goal I. Goal: Opportunities for increasing the affordability ofIncrease affordable
housing opportunities have the best chance for success if they are coordinated with programs that
seek to achieve other community goals as well.
I.1. Research housing affordability and program options that address
Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives.Housing affordability should be
researched and programs developed that address multiple Comprehensive Plan
goals and objectives.
I.2. Develop housing programs to encourage housing opportunities that build on
linkages between housing and other, complementary Comprehensive Plan
goals.
I.2.a. New programs that address housing affordability should be
coordinated with programs that address development of the arts,
encourage historic preservation, promote the continued development
of Activity Centers and transit-friendly development, and that
encourage economic development.
Housing Goal J. Goal: Recognize that iIn addition to traditional height and bulk standards,
design is an important aspect of housing and determines, in many cases, whether or not it is
compatible with its surroundings. Design guidelines for housing should be integrated, as
appropriate, into the policies and regulations governing the location and design of housing.
J.1. Provide design guidelines that encourage flexibility in housing types while
ensuring compatibility of housing with the surrounding neighborhood.
J.1.a. Incentives and programs for historic preservation and neighborhood
conservation should be researched and established to continue the
character of Edmonds’ residential and mixed use neighborhoods.
J.1.b. Design guidelines for housing should be developed to ensure
compatibility of housing with adjacent land uses. DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 367 of 680
Implementation Actions and Performance Measures
Implementation actions are steps that are intended to be taken within a specified timeframe to
address high priority sustainability goals. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan contains a small
number performance measures (no more than one per element) that can be used to monitor and
annually report on the implementation and effectiveness of the Comprehensive Plan. Performance
measures, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, are specific, meaningful, and easily obtainable
items that relate to sustainability and can be reported on an annual basis. They are intended to
help assess progress toward achieving the goals and policy direction of each major
Comprehensive Plan element. {Note: The measure identified below is specifically called out as
matching the above criteria and being important to housing goals and will be reported annually,
along with performance measures for other Comprehensive Plan elements. It is not intended to be
the only measure that the City may use for housing purposes.
Implementation Action: Develop a strategy by 2019 for increasing the supply of affordable
housing and meeting diverse housing needs.
Performance Measure: Report the number of residential units permitted each year with a goal
of reaching 21,168 units by 2035, or approximately 112 additional dwelling units
annually from 2011 to 2035.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 368 of 680
Economic Development
Introduction. The purpose of the Economic Development Element is to state the city’s economic
development policies clearly in one place, thereby guiding local policymakers and informing the
public about issues relating to the local economy.
The chapter is divided into four major sections: Introduction and Discussion of Economic
Development, The Edmonds Economy, Economic Development Goals and Policies, and
Implementation.
Introduction and Discussion of Economic Development
Why is economic development important?
The International Economic Development Council provides the following general objective
regarding economic development:
“Improving the economic wellbeing of a community through efforts that
entail job creation, job retention, tax base enhancements and quality of life.”
In simple terms, economic development has traditionally been thought of as meaning encouraging
“growth.” In recent years, many communities have focused more on how economic development
fits within a general framework of community sustainability. This framework attempts to
integrate economic prosperity, environmental sustainability, political governancesocial and
political equity, and cultural engagement as the constituent parts of the community’s overall
health.
With similar objectives in mind economic development in Edmonds can be defined as “the city’s
goals, policies and strategies for growing the local economy in order to enhance the quality of
life.” Economic development is essential to preserving the existing level of service and attaining
long-range goals for sustainable growth and community vitality.
In general, economic development programs and activities affect the local economy by
broadening and strengthening the local tax base, providing a greater range of goods and services
for local residents, and by providing meaningful employment and entrepreneurial opportunities.
Economic development priorities vary widely from community to community, but Edmonds’
priorities have historically coincided with those of many other Puget Sound area communities,
including: creating affordable housing, adding employment, downtown and business district
revitalization, small business assistance, expansion of existing businesses, new business
recruitment and site selection assistance, community marketing, historic preservation, tourism
generation, public relations, streamlining permit processes, and special development or
streetscape projects (including public art).
While the state of the economy may change greatly as boom and bust cycles come and go with
each passing decade, these economic development priorities seem to stand the test of time.
Greater or lesser emphasis may be placed on specific priorities, but for communities in
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 369 of 680
Washington, including Edmonds, these are the main economic development activities to continue
to pursue.
The Edmonds Economy
A solid understanding of the local economy helps a community to effectively guide policies,
investments, staff resources, and future plans. The following analysis provides a background of
the fundamentals of the Edmonds economy, local household and business characteristics, and
their impact on municipal revenues.
The Edmonds economy can best be understood by analyzing local demographics and household
characteristics, local employment data, and local sales activity.
Population
The US Census Bureau’s 2013 estimate lists 40,,727 381 residents in Edmonds. That is a 2.61.7
percent% increase since the official 2010 census, lagging behind both the Snohomish County and
Washington State growth figures of 4.62.9 percent% and 3.72.6 percent%, respectively, during
that period.
Of further note in understanding the local economy are the following additional demographic
factors:
Average age. The 2013 estimated average age in Edmonds is 46 48.1 years, substantially older
than the countywide average age of 37.5, indicating a sizeable retiree population. Several
conclusions can be drawn from the relatively older population of Edmonds.
• The size of the labor force is smaller in Edmonds than a similar-sized city with a
lower average age.
• While the retiree population includes a segment on fixed incomes, the city’s higher-
than-average household income figures suggest that there is a sizable segment of
retirees who have discretionary income. Coupled with greater free time, these retirees
constitute a demographic cohort that is able to engage in leisure activities and
associated spending that creates economic activity.
• The housing stock occupied by the older adults and couples may start to see a turn-
over in the next decade, potentially providing more housing for younger adults,
couples and young families. If this occurs, it could increase the size of the labor force
population and increase demand for certain household and personal goods and
services, as well as eating/drinking establishments.
• Conversely, if the average age continues to increase, it could mean that fewer
younger families and workers will reside in Edmonds. This could have a range of
economic impacts that would need to be monitored.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 370 of 680
Ethnic make-up. Edmonds and greater Snohomish County exhibit a lesser degree of racial or
ethnic diversity than the State as a whole or many parts of the Seattle-Tacoma-Everett
metropolitan area. With 83nearly 80 percent% of residents listed as “white,” Edmonds is less
ethnically/racially diverse than the following nearby cities:
Table XX: Percentage of Residents Listed as “White” in US
Census
Source: American Community Survey 3-yr, 2011-2013
Figure 28: Percentage of Residents Listed as "White" in US Census
Households. Of the 17,381 households, the degree of home ownership (69 percent%) in
Edmonds is substantially greater than many nearby cities.
Source: American Community Survey 3-yr, 2011-2013
Figure 29: Percentage of Owner-Occupied Households
Household income. As would be expected by the high percentage of owner-occupied homes in
Edmonds, the average household income levels are also higher than regional averages and
City Percentage of Residents listed
as "white" in the US Census
Edmonds 79.7
Kirkland 74.3
Mill Creek 66.9
Shoreline 66.8
Seattle 66.7
Everett 66.0
Redmond 58.7
Bellevue 58.2
Lynnwood 56.8
City Percentage Owner-Occupied
Households
Edmonds 69%
Shoreline 65%
Mill Creek 63%
Kirkland 57%
Redmond 54%
Lynnwood 53%
Bellevue 53%
Seattle 48%
Everett 45%
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 371 of 680
generally, although not exclusively, higher than other nearby cities. During the period from
2011-2013, the Edmonds’ median household income was $67,228 per year, compared with a
Snohomish Countywide average of $67,192 and a King Countywide average of $70,998.
Conclusions that can be made from the preceding data regarding ethnic make-up, home
ownership and household income include the following:
• With a generally more affluent population, Edmonds residents create demand for a
wide variety of goods, services and activities. While nearby communities vie with
Edmonds for market share to meet this demand, this fact should be kept in mind
when pursuing economic development strategies.
• Edmonds’ very robust services sector (see below) provides many related jobs.
However, often services-sector jobs pay lower wages than average. Consequently,
with higher home prices and rents in Edmonds, services-sector employees may have
fewer housing options here. This may create demand for more affordable housing
development.
Labor Force. Of the city’s total 2013 population of 40,72740,381 the US Census estimates the
civilian labor force to be 21,174. This is an important figure to keep in mind when considering
the number of jobs in Edmonds. While jobs per capita is often used as an econometric measure, it
is can be more insightful to consider jobs per labor force population, which portrays more
accurately the availability of jobs for working Edmonds residents.
Employment
The Edmonds economy is diverse and includes employment in the full range of business sectors:
construction, finance/insurance/real estate, retail, services, warehousing/utilities/transportation,
government, education, and a small amount of manufacturing.
With 13,232 jobs in 2013, Edmonds exhibits a ratio of 0.325 jobs per capita. However, this
equates to 0.625 jobs per person in the civilian labor force. The substantial disparity between
these two ratios reflects the relatively large amount of Edmonds residents who are retirees and no
longer in the labor force.
The following Figure 30 table provides a quick comparison of jobs, population and jobs per
capita in Edmonds and other Snohomish and King County communities. As can be seen,
Edmonds provides a relatively lower number of jobs per capita (0.325) than several other nearby
cities. However, as mentioned above, when compared with the 21,174 Edmonds residents in the
labor force, the Edmonds economy provides 13,232 jobs – a ratio of 0.62 per Edmonds
worker. Nevertheless, according to US Census data, Edmonds-based jobs employ only about 20
percent% (approximately 4,200) of these Edmonds labor-force residents. That is to say, up to 80
percent% (approximately 17,000) of Edmonds workers travel elsewhere to work. Given that
Edmonds households exhibit relatively higher median incomes, while predominately working
elsewhere; this seems to suggest that the Edmonds economy does not provide a sufficient supply
of higher-wage jobs.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 372 of 680
Figure 30: Jobs per Persons in Civilian Labor Force
Jobs by Sector
It is also of interest to analyze the break-down of jobs by sector. By far the largest single source
of employment is the “services” sector, comprised of jobs in such areas as health care,
accommodations and food service, arts and entertainment, professional services, etc. Swedish
Medical Center-Edmonds and the numerous health care-related businesses in its vicinity provide
a significant portion of these jobs in the “services” sector. In summary, this sector comprises
nearly 70 percent% of Edmonds jobs – substantially above the averages of Snohomish County
and several nearby cities:
Source: Puget Sound Regional Council, “Covered Employment Estimates,” 2013
Figure 31: Edmonds Employment by Sector
County City Total Jobs Population # Jobs per
Capita Labor Force
# Jobs per
Persons in
Civilian Labor
Force
King Redmond 79,649 57,530 1.384 32,593 2.444
King Bellevue 126,425 133,992 0.944 72,726 1.738
Snohomish Everett 91,310 105,370 0.867 54,725 1.669
King Seattle 499,946 652,405 0.766 393,184 1.272
King/Snohomish Bothell
26,886 35,576 0.756 19,550 1.375
Snohomish Lynnwood
25,474 36,485 0.698 19,019 1.339
King Issaquah 22,310 33,566 0.665 18,236 1.223
King Renton 59,697 97,003 0.615 54,325 1.099
King Kirkland 41,091 84,430 0.487 48,170 0.853
Snohomish Mountlake Terrace 7,201 20,674 0.348 12,516 0.575
Snohomish Edmonds
13,232 40,727 0.325 21,174 0.625
King Shoreline 15,819 54,790 0.289 29,773 0.531
Snohomish Marysville 12,409 63,269 0.196 32,448 0.382
King Kenmore 3,556 21,611 0.165 10,998 0.323
Snohomish Lake Stevens 4,451 29,949 0.149 15,444 0.288
King Total 1,183,811 2,044,449 0.579 1,128,768 1.049
Snohomish Total 264,844 745,913 0.355 391,151 0.677
Sources: Puget Sound Regional Council; American Community Survey 3-yr, 2011-2013
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 373 of 680
Source: Puget Sound Regional Council, “Covered Employment Estimates,” 2013
Figure 32: Percentage of Jobs in Service Sector
The second largest employment sector is retail, comprising 12.3 percent% of all jobs. While this
percentage is generally in line with countywide averages, it is notable that Lynnwood, with its
regional shopping mall and nearby shopping centers, exhibits a substantially larger percentage of
retail jobs, at 28 percent%.
Notwithstanding several major employers, including Swedish-Edmonds, the Edmonds School
District, major assisted-living/rehab centers, larger restaurants, major auto dealers and large
grocery store outlets, among others, much of Edmonds’ employment base is comprised of small
businesses. Among these small businesses figure retail shops, eating and drinking establishments,
professional services firms, personal services establishments, and many home-based businesses.
The manufacturing sector, in contrast, provides only 87 jobs and constitutes a substantially minor
employment sector, which is similar to many suburban Snohomish and King County
communities. Conversely, Everett and some areas of unincorporated Snohomish County provide
a large number of manufacturing jobs.
Based on the foregoing snapshot of the Edmonds employment base, the following conclusions
can be drawn:
• The services sector will continue to dominate the Edmonds employment base, with
continued growth expected, especially in the health care sector.
• While competition exists from nearby communities, the retail sector provides a
significant opportunity for additional employment growth.
• The following sectors will likely remain stable: education; government; finance,
insurance, real estate; wholesale, transportation, utilities.
• The construction sector is likely to see an upturn as additional commercial, multifamily
and mixed-use development occurs throughout the City.
City Percentage of Jobs
in Service Sector
Edmonds 70%
Mill Creek 59%
Shoreline 46%
Lynnwood 45%
Snohomish County 35%
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 374 of 680
• The manufacturing sector will likely remain small, but growth is likely to increase in both
the artisanal industries, such as food, beer, spirits and other products, as well as low-
impact, specialty manufacturing, such as software, electronics, green technology, etc.
• A substantial gap exists between Edmonds residents in the labor force and Edmonds-
based jobs. Additional, higher-paying jobs in all sectors in Edmonds would likely help
reduce this gap. Additionally, this would help increase quality of life, reduce regional
commuting, and increase the City’s tax revenue.
• Conversely, a substantial number of jobs in Edmonds are occupied by residents of other
outside communities. Additional housing within a greater distribution along the
affordability spectrum could help capture the latent housing demand of many Edmonds
workers.
.Retail Sales
An analysis of overall retail sales is also very insightful in understanding the Edmonds economy.
Comparison with other nearby communities yields an understanding of strengths and weaknesses in
local components of retail sales, indicating potential sources of sales “leakage.”
Figure 33 The following table shows the top (over $10,000,000) retail sales sectors (by NAICS title)
in 2013 of the 50 sectors reporting.
Source: Puget Sound Regional Council, “Covered Employment Estimates,” 2013
Figure 33: Top Retail Sectors in Edmonds, 2013
As presented in the table, automobiles and other vehicles are the top retail sales category by a wide
margin. At just over half of the car-sales figure, the food and drink sector is also substantial.
Another important data set to consider is retail sales per capita, especially as it compares with other
nearby communities.
Retail Sector (NAICS title)Taxable Retail Sales
(in millions)
Cars & Other Vehicle Dealers 152.2$
Food Service, Caterers, Bars 87.0$
Food/Beer/Wine/Liquor Stores 29.4$
Construction (new housing)25.0$
Apparel/Accessories/Jewelry Stores 22.8$
Health Care and Social Assistance 17.3$
Auto/Personal/Household Goods Repair 16.2$
Used Merchandise/Pet/Art/Gift/Office Stores 14.3$
Construction (exterior, finishing, equipment)10.9$
Pharmacies/Beauty/Personal Care Stores 10.5$ DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 375 of 680
Source: American Community Survey 3-yr, 2011-2013
Figure 34: Taxable Retail Sales per Capita in 2013
As shown in Figure 34Table XX, the city of Lynnwood, with its regional mall and associated
shopping centers, captures a great deal of retail sales, with the highest retail sales per capita –
approaching four times the amount in Edmonds. Kirkland, a similar-sized city in King County,
captures modestly more retail sales, while neighboring Shoreline sees almost the same per-capita
sales.
Even more insightful is an estimate of sales per capita within key retail categories as a function of
per-capita income, compared with Western US standards. This exercise provides an estimate of the
“leakage” of retail sales to other communities that could potentially be captured by Edmonds
residents within Edmonds.
One starts by using standards provided by the US Census, Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the
Washington Department of Revenue, which indicate that the portion of annual per-capita income
routinely spent by Western US residents on the main retail categories listed below is 19.94 percent%.
Based on the City’s per-capita income and population, one can determine the total income anticipated
to be spent by Edmonds’ residents. Applying the aforementioned 19.94 percent% retail sales
expenditure rate to the City’s total income, one arrives at the anticipated total retail sales by
Edmonds’ residents, otherwise known as “demand” for these retail categories. By analyzing the
City’s actual retail sales receipts for these categories, one can quantify both the total retail sales
“leakage” and the relative gap within each retail category. The following tables figures break down
this analysis:
CITY TAXABLE RETAIL
SALES
Lynnwood 57,289$
Kirkland 23,199$
Shoreline 15,582$
Edmonds 15,198$
Mukilteo 11,203$
Mountlake Terrace 9,522$
CITY TAXABLE RETAIL
SALES
Lynnwood 57,289$
Kirkland 23,199$
Shoreline 15,582$
Edmonds 15,198$
Mukilteo 11,203$
Mountlake Terrace 9,522$
Sources: American Community Survey 3-yr, 2011-2013
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 376 of 680
Source: US Census; American Community Survey 3-yr, 2011-2013; Bureau of Labor Statistics; WA Department of
Revenue
Figure 35: Edmonds Actual Aggregate Retail Sales as a Percentage of Potential Sales
Source: US Census; American Community Survey 3-yr, 2011-2013; Bureau of Labor Statistics; WA Department of
Revenue
**Note: A ratio of 1:1 would signify a 100 percent% capture in Edmonds of Edmonds’ latent demand
for that category. A ratio under 1 signifies a greater capture of market demand for a category than
Edmonds demand. A ratio over 1 signifies uncaptured demand or a retail sales “leakage” to other
communities.
Figure 36: Edmonds Actual Retail Sales by Category as Percentage of Potential Sales
The principal conclusions to be drawn from the foregoing analysis of retail sales in Edmonds are as
follows:
• Among the main retail sales categories, Edmonds captures approximately 84 percent% of
the total retail sales that would be expected from Edmonds residents, based on Western
Total
40,381
40,892$
19.94%
8,152$
1,651,259,852$
329,201,769$
279,092,756$
Expected Expenditures by City's Residents for Selected Categories
Estimated Taxable Retail Sales
Description
City Population, 2013 Census estimate
Per Capita Income, 3-yr ACS 2011-2013
Total % of CU Income Spent on Categories Listed (Western US Avg.)
Avg. Retail Spending Per Capita for Selected Categories (Edmonds)
Total Income of City's Residents
% of CU Income
Spent on
Category
(Western US
Avg.)
Est. Demand for
Category by
City's Residents
(2013)
Edmonds
Taxable Retail
Sales for
Category (2013)
Ratio of Total
Consumed to
Total
Demanded -
the "Gap"
4.39% 72,417,652$ 85,776,628$ 0.844
0.22% 3,627,818$ 1,040,569$ 3.486
0.63% 10,343,492$ 481,624$ 21.476
0.04% 606,012$ 1,101,342$ 0.550
0.39% 6,408,539$ -$
2.71% 44,787,121$ 20,189,446$ 2.218
0.52% 8,513,896$ 1,055,428$ 8.067
0.37% 6,179,014$ 1,529,057$ 4.041
4.68% 77,234,377$ 148,878,789$ 0.519
3.89% 64,262,080$ 5,220,946$ 12.309
0.77% 12,684,978$ 2,044,641$ 6.204
0.27% 4,408,864$ 1,354,332$ 3.255
1.07% 17,727,926$ 10,419,954$ 1.701
19.94% 329,201,769$ 279,092,756$ 1.180
Gasoline
Pet Supply
Toys, Hobbies, and Playground Equipment
Personal Care Products
Total
Floor Coverings
Major Appliances
Apparel and Services
Footwear
Other Apparel and Services
Vehicle Purchases
Category
Eating and Drinking Places
Household Textiles
Furniture
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 377 of 680
US average retail sales rates, with up to $57,929,741 of potential spending going
elsewhere.
• This figure, however, is skewed substantially by vehicle sales, because the rate of capture
in Edmonds is higher than average and the value of vehicle sales is high. Extracting
vehicle sales from the equation, Edmonds captures approximately 51 percent% of retail
sales that would be expected from Edmonds residents, based on Western US average
retail sales rates.
• Consequently, there is an almost 50 % percent “leakage” of potential nonvehicle-related
retail sales from Edmonds – an amount that could total as high as $125,000,000 annually.
• In addition, while the vehicle sales sector is valuable to the Edmonds economy, the
remaining major retail sectors are providing substantially less than Edmonds residents’
demand for such goods and services.
• This all points out that, given the volatility and size of the vehicle sales sector, growth in
the other sectors could help protect against an over reliance on that sector. In 2013,
vehicle sales made up 32.4 percent% of the total taxable retail sales for businesses with
locations in Edmonds.
City Revenues and Sustainability
Economic development is an important issue not only because it addresses jobs, availability of goods
and services and quality of life, but also for its role in supporting city revenues on a sustainable basis.
Of the City’s annual tax revenues, property tax comprises 38.9 percent%, utility tax 18.4 percent%
and sales tax 16.9 percent%, for a combined total of almost 75 percent% of municipal deriving from
taxes. Economic vitality is key to ensuring the continued sustainability of these tax revenue sources
in order to ensure continued support of valuable city services and the quality of life enjoyed by
residents and businesses.
Services
Quality
of Life
Revenue
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 378 of 680
Source: City of Edmonds Adopted 2015 Budget
Figure 37: Edmonds General Revenues by Source
The following figure compares Edmonds against other nearby communities in terms of percentage
contributions from sales and property taxes to municipal revenue:
Source: Budget documents from corresponding cities
Figure 38: Percentage Contribution of Sales and Property Tax
As one can see, Lynnwood relies substantially more than Edmonds and other nearby communities on
retail sales tax, given the presence of the regional shopping mall and associated shopping centers in
that community. Edmonds and several other communities rely to a greater degree on property tax
revenues. While this is often a more stable continued source of revenue than sales tax revenue, the
State-imposed limit of no more than one-percent annual growth in property tax revenue (absent a
voter-approved levy) does not keep up with inflation and has transformed this source into more of a
revenue baseline rather than a source of growth. In the face of inflationary pressures and increased
demands for services, municipalities like Edmonds must seek revenue growth from other sources.
Additionally, in the case of Edmonds, in light of the substantial “leakage” of potential retail sales to
other communities, recapture of even a modest amount of this leakage could yield much-needed
additional sales tax revenue.
City Sales Tax Property Tax
Edmonds 17% 39%
Lynnwood 28% 17%
Mukilteo 20% 34%
Mill Creek 21% 49%
Bothell 14% 14%
Kirkland 12% 18%
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 379 of 680
While it is simple to establish a goal of increasing sales tax revenues, it is more difficult to determine
how to implement that goal. Many cities have focused on new development because of its potentially
positive impact on both sales and property taxes.
Appropriately sited and sized development/redevelopment projects increase:
• Property tax receipts through the “new construction” provision that captures new
construction value-based property tax for the first year a project is brought on line and
adds that value to the city’s future property tax baseline.
• Sales tax revenue from construction materials and activity.
• Sales tax revenue from both personal and business spending accruing from new residents,
workers and businesses within newly developed buildings.
• Utility tax revenue from a greater number of utility customers.
Development opportunities in Edmonds are generally limited to redevelopment in the business
districts where under-developed parcels may still be found. This does not imply a need for wholesale
redevelopment of entire districts, but rather an emphasis on appropriately sited and sized residential,
mixed-use and commercial projects in key locations, such as the Highway 99 corridor, Westgate, Five
Corners and select locations in and near Downtown.
Consequently, this chapter includes goals and policies that reflect the need to accommodate
appropriate development/redevelopment throughout the various business districts in Edmonds.
Lastly, another source of potential growth in retail sales and the resulting municipal tax revenue could
lie in achieving greater energy efficiency in Edmonds’ homes and businesses. A 2010 study
conducted by Sustainable Edmonds reported that utility consumption just from electricity and natural
gas constituted on the order of $35-40 million annually in the 2008-2009 period. While that figure
can vary considerably as energy prices vary, a figure on the order of $30+ million suffices for
planning purposes. Sustainable Edmonds has further identified that through relatively modest energy-
saving interventions on existing homes and businesses, approximately 10 percent% savings can be
achieved, which could free up approximately $3 million dollars in additional discretionary income
among Edmonds residents.
Economic Development Goals and Policies
Edmonds’ current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) relating to economic
development
As a companion to of the foregoing analysis of the fundamentals of the Edmonds economy, the
following “SWOT” analysis assists in preparation of the goals and policies for economic development
in Edmonds.
Strengths:
• Amenity-rich community with high quality of life
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 380 of 680
o Picturesque waterfront setting, with publicly accessible waterfront and rich variety of
parks and recreational activities
o Traditional downtown with array of specialty retailers, food and drink
establishments, entertainment and services,
complemented by free parking
o Distinctive neighborhoods and business districts
o Regionally renowned events and festivals
o Historic character
• Intermodal transit connections
• Port of Edmonds’ role in economic vitality, especially as anchor
to strong, growing maritime business sector
• Publicly accessible fiber optic network in the Downtown area
• Strong, prominent and regionally recognized arts community
• Burgeoning health services sector, anchored by Swedish Hospital-Edmonds
• Strong and prominent educational infrastructure from public and private K-12 institutions to
Edmonds Community College
• International business community, offering diverse array of goods and services, both in
Highway 99 “International District” and throughout the City
• Strong social capital and community pride
• High degree of home ownership
• Low rates of unemployment and poverty
Weaknesses:
• Limited retail trade area due to geographical constraints (Puget Sound to the west, distance
from I-5) and prominence of major regional retail centers and lifestyle centers in nearby
communities
• Potentially restrictive land use and parking regulations in the business districts compared with
other communities
• Lack of large, regularly shaped parcels to accommodate redevelopment in commercial areas
outside the downtown BC zone
• Limited amusement/family entertainment establishments relative to surrounding
communities.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 381 of 680
• Shortage of tourism infrastructure, such as full range of accommodations, public restrooms,
way-finding signage, etc.
• Shortage of affordable housing opportunities
• Substantial portion of resident labor force commutes away for work, while large number of
workers commute in to town for work
Opportunities:
• Location, “character” and natural assets can leverage additional economic development by
nurturing existing businesses for growth and expansion and recruiting new, complementary
businesses that seek those assets.
• Existing and planned intermodal transit connections can leverage transit-oriented
development.
• Through enhanced connectivity, opportunities exist to maximize the synergy and economic
impact of the Edmonds Center for the Arts with
the Downtown business community,.
• The burgeoning arts community can leverage
greater tourism, artisanal manufacturing and
associated business.
• Highly skilled, educated workforce provides
opportunities for businesses to locate in Edmonds
that offer high-paying jobs
• Continued growth in the emerging business
sectors of artisanal and craft producers, including
microbreweries, distilleries, specialty foods, and
low-impact, specialty manufacturing.
• Telecommunication/technology assets can provide better service for existing business
customers and attract new business.
• Infrastructure improvements around the business districts can enhance their attractiveness for
investment and viability of commercial and mixed-use development.
• Downtown and the Highway 99 corridor near the medical services node around Swedish-
Edmonds offer opportunities for additional hospitality facilities.
• Underdeveloped sites in the City’s business districts (e.g., Westgate, Fiver Corners, Highway
99 corridor, etc.) offer opportunities for appropriate commercial and/or mixed-use
redevelopment projects. Additional population density in business districts can add market
demand for goods and services and employee base for new and growing businesses.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 382 of 680
• Large numbers of workers who commute to Edmonds create additional demand for
affordable housing
• Travelers through Edmonds via the Washington State Ferry system offer potential for greater
business activity.
• Senior, more affluent residents provide opportunities for businesses related to that
demographic cohort.
• Increased energy efficiency in homes and businesses could free up discretionary income to
support more local spending
Threats:
• Retail “leakage” (i.e. loss of potential local sales activity to areas outside of the City of
Edmonds)
• Wider variety and availability of housing options and commercial space elsewhere
• Concerns over the long-term fiscal sustainability of City of Edmonds services and
infrastructure without additional significant business sector growth
• Increasing volumes of train traffic, with resulting increase in blockage of at-grade crossings,
could threaten economic vitality of the waterfront community.
Goals and Policies
Economic Development Goal A. Foster a healthy business community that encourages appropriately
scaled growth and investment that offers a wide range of goods and services, provides employment,
and enhances municipal revenue.
A.1. Continually strive to offer an efficient, timely and predictable regulatory
environment within the framework of a strong customer service approach.
A.1.A.2. Develop or maintain business recruitment programs, including a tool box
of possible incentives, to encourage a wide range of new business development,
including retail, service, artisanal manufacturing and professional services
sectors.
A.3. Foster business expansion and retention through existing and enhanced programs.
A.4. Prioritize purchasing from local businesses while balancing a concern for cost
containment.
A.5. Promote local business through enhanced public awareness campaigns, events,
awards programs and other activities.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 383 of 680
A.2.A.6. Promote emerging business sectors such as artisanal and craft producers,
including microbreweries, distilleries, specialty foods, etc., as well as low-
impact, specialty manufacturing, including software, electronics, green
technology, etc
A.3.A.7. Continue to partner with business leaders, organizations and community
members, such as the Port of Edmonds, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, etc., to
leverage business opportunities and to solicit and address feedback to enhance
the business environment.
A.4.A.8. Leverage business opportunities related to travelers to/from Edmonds
using the Washington State Ferry system.
A.9. Pursue greater energy efficiency in homes and businesses to free up discretionary
income for more local spending.
Economic Development Goal B. Revitalize and enhance the city’s business districts, balancing the
needs for housing, commerce and employment development with neighborhood character, amenities
and scale.
B.1. Adopt land use policies, zoning, and design guidelines that are supportive of
economic development, while recognizing neighborhood character, context and
impacts.
B.2 Monitor and potentially revise parking requirements in business districts to
encourage business development, while reasonably accommodating parking
demand.
B.3. Pursue strategic planning efforts and/or develop land use regulations that will
encourage viable, appropriately scaled commercial and mixed-use redevelopment
of key properties in the City’s business districts.
B.4. Continue to foster and enhance the economic vitality of Downtown Edmonds,
including retention and growth of existing businesses, attraction of new businesses,
and promotion of appropriate in-fill redevelopment. Monitor and enhance the
Edmonds Downtown Business Improvement District in its efforts to fund business
promotion, marketing, improvement projects, beautification, etc.
B.5. Explore Provide staff support to businesses wishing to explore the potential of
additional Business Improvement Districts in other commercial areas to help fund
business promotion, marketing, improvement projects, beautification, etc., in a
sustainable fashion.
B.6. Promote enhanced connectivity between the Edmonds Center of the Arts and the
Downtown business community to maximize synergy and economic impacts.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 384 of 680
B.7. Continue to support an historic preservation program that works to identify and
preserve historic architectural, archeological and cultural resources for future
generations. This can include use of available incentives and the historic
preservation building code to encourage property owners to register eligible
historic buildings.
B.8. Work to “brand” and promote distinct business districts where there is a natural
identity, such as the Highway 99 International District, Westgate, the Swedish
Hospital Medical District, and the waterfront, among others.
B.9. Work with property owners, developers and investors to seek appropriate
redevelopment in underdeveloped and/or emerging business districts, such as the
Highway 99 medical services district, Five Corners, etc. Ensure that
redevelopment in business districts provide a quality environment with character,
walkability and amenities for patrons and residents to enjoy.
B.10. Implement regulations and/or design guidelines that will ensure the development of
quality retail and commercial space that can physically accommodate a variety of
future uses.
B.11. Implement infrastructure and technology improvements around business districts to
provide enhanced service, retain and attract business.
Economic Development Goal C. Diversify and grow the City’s economic make-up to reduce sales
leakage, attract spending from nearby communities, enhance local employment, and increase
municipal tax revenues to support local services.
C.1. Identify under-represented business sectors and work with partners, property
owners and/or developers to recruit new businesses that help fill under-met market
demand.
C.2. Leverage technology assets, such as existing fiber connections, to support
technology-based businesses and potentially to pursue new revenue streams.
C.3. Focus on recruitment and “buy local” community marketing on consumer spending
segments in which there is significant “leakage” and also a strong possibility of
recapturing spending.
C.4. Employ strategic marketing opportunities to attract consumer spending from
beyond Edmonds.
C.5. Pursue available incentives to foster appropriate redevelopment, where possible.
C.6. Encourage longer hours of business operation and/or more evening uses in the
business districts to add options during “peak” hours of consumer spending.
Economic Development Goal D. Support and enhance the community’s quality of life for residents,
workers and visitors in order to sustain and attract business and investment, and enhance economic
vitality.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 385 of 680
D.1. In concert with the Housing Element’s Goals and Policies, pursue a housing
strategy that seeks to accommodate a wide variety of housing options, both in
design and affordability, to meet the demands of the full range of the working
population, retirees, students, artists, et al.
D.2. Recognizing the value of a progressive community in retaining and attracting
business, continue to foster an open and accepting community culture that respects
diversity.
D.3. Support and enhance social, cultural, artistic, recreational and other learning
activities for residents, workers and visitors.
D.4. Pursue efforts to communicate with the public about the value of economic vitality
in sustaining the City’s quality of life, services and amenities.
D.5. Integrate programs and activities related to economic prosperity with objectives
related to environmental sustainability, social and political equity, and political
governance, cultural engagement and social equity.
Economic Development Goal E. Expand and enhance the tourism sector to attract outside spending
to help fuel the local economy.
E.1 Continue to support existing, and provide support to new, events and festivals that
attract visitors.
E.2. Continue to support and enhance the arts/culture sector and the visitors that
arts/culture events and activities attract.
E.3. Support and enhance sporting, nature, and other outdoor events and activities that
attract visitors.
E.4. Strategically employ marketing media and resources to attract visitors. An overall
marketing strategy should include a variety of traditional marketing, online
marketing, earned media presence and use of social media.
E.5. Market Edmonds as a year-round destination for its waterfront location, historic
downtown, arts community and venues, eating and drinking establishments,
international shopping and dining, natural amenities, gardens and flower displays,
parks and recreational assets, etc.
E.6. Support the tourism infrastructure, including visitor amenities such as public
restrooms, the visitorsvisitors’ center, way-finding signage, enhanced waterfront
accessibility etc.
E.7. Support efforts to enhance the hospitality infrastructure, including potential for an
increased number and/or wider range of lodging establishments Downtown, in the
medical services district on Highway 99, and/or in other business districts.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 386 of 680
Implementation
The policies in this document were constructed to provide a supportive foundation for future
economic development projects, legislation and decisions. Implementing the city’s policies will
require cooperative involvement on the part of the City, other public entities, and business and
community organizations.
As stated throughout this chapter, economic development in Edmonds could require a variety of
measures on the part of the City and other entities, including such measures as:
• Staff support, outreach and actions in support of business attraction and expansion, as well as
promotion of investment and development
• Legislative actions (such as decisions related to zoning, incentives, fees and taxes,
permit/business requirements, etc.)
• City expenditures on such things as amenities and infrastructure, and potential property
acquisition
• Actions by the Port of Edmonds to attract and expand marine-related business and activity
• Programs provided by Edmonds Community College that support work-force development,
job readiness, job placement, etc.
• Collaborative efforts between the Chamber, City and other entities to create and enhance a
positive, business-friendly environment
In addition, as part of a larger regional economy, the City of Edmonds and its partners must continue
to work actively with regional economic development organizations such as the Economic Alliance of
Snohomish County, the Snohomish County Economic Development Department, the Greater Seattle
Trade Alliance, the Washington Economic Development Association, the Puget Sound Regional
Council, the Prosperity Partnership, and the Washington State Department of Commerce, among
others.
Strategic Action Plan
After approximately two years of work on the part of staff, consultants, the Economic Development
Commission, and Councilmembers, together with substantial public involvement, on April 2, 2013
the Edmonds City Council approved the City’s Strategic Action Plan (SAP). The plan identifies both
short-term (3-5 years) and mid-term (5-10 years) community strategic objectives, as well as specific
action tasks and responsible participants, schedules and performance measures to achieve them.
The SAP is organized into five general strategic objectives:
1. Create economic health, vitality and sustainability
2. Maintain, enhance and create a sustainable environment
3. Maintain and enhance Edmonds’ community character and quality of life
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 387 of 680
4. Develop and maintain a transportation and infrastructure system to meet current and future
demand
5. Provide responsible, accountable, and responsive government
Each strategic objective is further subdivided into 88 specific action items to achieve implementation.
Strategic Objective 1, as mentioned above, is most directly involved with economic development
through a series of action items related to general economic sustainability, marketing of business
districts, promotion of business development, business outreach and development and a series of land
use standards and design guidelines intended to foster investment and appropriately scaled
redevelopment.
However, additional action items (for a total of 22) related to economic development can be found
throughout the SAP, illustrating the importance of economic development in the City’s strategic
direction.
As mentioned above, the SAP spans action items that can be worked on immediately to those that
may take many years. Nevertheless, it is incumbent on all participants to begin the process of
implementation.
Implementation is scheduled to begin in 2015 pursuant to a Council-approved implementation plan.
Notwithstanding all the above, the SAP does not enshrine the totality of economic development
activities to be pursued by the City and its partners. Strategic economic development initiatives, in
response to the bulleted items stated earlier will need to be pursued on an on-going basis. These
initiatives will in many cases be complementary to action items identified in the SAP.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 388 of 680
Performance Measures
Economic development is a tireless activity in pursuit of enhanced economic vitality that is often
more influenced by exogenous economic factors than local actions. For this reason it is difficult to
measure on a year-to-year basis the performance of the actions of a local agency and its partners on a
community’s economic health. Did an increase in business activity, home starts or jobs result from
local programs, incentives and/or outreach or would those economic successes have arisen otherwise
in a booming economy? Conversely, do lower sales, higher unemployment and a sagging
construction sector reflect on unsuccessful local economic development programs or more respond to
a regional, national or even global economic down-turn?
Whether or not economic success or failure can be attributed to any local actions, it is insightful and
informative to monitor the local economy’s performance and to attempt to steer economic
development strategies in response.
To this end, one of the two most basic performance measures related to a local community’s
economic health is growth or decline in overall employment.
What’s more, in its adopted planning growth targets Snohomish County has allocated 2,269 new jobs
to the City of Edmonds for the planning horizon of 2035. While job growth does not follow a straight
line year over year, this 20-year planning target provides a good index to gauge annual job growth in
Edmonds.
The Comprehensive Plan contains a small number performance measures (no more than one per
element) that can be used to monitor and annually report on the implementation and effectiveness of
the Comprehensive Plan. Performance measures, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, are
specific, meaningful, and easily obtainable items that relate to sustainability and can be reported on an
annual basis. They are intended to help assess progress toward achieving the goals and policy
direction of each major Comprehensive Plan element. {Note: The measure identified below is
specifically called out as matching the above criteria and being important to economic development
goals and will be reported annually, along with performance measures for other Comprehensive Plan
elements. It is not intended to be the only measure that the City may use for economic development
purposes.
Performance Measure: Report the number of jobs within the City each year with a goal of
reaching 13,948 jobs, excluding jobs within the resource and construction sectors, by
2035. This would require adding approximately 95 jobs annually from 2011 to 2035.DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 389 of 680
Community Culture and Urban Design Element
Community Culture
General. Edmonds is one of the oldest settlements in the southwest county area. It lies within
territory once attributed to the Snohomish, Suquamish and Snoqualmie tribes, all of whom spoke
Coast Salish languages. Native Americans made occasional use of the beach areas and lLater
explorations were made by both British and Americans. Certain geographical areas and sites within
Edmonds have special significance because of historical, archeological, architectural, recreational,
social, cultural and scenic importance. Contemporary Edmonds has a reputation as an arts community
with strong local organizations supporting visual, performing and literary arts.
The citizens of Edmonds recognize the historic significance of culture, environment, arts, beauty, and
recreation in our geographic area. A number of professional, non-profit, and volunteer organizations
exist to ensure that these combined elements remain a vital part of the community’s heritage and
quality of life.
Cultural facilities in the City of Edmonds can be divided into two three categories:
• Those funded, supported and maintained by private groups and organizations such as Wade
James Theatrethe Edmonds Theater, the Phoenix Theatre, and the various art galleries and
art-related businesses in town;, and
• Facilities operated and maintained in public/private partnership such as the Historical
Museum, the Wade James Theatre, and ArtWorks at Old Public Works; and,
Public facilities such as Sno-Isle Regional Library, the Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA), the
Historical Museum, and the Frances Anderson Community Cultural Center, etc.
•
Outdoor public gathering spaces include:
• Specific parks and sites such as the Hazel Miller Plaza, Edmonds Library Plaza, Frances
Anderson Center amphitheater and the City Park Pavilion, and
• Corridors such as the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor.
Outdoor gathering spaces provide venues for performing, visual and literary events and opportunities
for inclusion of public art. The 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor Plan (2009) was developed to enhance
Edmonds’ reputation as a cultural destination and stimulate economic activity in the downtown
through redevelopment of the public right of way to encourage pedestrian flow between the Edmonds
Center for the Arts and downtown retail. The plan includes art elements in a curbless roadway design
as well as incorporation of public art and interpretive elements highlighting local history along the
corridor.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 390 of 680
Because of community emphasis on both the performing and visual arts, community housing for such
events becomes increasingly important to the citizens of Edmonds. The City has completed a a
current Community Cultural Plan (2014), adopted by reference as a part of the Comprehensive Plan,
which provides the vision, goals and implementation strategies for the cultural development of the
community. The Community Cultural Plan points to incorporation of public art and quality design to
increase public use and enjoyment of public facilities, spaces, and gateways to the community.
Goal - Historical
Historic preservation is an important facet of community culture. The City has an inventory of
various historic buildings and sites. The Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) has been
established to promote historic preservation in the community and encourage owners of historically
significant properties to voluntarily add them to the Edmonds Register of Historic Places. The HPC
partners with other arts and historical organizations, such as the Edmonds South Snohomish County
Historical Society and Museum, in pursuing its mission.
The Community Culture component of the Comprehensive Plan has five goals emphasizing historic,
recreational, social, cultural facilities, and scenic values. Each goal is listed below and followed by
specific policies.
Community Culture Goal A.. Encourage the identification, maintenance and preservation of
historical sites in accordance with the following policies:
A.1 The City should cContinue to support an historic preservation program to identify
and preserve the city’s historic architectural, archeological and cultural resources
for future generations to study and enjoy.
A.2 The City should wWork with other public agencies and the local historical society
to determine priorities and incentives for identifying and preserving historic sites.
Incentives encouraging the adaptive use of historic buildings should be integrated
into City codes and development standards.
A.3 The City should cContinue to maintain and expand its inventory of historic sites.
A.4 Use a variety of means to Written narratives and visual aids should be made
available for sites listed on the City’s register of historic places to promote public
awareness and recognition of the value of these historic resources, especially those
listed on the City’s Register of Historic Places. Look for opportunities to partner
with other historical, cultural, or arts organizations to jointly promote the City’s
historic and cultural resources. This should also include providing markers and
maps for identifying and promoting these sites as visual and cultural assets within
the community.
A.5 Additions or alterations to significant architectural buildings should conform to the
style and period of the initial construction as much as possible. Development of
adjacent properties should be encouraged to be sympathetic to listed historic sites
by acknowledging and including historic forms, materials, and architectural details
in their design.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 391 of 680
A.6 Conversion/Adaptive Reuse. Part of the direction of the updated plans and
regulations for the Downtown Waterfront area is to provide more flexible standards
that can help businesses move into older buildings and adapt old homes to
commercial or mixed use spaces. An example is the ability of buildings on the
Edmonds Register of Historic Places to get an exception for parking for projects
that retain the historic character of the site. Encourage the adoption of Further
incentives and flexible standards to promote the adaptive use and restoration of
historic properties should be pursued.
A.7 The report and recommendations included in ‘A Historic Survey of Downtown
Edmonds’ by BOLA Architecture (February 2005) shall be studied and used as the
basis for development of a Historical Preservation Plan to be included in a future
Comprehensive Plan updateMaintain a HPC strategic plan to help guide the
priorities and activities of the Commission.
Community Culture Goal B. Goal - Encourage Rrecreational opportunities.
B.1 Encourage public access to significant recreational areas and development of
pedestrian friendly connections between areas..
B.2 Significant recreational areas would include, but not be limited to: Puget Sound
Shorelines, Lake Ballinger, Edmonds Marsh, Yost Park, University Properties,
Lund's Gulch, etc.
B.3 Compatible land uses should be made of surrounding areas.
B.4 Promote public awareness and recognition of the value of these resources.
Community Culture Goal C. Goal - Social. Identify and maintain significant public and private
social areas in accordance with the following policies:.
C.1 Compatible land uses should be made of surrounding lands including potential for
incorporation of public art elements.
C.2 Pursue public and private funding for such social areas such as: Senior Center,
Frances Anderson Center, Edmonds Center for the Arts, Edmonds Museum, Wade
James Theatre, Maplewood Rock and Gem Club House, and public plazas.
Community Culture Goal D. Goal - Cultural. Identify, maintain and develop cultural facilities –
both public and private – in a wide variety of the areas, of including drama, dance, music, visual arts,
literary arts, theaters, museums, and library.etc. in accordance with the following policies:
D.1 Encourage compatible land uses surrounding cultural sites including potential for
incorporation of public art elements.
D.2 Pursue funding for public purposes and partner with private non-profit
organizations funding to develop and operate such cultural facilities.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 392 of 680
D.3 Cultural sites would include, but not be limited to: the Wade James Theatreer, the
Edmonds Center for the Arts, Frances Anderson Center and amphitheater,
Museum, Edmonds TheatreTheater, Masonic Hall, Old Public Works, and Sno-Isle
Library.etc.
Community Culture Goal E. Goal - Scenic. Identify, maintain and enhance scenic areas throughout
the city in accordance with the following policies:.
E.1 Identify and inventory scenic areas and features within the city which contribute to
the overall enjoyment of the environment for both residents and visitors.
E.2 Incorporate scenic and aesthetic design features, such as public art, into the
development of public projects.
E.3 Preserve scenic features whenever possible in the development of public projects.
E.4 Use environmental and urban design review of development projects to avoid or
mitigate impacts to identified scenic features.
Urban Design: General Objectives
General. The man-made environment is an expression of human culture and reflects, in physical
form, the social values of the members of the community.
The manner in which the man-made elements are incorporated integrated into the natural
environment helps creates the community’s special characteristics which identify a community and
contribute to the quality of life in that communityEdmonds.
The beauty and variety of the natural surroundings in Edmonds and the historical development of the
City have combined to create an interesting and visually attractive community. Views, especially
views from public corridors and public places, are an important community asset.
However, unsightly development – of poor quality and or design – does exist in the City. and may
occur in the future. Aging buildings in some parts of the City, primarily downtown, can also create
an aesthetic problem if they are not maintained. Retaining Removal or poor restoration of
olderhistoric buildings can alters positively reinforce the character of an area such as the downtown
area. The historical and typical strip type of development along Highway 99 has often resulted in
economic and aesthetic underdevelopment of private properties that end up being aesthetically
displeasing.
Although utility wires are placed underground where new development takes place, overhead wires
still exist in most of the older parts of the City where they interfere with views and create visual
blight.
Commercial signs contribute to the color and variety of community life as well as providing an
important function but they may also create discordant and unsightly conditions where they are of
excessive or of poor design.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 393 of 680
Street landscaping has been utilized in the past on a limited basis. However, in many areas, parking
lots, access roads, streets and buildings are poorlycan be better integrated with the landscape.
Design Goals and Objectives. The general design objectives provided with this goal are intended to
provide general guidance, while the subsequent design objectives (Goals B, C and D) for specific
locations or situations are intended to supplement the general objectives and add more guidance for
those specific situations.
DGeneral Design Objectives for Site DesignGoal A. Design goals and objectives are a intended to
provide a set of tools for city staff, the ADB, City Council, and the Hearing Examiner the City to use
to direct guide future development in the city to result in high quality, well-designed, and sensitive
projects that reflect the values of the citizens of Edmonds. The goals and related objectives contained
in this section are intended to:
• improve the physical appearance and character of Edmonds,
• improve retail and pedestrian circulation options,
• improve business opportunities,
• protect natural environments using sustainable design practices,
• protect and enhance the single-family residential character of Edmonds.
The development of parking lots, pedestrian walkways and landscaping features is
an integral part of how a building interacts with its site and its surrounding
environment. Design Objectives for Site Design. The development of parking lots,
pedestrian walkways and landscaping features is an integral part of how a building
interacts with its site and its surrounding environment. Good design and site planning
improves access by pedestrians, bicycles and automobiles, minimizes potential negative
impacts to adjacent development, reinforces the character and activities within a district
and builds a more cohesive and coherent physical environment.
A.1 Design Objectives for Vehicular Access. Reduce the numbers and width of
driveways (curb cuts) in order to improve pedestrian, bicycle and auto safety.
A.2 Reduce the numbers of driveways (curb cuts) in order to improve pedestrian,
bicycle and auto safety by reducing the number of potential points of conflict.
Provide safe routes for disabled people.
Improve streetscape character to enhance pedestrian activity in retail/multi-family/
commercial areas.
Design Objectives for Location And Layout of Parking. Locating buildings in proximity
to the street to facilitate direct pedestrian access and help define the street edge.
Parking should be placed to the side and rear.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 394 of 680
A.3 Create adequate parking for each development, but keep the cars from dominating
the streetscape.
Improve pedestrian access from the street by locating buildings closer to the street and
defining the street edge.
Improve the project’s visibility from the street by placing parking to side and rear.
Provide direct pedestrian access from street, sidewalk, and parking.
Integrate pedestrian and vehicular access between adjacent developments.
Design Objectives for Pedestrian Connections On- and Offsite. Design site access and
circulation within and between sites to encourage linkages for pedestrians,
vehicles, and bicycles. Special attention should be paid to providing and improving
connections to transit.
A.4 Design the site access and circulation routes with pedestrians’ comfort and ease of
access in mind.
Create parking lots and building service ways that are efficient and safe for both
automobiles and pedestrians.
Provide direct and safe access along, through and to driveways and adjacent
developments or city streets.
Encourage the use of mass transit by providing easy access to pleasant waiting areas.
Design Objectives for Garage Entry/Door Location.
Ensure pedestrian safety by allowing cars the space to pull out of a garage without
blocking the sidewalk.
Improve pedestrian safety by reducing points of conflict/curb cuts.
Reduce harsh visual impacts of multiple and/or large garage entries/ doors and access
driveways. Reduce the quantity of entries/doors visible to the street.
Design Objectives for Building Entry Location. Building entries should be configured to
provide clear entry points to buildings, be oriented to pedestrian
walkways/pathways, and support the overall intent of the streetscape environment.
Space at the entry for gathering or seating is desirable for residential or mixed use
buildings.
A.5 Create an active, safe and lively street-edge.
Create a pedestrian friendly environment.
Provide outdoor active spaces at entry to retail/commercial uses.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 395 of 680
Provide semi-public/private seating area at multi-family and commercial entries to
increase activity along the street.
Design Objectives for Setbacks. Create and maintain the landscape and site
characteristics of each neighborhood area and provide a common street frontage
tieing each site to its neighbor. Setbacks should be appropriate to the desired
streetscape, providing for transition areas between public streets and private
building entries where a variety of activities and amenities can occur.
A.6 To create and maintain the landscape and site characteristics of each neighborhood
area.
To create a common street frontage view with enough repetition to tie each site to its
neighbor.
To provide enough space for wide, comfortable and safe pedestrian routes to encourage
travel by foot.
To encourage transition areas between public streets and private building entries where a
variety of activities and amenities can occur.
Design Objectives for Open Space. For residential settings, create green spaces to
enhance the visual attributes of the development and provide places for interaction,
play, seating, and other activities.
A.7 To create green spaces to enhance the visual attributes of the development and
encourage outdoor interaction.
To provide places for residents and visitors to meet and to interact.
To provide an area for play, seating and other residential activities.
Design Objectives for Building/Site Identity. Improve pedestrian access and way-finding
by providing variety in building forms, colors, materials and individuality of
buildings.
A.8 Do not use repetitive, monotonous building forms and massing in large multi-
family or commercial projects.
Improve pedestrian access and way-finding by providing variety in building forms, color,
materials and individuality of buildings.
Retain a connection with the scale and character of the City of Edmonds through the use
of similar materials, proportions, forms, masses or building elements.
Encourage new construction to use design elements tied to historic forms or patterns
found in the city.
Design Objectives for Weather Protection. Provide covered walkways and entries for
pedestrian weather protection.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 396 of 680
A.9 Provide a covered walkway for pedestrians traveling along public sidewalks in
downtown.
Protect shoppers and residents from rain or snow.
Provide a covered waiting area and walkway for pedestrians entering a building, coming
from parking spaces and the public sidewalk in all areas of the City.
Design Objectives for Lighting. Provide adequate and appropriate illumination in all
areas used by automobiles, bicycles and pedestrians – including building entries,
walkways, parking areas, circulation areas and other open spaces – to support
activity and security.
A.10 Provide adequate illumination in all areas used by automobiles, bicycles and
pedestrians, including building entries, walkways, parking areas, circulation areas
and other open spaces to ensure a feeling of security.
Minimize potential for light to reflect or spill off-site.
Create a sense of welcome and activity.
Provide adequate lighting for signage panels.
Design Objectives for Signage. Encourage signage that provides clear information and
direction for properties and businesses while preventing the streetscape from
becoming cluttered. Encourage the use of graphics and symbols in signage to
support the city’s emphasis on uniqueness and the arts.
A.11 Protect the streetscape from becoming cluttered.
Minimize distraction from the overuse of advertisement elements.
Provide clear signage for each distinct property.
Use graphics/symbols to reduce the need to have large letters.
Minimize potential for view blockage.
Signs should be related to the circulation element serving the establishment.
Landscaping should be used in conjunction with pole signs for safety as well as
appearance.
Where multiple businesses operate from a central location, tenants should be encouraged
to coordinate signing to avoid the proliferation of signs, each competing with the
others.
Design Objectives for Site Utilities, Storage, Trash and Mechanical Systems. Minimize
the noise, odor and visual impacts of utility systems using such features as
landscaping, building forms, or integrated design.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 397 of 680
A.12 Hide unsightly utility boxes, outdoor storage of equipment, supplies, garbage,
recycling and composting.
Minimize noise and odor.
Minimize visual intrusion.
Minimize need for access/paving to utility areas
Design Objectives for SignificantIntegrating Site Features. Integrate natural landscape
features and unique landforms – such as rocky outcroppings or significant trees –
into site design whenever possible.
A.13 Retain significant landscape features and unique landforms such as rock
outcroppings and significant trees.
Limit potential future negative environmental impacts such as erosion, runoff, landslides,
and removal of vegetation and/or habitats.
Buffer incompatible uses.
Integrate buildings into their site by stepping the mass of the building along steep sloping
sites.
Design Objectives for Landscape Buffers. Use landscaping and/or other features such as
fences to maintain privacy and create a visual barrier between incompatible uses.
These buffering techniques should also be used to soften hard edges (such as the
perimeters of parking lots) and reinforce pedestrian ways and circulation routes.
Native plants and rain gardens should be promoted as alternatives to lawns and
runoff retention areas.
Create a visual barrier between different uses.
Maintain privacy of single family residential areas.
Reduce harsh visual impact of parking lots and cars.
Landscape buffers should reinforce pedestrian circulation routes.
Landscape buffers should not be designed or located in a manner that creates an unsafe pedestrian
environment.
Minimize heat gain from paved surfaces.
Provide treatment of runoff from parking lots.
Design Objectives for Building Form.
Building height and modulation guidelines are essential to create diversity in building
forms, minimize shadows cast by taller buildings upon the pedestrian areas and to ensure
compliance with policies in the city’s Comprehensive Plan. Protecting views from public
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 398 of 680
parks and building entries as well as street views to the mountains and Puget Sound are
an important part of Edmonds character and urban form.
A.14 Design Objectives for HeightBuilding Form. Encourage new construction to avoid
repetitive, monotonous building forms.
A.15 Preserve views to mountains and Puget Sound to the west.
Maintain the smaller scale and character of historic Edmonds.
Minimize blockage of light and air to adjacent properties or to the sidewalk area.
Maintain/protect view from public places and streets.
Design Objectives for Massing. Reduce the apparent bulk and mass of buildings by
encouraging human scale elements in building design and/or by subdividing
building masses vertically or horizontally.
A.16 Encourage human scale elements in building design.
Reduce bulk and mass of buildings.
Masses may be subdivided vertically or horizontally.
Explore flexible site calculations to eliminate building masses that have one story on one
elevation and four or greater stories on another.
Design Objectives for Roof Modulation. Use roof forms to help identify different
programs or functional areas within the building and support differentiation of
building form and massing. Roof design, in combination with wall modulation, can
allow for additional light to enter buildings or pedestrian spaces.
A.17 To break up the overall massing of the roof.
Create human scale in the building.
Use roof forms to identify different programs or functional areas within the building.
Provide ways for additional light to enter the building.
Design Objectives for Wall Modulation. Variation in materials, decorative elements, or
other features should be employed to support pedestrian scale environments and
streetscapes, or to help break up large building masses to keep in scale with the
surrounding environment.
To let more light and air into the building.
Break up large building mass and scale of a facade.
To avoid stark and imposing building facades.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 399 of 680
To create a pedestrian scale appropriate to Edmonds.
To become compatible with the surrounding built environment.
DDesign Objectives for Building Façade.
Building facade objectives ensure that the exterior of a building – the portion of a
building that defines the character and visual appearance of a place – is of high quality
and demonstrates the strong sense of place and integrity valued by the residents of the
City of Edmonds.
A.18 Design Objectives for Building Façade Design. Encourage building façades that
reinforce the appearance and consistency of streetscape patterns while supporting
diversity and identity in building design.
A.19 Ensure diversity in design.
Reinforce the existing building patterns found in Edmonds.
Improve visual and physical character and quality of Edmonds.
Improve pedestrian environment in retail/commercial areas.
Create individual identity of buildings.
Design Objectives for Window Variety Andand Articulation. Use window size and
placement to help define the scale and character of the building. Use the
organization and combinations of window types to reinforce the streetscape
character or to provide variation in a façade, as well as provide light and air to the
building interior.
A.20 Windows help define the scale and character of the building. The organization and
combinations of window types provide variation in a facade as well as provide
light and air to the interior. Small windows are more typically utilitarian in
function, such as bathroom or stairway windows, etc. and can be grouped to
provide more articulation in the facade.
Design Objectives for Variation in Facade Materials. Employ variation in materials,
colors or design elements on building façades to help define the scale and style of
the structure. Variation in façade materials can help reduce the apparent bulk of
larger buildings while allowing variety and individuality of building design.
Urban Design Goals and Objectives for Specific Areas. In addition to the general design goal and
objectives described above under Goal A, supplemental design objectives are outlined below for
specific areas or districts within the city. (note that design objectives for the Downtown Waterfront
Activity Center are contained in the portion of the Land Use Element dealing specifically with that
area).
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 400 of 680
Urban Design Goal B: Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center. Design objectives and standards
should be carefully crafted for the Downtown/Waterfront Activity Center to encourage its unique
design character and important place-making status within the city.
B.1 Vehicular Access and Parking. Driveways and curb cuts should be minimized to
assure a consistent and safe streetscape for pedestrians. When alleys are present,
these should be the preferred method of providing vehicular access to a property
and should be used unless there is no reasonable alternative available.
Configuration of parking should support a “park and walk” policy that provides
adequate parking while minimizing impacts on the pedestrian streetscape.
B.2 Pedestrian Access and Connections. Improve pedestrian
access from the street by locating buildings close to the
street and sidewalks, and defining the street edge. Cross
walks at key intersections should be accentuated by the
use of special materials, signage or paving treatments.
Transit access and waiting areas should be provided where
appropriate.
B.3 Building Entry Location. Commercial building entries
should be easily recognizable and oriented to the
pedestrian streetscape by being located at sidewalk grade.
B.4 Building Setbacks. Create a common street frontage view with enough repetition to
tie each site to its neighbor. Encourage the creation of public spaces to enhance the
visual attributes of the development and
encourage outdoor interaction. In the Waterfront
area west of the railroad, buildings should be set
back from the waterfront to preserve and
provide a buffer from existing beach areas. In
the Waterfront area, site layout should be
coordinated with existing buildings and
proposed improvements to provide views of the
water, open spaces, and easy pedestrian access
to the beach.
B.5 Building/Site Identity. In the downtown area, retain a connection with the scale and
character of downtown through the use of similar materials, proportions, forms,
masses or building elements. Encourage new construction to use design elements
tied to historic forms or patterns.
B.6 Weather Protection. Provide a covered
walkway for pedestrians traveling along
public sidewalks or walkways.
B.7 Signage. Lighting of signs should be
indirect or minimally backlit to display
lettering and symbols or graphic design instead of
broadly lighting the face of the sign. Signage using
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 401 of 680
graphics or symbols or that contributes to the historic character of a building
should be encouraged.
B.8 Art and Public Spaces. Public art and amenities such as mini parks, flower baskets,
street furniture, etc., should be provided as a normal part of the public streetscape.
Whenever possible, these elements should be continued in the portion of the
private streetscape that adjoins the public streetscape. In the 4th Avenue Arts
Corridor, art should be a common element of building design, with greater design
flexibility provided when art is made a central feature of the design.
B.9 Building Height. Create and preserve a human scale for downtown buildings.
Building frontages along downtown streetscapes should be pedestrian in scale.
B.10 Massing. Large building masses should be subdivided or softened using design
elements that emphasize the human scale of the streetscape. Building façades
should respect and echo historic patterns along downtown pedestrian streets.
B.11 Building Façade. Provide a human scale streetscape, breaking up long façades into
defined forms that continue a pattern of individual and distinct tenant spaces in
commercial and mixed use areas. Avoid blank, monotonous and imposing building
facades using design elements that add detail and emphasize the different levels of
the building (e.g. the top or cornice vs. the pedestrian level or
building base).
B.12 Window Variety and Articulation. In the downtown retail and
mixed commercial districts, building storefronts should be
dominated by clear, transparent glass windows that allow and
encourage pedestrians to walk past and look into the
commercial space. Decorative trim and surrounds should be
encouraged to add interest and variety. Upper floors of
buildings should use windows as part of the overall design to
encourage rhythm and accents in the façade.
Urban Design Goal C: Highway 99 Corridor. Additional Design Objectives for the Highway 99
Corridor should support its function as a locus of commercial and potential mixed use activity,
building on the availability of multiple forms of transportation and its proximate location to
surrounding neighborhoods.
C.1
A.5. Highway 99
General Appearance and Identity: . Design of buildings and spaces along Highway 99
should encourage a feeling of identity associated with different sections of the
highway.
C.2 Site Design. Site design should allow for vechicular access and parking as well as
safe access and circulation for pedestrians. Whenever possible, sites should provide
connections between adjacent businesses and between businesses and nearby
residential neighborhoods.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 402 of 680
C.3 Landscaping and Buffering. Landscaping, fencing or other appropriate techniques
should be used to soften the street front of sites and also used to buffer more
intensive uses from adjoining less intensive use areas (e.g. buffer commercial from
residential development).
Urban Design Goal D: Neighborhood Commercial Areas. Design in neighborhood commercial
areas should seek to support the function of the neighborhood center while paying close attention to
its place within the neighborhood setting.
A.5.a. D.1 Creation of new identity. Development of high intensity nodes.
Better identification of businesses by numbering. Encouragement of
planned business centers and design coordination among neighbors.
Building forms compatible with adjacent uses. Parking areas more clearly
defined to eliminate confusion of driveways, street and parking areas.
Unsightly uses and storage screened by landscaping and fencing.
Signs: Less conflict and confusion among signs. Visible from a distance at
speeds of 35-45 mph. Pole signs no higher than 20' maximum height.
Design approval of signing as a condition of approval for highrise
buildings in "nodes".
A.5.b. Lighting: Oriented away from thoroughfare and residential areas.
A.5.c. Landscaping: Use of landscaping berms in and around parking areas and
setbacks to provide a visual screen.
Neighborhood Shopping Centers
General AppearanceLandscape and Buffering. Special attention should be paid to
transitions from commercial development to surrounding residential areas, using
landscaping and/or gradations in building scale to provide compatible
development.
Streetscape and Street Trees
General.
Trees are a valuable asset to the community.They help absorb stormwater, provide habitat for wildlife,
clean pollution from the air, and give both summer shade and aesthetic pleasure. Trees on public property
and within the right-of-way are a common feature of urban design.
“Streetscape” is a term that refers to the street environment, often including pedestrian features,
landscaping, lighting, pavement materials, and signage. The streetscape plays an important role in the
livability and character of Edmonds. Public streets, with their associated walkways and pedestrian spaces,
provide the places for people to interact with their neighbors, accommodate public events and commerce,
promote human needs for enjoyment and exercise including arts and aesthetics, and can improve the
ecological function of the city. When designed properly, the streetscape complements the urban design
elements incorporated into the development of private property.
A Streetscape Plan was developed in 2002 by the Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Department
and updated in 2006. It focused on the public realm along streets, certain areas of the City such as the 4th
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 403 of 680
Avenue Arts Corridor, Highway 99 International area, and downtown. The Streetscape Plan included a
Street Tree Plan as an appendix. The Street Tree Plan has since been updated to reflect lessons learned
about preferred tree species in certain locations. The Street Tree Plan provides guidance to the City in
selecting and maintaining street trees in specific areas.
In 2011, the City adopted a ‘Complete Streets’ program that prioritizes accommodating the needs of all
users – including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit and individual vehicles – in transportation projects. The
intent is to create safe environments for people of all ages and abilities while improving transportation
options and connections between the City’s destinations and centers of activity. A complete streets
approach can improve the ability of residents and visitors to experience the City in a variety of ways
while improving environmental quality, enhancing economic activity, and promoting healthy lifestyle.
Where feasible, street trees or other landscaping located between the travel lane and the sidewalk can
improve the pedestrian experience.
This section has a key goal and several policies specifically related to streetscape and street trees within
the public right of way.
Goals and Policies
Streetscape and Street Trees Goal A. Enhance the public realm through streetscape and street tree
choices.
A.1. Encourage improvements to streets that link parks, open spaces, recreation
centers, employment centers, and transportation nodes.
A.2. Balance the need for short-term parking for shoppers and loading for businesses
with the need for pedestrian-oriented design, especially downtown.
A.3. As opportunities arise, provide for sustainable streetscapes that can enhance the
natural environment, help ensure safety, and complement the characteristics of
the neighborhood or district in which they are located.
A.4. Promote the planting and maintenence of landscaping and street trees to enhance
City gateways and connections; strengthen the character and identify of
downtown and other retail/commercial centers; and improve the pedestrian
environment.
A.5. Seek to maintain and retain existing healthy trees in the rights-of-way without
sacrificing public safety or public infrastructure or allowing a hazard or nuisance.
A.6. Selecting and managing trees for planting in the public rights-of-way should be
based on a variety of factors, such as aesthetics, view corridors, safety,
maintenence, size, spacing, longevity, location, utilities, and adaptability within
to the regional environment.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 404 of 680
Implementation Actions
Implementation actions are steps that are intended to be taken within a specified timeframe to
address high priority Streetscape and Street Tree goals. The actions identified here are
specifically called out as being important, but are not intended to be the only actions or measures
that may be used by the City.
Action 1: Develop an update to the Street Tree Plan by the end of 2016.
Action 2: Develop an Urban Forest Management Plan by the end of 2017.
Signs: Use sign concept from downtown.
Lighting: Oriented away from residential areas. Designed for safety rather than advertisement of
uses.
Landscaping: Buffer from street, provide transition from commercial areas to residential areas.
Waterfront Building Design
Buildings should be set back from the waterfront to preserve existing beach areas and provide a
buffer area.
Buildings should be oriented to pedestrians by providing visible activity at the first floor level, using
awnings, windows, etc. Retail uses are encouraged in first floor spaces.
Covered parking areas shall screen cars parked inside them from public rights-of-way.
Waterfront Site Design
The site layout should be coordinated with existing buildings and proposed improvements to provide
views of the water, open spaces, and easy pedestrian access to the beach.
The site design should provide adequate separation of vehicles and pedestrians to avoid conflicts.
On-site parking spaces and paved surfaces should be kept to a minimum. Joint use parking
arrangements and in-lieu parking payments are encouraged. Only the absolute minimum number of
parking spaces to accommodate the use(s) should be permitted on-site.
Waterfront Landscaping
Landscaping should be used to soften edges of buildings and parking areas.
Plant species should be selected to endure salt spray, wind, and soil conditions.
Landscaping should not obscure waterfront views.
Landscaping should be used to separate pedestrians and vehicles.
Street Landscaping
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 405 of 680
The City should establish a program to place utility wires underground in areas of the City where
scenic vistas will be enhanced or the general environment will be improved. Encourage LID's and
arterial conversions.
The areas of the City which are most suitable for street landscaping should be identified and a
program developed to carry out a public landscaping plan.
Street lighting should be designed to provide comfort, security and aesthetic beauty. [Ord. 2527,
1985.]
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 406 of 680
Utilities Element
Water
The City of Edmonds has for many years acquired all of its potable water under a long-term
wholesale purchase agreement with the Alderwood Water and Wastewater District. The District, in
turn, purchases its water from the City of Everett’s regional water system. Everett’s water source is
the upper Sultan River and the water from that basin is collected in Spada Lake, approximately 30
miles east of downtown Everett. It flows from there to Chaplain Reservoir where it is treated and
placed into one of four large transmission main lines that move it westward to the urbanized areas of
Snohomish County. The City of Edmonds distributes this water on a retail basis to local customers
and bills them for this service. Edmonds provides for operation, maintenance, capital improvements,
and replacement of the “end-user” system that provides storage to cover peak usage periods and that
further provides required fire protection volumes, and maintains the required the minimum and
maximum allowable pressures.
Goals, policies, and design criteria for operating the water system are developed as part of the City’s
Comprehensive Water System Plan (2010). The Water System Plan has detailed information that
helps establish priorities for the utility’s operation and maintenance budgets as well as its six-year and
20-year Capital Improvement Plans.
Edmonds’ current Utility system rate structure was designed to fund a long-range program of
replacing the community’s aging network of water mains and sewer mains from current rate revenues
rather than debt financing. The first three years of this program were approved by City Council on
November 19th, 2013 with the first rate increase taking place on 1/1/2014, the second one on 1/1/2015
and the third annual adjustment is set for 1/1/2016. The financial results for this program will be
reviewed during budget discussions in 2016 and a decision will be made regarding continuance of the
program and the rate structure necessary to support it.
Water System Goals and Policies
Goals, policies, and design criteria for the City’s water utility are found in Chapter 5, Policies and
Design Criteria, of the 2010 Water System Plan under the following sections: water service, water
supply, and facility policies and design criteria. The City’s financial policies are described in Chapter
10 of the same Water System Plan and include a recommended utility rate structure and an asset
management-based replacement program designed to provide adequate on-going revenues to fully
fund operations, maintenance, debt service and the recommended Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
Sanitary Sewer
The City provides sanitary sewer service to area customers. Its operations include a wastewater
treatment plant. The system is described in the City’s Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan of 2013.
The Plan evaluates existing and future capacity, material types of the various pieces of infrastructure,
pipe inspection assessments of the sewer system, anticipated future wastewater flow rates, and the
structural condition of the sewer collection system. Future wastewater flow rates are estimated from
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 407 of 680
existing flow data using population growth projected within the sewer service area. This growth rate
is expected to continue to be modest at an average of 0.5 percent% per year.
An implementation plan is provided as part of the adopted Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan. This
includes an estimated timeline for constructing selected projects that are in need of maintenance or
upsizing. The financial analysis includes asset management of the system along with a utility rate
structure to support the policies and goals set forth in the Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan.
Similar to the Water Utility, the Sewer Utility includes a program to convert from debt-financing pipe
replacements to one where the program can be funded directly from rate revenues.
Sanitary Sewer System Goals and Policies
The City’s policy for sewer service recognizes its function is not to determine allowable land uses
within its service area but to respond to the capacity and service levels needs necessary to support the
land uses approved in the City’s land use planning processes. Development of the City’s
Comprehensive sewer plan has been guided by policies adopted by the City Council and coordinated
with the sewer plans from adjacent agencies.
The adopted Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan provides guidance to the City for management and
operation of its sewer system and sets the timing for expansions and upgrades to sewer infrastructure
over the next twenty years. The City’s adopted Plan serves as a guide for policy development and
decision making for the City. It also provides other agencies and the public with information
regarding the City’s plans for sewer system extensions within its service area. This approach allows
the City to maintain its goal of providing high quality service to its customers while protecting
environmental quality, primarily the water quality of both Puget Sound and the coastal streams
located in Edmonds.
Chapter 2.5 of the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan (2013) includes specific policies for
managing the system.
Storm and Surface Water Management
The City owns and operates an extensive system of drainage pipes and ditches to convey stormwater
runoff to streams, lakes, and Puget Sound in a manner designed to prevent and minimize damage to
private property, streets, and other infrastructure. A more detailed description of this system is
contained in the adopted Storm & Surface Water Management Comprehensive Plan (2010).
Due to extensive alteration of the natural landscape in most areas of the City, the amount of
stormwater that runs off the land in larger storm events is substantial, and runoff in all storm events
carries a variety of pollutants that wash off of their source areas into receiving waters. The City is
faced with the challenge of conveying stormwater runoff safely and cost-effectively while preventing
or minimizing adverse high flow impacts (erosion, flooding, and sediment deposition), water quality
degradation in lakes and streams receiving runoff, and degradation of aquatic habitat caused by high
flows and water quality degradation.
Local governments manage their stormwater under a permit issued by the state Department of
Ecology that stems from the Federal Clean Water Act. For many cities in Western Washington, such
as Edmonds, the permit is the Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit. This
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 408 of 680
Permit “permits” the City to discharge its collected stormwater into streams, lakes, and Puget Sound
if a series of programs and activities are implemented to help improve water quality. This Pemit has
and will continue to have a significant impact on the workload and operational budget of the Public
Works Department. Approximately 2/3 or more of the total stormwater operational budget is spent on
permit-related compliance programs.
Storm & Surface Water System Goals and Policies
Goal and policies for the system are contained in the Storm & Surface Water Management
Comprehensive Plan (2010). The goals are summarized below.
Storm and Surface Water Management Goal A. Manage the storm and surface water system by
combining preservation of natural systems and engineered solutions to:
• Provide for public safety;
• Minimize property damage;
• Preserve and enhance v critical areas;
• Promote sustainability;
• Comply with applicable local, state, and Federal regulations.
Storm and Surface Water Management Goal B. To preserve, protect, and (where feasible) restore
surface water resources to provide beneficial uses to humans, fish, and wildlife.
Storm and Surface Water Management Goal C. Use public education to increase understanding of
sustainability and other environmental values to help protect surface water resources.
Storm and Surface Water Management Goal D. Provide adequate funding through an equitable
stormwater utility rate structure and outside funding sources to support necessary programs (including
an asset management-based replacement program) that meet goals A, B, and C.
To accomplish these goals, the City developed guiding policies for the flood protection, water quality,
aquatic habitat, and stormwater utility funding program areas. More detailed language for goals and
polices are in the current adopted version of the Storm and Surface Water Comprehensive
Management Plan.
v The enhancement of critical areas typically occurs through the planting of native vegetation, the daylighting of creeks,
restoration of habitat, and/or other methods found to improve the critical area’s functions and values.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 409 of 680
Solid Waste
Solid waste collection and disposal is a sophisticated system that continues to evolve in using the
most efficient and economical methods. Waste prevention and recycling have risen to become an
elemental part of solid waste management planning. Curbside recycling, along with yard and food
waste collection service, has become the norm as everyday activities for most residences, businesses,
and schools. Engagement in these beneficial behaviors conserves resources, reduces litter, saves
energy and contributes to greenhouse gas reduction efforts.
The City is a signatory on the Snohomish County Solid Waste Management Comprehensive Plan and
an active participant on the County’s Solid Waste Advisory Committee. The County Plan provides a
blueprint for which the City is able to provide education and outreach to all sectors in regards to
proper disposal and recycling, and opportunities for collection and proper handling of several
common unwanted materials.
Goals and Policies
Solid Waste Goal A. Continue to support and follow the directives outlined in the Snohomish
County Solid Waste Management Comprehensive Plan, including:
A.1 Work directly with County Solid Waste staff to implement recommendations that
strengthen recycling, organics diversion, waste prevention, and product
strewardship programs.
A.2 Support the County’s initiatives to work with the certified solid waste haulers to
harmonize services and communication formats, and to expand their educational
efforts, especially classroom workshops and presentations in the schools.
Solid Waste Goal B. Strengthen local controls over collection of solid waste in accordance to the
following policies:
B.1 Investigate the requirement for city-wide mandatory garbage collection, combined
with recycling services.
B.2 Update and revise the original Recycling Ordinance to reflect current and alternative
collection methods and service scenarios.
Solid Waste Goal C. Continue to support and provide education and incentives for recycling and
other waste diversion practices:
C.1 Continue a program to provide outreach and education to the community in all
aspects of best solid waste management practices.
C.2 Provide support for the establishment and expansion of public recycling
opportunities, on an ongoing basis, and at all public events.
C.3 Support programs that establish collection and recycling infrastructure for materials
that are toxic, hazardous, hard-to-handle or under-recycled.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 410 of 680
C.4 Establish a policy that can assist in the reuse, recycling, and proper disposal of
construction and demolition debris that is generated by development in the City.
Solid Waste Goal D. Investigate policies and activities that will lead to development of a Zero
Waste Strategy.
D.1 Learn basic concepts as they apply to both waste management planning and
materials management planning.
D.2 Pursue waste prevention and reduction strategies.
D.3 Consider a purchasing policy that would increase the proportion of recycled
products the City purchases.
D.4 Eliminate or reduce use of hazardous materials in City operations.
Other Utilities
New utility systems and technologies are constantly developing or evolving. Rather than being
reactive, the City should seek to plan for these new services as they develop.
Other Utilities Goal A. Provide for public needs while protecting the character of the community
and assuring consistency with other plan goals.
A.1. New technologies should be planned and carefully researched prior to developing
new regulations or reviewing siting proposals.
Other Utilities Goal B. Public and private utility plans should be encouraged that identify long-range
system needs and that are coordinated with the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
B.1. All utility projects should be coordinated to provide opportunities for projects to
address more than one system improvement or maintenance need.
Other Utilities Goal C. Utility structures should be located whenever possible with similar types of
structures to minimize impacts on surrounding neighborhoods.
C.1. When such locations are not available, utility structures should be located or sited
so that they are as unobtrusive as possible and are integrated with the design of
their site and surrounding area.
C.2. Free-standing structures should be discouraged when other siting opportunities are
available.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 411 of 680
Performance Measures
The Comprehensive Plan contains a small number performance measures (no more than one per
element) that can be used to monitor and annually report on the implementation and effectiveness of
the Comprehensive Plan. Performance measures, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, are
specific, meaningful, and easily obtainable items that relate to sustainability and can be reported on an
annual basis. They are intended to help assess progress toward achieving the goals and policy
direction of each major Comprehensive Plan element. {Note: The measure identified below is
specifically called out as matching the above criteria and being important to utilities goals and will be
reported annually, along with performance measures for other Comprehensive Plan elements. It is not
intended to be the only measure that the City may use for utilities purposes.
Performance Measure: Lineal feet of old water, sewer, and stormwater mains replaced or
rehabilitated both annually and Program-to-Date.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 412 of 680
Capital Facilities Element
Capital FacilitiesBackground
General. The Ccapital Ffacilities Eelement identifies the City’s existing and needed capital facilities
to support the delivery of public services to the community and its visitors. It also provides the
related goals and standards for meeting the community’s needs. for capital facilities. Capital facilities
include land and buildings for public purpose. are those facilities support the delivery of public
services to the community, as well as visitors making use of the City’s resources and services. In
addition to serving existing residents, capital facilities are also planned in order to meet the
community’s needs as new development occurs in the future. Because Edmonds is a mature city with
a full complement of facilities and services, most capital facility planning is targeted to maintaining
existing level of service standards and expanding the quality of life of its citizens with new or
expanded facilities.
Level-of-service (LOS)Service standards are described in the transportation, utility and parks
elements. School facility needs and LOS standards are contained in the Capital Facilities Plan for
Edmonds School District No. 15. These LOS service standards are used to assist in developing both
short and long range capital improvements projects. The capital facilities element identifies these
projects and their funding sources for a six-year period. This schedule will be updated on an annual
basis and integrated with the City’s budget process. The element also identifies public facility needs
for the 20-year planning period. Funding sources will vary as specific projects are developed, and will
include a variety of public and private sources. The siting of essential public facilities is a common
concern for jurisdictions within the county, and the City is actively participating incoordinates on the
development of a common siting processsiting of essential public facilities with its neighboring cities
and the county.
Concurrency Management. Introduced in 1990 by the Washington State Legislature with the
enactment of the Growth Management Act, the term “concurrency management” is specifically
required for transportation facilities and is defined as the process that cities use to ensure that no
development or permit is approved by the city unless the necessary capital facilities are in place or
that funding is adequate to complete the required improvements within six years. Concurrency for
transportation systems is tied to established level-of-service standards. The City has also established
an impact fee system for parks in order to provide for growth-related facilities. Other facilities, such
as water and sewer systems, are funded and maintained through utility plans and fee structures, as
well as grant-supported projects.
Inventory. Publicly owned capital facilities in the City are comprised primarily of those owned by
the City of Edmonds. A few of these facilities, while owned by the City, are operated by other
entities. For example, fire stations are currently owned by the City but operated by Fire District 1.
Other facilities are owned by different governmental agencies, such as the Port of Edmonds and the
Edmonds School District.
Following is a map and list of public-owned capitial facilities, as identified in 2015. This inventory
focuses on larger properties and buildings; it does not include transportation or utility facilities, since
these are discussed, repectively, in the Comprehensive Plan’s Transportation Element and in
functional plans referenced in the Comprehensive Plan’s Utilities Element.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 413 of 680
Note: While City-owned parks are included in this Element’s inventory, more specific details about them
can be found in the Parks Recreation and Open Space Plan, which is also adopted as an element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Figure 39: Public Capital Facilities Map
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 414 of 680
Following is a 2015 map of facilities owned by the Edmonds School District (ESD).
Figure 40: School Facilities Map
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 415 of 680
Following is a list of publicly-owned facilities in Edmonds and other nearby areas.
Figure 41: List of Publicly-owned Capital Facilities
Name La
n
d
(
a
c
r
e
s
)
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
(
s
q
.
f
t
)
Ow
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
Name La
n
d
(
a
c
r
e
s
)
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
s
(
s
q
.
f
t
)
Ow
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
Neighborhood Parks Other City Owned Facilities
Elm Street Park 1.85 CoE Log Cabin Visitor Center/Chamber of Commerce 0.03 372 CoE
Frances Anderson Center Field 1.94 CoE City Hall 0.59 34,074 CoE
Haines Wharf 0.69 CoE Edmonds Historical Museum 0.12 2,084 CoE
Hickman Park 5.6 CoE Edmonds Library and Plaza Room 3.03 19,520 CoE
Hummingbird Hill Park 1.22 CoE Fire Station #16 10,700 CoE
Mathay Ballinger Park 0.51 CoE Fire Station #17 9,800 CoE
Pine Street Park 1.47 CoE Fire Station #20 6,400 CoE
Seaview Park 6.05 CoE Fishing Pier Ranger Station 1,200 CoE
Sierra Park 5.52 CoE Fishing Pier Restroom 918 CoE
Subtotal 24.85 - Frances Anderson Center 55,000 CoE
Community Parks Karlsten House 0.22 2,250 CoE
City Park 13.96 CoE "Old" Public Works 3.94 14,100 CoE
Yost Memorial Park 44.14 CoE Sewage Treatment Plant 115,200 CoE
Pool 4,808 CoE Public Safety Complex 2.61 30,940 CoE
Subtotal 58.1 4,808 Public Works Operation and Maintenance Center 4.35 28,000 CoE
Regional Parks Wade James Theatre 2.34 6,289 CoE
144 Railroad Ave Tidelands 0.9 CoE Subtotal 17.23 336,847
Brakett's Landing North 5.11 CoE Edmonds School District Properties in Edmonds
Brakett's Landing South 2.22 CoE Civic Center Playfield 7.92 ESD 15
Edmonds Senior Center 2.63 CoE Boys and Girls Club 6,856 ESD 15
Marina Beach Park 3.37 CoE Stadium 7,140 ESD 15
Olympic Beach Park 2.82 CoE Skate Park 6,000 ESD 15
Subtotal 17.05 - Chase Lake Elementary School 10.26 57,697 ESD 15
Special Use Parks Edmonds Elementary School 8.58 34,726 ESD 15
Centenial Plaza 0.08 CoE Edmonds-Woodway High School 30.19 208,912 ESD 15
Dayton Street Plaza 0.1 CoE Former Woodway High School 39.75 148,740 ESD 15
Edmonds Library & Plaza Room 1.29 CoE Edmonds Homeschool Resource (K-12)
Edmonds Memorial Cemetary and Columbarium 6.63 CoE Schriber Lake High School
Anderson Center Field 1.62 CoE Madrona School (K-8)31.3 85,505 ESD 15
Hazal Miller Plaza 0.09 CoE Maplewood Parent Cooperative (K-8)7.41 76,554 ESD 15
Interurban Trail 4.88 CoE Maplewood Center (K-12)ESD 15
Lake Ballinger Access 0.19 CoE Seaview Elementary 8.28 49,420 ESD 15
Meadowdale Community Clubhouse 0.99 3,232 CoE Sherwood Elementary 13.19 43,284 ESD 15
Richard F. Anway Park 0.17 CoE Westgate Elementary 8.34 44,237 ESD 15
Ocean Avenue Viewpoint 0.2 CoE Woodway Elementary 9.89 37,291 ESD 15
Point Edwards Scenic Overlook (easement)0.1 CoE Subtotal 175.11 769,071
Stamm Overlook Park 0.36 CoE Edmonds School District Properties Near Edmonds
Sunset Ave. Overlook 1.14 CoE Chase Lake Natural Area 10.8 ESD 15
Willow Creek Hatchery and Interpretive Center 1.68 CoE College Place Elementary 9 48,180
Subtotal 19.52 3,232 College Place Middle School 18.7 87,031
Open Space Lynndale Elementary School 10 39,043
Edmonds Marsh/Walkway 23.37 CoE Meadowdale High School 39.56 197,306 ESD 15
Edmonds Marsh East 0.85 CoE Meadowdale Middle School 19.38 102,925 ESD 15
H.O. Hutt Park 4.53 CoE Meadowdale Elementary 8.78 57,111 ESD 15
Haines Tidelands 0.44 CoE Meadowdale Playfields 24.09 ESD 15
Maplewood Hill Park 9.96 CoE Subtotal 140.31 531,596
Meadowdale Natural Area 1.07 CoE Other Publicly Owned Facilities in Edmonds
Olympic View Open Space 0.49 CoE Edmonds Center for the Arts 2.54 PFD
Pine Ridge Park 23.78 CoE Edmonds Conference Center 0.33 11,252 EDCC
Seaview Corridor 1.31 CoE Edmonds Fishing Pier 0.61 WDFW
Shell Creek Open Space 1.04 CoE Edmonds Underwater Park and Higgins Trails 33.21 DNR
Wharf Street 0.12 CoE Olympic View Water District Maintenance Facility 0.83 7,480 OVWD
Willow Creek Park 2.25 CoE Public Utility District #1 0.68 PUD
Subtotal 69.21 - Subtotal 38.2 18,732
Port of Edmonds Properties Other Publicly Owned Facilities Near Edmonds
Marina 8.1 PoE Ballinger Playfield and Former Golf Course 52.59 MLT
Waterfront Businesses 14.22 PoE Esperance County Park 9.59 SnoCo
Harbor Square Business Complex 15.11 PoE Meadowdale Beach County Park 144.34 SnoCo
Subtotal 37.43 - South County Park 118.55 SnoCo
Subtotal 325.07 -
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 416 of 680
Future Needs
Future capital facility needs and projects have been identified for the City in a special section “Capital
Facilities Projects” at the end of this element. The section is divided into three subsections: General,
Transportation, and Stormwater. Within each subsection is a table of capital projects and their
anticipated financing over a six-year period. Each section also contains information on longer-term
capital projects, for which funding may not yet be available. Some of the projects in the latter
category have been considered for an extended period of time and their exact descriptions/costs have
not been recently updated.
The Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan, adopted as an element of the Comprehensive Plan,
includes more information on future capital facility needs for parks, recreation, and open space.
Goals and Policies
This section identifies key goals for the City in managing its capital facilities. Each goal is followed
by a set of numbered policies related to that goal.
Capital Facilities Goal A. Establish level of service (LOS)service standards for all city-provided
services in order to provide public facilities and services that meet citizens’ needs and enhance the
community’s quality of life. according to the following policies:
A.1. Provide capital facility improvements in order to meet or exceed established
level-of-service standards.
A.2. Coordinate and set level-of-service standards that meet the goals and policies of
the comprehensive plan.
A.3. Evaluate and prioritize capital facility projects according to how they achieve
established criteria and the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan.
Examples of typical criteria include the following:
A.3.a. Whether the project is needed to achieve or maintain a LOS service
standard.
A.3.b. Whether the facility will contribute to the elimination of a public hazard
or safety concern.
A.3.c. Whether the facility is financially feasible.
A.3.d. The extent to which the facility will impact annual and long-term
budgets.
A.3.e. Whether the facility is consistent with future facility needs and site
considerations.
A.3.f. The extent to which the facility will impact natural and cultural
resources.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 417 of 680
Capital Facilities Goal B. Goal. Evaluate and coordinate the provision of capital facility
improvements with both annual budgeting and long-term financial planning. consistent with the
following policies:
B.1. Capital budget decisions will be made consistent with the Edmonds comprehensive
plan in accordance with RCW 36.70A.120.
B.2. If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs, the comprehensive plan
shall be re-examined to review how additional funding will be raised, or how land
use assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that established level of service
standards will be met.
B.3. Capital improvements will be planned to achieve fiscal responsibility, maintenance
of existing facilities, and protect the quality of life of the community.
B.4. The City will continue to adopt multi-year budgets and six-year capital
improvement programs as part of its annual budget and planning process.
B.5. Six-year capital improvement programs will be coordinated with long-term (at least
20-year) capital needs
Capital Facilities Goal C. Goal. Seek to use a coordinated array of mechanisms and sources of
revenue to fund needed capital facilities. according to the following policies:
C.1. Make use of the City’s budget and structure of funds to identify adequate funding
sources for capital facilities.
C.2. Seek grants and cooperative funding agreements to supplement internal City
funding of capital facilities that benefit the general public or that are required to
meet needs not generated solely by Edmonds residents.
C.3. Make use of regulatory and incentive programs to assist in achieving LOS service
standards for City services.
Capital Facilities Goal D. Goal. Strategically locate new facilities to complement the delivery of
services and provide for efficient and convenient access.1 by the community consistent with the
following policies:
D.1. The location of new or improved capital facilities should take into account existing
service delivery systems and the location and access of service populations.
D.2. Ensure that the siting of essential public facilities is not precluded by the
implementation of this Comprehensive Plan.
Capital Facilities Goal E. Essential public facilities are necessary to support orderly growth and the
delivery of public services. The City’s goal is to ensure that these facilities are sited in an efficient,
timely manner while acknowledging and mitigating any community impacts created by these
facilities consistent with the following policies.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 418 of 680
E.1. Essential public facilities are those defined by state law, through the City's
planning process or on application of a service provider.
E.2. Sponsors of essential public facilities should be encouraged to consult with the City
prior to choosing a site in order to seek information about potential sites, provide
information concerning project proposals, identify potential community impacts,
and propose possible siting incentives or mitigation measures.
E.3. The City shall assure adequate public notice and participation in the siting of
essential public facilities by reviewing these facilities through a conditional use
process, allowing the identification of community impacts and mitigation
measures. Because the City’s normal notification requirements may not provide for
adequate public notice to the project’s impact area, the project sponsor shall
develop a public participation plan designed to encourage early public involvement
in the siting decision and identification of impacts and mitigation measures.
E.4. The City shall develop decision criteria for the siting of essential public facilities
which allow the sponsor to demonstrate:
E.4.a. the need for the facility,
E.4.b. its consistency with adopted plans and policies,
E.4.c. its location is designed to serve its service population,
E.4.d. its location criteria is compatible with the siting of other essential public
facilities,
E.4.e. the site is physically suitable for the facility, and
E.4.f. the project is able to mitigate community impacts.
E.5. City policies and procedures – including any conditional use process – shall be
interpreted and administered in accordance with the admonition contained in the
Growth Management Act that no development plan or development regulation may
preclude the siting of essential public facilities.
Capital Improvements Program. The tables following this section summarize the six-year capital
improvements program for the city.
Concurrency Management Goal F. Provide a system of concurrency management that will assure
that the facilities needed to support city services are provided in a timely and coordinated manner.
according to the following policies:
F.1. For transportation facilities, assure that the facilities or services needed to meet
level-of-service standards are in place at the time of development, or assure that a
financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within
six years. These facilities or services must be provided by either the City or the
appropriate public or private developer.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 419 of 680
F.2 For park facilities, new growth or development will create additional demand for
park facilities. Fees collected from the “Park Impact Fee” can only be appied to
projects resulting from city-wide development growth and cannot be used to
mitigate existing shortfalls of the parks system.
Performance Measures
For all capital facilities, develop concurrency management systems to
manage the provision of facilities and services in order to achieve and
maintain level-of-service standards.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 420 of 680
The Comprehensive Plan contains a small number performance measures (no more than one per element)
that can be used to monitor and annually report on the implementation and effectiveness of the
Comprehensive Plan. Performance measures, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, are specific,
meaningful, and easily obtainable items that relate to sustainability and can be reported on an annual
basis. They are intended to help assess progress toward achieving the goals and policy direction of each
major Comprehensive Plan element.
The measure identified below is specifically called out as matching the above criteria and being
important to capital facilities goals and will be reported annually, along with performance measures
for other Comprehensive Plan elements. It is not intended to be the only measure that the City may
use for capital facilities purposes.
Performance Measure: Project delivery, based on comparison of expected results from
the approved Capital Facilities Plan to the actual results.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 421 of 680
CITY OF EDMONDS
CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN
2015-2020
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 422 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 423 of 680
CFP
GENERAL
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 424 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 425 of 680
$0 Public Vote
Unknown Conceptual $0 G.O. Bonds
$0
$0 Total $5-$23 M
$0 Community
Unknown Conceptual $0 Partnerships
$0 REET
$0 Total $5 M
$0 Capital Campaign
Unknown Conceptual $0 G.O. Bonds
$0
$0 Total $5 M
$0 Public Vote
RCO Land Acquisitio Conceptual $2,100,000 REET 1 / Grants $1,000,000 $100,000 $1,000,000
$4,000,000 G.O. Bonds $2,000,000 $2,000,000
$6,100,000 Total $3,000,000 $100,000 $3,000,000 Unknown
$0 Library /
Unknown Conceptual $0 City G.O. Bonds
$0
$0 Total Unknown
$0 Capital Campaign
Unknown Conceptual $1,330,000 REET 2 $0 $40,000 $440,000 $400,000 $450,000
$1,000,000 School District $500,000 $500,000
$5,800,000 Foundation $2,500,000 $1,750,000 $1,550,000
$2,750,000 Grants $750,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000
$10,880,000 Total $3,750,000 $40,000 $3,690,000 $400,000 $3,000,000 10-12M
$0 Public Vote
Unknown Conceptual $0 G.O. Bonds
$0
$0 Total $3 - $4M
$0 Public Vote / Grants
Unknown Conceptual $0 G.O. Bonds
$0 Private Partnership
$0 Total $1 - 2M
EIS $0 Federal (Unsecured)
US DOT Completed $0 State Funds
$0 Total Unknown
Unknown Conceptual $0 Grants
$0 Total
Unknown Conceptual $0 Grants
$0 Total $0 $300,000
Total CFP $16,980,000 Annual CFP Totals $6,750,000 $140,000 $6,690,000 $400,000 $3,000,000 $0
Downtown Public Restroom Locate, construct, and maintain a
public restroom downtown.
Parks & Facilities Maintenance & Operations
Building
Edmonds / Sno-Isle Library Expand building for additional
programs (Sno-Isle Capital Facilities
Plan).
Public Market (Downtown Waterfront)Acquire and develop property for a
year round public market.
Community Park / Athletic Complex -
Old Woodway High School
In cooperation with ESD#15 develop
a community park and athletic
complex.
Edmonds Crossing WSDOT Ferry / Mutimodal
Facility
Relocate ferry terminal to Marina
Beach.
Replace / Renovate deteriorating
building in City Park.
Senior Center Grounds Replace and expand deteriorating
building on the waterfront.
Edmonds School District
(City has lease until 2021).
Replace / Renovate
(Currently subleased on Civic
Playfield until 2021).
Boys & Girls Club Building
Civic Playfield Acquisition and/or development
2021-20252020201920182017
Art Center / Art Museum
20162015Revenue Source
(2015-2020)
Total Cost
Current
Project
Phase
Grant
Opportunity PurposeProject Name
Aquatic Facility Meet citizen needs for an Aquatics
Center (Feasibility study complete
August 2009).
Establish a new center for the Art's
Community.
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
2
6
o
f
6
8
0
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
2
7
o
f
6
8
0
PROJECT NAME: Aquatic Facility
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $5,000,000 –
$23,000,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Implement recommendations of the Aquatics Feasibility Study
completed in 2009. Six scenarios were presented and the plan recommended by the
consultants was a year round indoor pool with an outdoor recreational opportunity in the
summer. The project is dependent upon a public vote.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The current Yost Pool, built in 1972, is nearing the end of
its life expectancy. The comprehensive study done in 2009 assessed the needs and wants of
Edmonds citizens in regard to its aquatic future as well as the mechanical condition of the
current pool.
SCHEDULE: 2014-2025
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-2025
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin.
Construction
1% for Art
TOTAL $5m - $23m
* all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 428 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Art Center / Art Museum ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $5,000,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A new Art Center/Museum facility will provide and promote
Cultural / Arts facilities for the City of Edmonds. The need for visual and performing arts
facilities is a high priority stated in the adopted updated Community Cultural Arts Plan 2001
and in the 2008 update process.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The City of Edmonds desires to secure and provide for
public Cultural Arts facilities in the community. The emphasis on the arts as a high priority
creates the need to determine feasibility for and potentially construct new visual arts related
facilities.
SCHEDULE: 2014-2025
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-2025
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin.
Construction
1% for Art
TOTAL $5,000,000
* all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 429 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Boys & Girls Club Building ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $5,000,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Build new Boys & Girls Club facility to accommodate the growing
and changing needs of this important club.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The current Boys & Girls Club was constructed as a field
house by the Edmonds School District decades ago and is in need of major renovation or
replacement. It is inadequate in terms of ADA accessibility and does not meet the needs of a
modern club.
SCHEDULE: 2014-2025
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-2025
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin.
Construction
1% for Art
TOTAL $5,000,000
* all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 430 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Civic Playfield Acquisition
and/or Development
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $6.1M
6th Street N. and Edmonds Street, Edmonds City limits, Snohomish County
8.1 acres / property owned and leased from Edmonds School District until 2021; Community Park/Zoned Public
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Acquire or work with the School District to develop this 8.1 acre
property for continued use as an important community park, sports tourism hub and site of
some of Edmonds largest and most popular special events in downtown Edmonds.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Gain tenure and control in perpetuity over this important
park site for the citizens of Edmonds.
SCHEDULE: 2014-2025
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2019-2025
Acquisition $20,000 $2M
Planning/Study 100,000
Eng. & Admin.
Construction $3M
1% for Art
TOTAL $20,000 $2M $100,000 $3M
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 431 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Edmonds/Sno-Isle Library ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Unknown
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Expand building/parking to accommodate additional library needs
and programs. Library improvements identified in Sno-Isle Libraries Capital Facility Plan:
2007-2025
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improvements will better serve citizens needs requiring
additional space and more sophisticated technology.
SCHEDULE: 2014-2025
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-2025
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin.
Construction
1% for Art
TOTAL Unknown
* all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 432 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Community Park / Athletic
Complex at the Former Woodway High School
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $11,535,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Develop community park and regional athletic complex with lighted
or unlighted fields and recreational amenities in partnership with Edmonds School District,
community colleges, user groups, and other organizations. Development dependent upon
successful regional capital campaign. $10m - $12M project.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The site is currently an underutilized and undermaintained
facility with great potential as community multi-use active park. Site has existing controlled
access, greenbelt, parking and 4-court tennis facility with substandard fields. Highly urbanized
area with 150,000 residents within 5-mile radius. Future maintenance supported by user fees.
SCHEDULE: 2014-2025
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-
2025
Planning/Study $655000 300,000 40000 150,000
Engineering &
Administration
175,000 150,000 175,000
Construction $3,930,000 3,390,000 400,000 2,700,000
1% for Art 125,000
TOTAL $655000 $3,750,000 40000 $3,690,000 $400,000 $3,000,000 $10m
-
$12m
* all or a portion of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 433 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Parks & Facilities
Maintenance & Operations Building
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3-$4 Million
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The 40 year old maintenance building in City Park is reaching the
end of its useful life and is in need of major renovation or replacement.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Parks and Facilities Divisions have long outgrown this
existing facility and need additional work areas and fixed equipment in order to maintain City
parks and Capital facilities for the long term.
SCHEDULE: Contingent on finding additional sources of revenue from general and real
estate taxes.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-2025
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin.
Construction
1% for Art
TOTAL $3m - $4m
* all or part of this Project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 434 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Senior Center grounds ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1-2M
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Rehabilitate grounds, parking, beach access and area around
Senior Center, in conjunction with the construction of a new Senior Center building.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: This facility is at the end of its useful life. The
Edmonds Senior Center, a nonprofit, will be launching a capital campaign to reconstruct the
Senior Center and seek a long term land lease with the City. It is the City’s intent to
rehabilitate the grounds and beach access surrounding the Sr. Ctr when construction
begins.
SCHEDULE: Work with Sr. Center on timing of construction and grounds rehab.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2025
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin.
Construction $2M
1% for Art
TOTAL $2M
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 435 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Crossing
WSDOT Ferry / Multimodal Facility
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Unknown
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Edmonds Crossing is multimodal transportation center that will
provide the capacity to respond to growth while providing improved opportunities for connecting
various forms of travel including rail, ferry, bus, walking and ridesharing.
NOTE: The design of Marina Beach Park is a separate project.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide an efficient point of connection between
existing and planned transportation modes.
SCHEDULE: 2014-2025
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-
2025
Engineering &
Administration
Right of Way
Construction
1% for Art
TOTAL Unknown
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 436 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Public Market (Downtown
Waterfront)
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Unknown
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with community partners to establish a public
market, year around, on the downtown waterfront area.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The project will help to create a community
gathering area, boost economic development, bring tourists to town, and will be a
valuable asset to Edmonds.
SCHEDULE:
This project depends on the ability to secure grant funding, and community partners
willing to work with the city to establish this. This potentially can be accomplished
by 2017.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-2025
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin.
Construction
1% for Art
TOTAL Unknown
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 437 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Downtown Restroom ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $300,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Work with community partners to locate, construct and
maintain a downtown public restroom.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The project satisfies goals in the Strategic Action
Plan and the PROS plan. It is being supported by the Economic Development
Commission and Planning Board. This will help to provide a much needed
downtown amenity, boost economic development, bring tourists to town, and will be
a valuable asset to Edmonds.
SCHEDULE:
This project depends on the ability of funds.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020-2025
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin.
Construction
1% for Art
TOTAL 300,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 438 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 439 of 680
CFP
TRANSPORTATION
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 440 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 441 of 680
Safety / Capacity Analysis
$251,046 (Federal or State secured)$251,046
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Construction $0 (Unsecured)
$43,954 (Local Funds)$43,954
$295,000 Total $295,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$1,115,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$100,000 $163,000 $852,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$1,115,000 Total $100,000 $163,000 $852,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$10,000 (Local Funds)$10,000
$10,000 Total $10,000
$3,588,077 (Federal or State secured)$481,447 $3,106,630
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Possible Grant Design / ROW $0 (Unsecured)
$2,134,510 (Local Funds)$230,140 $1,904,370
$5,722,587 Total $711,587 $5,011,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$4,964,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$500,000 $836,000 $3,628,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$4,964,000 Total $500,000 $836,000 $3,628,000
$5,375,000 (Federal or State secured)$3,431,500 $1,943,500
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Design / ROW $0 (Unsecured)
$518,500 (Local Funds)$518,500
$5,893,500 Total $3,950,000 $1,943,500
$0 (Federal or State secured)
Possible $10,000,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$500,000 $4,500,000 $5,000,000
State Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
Appropriation $0 (Local Funds)
$10,000,000 Total $500,000 $4,500,000 $5,000,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$1,431,000
$0 (Local Funds)
$0 Total $1,431,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$10,211,000
$0 (Local Funds)
$0 Total $10,211,000
Project Name
228th St. SW Corridor Safety
Improvements
Intersection improvements to
decrease intersection delay and
improve level of service.
Install two-way left turn lanes to
improve capacity and install sidewalk
along this stretch to increase
pedestrian safety (50 / 50 split with
Snohomish County; total cost: ~20
Million).
Highway 99 Gateway / Revitalization
2016Funding Source
Project
Phase
Realign highly skewed intersection
to address safety and improve
operations; create new east-west
corridor between SR-99 and I-5.
220th St. SW @ 76th Ave. W
Intersection Improvements
Reconfigure EB lane and add
protected/permissive for the NB and
SB LT to improve the intersection
delay.
84th Ave. W (212th St. SW to 238th
St. SW)
2021-2025
Olympic View Dr. @ 76th Ave. W
Intersection Improvements
212th St SW @ 84th Ave W
(5corners) Intersection Improvements
76th Av. W @ 212th St. SW
Intersection Improvements
Reduce intersection delay by
converting 9th Ave. to (2) lanes for
both the southbound and
northbound movements.
SR 524 (196th St. SW) / 88th Ave W
Intersection Improvements
Main St. and 9th Ave S (Interim
Solution)
2018 2019 2020
Improve safety at the intersection by
converting a stop controlled
intersection for NB and SB to a
signalized intersection.
Grant
Opportunity
(2015-2020)
Total CostPurpose 20172015
Intersection improvements to
decrease intersection delay and
improve level of service (LOS).
Installation of a traffic signal to
reduce the intersection delay and
improve Level of Service (LOS).
Install gateway elements and safety
improvements along SR-99 Corridor.
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
2
o
f
6
8
0
Project Name 2016Funding Source
Project
Phase 2021-2025201820192020
Grant
Opportunity
(2015-2020)
Total CostPurpose 20172015
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$3,722,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$341,000 $686,000 $2,695,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$3,722,000 Total $341,000 $686,000 $2,695,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$5,046,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$484,000 $737,000 $3,825,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$5,046,000 Total $484,000 $737,000 $3,825,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$5,235,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$502,000 $765,000 $3,968,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$5,235,000 Total $502,000 $765,000 $3,968,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$906,000
$0 (Local Funds)
$0 Total $906,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$1,093,000
$0 (Local Funds)
$0 Total $1,093,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$1,093,000
$0 (Local Funds)
$0 Total $1,093,000
Widen 212th St. SW to add a
westbound left turn lane for 200'
storage length and an eastbound left
turn phase for eastbound and
westbound movements.
Convert all-way controlled
intersection into signalized
intersection.
Widen 216th St. SW to add a left
turn lane for eastbound and
westbound lanes.
Walnut St. @ 9th Ave. Intersection
Improvements
Convert all-way controlled
intersection into signalized
intersection.
Olympic View Dr. @ 174th St. SW
Intersection Improvements
Main St. @ 9th Ave. Intersection
Improvements
Hwy. 99 @ 216th St. SW Intersection
Improvement
Hwy 99 @ 212th St SW Intersection
Improvements
Hwy. 99 @ 220th St. SW Intersection
Improvement
Widen 220th St. SW and Hwy 99 to
add a westbound right turn lane (for
325' storage length) and a
soutbound left turn lane (for 275'
storage length).
Install traffic signal to improve the
Level of Service (LOS) and reduce
intersection delay.
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
3
o
f
6
8
0
2021-2025201820192020
Grant
Opportunity
(2015-2020)
Total CostPurpose 201720152016Funding Source
Project
PhaseProject Name
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$1,520,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$125,000 $125,000 $1,270,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$1,520,000 Total $125,000 $125,000 $1,270,000
$392,109 (Federal or State secured)$392,109
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Design $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$392,109 Total $392,109
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$65,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$65,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$65,000 Total $65,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$65,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$65,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$65,000 Total $65,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$82,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$82,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$82,000 Total $82,000
$8,650 (Federal or State secured)$8,650
Possible $1,816,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$1,816,000
RCO / TIB Grant Design $283,000 (Unsecured)$283,000
$1,350 (Local Funds)$1,350
$2,109,000 Total $10,000 $2,099,000
Provide safe sidewalk along short
missing link.
Non-motorized Pedestrian / Bicycle Projects
2nd Ave. S from James St. to Main St.
Walkway
Dayton St. between 7th Ave. S to 8th
Ave. S Walkway
Provide safe sidewalk along short
missing link.
Sunset Ave. Walkway from Bell St. to
Caspers St.
Provide sidewalk on west side of the
street, facing waterfront.
236th St SW from Edmonds Way (SR-
104) to Madrona Elementary
Improve pedestrian safety along
236th St. SW, creating a safe
pedestrian connection between SR-
104 and Madrona Elementary
Provide safe and desirable route to
Seview Elementary and nearby
parks.
80th Ave. W from 188th St. SW to
Olympic View Dr Walkway and sight
distance improvements
Maple St. from 7th Ave. S to 8th Ave.
S Walkway
Provide safe sidewalk along short
missing link.
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
4
o
f
6
8
0
2021-2025201820192020
Grant
Opportunity
(2015-2020)
Total CostPurpose 201720152016Funding Source
Project
PhaseProject Name
$0 (Federal or State secured)
Grant for Design $2,306,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$349,000 $1,957,000
funding currently Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
under review $0 (Local Funds)
$2,306,000 Total $349,000 $1,957,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$189,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$189,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$29,000 (Local Funds)$29,000
$218,000 Total $218,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$325,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$325,000 $760,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$0
$0 (Local Funds)
$325,000 Total $325,000 $760,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$190,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$190,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$190,000 Total $190,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$380,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$380,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$380,000 Total $380,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$3,900,000 (Federal or State unsecured)$1,000,000 $2,900,000
Possible Grant Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$425,000 (Local Funds)$425,000
$4,325,000 Total $1,425,000 $2,900,000
$519,041 (Federal or State secured)$519,041
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Design $0 (Unsecured)
$1,038,893 (Local Funds)$1,038,893
$1,557,934 Total $1,557,934
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$1,249,000
$0 (Local Funds)
$0 Total $1,249,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$189,000
$0 (Local Funds)
$0 Total $189,000
216th St. SW Walkway from Hwy. 99
to 72nd Ave W
Provide sidewalk on north side of
216th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 72nd
Ave W (completing missing link)
Meadowdale Beach Rd. Walkway Provide safe sidewalk along missing
link.
Maplewood Dr. Walkway from Main
St. to 200th St. SW
Provide safe sidewalk, connecting to
ex. sidewalk along 200th St. SW
(Maplewood Elementary School).
Walnut St from 3rd Ave. S to 4th Ave.
S Walkway
Provide short missing link.
Walnut St. from 6th Ave. S to 7th Ave.
S Walkway
Provide short missing link.
189th Pl. SW from 80th Ave. W to
78th Ave. W Walkway
Provide short missing link.
Olympic Ave from Main St to SR-524 /
196th St. SW Walkway
Reconstruct sidewalk (ex.
conditions: rolled curb / unsafe
conditions) along a stretch with high
pedestrian activity and elementary
school.
4th Ave. Corridor Enhancement Create more attractive and safer
corridor along 4th Ave.
238th St. SW from 100th Ave W to
104th Ave W Walkway and
Stormwater Improvements
Provide safe walking route between
minor arterial and collector.
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
5
o
f
6
8
0
2021-2025201820192020
Grant
Opportunity
(2015-2020)
Total CostPurpose 201720152016Funding Source
Project
PhaseProject Name
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$175,000
$0 (Local Funds)
$0 Total $175,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)$1,050,000
$0 (Local Funds)
$0 Total $1,050,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$70,000 (Local Funds)$20,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
$70,000 Total $20,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
$6,000 (Federal or State secured)$6,000
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Construction $0 (Unsecured)
$0 (Local Funds)
$6,000 Total $6,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
$0 (Federal or State unsecured)
Conceptual $0 (Unsecured)
$350,000 (Local Funds)$50,000 $300,000
$350,000 Total $50,000 $300,000
Total CFP $50,759,130 Annual CFP Totals $6,986,630 $7,274,500 $10,000 $6,418,000 $11,942,000 $18,128,000 $18,157,000
Totals Source 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2025
$10,133,923 Total Federal & State (Secured)$5,083,793 $5,050,130 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$40,920,000 Total Federal & State (Unsecured)$0 $0 $0 $6,308,000 $12,669,000 $21,943,000 $760,000
$283,000 Unsecured $0 $0 $0 $283,000 $0 $0 $17,397,000
$4,592,207 Local Funds $1,902,837 $2,224,370 $10,000 $435,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0
Revenue Summary by Year
84th Ave. W between 188th St. SW
and 186th St. SW Walkway
Provide safe walking route between
those (2) local streets.
238th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 76th
Ave. W Walkway
Provide safe walking route between
principal arterial and minor arterial.
Residential Neighborhood Traffic
Calming
To assist residents and City staff in
responding to neighborhood traffic
issues related to speeding, cut-
through traffic and safety.
Trackside Warning System or Quiet
Zone @ Dayton and Main St.
Crossings
Install Trackside Warning System
and Quiet Zone @ Dayton and Main
St. Railroad Crossings in order to
reduce noise level within Downtown
Edmonds.
15th St SW from Edmonds Way to
8th Ave S
Provide safe walking route between
minor arterial and collector.
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
6
o
f
6
8
0
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
7
o
f
6
8
0
PROJECT NAME: 212th St. SW @ 84th Ave.
W (5-Corners) Intersection Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $4,305,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The intersection of 84th Ave and 212th is 5 legged, which also
includes Main Street and Bowdoin Way approaches. The intersection is stop-controlled for all
approaches. A roundabout would be constructed. The project also includes various utility
upgrades and conversion of overhead utilities to underground. (ROADWAY ROJECT
PRIORITY in 2009 Transportation Plan: #6).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The intersection currently functions at LOS F and delays
during the PM peak hour will worsen over time. A roundabout will improve the LOS.
SCHEDULE: Construction documentation will be completed in 2015.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration &
ROW
Construction $295,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $295,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 448 of 680
PROJECT NAME: SR-524 (196th St. SW)/ 88th
Ave. W Intersection Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,115,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install traffic signal at the intersection of 196th St. SW @ 88th Ave.
W. The modeling in the 2009 Transportation Plan indicated that restricting northbound and
southbound traffic to right-turn-only (prohibiting left-turn and through movements) would also
address the deficiency identified at this location through 2025. This is same alternative as one
concluded by consultant in 2007 study but not recommended by City Council. This could be
implemented as an alternate solution, or as an interim solution until traffic signal warrants are
met. The ex. LOS is F (below City Standards: LOS D). (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in
2009 Transportation Plan: #8).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve traffic flow characteristics and safety at the
intersection. The improvement would modify LOS to A, but increase the delay along 196th St.
SW.
SCHEDULE: The intersection LOS must meet MUTCD traffic signal warrants and be approved
by WSDOT since 196th St. SW is a State Route (SR524). No funding is currently allocated to
this project (pending grant funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration &
ROW
$100,000 $163,000
Construction $852,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $100,000 $163,000 $852,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 449 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Main St and 9th Ave. S
(interim solution)
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $10,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Installation of a mini-roundabout or re-striping of 9th Ave. with the
removal of parking on both sides of the street. (not included in the 2009 Transportation Plan
project priority chart)
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The intersection is stop-controlled for all approaches and
the existing intersection LOS is E (below the City’s concurrency standards: LOS D). The re-
striping of 9th Ave. would improve the intersection delay to LOS C or LOS B with the
installation of a mini-roundabout.
SCHEDULE: 2016
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$1,000
Construction $9,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $10,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 450 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 76th Ave W @ 212th St. SW
Intersection Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $6,191,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Add a northbound and southbound left-turn lane to convert the signal
operation for those approaches from split phasing to protected-permissive phasing. Add a right-
turn lane for the westbound, southbound, and northbound movements. The project also consists of
various utility upgrades and conversion of overhead utilities to underground (ROADWAY ROJECT
PRIORITY in 2009 Transportation Plan: #3).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Reduce the intersection delay and improve the existing level
of service from LOS D (LOS F by 2015) to LOS C.
SCHEDULE: Federal grants have been secured for all project phases. Design started in 2012 and
is scheduled for completion in Fall 2015. Right-of-way acquisition is anticipated to be completed in
Fall 2015. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2016.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration &
ROW
$711,587
Construction $5,011,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $711,587 $5,011,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 451 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 220th St SW @ 76th Ave W
Intersection Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST:
$4,964,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Reconfigure eastbound lanes to a left turn lane and through / right
turn lane. Change eastbound and westbound phases to provide protected-permitted phase for
eastbound and westbound left turns. Provide right turn overlap for westbound movement during
southbound left turn phase. (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2009 Transportation Plan:
#11).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Reduce the intersection delay and improve the LOS. The
LOS would be improved from LOS E to LOS C.
SCHEDULE: Engineering and construction scheduled between 2018 and 2020 (unsecured
funding).
* All or a portion of this project may qualify for 1% for the arts
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$500,000 $836,000
Construction $3,628,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $500,000 $836,000 $3,628,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 452 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 228th St. SW Corridor
Safety Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $7,300,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1) Extend 228th St across the unopened right-of-way to 76th Avenue West 2)
Signalize the intersection of 228th St SW @ SR99 and 228th St. SW @ 76th Ave. West 3) Construct a raised
median in the vicinity of 76th Avenue West. 4) Add illumination between 224th St SW and 228th St SW on SR 99
5) Overlay of 228th St. SW from 80th Ave. W to ~ 2,000’ east of 76th Ave. W. (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in
2009 Transportation Plan: #1).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The project will improve access / safety to the I-5 / Mountlake
Terrace Park & Ride from SR99. This east / west connection will reduce demand and congestion along two east-
west corridors (220th Street SW and SR104). Roadway safety will also be improved as SR 99/ 228th Street SW
will become a signalized intersection. 228th St. SW is being overlaid from 80th Pl. W to ~ 1,000 LF east of 72nd
Ave. W. as well as 76th Ave. W from 228th St. SW to Hwy. 99. The project consists of various utility upgrades.
SCHEDULE: Construction scheduled to begin in 2015 and be completed in 2016. Federal and State grants
were secured for the construction phase. This project is combined into one construction contract with the Hwy. 99
(Phase 3) Lighting project.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering,
Administration, and
ROW
Construction $3,950,400 $1,943,500
1% for Art
TOTAL $3,950,400 $1,943,500
* All or a portion of this project may qualify for 1% for the arts
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 453 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Highway 99 Gateway /
Revitalization
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $10,000,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project would include, among other features, wider replacement
sidewalks or new sidewalk where none exist today, new street lighting, center medians for access
control and turning movements, etc., attractive and safe crosswalks, better stormwater
management, targeted utility replacements, potential undergrounding of overhead utilities, as well
as landscaping and other softscape treatments to warm-up this harsh corridor and identify the area
as being in Edmonds.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve aesthetics, safety, user experience, and access
management along this corridor. In addition, economic development would be improved.
SCHEDULE: The design phase is scheduled for 2018. The construction phase is scheduled for
2019 and 2020 (unsecured funding for all phases).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration &
ROW
$500,000
Construction $4,500,000 $5,000,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $500,000 4,500,000 $5,000,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 454 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Olympic View Dr. @ 76th Ave.
W Intersection Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST:
$1,431,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install traffic signal (the intersection currently stop controlled for
all movements). (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2009 Transportation Plan: #9).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The improvement will reduce the intersection delay. By
2015, the Level of Service will be F, which is below the City’s concurrency standards (LOS D).
The improvement would modify the Level of Service to LOS B.
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2021 and 2026
(unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$286,000
Construction $1,145,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $1,431,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 455 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 84th Ave. W (212th St. SW
to 238th St. SW)
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $20,422,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen 84th Ave. W to (3) lanes with curb, gutter, bike lanes, and
sidewalk on each side of the street. (part of this project was ranked #11 in the Long Walkway list
of the 2009 Transportation Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve overall safety of the transportation system along
this collector street: 1) the sidewalk and bike lanes would provide pedestrians and cyclists with
their own facilities and 2) vehicles making left turn will have their own lane, not causing any
back-up to the through lane when insufficient gaps are provided.
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2021 and 2026
(unsecured funding). The project cost is split between Snohomish County and Edmonds since
half the project is in Esperance.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$2,042,000
Construction $8,169,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $10,211,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 456 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Hwy. 99 @ 216th St. SW
intersection improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $3,722,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen 216th St. SW to add a westbound left turn lane
for and an eastbound left turn lane. Provide protected-permissive left turn phases for
eastbound and westbound movements.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve intersection efficiency and reduce
delay.
SCHEDULE: All phases are scheduled between 2018 and 2020. (unsecured
funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
ROW &
Administration
$341,000 $686,000
Construction $2,695,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $341,000 $686,000 $2,695,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 457 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Hwy. 99 @ 220th St. SW
intersection improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $5,046,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen 220th St. SW to add Westbound right turn lane for
325’ storage length. Widen SR-99 to add 2nd Southbound left turn lane for 275’ storage
length. (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2009 Transportation Plan: #10).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve existing intersection delay from 72 seconds
(w/o improvement) to 62 seconds (w/ improvement) in 2025.
SCHEDULE: All Phases are scheduled between 2018 and 2020 (unsecured funding for
all phases).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
& ROW
$484,000 $737,000
Construction $3,825,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $484,000 $737,000 $3,825,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 458 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Hwy. 99 @ 212th St. SW
intersection improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $5,235,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen 212th St. SW to add a westbound left turn lane
for 200’ storage length and an eastbound left turn lane for 300’ storage length.
Provide protected left turn phase for eastbound and westbound
movements.(ROADWAY PROJECT PRIORITY in 2009 Transportation Plan: #13)
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve intersection efficiency and reduce
delay.
SCHEDULE: All phases are scheduled between 2018 and 2020. (unsecured
funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering,
ROW, &
Administration
$502,000 $765,000
Construction $3,968,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $502,000 $765,000 $3,968,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 459 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Olympic View Dr. @ 174th St.
SW Intersection Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $906,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Widen Olympic View Dr. to add a northbound left turn lane
for 50’ storage length. Shift the northbound lanes to the east to provide an acceleration
lane for eastbound left turns. Install traffic signal to increase the LOS and reduce
intersection delay. (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2009 Transportation Plan: #17)
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve intersection efficiency and safety of drivers
accessing either street.
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2021 and 2026
(unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$180,000
Construction $726,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $906,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 460 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Main St. @ 9th Ave
Intersection Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,093,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install traffic signal. The intersection is currently stop
controlled for all approaches. (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2009 Transportation
Plan: #2)
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve the Level of Service, which is currently LOS
E (below City’s Level of Service standards: LOS D), to LOS B (w/ improvement).
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2021 and 2026
(unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$220,000
Construction $873,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $1,093,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 461 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Walnut St. @ 9th Ave.
Intersection Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,093,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install traffic signal. The intersection is currently stop
controlled for all approaches. (ROADWAY ROJECT PRIORITY in 2009 Transportation
Plan: #7).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve the Level of Service.
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2021 and 2026
(unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$220,000
Construction $873,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $1,093,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 462 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 80th Ave W from 188th St
SW to Olympic View Dr. Walkway and sight
distance improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,520,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct ~ 3,000’ sidewalk on 80th Ave West between
188th St SW and 180th St SW and on 180th St SW between 80th Ave W and Olympic
View Drive (ranked #6 in Long Walkway list in 2009 Transportation Plan). 80th Ave. W
will be re-graded north of 184th St. SW, in order to improve sight distance.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Provides safe pedestrian access between Seaview
Park, connecting to Olympic View Drive Walkway and Southwest County Park. Would
create an additional safe walking route for kids attending Seaview Elementary School
(188th St. SW).
SCHEDULE: Engineering and construction are scheduled between 2018 and 2020
(unsecured funding for all phases).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$125,000 $125,000
Construction $1,270,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $125,000 $125,000 $1,270,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 463 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 236th St. SW from
Edmonds Way to Madrona Elementary School
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $420,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct an ~ 800’ sidewalk on the south side of 236th St.
SW from SR-104 to Madrona Elementary as well as the addition of sharrows along that
stretch. (This is only part of a stretch of Walkway project, which ranked #1 in the Long
Walkway list in the 2009 Transportation Plan)
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route
near Madrona Elementary School and along 236th St. SW.
SCHEDULE: Construction is scheduled to take place in 2015. The project is funded
through the Safe Routes to School Grant program.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
& ROW
Construction $392,109
1% for Art
TOTAL $392,109
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 464 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 2nd Ave. S from James St.
to Main St. Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $65,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a missing link of sidewalk (approximately 100’) on
2nd Ave. S between Main St. and James St. (Ranked #1 in Short Walkway Project list in
2009 Transportation Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route.
SCHEDULE: 2018 (Unsecured Funding)
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$65,000
Construction
1% for Art
TOTAL $65,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 465 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Maple St. from 7th Ave.
S to 8th Ave. S Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $65,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a missing link of sidewalk (approximately 250’)
on Maple St. between 7th Ave. S and 8th Ave. S (ranked #3 in Short Walkway Project list
in 2009 Transportation Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route.
SCHEDULE: Engineering & Construction scheduled for 2018 (unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $65,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $65,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 466 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Dayton St between 7th Ave.
S and 8th Ave. S Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $82,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a missing link of sidewalk (approximately 250’) on
Dayton St. between 7th Ave. S and 8th Ave. S (ranked #2 in Short Walkway Project list in
2009 Transportation Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route.
SCHEDULE: Engineering & Construction scheduled for 2018 (unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $82,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $82,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 467 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Sunset Ave Walkway
from Bell St to Caspers St.
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $2,350,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Provide a multi-use path on the west side of the street, facing
waterfront (~ 1/2 mile / more recent project, not included in the 2009 Transportation Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route.
SCHEDULE: Temporary improvements have been installed to evaluate the alignment of the
proposed multi-use path. The final design phase is on-hold until the evaluation period is
completed.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study $10,000
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $2,099,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $10,000 $2,099,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 468 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Maplewood Dr. Walkway
from Main St. to 200th St. SW
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $2,306,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct sidewalk on Maplewood Dr. from Main St. to 200th St. SW
(~ 2,700’). A sidewalk currently exists on 200th St. SW from Main St. to 76th Ave. W, adjacent to
Maplewood Elementary School (rated #2 in the Long Walkway list of the 2009 Transportation
Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Create pedestrian connection between Maplewood
Elementary School on 200th St. SW and Main St., by encouraging kids to use non-motorized
transportation to walk to / from school.
SCHEDULE: Engineering scheduled for 2018 and construction in 2019 (grant application
recently submitted to fund design phase / from Pedestrian and Bicycle Program).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$349,000
Construction $1,957,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $349,000 $1,957,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 469 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 216th St. SW Walkway from
Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave. W
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $218,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install 150’ sidewalk on north side of 216th St. SW from
Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave. W (completing a missing link on north side of stretch).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route.
SCHEDULE: Engineering & Construction scheduled for 2018 (unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$41,000
Construction $177,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $218,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 470 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Meadowdale Beach Rd.
Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST:
$1,085,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a sidewalk on Meadowdale Beach Dr. between 76th
Ave. W and Olympic View Dr. (~3,800’). This is one of the last collectors in the City with no
sidewalk on either side of the street (ranked #4 in Long Walkway Project list in 2009
Transportation Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route
connecting a minor arterial w/ high pedestrian activity (Olympic View Dr.) to a collector with
sidewalk on the east side of the street (76th Ave. W). Meadowdale Elementary School is
directly north of the project on Olympic View Dr.
SCHEDULE: Design scheduled for 2020 (unsecured funding) and construction between
2021 and 2026.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 - 2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $325,000 $760,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $325,000 $760,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 471 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Walnut from 3rd Ave. S to 4th
Ave. S Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $190,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a missing link of sidewalk (approximately 350’)
on Walnut St. between 3rd Ave. S and 4th Ave. S (ranked #5 in Short Walkway Project
list in 2009 Transportation Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route.
SCHEDULE: Engineering & Construction scheduled for 2018 (unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $190,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $190,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 472 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Walnut from 6th Ave. S to 7th
Ave. S Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $380,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a missing link of sidewalk (approximately 700’) on
Walnut St. between 6th Ave. S and 7th Ave. S (ranked #4 in Short Walkway Project list in 2009
Transportation Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route.
SCHEDULE: Engineering & Construction scheduled for 2020 (unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $380,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $380,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 473 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 4th Ave Corridor
Enhancement
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $5,700,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Corridor improvements along 4th Avenue to build on concept plan
developed in the Streetscape Plan update (2006). (Project not included in 2009 Transportation
Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The corridor improvements in the public right of way will
encourage pedestrian traffic & provide a strong visual connection along 4th Ave. Improvements will
enhance connectivity as an attractive walking corridor & contribute to the economic vitality in the
downtown by encouraging the flow of visitors between the downtown retail & the Edmonds Center
for the Arts. Timing for design phase is crucial as the City addresses utility projects in the area &
will assist the City in the process of identifying & acquiring funding sources for the project
implementation phase.
SCHEDULE: Work on identifying grants for engineering services and construction is scheduled
for 2018 and 2019 (pending additional grant funding and local match).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $1,425,000 $2,900,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $1,425,000 $2,900,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 474 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 238th St. SW from 100th
Ave. W to 104th Ave. W Walkway and
Stormwater Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,657,681
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Installation of ~ 1,200’ of sidewalk on the north side of 238th St.
SW from 100th Ave. W to 104th Ave. W. as well as sharrows. Stormwater improvements will
also be incorporated into the project (ranked #8 in the Long Walkway list of the 2009
Transportation Plan).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve pedestrian safety and create a safe pedestrian
connection between 100th Ave. W and 104th Ave. W.
SCHEDULE Engineering and construction are scheduled between 2014 and 2015. Funding
was secured for the completion of the design and construction phases (through Safe Routes to
School program). Stormwater improvements will be funded by the Stormwater Utility Fund 422.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $1,557,934
1% for Art
TOTAL $1,557,934
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 475 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Olympic Ave. from Main St.
to SR-524 / 196th St. SW Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST:
$1,249,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ranked #3 in Long Walkway project list in 2009 Transportation
Plan. Install new sidewalk on the east side of the street. Ex. sidewalk is unsafe because of
rolled curb (~ 0.75 mile / ranked #3 in the Long Walkway list of the 2009 Transportation
Plan)
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve pedestrian safety and access to Yost Park
and Edmonds Elementary.
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2021 and 2026
(unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$200,000
Construction $1,049,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $1,249,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 476 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 189th Pl. W from 80th Ave. W
to 78th Ave. W Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $189,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ranked # 7 in Short Walkway list from 2009 Transportation Plan.
Install 5’ sidewalk on either side of the street (approximately 750’).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve pedestrian safety and create connection to ex.
sidewalk on 189th Pl. W. This missing link will create a pedestrian connection from 80th Ave. W
to 76th Ave. W.
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2021 and 2026
(unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$35,000
Construction $154,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $189,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 477 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 84th Ave. W between 188th St.
SW and 186th St. SW Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $175,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2021 and 2026 (unsecured
funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$35,000
Construction $140,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $175,000
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ranked #9 in Short Walkway list from 2009 Transportation Plan.
Install 5’ sidewalk on the east side of the street (approximately 750’).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve pedestrian safety and access for school kids
walking to Seaview Elementary. DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 478 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 238th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to
76th Ave. W Walkway
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,050,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Ranked #9 in Long Walkway list from 2009 Transportation Plan.
Install 5’ sidewalk on the north side of 238th St. SW (approximately ½ mile).
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Improve pedestrian safety along that stretch and creating
safe pedestrian connection between Hwy. 99 and 76th Ave. W.
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled between 2021 and 2026
(unsecured funding).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
$210,000
Construction $840,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $1,050,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 479 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Residential Neighborhood
Traffic Calming
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: Varies
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The traffic calming program is designed to assist residents and City
staff in responding to neighborhood traffic issues related to speeding, cut-through traffic and
safety.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Allows traffic concerns to be addressed consistently and
traffic calming measures to be efficiently developed and put into operations.
SCHEDULE: Annual program
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 480 of 680
PROJECT NAME: 15th St. SW from Edmonds
Way (SR-104) to 8th Ave. S
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $374,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Construct a missing link of sidewalk (approximately 600’) on 15th
St. SW from Edmonds Way to 8th Ave. S. (new project, not included in the 2009
Transportation Plan)
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To provide a safe and desirable walking route for kids
attending Sherwood Elementary.
SCHEDULE: Construction documentation will be completed in 2015. The project is 100%
grant funded (through Safe Routes to School program).
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
Construction $6,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $6,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 481 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Trackside Warning System or
Quiet Zone @ Dayton and Main St. RR Crossing
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $350,000
* all or part of this project may qualify for 1% for the Arts.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install Trackside Warning System or Quiet Zone @ Dayton and
Main St. Railroad Crossings.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Reduce noise level throughout the Downtown Edmonds
area during all railroad crossings (@ both intersections).
SCHEDULE: Engineering and Construction are scheduled for 2015 and 2016.
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021-2026
Planning/Study
Engineering &
Administration
50,000
Construction $300,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $50,000 $300,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 482 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 483 of 680
CFP
STORMWATER
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 484 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 485 of 680
$0 (Federal or State secured)
Design $465,318 (Federal or State unsecured)$125,000 $327,818 $12,500
$1,495,954 (Debt/Stormwater Fees)$100,000 $375,000 $983,454 $37,500
$1,961,272 Total $100,000 $500,000 $1,311,272 $50,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
Possible Grant/TBD Study $5,312,500 (Federal or State unsecured)$160,000 $562,500 $825,000 $1,800,000 $1,950,000 $15,000
$1,920,500 (Debt/Stormwater)$203,000 $187,500 $275,000 $600,000 $650,000 $5,000
$7,233,000 Total $363,000 $750,000 $1,100,000 $2,400,000 $2,600,000 $20,000
$0 (Federal or State secured)
Possible Grant/TBD Design $1,672,500 (Federal or State unsecured)$135,000 $375,000 $375,000 $637,500 $112,500 $37,500
$597,500 (Debt/Stormwater Fees)$85,000 $125,000 $125,000 $212,500 $37,500 $12,500
$2,270,000 Total $220,000 $500,000 $500,000 $850,000 $150,000 $50,000
Total CFP $11,464,272 Annual CFP Totals $683,000 $1,750,000 $2,911,272 $3,300,000 $2,750,000 $70,000
Totals Source 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
$0 Total Federal & State (Secured)$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$7,450,318
Total Federal & State
(Unsecured)$295,000 $1,062,500 $1,527,818 $2,450,000 $2,062,500 $52,500
$4,013,954 Debt / Stormwater Fees $388,000 $687,500 $1,383,454 $850,000 $687,500 $17,500
Dayton St and Hwy 104 Drainage
Improvements.
Add lift station and other new infrastructure to reduce
intersection flooding.
Revenue Summary by Year
Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger Cr/Willow
Creek/Day lighting/Restoration
Daylight channel and remove sediment to allow better
connnectivity with the Puget Sound to benefit fish and reduce
flooding.
Perrinville Creek High Flow
Reduction/Management Project
Find solution to high peak stream flows caused by excessive
stormwater runoff that erodes the stream, causes flooding
and has negative impacts on aquatic habitat.
Project Name Purpose
Grant Opportunity
Grant/Date
Current Project
Phase
(2015-2020)
Total Cost 2020Revenue Source 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
8
6
o
f
6
8
0
D
R
A
F
T
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
8
7
o
f
6
8
0
PROJECT NAME: Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger
Cr/Willow Cr – Daylighting
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $7,233,000
Edmonds Marsh as seen from the viewing platform. Previously restored section of Willow Creek. Source:
www.unocaledmonds.info/clean-up/gallery.php
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Build on the feasibility study completed in 2013 that assessed the feasibility
of day lighting the Willow Creek channel. The final project may include 23 acres of revegetation,
construct new tide gate to allow better connectivity to the Puget Sound, removal of sediment, 1,100
linear ft of new creek channel lined with an impermeable membrane. Funds will be used for study and
construction but exact breakdown cannot be assessed at this time.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: The daylight of willow creek will help reverse the negative impacts
to Willow Creek and Edmonds Marsh that occurred when Willow Creek was piped. It will also help
eliminate the sedimentation of the marsh and the transition to freshwater species and provide habitat for
salmonids, including rearing of juvenile Chinook.
SCHEDULE: 2015-2020
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT COST 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin. $363,000 $750,000 $20,000
Construction $1,100,000 $2,400,000 $2,600,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $363,000 $750,000 $1,100,000 $2,400,000 $2,600,000 $20,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 488 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Perrinville Creek High Flow
Reduction/Management Project
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $2,270,000
Perrinville Creek Channel illustrating the channel incision that
will be addressed by restoration.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A flow reduction study began in 2013 that will develop alternatives
to implement in the basin. Projects are expected to begin the design and/or construction
phases in 2014. It is expected that this project will be implemented with the City of Lynnwood
(half the Perrinville basin is in Lynnwood) and Snohomish County (owner of the South County
Park). Projects will likely be a combination of detention, infiltration, and stream bank
stabilization. A $188,722 grant from the Department of Ecology is contributing funds to the
2013-2014 Study.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: Urbanization of the Perrinville Creek Basin has increased
flows in the creek, incision of the creek, and sedimentation in the low-gradient downstream
reaches of the creek. Before any habitat improvements can be implemented, the flows must be
controlled or these improvements will be washed away.
SCHEDULE: 2015-2020
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study
Eng. & Admin. $20,000 $50,000 $50,000 $85,000 $20,000 $50,000
Construction $200,000 $450,000 $450,000 $765,000 $130,000
1% for Art
TOTAL $220,000 $500,000 $500,000 $850,000 $150,000 $50,000
Perrinville
Creek
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 489 of 680
PROJECT NAME: Dayton St and Hwy 104
Drainage Improvements
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST: $1,961,272
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Add lift station and other new infrastructure.
PROJECT BENEFIT/ RATIONALE: To reduce flooding at the intersection of Dayton St and
Hwy 104.
SCHEDULE: 2015-2020
COST BREAKDOWN
PROJECT
COST
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Planning/Study $100,000
Eng. & Admin. $500,000 $50,000
Construction $1,311,272
1% for Art
TOTAL $100,000 $500,000 $1,311,272 $50,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 490 of 680
Comprehensive
Transportation Plan
Prepared by
With support from:
May 2015
Perteet Engineering
Henderson Young
& Co
EnviroIssues
ADD PICTURES TO THIS
PAGE
Comprehensive
Transportation
Plan
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 491 of 680
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 1-1
Purpose of the Transportation Comprehensive Plan ................................................................................................ 1-1
Plan Background ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1-2
Reports, Plans and Records ........................................................................................................................................ 1-2
Land Use Review ............................................................................................................................................................. 1-2
Regulatory Framework .......................................................................................................................................................... 1-3
Growth Management Act (GMA) .............................................................................................................................. 1-3
Washington Transportation Plan .............................................................................................................................. 1-4
Puget sound regional council (PSRC) Plans ......................................................................................................... 1-4
Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies ............................................................................................ 1-5
Edmonds Comprehensive Plan.................................................................................................................................. 1-6
Public Participation ................................................................................................................................................................. 1-7
Public Open Houses ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-7
Citizen Advisory Transportation Committee ........................................................................................................ 1-7
Edmonds Bike Group ..................................................................................................................................................... 1-8
Intergovernmental Coordination .............................................................................................................................. 1-8
Overview of the Transportation Plan Elements ........................................................................................................... 1-8
2. GOALS AND POLICIES .......................................................................................................................... 2-1
Goal 1: Provide a safe and comfortable travel experience for all users ............................................................ 2-2
Goal 2: Build a transportation system that Enhances the City’s land use vision ............................................ 2-2
Goal 3: Be sustainable- financially, environmentally, and Socially ...................................................................... 2-4
Goal 4: Foster an active and healthy community ....................................................................................................... 2-6
Goal 5: Create a complete and connected system that offers Efficient transportation options ............. 2-8
Goal 6: Partner with other entities to create a logical system that integrates within the regional
transportation network ....................................................................................................................................................... 2-10
3. TRANSPORTATION NETWORK ........................................................................................................... 3-14
Existing Roadway Functional Classification ................................................................................................................ 3-14
Evaluation of Road Functional Classifications ................................................................................................... 3-17
roadway System Inventory ................................................................................................................................................ 3-19
State Highways .............................................................................................................................................................. 3-19
City Streets ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3-20
Speed Limits .................................................................................................................................................................... 3-20
Traffic Control ................................................................................................................................................................ 3-22
Traffic Calming Devices .............................................................................................................................................. 3-22
Parking .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3-25
Street Standards ............................................................................................................................................................ 3-25
Roadway Conditions ............................................................................................................................................................ 3-27
Existing traffic Operations ......................................................................................................................................... 3-27
Future Traffic Operations ........................................................................................................................................... 3-36
Safety Assessment ........................................................................................................................................................ 3-42
Recommended Roadway Capital Projects .................................................................................................................. 3-46
Roadway Project Priority ............................................................................................................................................ 3-53
Traffic Calming Program ............................................................................................................................................ 3-55
Preservation and Maintenance Programs and Projects ................................................................................ 3-56
Non-Motorized System ........................................................................................................................................................ 3-2
Pedestrians ........................................................................................................................................................................ 3-2
Bicycles .............................................................................................................................................................................. 3-14
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 492 of 680
Transit ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 3-22
Existing Bus Service ...................................................................................................................................................... 3-22
Rideshare Services ........................................................................................................................................................ 3-25
Park-and-Ride Facilities .............................................................................................................................................. 3-25
Rail Service ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3-26
Washington State Ferries ........................................................................................................................................... 3-27
Future transit Improvements .................................................................................................................................... 3-28
Goods Movement ................................................................................................................................................................. 3-32
Transportation Demand Management ......................................................................................................................... 3-34
SR 104 Complete streets corridor analysis ................................................................................................................. 3-35
4. IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCIAL PLAN ............................................................................................. 4-1
Performance Measure ........................................................................................................................................................... 4-1
Project Costs ............................................................................................................................................................................. 4-1
Revenue Sources ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4-7
Current Sources of Revenue ....................................................................................................................................... 4-7
Other Potential Financing Options .......................................................................................................................... 4-8
Implementation Plan ........................................................................................................................................................... 4-11
Transportation Improvement Plan (2016-2035) ............................................................................................... 4-11
Interjurisdictional Coordination .............................................................................................................................. 4-13
Contingency Plan in Case of Revenue Shortfall ........................................................................................................ 4-14
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 493 of 680
Table of Figures
Figure 3-1 Functional Classification..................................................................................................................... 3-16
Figure 3-2. Speed Limits on City Streets .............................................................................................................. 3-21
Figure 3-3. Existing Traffic Control Devices ......................................................................................................... 3-24
Figure 3-4. Downtown On-Street Parking ............................................................................................................. 3-26
Figure 3-5. Study Intersections ............................................................................................................................. 3-28
Figure 3-6. Existing Level of Service .................................................................................................................... 3-35
Figure 3-7. 2035 Level of Service ......................................................................................................................... 3-41
Figure 3-8 Collision Map ...................................................................................................................................... 3-44
Figure 3-9 Recommended Capital Road Improvements ..................................................................................... 3-50
Figure 3-10. 2035 Level of Service with and without Improvements ...................................................................... 3-52
Figure 3-11. Pedestrian Intensive Land Uses........................................................................................................... 3-4
Figure 3-12. Existing Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................................... 3-5
Figure 3-13. Recommended Walkway Projects........................................................................................................ 3-9
Figure 3-14. Existing Bicycle Facilities ................................................................................................................... 3-15
Figure 3-15 Recommended Bicycle Facilities ....................................................................................................... 3-18
Figure 3-16 Recommended Signed Bicycle Loops................................................................................................ 3-20
Figure 3-17. Existing Access to Local and Commuter Transit ................................................................................ 3-24
Figure 3-18. Future Priority Transit Corridors ......................................................................................................... 3-31
Figure 3-19. Truck Routes ...................................................................................................................................... 3-33
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 494 of 680
List of Tables
Table 1-1. City of Edmonds Existing and Future Land Use Summary .................................................................. 1-3
Table 3-1. Miles of Roadway by Existing Federal Functional Classification ........................................................ 3-17
Table 3-2. Typical Roadway Level of Service Characteristics............................................................................. 3-29
Table 3-3. Level of Service Criteria for Intersections........................................................................................... 3-30
Table 3-4. Roadway Level of Service Standards ................................................................................................ 3-31
Table 3-5. Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS .......................................................................................... 3-33
Table 3-6. City of Edmonds Existing and Future Land Use Summary ................................................................ 3-37
Table 3-7. 2035 Intersection Level of Service ..................................................................................................... 3-39
Table 3-8. High Collision Locations ..................................................................................................................... 3-45
Table 3-9 Recommended Roadway Improvements ........................................................................................... 3-47
Table 3-10 Changes in 2035 Intersection Level of Service with Proposed Roadway Improvements .................. 3-51
Table 3-11. Prioritization Criteria for Roadway Projects ........................................................................................ 3-53
Table 3-12. Roadway Project Priority .................................................................................................................... 3-54
Table 3-13. Prioritization Criteria for Walkway Projects .......................................................................................... 3-6
Table 3-14. Recommended Walkway Projects...................................................................................................... 3-10
Table 3-15. Pedestrian Level of Service Standards .............................................................................................. 3-13
Table 3-16 Existing and Recommended Bike Facilities ....................................................................................... 3-17
Table 3-17 Bicycle Level of Service Standards .................................................................................................... 3-19
Table 3-18. Community Transit Bus Routes.......................................................................................................... 3-23
Table 3-19. Park-and-Ride Facilities Serving Edmonds ........................................................................................ 3-26
Table 3-20 Transit Priority Corridor Level of Service ........................................................................................... 3-29
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 495 of 680
Table 4-1. Costs of Transportation Projects .......................................................................................................... 4-2
Table 4-2. Potential Transportation Revenues- Current Sources.......................................................................... 4-8
Table 4-3. Potential Transportation Revenue- Additional Optional Sources ....................................................... 4-10
Table 4-4. Transportation Improvement Plan 2016-2035 .................................................................................... 4-12
Appendices
Appendix A – Goals and Policies Comparison Table
Appendix B – Roadway Functional Classifications and Inventory
Appendix C – Travel Model Transportation Analysis Zones
Appendix D– Walkway Project Ratings
Acronyms
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADT Average Daily Traffic
BRT Bus Rapid Transit
CAC Citizens’ Advisory Committee
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CTR Commute Trip Reduction
DART Dial-A-Ride Transit
ECDC Edmonds Community Development Code
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FTE full time equivalent
GMA Growth Management Act
LID Local Improvement District
LOS level of service
mph miles per hour
PRSC Puget Sound Regional Council
RID Roadway Improvement District
SEPA State Environmental Policy Act
SP Sidewalk Program
SR State Route
STP Surface Transportation Program
TAC Technical Advisory Committee
TAZ transportation analysis zone
TBD Transportation Benefit District
TIB Transportation Improvement Board
TDM Transportation Demand Management
TIP Transportation Improvement Program
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 496 of 680
TSM Transportation System Management
UAP Urban Arterial Program
UCP Urban Corridor Program
WAC Washington Administrative Code
WSDOT Washington State Department of
Transportation
WSF Washington State Ferries
WTP Washington Transportation Plan
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 497 of 680
Glossary
Access The ability to enter a freeway or roadway via an on-ramp or
other entry point.
Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA)
A federal act that was passed in 1990 and amended in 2008.
ADA requires jurisdictions to provide accessible sidewalks
primarily through the installation of ADA-compliant sidewalk
ramps. The design requirements address various areas of
concern such as curb alignment with crosswalks, narrower
sidewalk width, obstacles such as utility poles, placement of
the sidewalk adjacent to the curb, or the slope of the ramps.
Deficiencies in any of these areas could render a sidewalk or
sidewalk ramp to be unsafe or inaccessible for the
handicapped, or those who generally have difficulty walking.
Arterial A major street that primarily serves through traffic, but also
provides access to abutting properties. Arterials are often
divided into principal and minor classifications depending on
the number of lanes, connections made, volume of traffic,
nature of traffic, speeds, interruptions (access functions), and
length.
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) The average number of vehicles that travel on a roadway on a
typical day.
Capacity The maximum sustained traffic flow of a transportation facility
under prevailing traffic and roadway conditions in a specified
direction.
Capital Improvement Program
(CIP)
A long-range plan established by a city or county that
encompasses its vision and future needs for capital facilities,
including fire, police, utilities, and transportation. The CIP also
establishes the jurisdiction’s project priorities and funding
methods.
Commute trip reduction (CTR) Efforts related to reducing the proportion of trips made in
single-occupancy vehicles during peak commuting hours. CTR
efforts may include carpooling, telecommuting, compressed
work weeks, or using alternative modes to get to work (e.g.
walking or biking). Washington State’s CTR efforts are
coordinated through WSDOT and local governments in
counties with the highest levels of automobile-related air
pollution and traffic congestion. Qualified employers in these
counties are required by law to develop a commuter program
designed to achieve reductions in vehicle trips.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 498 of 680
Concurrency A requirement established by Washington State’s Growth
Management Act that adequate infrastructure be planned
and financed to support a jurisdiction’s adopted future land
use plan. For transportation, adequacy is measured by the
impact on a jurisdiction’s roadway and/or intersection LOS. If
an impact is anticipated to cause the adopted LOS standard
to be exceeded, then the jurisdiction must have a strategy in
place to increase capacity or manage demand (or a financial
plan to put that strategy in place) within 6 years of the
transportation impact.
Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA)
A major agency of the United States Department of
Transportation responsible for ensuring that America’s roads
and highways continue to be the safest and most
technologically up-to-date.
Functional classification A roadway category that is based on the types of trips that
occur on the roadway, the roadway’s basic purpose, and the
level of traffic that the roadway carries. The functional
classification of a roadway can range from a freeway to
principal arterial to minor arterial to collector to local access.
Growth Management Act
(GMA)
A Washington state law that provides a framework for
managing growth through comprehensive plans,
development regulations, and other activities. Under the
GMA, comprehensive plans must address required topics,
including but not limited to land use, transportation, capital
facilities, utilities, and housing. The GMA requirements also
include guaranteeing the consistency of transportation and
capital facilities plans with land use plans.
Highways of Statewide
Significance
Highways identified by the Washington State Transportation
Commission that provide significant statewide travel and
economic linkages.
Level of service (LOS) A measure of how well a roadway or local signalized
intersection operates. For roadways, LOS is typically a
measure of traffic congestion based on volume-to-capacity
ratios. For local intersections, LOS is typically based on how
long it takes a typical vehicle to clear the intersection.
Different criteria may be used to gauge the operating
performance of transit, non-motorized, and other
transportation modes.
Local Improvement District
(LID)
Special assessment district in which infrastructure
improvements, such as water, sewer, storm water, or
transportation system improvements, will benefit primarily
the property owners in the district.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 499 of 680
Motorized Vehicle A vehicle that is self-propelled but not operated upon rails,
and includes neighborhood electric vehicles as defined in
RCW 46.04.357. An electric personal assistive mobility device
is not considered a motor vehicle. A power wheelchair or an
electric-assisted bicycle is not considered a motor vehicle.
Non- Motorized Vehicle A device other than a motor vehicle used to transport
persons, including, but not limited to, bicycles, skateboards,
in-line skates, and roller skates. Electric-assisted bicycles are
included in this definition.
Traffic calming The combination of physical measures and educational efforts
to alter driver behavior and improve conditions for non-
motorized street users. Physical measures may include bulb-
out curb extensions, chicanes, or traffic circles, among other
things. Educational efforts may include pavement markings or
increased police enforcement.
Transportation Analysis Zone
(TAZ)
Areas with similar land use characteristics that are used in
travel demand models to assess traffic conditions and
operations.
Transportation Benefit District
(TBD)
A geographic area designated by a jurisdiction that is a
means to funding transportation improvement projects;
funding sources can include vehicle license fees, property
taxes or sales taxes.
Transportation Demand
Management (TDM)
A set of strategies intended to maximize the efficiency of the
transportation network by reducing demand on the system.
Examples of TDM strategies are encouraging commuting via
bus, rail, bicycle, or walking; managing the available parking
supply; or creating a compressed work week.
Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP)
A long-range (6 years) plan established by a city or county
that results from the Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
process. The TIP establishes the jurisdiction’s transportation
deficiencies, project priorities, and possible funding methods.
Transportation System
Management (TSM)
A coordinated approach to the construction, preservation,
maintenance, and operations of the transportation network
with the goal of maximizing efficiency, safety, and reliability.
These activities include making intersection and signal
improvements, constructing turn lanes, improving signage
and pavement markings, and collecting data to monitor
system performance.
Travel Demand Forecasting Methods for estimating the desire for travel by potential users
of the transportation system, including the number of
travelers, the time of day, travel mode, and travel routes.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 500 of 680
Washington Transportation
Plan (WTP)
A long-range (20 years) statewide transportation plan
adopted by the Washington Transportation Commission. The
WTP describes existing transportation conditions in the state,
and outlines future transportation needs.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 501 of 680
1. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (Transportation Plan) is to guide the development
of multimodal surface transportation within the City of Edmonds (City) in a manner consistent with the
City’s adopted transportation goals, objectives, and policies (presented in Chapter 2). The Transportation
Plan serves as the transportation element of the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan (Comprehensive
Plan). It identifies transportation infrastructure and services needed to support projected land use within
the city through the year 2035, in compliance with the State of Washington Growth Management Act
(GMA) [RCW 36.70A, 1990, as amended].
Based upon existing and projected future land use and travel patterns, the Transportation Plan describes
roadway, pedestrian, bicycle and transit infrastructure and services and provides an assessment of existing
and projected future transportation needs. It establishes transportation priorities and guides the
development of the six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), Capital Improvements Program
(CIP), and Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). The Transportation Plan also establishes implementation strategies
that address the transportation needs for the city through the year 2035.
PURPOSE OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Based upon the directives of the City’s adopted transportation goals and policies, and the requirements of
the GMA, the objectives of the Transportation Plan are as follows:
• Address the total transportation needs of the city through 2035;
• Identify transportation improvements necessary to provide a complete system that will function
safely and efficiently through the year 2035;
• Ensure consistency with the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan;
• Contribute to economic growth within the city through an efficient transportation system;
• Provide cost-effective accessibility and mobility for people, goods, and services;
• Provide multimodal travel alternatives that are safe and have convenient access to employment,
education, and recreational opportunities for urban and suburban residents in the area, in support
of the City’s Complete Streets Ordinance;
• Identify funding needs for identified transportation improvements and the appropriate
contribution by the public and private sectors of the local economy;
• Comply with the requirements of the GMA and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA); and
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 502 of 680
• Support improvements to major transportation routes outside the city that will reduce through-
traffic in the community.
The Transportation Plan sets a framework for understanding, creating, and prioritizing a transportation
network for Edmonds, and it provides metrics for measuring progress towards its implementation.
PLAN BACKGROUND
REPORTS, PLANS AND RECORDS
This Transportation Plan integrates the analysis and results of numerous plans and prior reports that have
been completed for the City. Information was obtained from the following sources:
• City of Edmonds Transportation Element. 2009. Previous transportation plan that established
citywide transportation goals and policies and infrastructure and service needs, which was
updated for this Plan.
• City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. 2009. Current GMA plan that presents the City’s planned
future land use through 2025, and plans and policies established by the City to support that land
use.
• SR 99 Traffic and Circulation Study. 2006. Assesses traffic conditions on State Route (SR) 99, and
recommends safety and mobility improvements to be included in the City TIP.
• 2012 Technical Memorandum: SR-104/Westgate Transportation Assessment
• Memorandums prepared as part of the process for a future (2015) SR 104 Complete Streets
Corridor Analysis (2015).,
LAND USE REVIEW
The Edmonds Comprehensive Plan and Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) guides
development and growth within the city. Future transportation infrastructure and service needs identified
in this Transportation Plan were established by evaluating the level and pattern of travel demand
generated by planned future land use. Future population and employment projections for the region are
provided by the state Office of Financial Management (for population) and the Puget Sound Regional
Council (PSRC). Snohomish County works with local jurisdictions to determine the expected distribution
and allocation of population and employment between cities and unincorporated county. The
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 503 of 680
transportation analysis presented in this Transportation Plan is based upon the future population and
employment allocated to the City of Edmonds, based on the countywide process.
Table 1-1 summarizes the City’s existing and projected future land use growth.
Based on the City of Edmonds’ adopted regional growth target, the population is expected to reach
45,550 residents by the year 2035 (increased of 5,750 from 2011). The City also anticipates by the year
2035 a total of 21,168 housing units (increase of 2,772 from 2011) and 13,948 jobs (increase of 2,269 from
2011).
Table 1-1. City of Edmonds Existing and Future Land Use Summary
Land Use Type Unit
Existing
(2014) 2035
Single Family Dwelling Units 10,990 11,790
Multi-Family Dwelling Units 6,370 8,450
Retail Jobs 2,240 3,080
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, Services & Government Jobs 6,220 7,630
Wholesale, Transportation, Utilities, Manufacturing & Construction Jobs 140 170
Education Students 5,760 6,730
1. The model also includes values for park acres, marina slips, and park-and-ride spaces.
2. Excludes land use within Esperance.
REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT (GMA)
Transportation planning at the state, county and local levels is governed by the GMA, which contains
requirements for the preparation of the transportation element of a Comprehensive Plan. In addition to
requiring consistency with the land use element, the GMA [RCW 36.70A.070 (6)] requires that the
following components be included in transportation elements:
• Inventory of facilities by mode of transport;
• Level of service assessment to aid in determining the existing and future operating conditions of
the facilities;
• Proposed actions to bring these deficient facilities into compliance;
• Traffic forecasts, based upon planned future land use;
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 504 of 680
• Identification of infrastructure needs to meet current and future demands;
• Funding analysis for needed improvements, as well as possible additional funding sources;
• Identification of intergovernmental coordination efforts; and
• Identification of demand management strategies as available.
In addition to these elements, GMA mandates that development cannot occur if development causes
Level of Service to decline below the adopted standards, unless transportation improvements can be
made or other appropriate actions taken, concurrent with development. Such appropriate actions occur
unless adequate supporting infrastructure either already exists or is built concurrent with development. In
addition to capital facilities, infrastructure may include transit service, Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) strategies, or Transportation System Management (TSM) strategies.
Under the GMA, local governments and agencies must annually prepare and adopt six-year
Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs). These programs must be consistent with the transportation
element of the local comprehensive plan and other state and regional plans and policies as outlined
below.
WASHINGTON TRANSPORTATION PLAN
The Washington Transportation Plan (WTP) presents the State’s strategy for developing budgets and
implementing improvements over a 20-year planning horizon. The WTP contains an overview of the
current conditions of the statewide transportation system, and an assessment of the State’s future
transportation investment needs. The WTP policy framework sets the course for meeting those future
needs.
PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL (PSRC) PLANS
The PSRC is the Regional Transportation Planning Organization for the area that includes Snohomish,
King, Pierce, and Kitsap counties. The PSRC works with local jurisdictions to establish regional
transportation guidelines and principles and certifies that the transportation-related provisions within
local jurisdictions’ comprehensive plans are consistent with the Regional Transportation Plan and conform
to GMA requirements.
VISION 2040
VISION 2040 is the region’s growth plan through the year 2040. Key to Vision 2040 is the establishment
of Multicounty Planning Policies, which are designed to help achieve the Regional Growth Strategy and
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 505 of 680
address region-wide issues within a collaborative and equitable framework. The policies are built around
several key goals for transportation in the region:
• Maintenance, Management, and Safety – Maintain, preserve, and operate the existing
transportation system in a safe and usable state.
• Support the Growth Strategy – Support the regional growth strategy by focusing on connecting
centers with a highly efficient multimodal transportation network.
• Greater Options, Mobility, and Access – Invest in transportation systems that offer greater
options, mobility, and access in support of the regional growth strategy.
Each policy section contains actions that lay out steps the region will need to take to achieve VISION
2040. This Transportation Element is consistent with the Vision 2040 priorities.
Destination 2040
Transportation 2040 is an action plan for transportation in the central Puget Sound region, consistent with
VISION 2040. Adopted in 2010, it identifies investments to support the region’s expected growth and
improve the service transportation provides to people and businesses. It lays out a financing plan that
suggests a long-term shift in how we fund transportation improvements, with more reliance on users
paying for transportation improvements. Transportation 2040 also proposes a strategy for reducing
transportation’s contribution to climate change and its impact on important regional concerns such as air
pollution and the health of Puget Sound.
SNOHOMISH COUNTY COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES
The Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies are written policies used to establish a countywide
framework from which the county and cities’ comprehensive plans are developed. The Countywide
Planning Policies were last amended in 2011. Future amendments will be in response to changes in the
countywide growth strategy, changes in the GMA, decisions of the Growth Management Hearings Board,
and issues involving local plan implementation.
The County’s transportation policies are intended to guide transportation planning by the county and
cities within Snohomish County and to provide the basis for regional coordination with the Washington
State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and transit operating agencies. The policies ensure that the
countywide transportation systems are adequate to serve the level of land development that is allowed
and forecasted.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 506 of 680
EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan serves as the City’s primary growth management tool and must be consistent
with the Growth Management Act. A community such as Edmonds, with attractive natural features, a
pleasant residential atmosphere and proximity to a large urban center, is subject to constant growth
pressures. The Plan is intended to provide a long-range strategy guiding how the City will develop and
how services will be provided.
The Comprehensive Plan identifies the City’s expected population, housing, and jobs through the year
2035. It contains goals, policies, maps, and narrative—all of which must be consistent and coordinated
with each other. Key elements of the Comprehensive Plan include:
• Community sustainability
• Land use
• Transportation (as represented by this Transportation Plan)
• Housing
• Parks, recreation, and open space
• Community culture and urban design
• Economic development.
• Capital facilities
• Utilities
(City of Edmonds 2015)
The comprehensive transportation plan serves as the transportation element of the city’s comprehensive
plan.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 507 of 680
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan has included a significant amount of community involvement at
all stages of the planning and development process. Feedback obtained from open houses, citizen
committee involvement, and intergovernmental coordination was very useful to the initial development
and subsequent revision of the Transportation Plan, greatly enhancing its effectiveness. These efforts led
to more realistic assessments of existing conditions and impacts of forecasted growth, as well as the
identification of appropriate measures to address both current and future conditions.
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES
Two public open houses were held at Edmonds City Hall to inform the community about the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan and gather comments on transportation improvement priorities.
The first open house was held on February 25, 2015. The purpose of this meeting was to introduce the
project to citizens, share the existing transportation inventories and existing conditions analyses that had
been completed, and gather input from participants on the transportation issues they felt are most
important. The second meeting was held on June 10, 2015. The purpose of this meeting was to share the
draft list of recommended transportation projects, present cost estimates, discuss the financial outlook for
transportation capital projects and solicit citizen input on project priorities.
The public open houses were publicized through notice in the City newsletter, City website, advertisement
on the local government channel, and meeting notification in the local newspaper.
CITIZEN ADVISORY TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
The City of Edmonds Citizen Advisory Transportation Committee is comprised of ten citizens and (1) City
Council member who met monthly with the City’s Transportation Engineer City engineering staff. The
purpose of the Committee was to:
• Monitor and make recommendations relating to motorized and non-motorized transportation
issues, systems, and funding;
• Contribute input to updates of the City Comprehensive Transportation Plan and monitor the
City’s efforts to implement the improvements detailed in the Plan; and
• Enhance communication with the public with regard to transportation needs.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 508 of 680
The Transportation Committee provided transportation recommendations for updates reflected in this
Transportation Plan. City staff worked with Transportation Committee members throughout the Plan
development to update the City’s transportation goals and policies, discuss Plan elements, and determine
how best to produce a balanced multimodal plan. The Committee also acted as the Walkway Committee,
ranking all the proposed Walkway projects (based on various criteria).
EDMONDS BIKE GROUP
The long-standing group meets monthly to discuss bicycle transportation issues. Membership includes
over 50 residents, with about 10 members who regularly attend monthly group meetings. Members
represent Edmonds, Woodway, Lynnwood, and Mountlake Terrace, and are interested in improving
citywide bicycle infrastructure and conditions for bicycle travel. The Bike Group helped establish a bike
map indicating existing local bicycle facilities (such as bike lanes, bike routes, and sharrows) and where
those should be added as part of future projects. The Bike Group’s recommendations are also presented
in Chapter 4 of this Transportation Plan.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION
The following agencies reviewed this Comprehensive Transportation Plan: WSDOT, PSRC, Community
Transit, Snohomish County, the City of Mountlake Terrace, the City of Shoreline, the City of Lynnwood,
and the Town of Woodway.
OVERVIEW OF THE TRANSPORTATION PLAN ELEMENTS
This Comprehensive Transportation Plan includes the following elements:
Chapter 2: Goals, and Policies – Presents the transportation goals and policies that guide the
evaluation of existing and future conditions, and the development of the Recommended
Transportation Plan.
• Chapter 3: Street System – Provides an inventory of existing streets, existing and projected
future traffic volumes, assessment of existing and projected future roadway operations, safety
assessment, and recommended improvements to address safety and mobility needs.
• Chapter 4: Non-Motorized System – Provides an inventory of existing walkways and bikeways,
assessment of needs, strategy for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and
recommended improvements to address pedestrian and bicycle mobility and safety.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 509 of 680
• Chapter 5: Transit and Transportation Demand Management – Provides an inventory of
existing transit facilities and service, including buses, rail and ferries; and presents strategies to
support transit and commute trip reduction.
• Chapter 6: Implementation and Financial Plan – Provides a summary of the projects, project
prioritization, total costs, and financial strategies and projected revenue for recommended
improvements through 2035.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 510 of 680
2. GOALS AND POLICIES
Assessments of existing and future conditions, as well as development of the Transportation Plan, are
guided by transportation goals and policies developed by the City. Major updates of the goals and
policies take place during updates of the Transportation Element, under the direction of the Citizen
Advisory and Technical Advisory Committees.
Goals are generalized statements which broadly relate the physical environment to values. Under each
goal, Policies are listed that provide specific direction for meeting the goals. In 2011, the City of Edmonds
adopted a Complete Streets Ordinance, which pledges that the City will plan, design, and implement
transportation projects, accommodating bicycles, pedestrians, and transit riders.
The Transportation Element has six overarching goals that work together to achieve this vision of
providing a transportation system that accommodates all users:
1. Provide a safe and user-friendly travel experience for all users
2. Build a transportation system that enhances the City’s land use vision
3. Be sustainable- financially, environmentally, and socially
4. Foster an active and healthy community
5. Create a complete and connected system that offers efficient transportation options
6. Partner with other entities to create a logical system that integrates within the regional
transportation network
Each of these goals is described in more detail below, and includes specific policies to achieve individual
goals. Appendix A provides a tabular comparison of goal and policy changes compared to the previous
plan.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 511 of 680
GOAL 1: PROVIDE A SAFE AND COMFORTABLE TRAVEL
EXPERIENCE FOR ALL USERS
Policy 1.1 Design new streets and, when the opportunity arises, redesign streets to a standard
that reduces lane width to accommodate vehicles that use the street most frequently;
rather than large vehicles that may use the street only occasionally.
Policy 1.2 Relate required street widths to the function and operating standards for the street.
Policy 1.3 Design street improvements to enhance the safe and efficient movement of
pedestrians and bicycle traffic. Incorporate traffic calming measures where
appropriate.
Policy 1.4 Design walking paths for use by people at all mobility levels. Improvements to walking
paths and curb cuts should meet the requirements of the ADA.
Policy 1.5 Place highest priority on provision of lighting on walking paths, crosswalks and bicycle
facilities that regularly carry non-motorized traffic at night. Non-motorized traffic,
characterized as any vehicle that does not require a license, includes motorized
bicycles, scooters, and Segways, in addition to pedestrians and people riding bicycles.
Policy 1.6 Seek opportunities to improve safety for those who bicycle in the city.
Policy 1.7 Coordinate planning, construction, and operation of transportation facilities and
programs with the State, Counties, neighboring cities, Puget Sound Regional Council,
Community Transit, Sound Transit, and other entities to ensure critical infrastructure is
in place to respond to both natural and human-caused disasters.
GOAL 2: BUILD A TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM THAT ENHANCES
THE CITY’S LAND USE VISION
Policy 2.1 Locate and design transportation facilities to meet the demands of existing and
projected land uses as provided for in the Comprehensive Plan.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 512 of 680
Policy 2.2 Work with transit agencies to ensure existing and planned transit creates connections
to existing and future employment and activity centers.
Policy 2.3 Locate and design transportation facility improvements to respect the community’s
residential character, natural features, and quality of life.
Policy 2.4 Design local residential streets to prevent or discourage use as shortcuts for vehicle
through-traffic. Coordinate local traffic control measures with the affected
neighborhood.
Policy 2.5 Design street improvements to encourage downtown traffic circulation to flow in and
around commercial blocks, promoting customer convenience and reducing
congestion. Separate through-traffic from local traffic circulation to encourage and
support customer access.
Policy 2.6 Carefully review parking requirements for downtown development proposals both for
autos and bikes to promote development while still ensuring adequate balance
between parking supply and demand.
Policy 2.7 Encourage underground parking as part of new development.
Policy 2.8 Provide a complete walking path network in commercial areas, especially downtown,
as an element of public open space that supports pedestrian and commercial activity.
Policy 2.9 Reassess the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) annually to ensure that
transportation facility needs, financing, and levels of service are consistent with the
City’s land use plan. The annual update should be coordinated with the annual budget
process, and the annual amendment of the Comprehensive Plan.
Policy 2.10 Ensure city transportation facilities and services are provided concurrent with new
development or redevelopment to mitigate impacts created from such development.
Road improvements may be funded with impact fees, and provided at the time of or
within 10 years of development.
Policy 2.11 Encourage neighborhoods to fund improvements that exceed City standards (e.g. for
parking, median strips, landscaping, traffic calming, walking paths or other locally-
determined projects).
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 513 of 680
Policy 2.12 Guide the development of new streets and maintenance of existing streets to form a
well-connected network that provides for safe, direct, and convenient access to the
existing roadway network for automobiles, bicycles, and pedestrians. Prioritize
transportation investments that reinforce the City’s vision of developing near transit-
oriented areas.
GOAL 3: BE SUSTAINABLE- FINANCIALLY, ENVIRONMENTALLY,
AND SOCIALLY
Policy 3.1 Minimize the adverse impact of transportation facility improvements on the natural
environment both in established neighborhoods and undeveloped areas.
Policy 3.2 Design streets with the minimum pavement areas needed and utilized innovative and
sustainable materials where feasible, to reduce impervious surfaces.
Policy 3.3 Include analyses of geological, topographical, and hydrological conditions in street
design.
Policy 3.4 Encourage landscaping along residential streets to preserve existing trees and
vegetation, increase open spaces, and decrease impervious surfaces. Landscaping may
be utilized to provide visual and physical barriers but should be carefully designed not
to interfere with motorists’ sight distance and traffic, pedestrian, bicycle, and wheel
chair safety. Landscaping improvements should take maintenance requirements into
consideration.
Policy 3.5 Encourage underground placements of utilities when existing roadways are improved.
Policy 3.6 Encourage placement of underground conduit for future installation of fiber optic
cable as roadways are built or improved.
Policy 3.7 Convert private streets to public streets only when:
a. The City Council has determined that a public benefit would result.
b. The street has been improved to the appropriate City public street standard.
c. The City Engineer has determined that conversion will have minimal effect on the
City’s street maintenance budget.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 514 of 680
d. In the case that the conversion is initiated by the owner(s) of the road, that the
owner(s) finance the survey and legal work required for the conversion.
Policy 3.8 Construct walking paths in an ecologically friendly manner, encouraging the use of
pervious paving materials where feasible.
Policy 3.9 Maximize efficiencies of existing transportation facilities through:
• Transportation Demand Management
• Encouraging development to use existing facilities
• Technologies that improve the efficiency of travel, including signal improvements
and changeable message signs.
Policy 3.10 Base the financing plan for transportation facilities on estimates of local revenues and
external revenues that are reasonably anticipated to be received by the City.
Policy 3.11 Finance the six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) within the City's
financial capacity to achieve a balance between available revenue and expenditures
related to transportation facilities. If projected funding is inadequate to finance
needed transportation facilities, based on adopted LOS (Level of Service) standards
and forecasted growth, the City should explore one or more of the following options:
• Lower the LOS standard
• Change the Land Use Plan
• Increase the amount of revenue from existing sources
• Adopt new sources of revenue
Policy 3.12 Seek funding to complete multimodal solutions to transportation needs.
Policy 3.13 Ensure that ongoing operating and maintenance costs associated with a
transportation facility are financially feasible prior to constructing the facility.
Policy 3.14 Ensure that future development pays a proportionate share of the cost to mitigate
impacts associated with growth. Future development's payments may take the form of
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 515 of 680
impact fees, SEPA mitigation payments, dedications of land, provision of
transportation facilities, or special assessments.
Policy 3.15 Strive to conform to the Federal and State Clean Air Acts by working to help
implement PSRC’s Vision 2040 and by following the requirements of Chapter 173-420
of the WAC.
Policy 3.16 Support transportation investments that advance alternatives to driving alone, as a
measure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and in turn reduce the effect of citywide
transportation on global climate change.
Policy 3.17 Keep roadways operating in safe condition by taking steps to secure roadway funding
from a variety of sources to maintain, rehabilitate, or replace roadways. Edmonds will
work with its partners to understand street maintenance and rehabilitation needs.
Prioritize roadway preservation projects and consider the long term maintenance
costs of new capacity as part of the up-front cost of development.
Policy 3.18 Where possible, preserve encourage easements that provide pedestrian connections
and protect the natural environment.
Policy 3.19 Support the transportation needs of traditionally underserved neighborhoods and
vulnerable populations through investment in equitable modes of transportation, in
addition to potential catch-up investment for areas in need as necessary.
GOAL 4: FOSTER AN ACTIVE AND HEALTHY COMMUNITY
Policy 4.1 Encourage active transportation by providing safe facilities for bicycle and pedestrians.
Policy 4.2 Leverage funding opportunities and the City’s right of way to complete the arterial
walking path system according to the following priority list:
• Arterial roadways without walking paths or shoulders on which transit service is
provided;
• Arterial roadways without walking paths or shoulders on which transit service is
not provided;
• Arterial roadways with shoulders too narrow or in or poor walking condition for
pedestrians;
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 516 of 680
• Arterial roadways with adequate shoulders for pedestrians but without walking
paths; and
• The remainder of the arterial roadway system (e.g. roads with walking paths along
one side, or roads with walking paths in disrepair).
Policy 4.3 As funding permits and right of way is available, complete collector walking path
system according to the following priority list:
• Collector roadways without walking paths or shoulders (or with narrow shoulders)
on which transit service is provided; and
• Collector roadways without walking paths that are adjacent to retail, schools, bus
stops or parks.
Policy 4.4 When appropriate, acquire easements and/or development rights in lieu of rights-of-
way for installation of smaller facilities such as sidewalks, walking paths, and bikeways.
Policy 4.5 Locate utilities and walking path amenities, including but not limited to poles,
benches, planters, trashcans, bike racks, and awnings, so as to not obstruct non-
motorized traffic or transit access.
Policy 4.6 Locate walking paths and bicycle facilities to facilitate community access to parks,
schools, neighborhoods, shopping centers and transit facilities/stops.
Policy 4.7 Place highest priority on pedestrian safety in areas frequented by children, such as
near schools, parks, and playgrounds. Provide walking paths in these areas at every
opportunity.
Policy 4.8 Maintain existing public walking paths.
Policy 4.9 Periodically review and update walking path construction priorities in the
Transportation Plan.
Policy 4.10 Encourage the use of innovative crosswalk treatments, such as pedestrian actuated
flashing signals or pedestrian crossing flags.
Policy 4.11 Encourage collaboration across departments to develop a network of walking paths
throughout the city. This network could include but not be limited to signed loop trails
in neighborhoods, park-to-park walking paths, and theme-related walks.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 517 of 680
Policy 4.12 Encourage separation of walking paths from bikeways, where feasible. Multi-use
paths should also be encouraged in instances which separating walk and bike paths is
unreasonable.
Policy 4.13 Place highest priority for improvements to bicycle facilities and installation of bike
racks and lockers near schools, commercial districts, multi-family residences,
recreation areas, and transit facilities.
Policy 4.14 Provide bicycle lanes where feasible, to encourage the use of bicycles for
transportation and recreation purposes. Sharrows can be provided on lower volume
roadways to create motorist awareness.
Policy 4.15 Identify bicycle routes through signage.
Policy 4.16 Ensure that existing public bicycle facilities are maintained and upgraded when
feasible.
Policy 4.17 Prioritize connectivity to transit nodes that provide important connections to regional
destinations.
Policy 4.18 When bicycle improvements are being considered along a certain stretch, the
addition of protected bike lanes will be considered as part of the evaluation.
GOAL 5: CREATE A COMPLETE AND CONNECTED SYSTEM THAT
OFFERS EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS
Policy 5.1 Design all streets where feasible as complete streets that serve automobile, transit,
pedestrian and bicycle travel according to City ordinance 3842., where feasible.
Policy 5.2 Periodically review functional classifications of city streets and adjust the classifications
when appropriate.
Policy 5.3 Provide on-street parking as a secondary street function only in specifically designated
areas such as in the downtown business district and in residential areas where off-
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 518 of 680
street parking is limited. Streets should not be designed to provide on-street parking
as a primary function, particularly in areas with frequent transit service.
Policy 5.4 Encourage parking on one side rather than both sides of streets with narrow rights-of-
way, with the exception of downtown.
Policy 5.5 Encourage the efficient movement of people and goods through an effective and
inter-connected transportation network that includes: collector and arterial streets,
trails, bike paths, public transit and other transportation facilities.
Policy 5.6 Design streets to accommodate emergency service vehicles. Improve emergency
service access to the waterfront, especially to west side of train tracks when there is a
train crossing.
Policy 5.7 Coordinate traffic signals located within ½ mile of each other to decrease delay and
improve operations.
Policy 5.8 Use public rights-of-way only for public purposes. The private use of a public right-of-
way is prohibited unless expressly granted by the City.
Policy 5.9 Construct pedestrian facilities on all streets and highways, interconnecting with other
modes of transportation.
Policy 5.10 Locate walking paths and additional street features such as benches and shelters
along transit routes to provide easy access to transit stops.
Policy 5.11 Explore future funding for a city-based circulator bus that provides local shuttle
service between neighborhoods (Firdale Village, Perrinville, Five Corners, Westgate)
and downtown.
Policy 5.12 Place priority on coordinating bus routes and bus stop sites in City plans for street
lighting improvements.
Policy 5.13 Consider transit stop sites in the design of roadways, walking path improvements and
land use permit reviews.
Policy 5.14 Design Arterial and Collector roadways to accommodate buses and other modes of
public transportation including the use of high occupancy vehicle priority treatments,
transit signal priority, queue bypass lanes, boarding pads and shelter pads, and
transit-only lanes where appropriate.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 519 of 680
Policy 5.15 Implement multi-modal LOS standards that considers transit and non-motorized
operations as well as automobile operations.
Policy 5.16 Provide additional transportation facility capacity when existing facilities are used to
their maximum level of efficiency consistent with adopted LOS standards.
Policy 5.17 The City encourages the provision of a bus rapid transit system of other high-capacity
frequent transit service along SR 104.
GOAL 6: PARTNER WITH OTHER ENTITIES TO CREATE A LOGICAL
SYSTEM THAT INTEGRATES WITHIN THE REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION NETWORK
Policy 6.1 Provide access between private property and the public street system that is safe and
convenient, and incorporates the following considerations:
• Limit and provide access to the street network in a manner consistent with the
function and purpose of each roadway. Restrict number of driveways located
along arterials. Coordinate with local businesses and property owners to
consolidate access points in commercial and residential areas.
• Require new development to consolidate and minimize access points along all
state highways, principal arterials, and minor arterials.
• Design the street system so that the majority of direct residential access is
provided via local streets.
• For access onto state highways, implement Chapter 468-52 of the Washington
Administrative Code (WAC), Highway Access Management -- Access Control
Classification System and Standards.
Policy 6.2 Provide safe bicycle connections to existing bicycle facilities in adjacent jurisdictions.
Policy 6.3 Work with transit providers to ensure that transit service within the city is:
• Convenient and flexible to meet community and user needs;
• Dependable, affordable, and maintains regular schedules;
• Provides adequate service during evening hours, weekends, and holidays; and
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 520 of 680
• Comfortable and safe for all users.
Policy 6.4 Work with transit providers to ensure that public transit is accessible within a quarter
(1/4) mile of any address in the city.
Policy 6.5 Work with transit providers to serve designated activity centers with appropriate levels
of transit service. Transit stops should be properly located throughout the activity
center, and designed to serve local commuting and activity patterns, and significant
concentrations of employment.
Policy 6.6 Design new development and redevelopment in activity centers to provide pedestrian
access to transit.
Policy 6.7 Work with transit agencies to coordinate public transit with school district
transportation systems to provide transit connections for school children.
Policy 6.8 Form a multimodal system that links ferry, rail, bus, auto, and non-motorized travel
providing access to regional transportation systems while ensuring the quality, safety,
and integrity of local commercial districts and residential neighborhoods.
Policy 6.9 Locate and design a multi-modal transportation center and terminal to serve the city’s
needs with the following elements:
• A ferry terminal that meets the operational requirements to accommodate
forecast ridership demand and that provides proper separation of automobile,
bicycle and walk-on passenger loading;
• A train station that meets intercity passenger service and commuter rail loading
requirements, and provides the requisite amenities such as waiting areas, storage
and bicycle lockers;
• A transit center with connections to major regional destinations;
• A linkage between stations/terminals that meets the operational and safety
requirements of each mode, including a link between the multi-modal station
terminal to the business/commerce center in downtown Edmonds;
• Safety features that include better separation between train traffic and other
modes of travel, particularly vehicle and passenger ferry traffic as well as the
general public; and
• Overall facility design that minimizes the impact to the natural environment, in
particular the adjacent marshes.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 521 of 680
Policy 6.10 Encourage joint public/private efforts to develop and implement transportation
demand management and traffic reduction strategies.
Policy 6.11 Work with both public and private entities to ensure the provision of adequate
transportation facilities and services necessary to mitigate impacts to Edmonds’
transportation system.
Policy 6.12 Participate in local and regional forums to coordinate strategies and programs that
further the goals of the Comprehensive Plan.
Policy 6.13 Coordinate with neighboring jurisdictions and regional and state agencies to make
transportation system improvements and assure that funding requirements are met.
Policy 6.14 Encourage public transportation providers within the city to coordinate services to
ensure the most effective transportation systems possible and provide comfortable
stop amenities.
Policy 6.15 Coordinate with neighboring jurisdictions and regional and state agencies to
encourage their support of the City’s policies and planning processes.
Policy 6.16 Participate on the boards of Community Transit and other public transit providers, and
regularly share citizen and business comments regarding transit services to the
appropriate provider.
Policy 6.17 Work with Community Transit to provide additional passenger shelters and benches at
bus stops sites within Edmonds.
Policy 6.18 Coordinate with local public transit agencies and private transit providers regarding
road closures or other events that may disrupt normal transit operations in order to
minimize impacts to transit customers.
Policy 6.19 Work with Community Transit and local employers to encourage ridesharing to
employment centers and major activity centers.
Policy 6.20 Coordinate with non-City providers of transportation facilities and services on a joint
program for maintaining adopted LOS standards, funding and construction of capital
improvements. Work in partnership with non-City transportation facility providers to
prepare functional plans consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan.
Policy 6.21 Regularly coordinate with WSDOT, Washington State Ferries, Community Transit, King
County Metro, Snohomish County, the Town of Woodway, and the Cities of Mountlake
Terrace, Lynnwood, Shoreline, and Mukilteo, to ensure planning for transportation
facilities is compatible.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 522 of 680
Policy 6.22 Encourage and promote the use of electric vehicles as they are developed in all
automobile, truck, and commercial vehicle classes. Encourage the use of such vehicles
in a way that conditions are safe and don’t impede traffic flow. Provide for a broad
range of electric charging opportunities at public and private parking venues
throughout the city, including minimum standards for new developments that provide
parking facilities.
Position Edmonds to respond to technical innovations, such as electric vehicles,
autonomous and driverless carsvehicles, and other personal mobility devices.
Coordinate with PSRC and other regional and private entitles entities to understand
regional plans for electric vehicle charging and accommodation accommodate these
modes of transportation that have the potential to provide increased mobility and
environmental benefits. of other alternative fuel sources. `
Due to the restructuring of sections when compared to the 2009 PplanPlan, many policy numbers have
changed. Appendix A shows a comparison table.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 523 of 680
3. TRANSPORTATION NETWORK
This chapter provides an inventory of the existing transportation network in Edmonds, including
roadways, pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, and transit service. This chapter also includes safety
assessment and inventory of parking facilities.
EXISTING ROADWAY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
All streets in the city have a designated functional classification. The functional classification of a street
depends on the types of trips that occur on it, the basic purpose for which it was designed, and the
relative level of traffic volume it carries. The different classifications of roadways serve different stages of a
trip, with some roadways designed to prioritize mobility while others prioritize access to adjacent land
uses:
Each road is classified as one of the following:
• Freeway – Multi-lane, high-speed, high-capacity road intended exclusively for motorized traffic.
All access is controlled by interchanges and road crossings are grade-separated. No freeways pass
through Edmonds, though Interstate-5 (I-5) runs to the east of the city limits.
• Principal Arterial – Road that connects major activity centers and facilities, typically constructed
with limited direct access to abutting land uses. The primary function of principal arterials is to
provide a high degree of vehicle mobility, but they may provide a minor amount of land access.
Principal arterials serve high traffic volume corridors, carrying the greatest portion of through or
long-distance traffic within a city, and serving inter-community trips. On-street parking is often
limited to improve capacity for through-traffic. Typically, principal arterials are multi-lane facilities
and have traffic signals at intersections with other arterials. Regional bus routes are generally
located on principal arterials, as are transfer centers and park-and-ride lots. Principal arterials
usually have sidewalks and sometimes have separate bicycle facilities, so that non-motorized
traffic is separated from vehicle traffic.
• Minor Arterial – Road that connects centers and facilities within the community and serves some
through traffic, while providing a greater level of access to abutting properties. Minor arterials
connect with other arterial and collector roads, and serve less concentrated traffic-generating
areas, such as neighborhood shopping centers and schools. Provision for on-street parking varies
by location. Although the dominant function of minor arterials is the movement of through traffic,
they also provide for considerable local traffic with origins or destinations at points along the
corridor. Minor arterials also carry local and commuter bus routes. They usually have sidewalks
and sometimes have separate bicycle facilities, so that non-motorized traffic is separated from
vehicular traffic.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 524 of 680
• Collector – Road designed to fulfill both functions of mobility and land access. Collectors typically
serve intra-community trips connecting residential neighborhoods with each other or activity
centers, while also providing a high degree of property access within a localized area. These
roadways “collect” vehicular trips from local access streets and distribute them to higher
classification streets. Additionally, collectors provide direct services to residential areas, local
parks, churches and areas with similar land uses. Typically, right-of-way and paving widths are
narrower for collectors than arterials. They may only be two lanes wide and are often controlled
with stop signs. Local bus routes often run on collectors, and they usually have sidewalks on at
least one side of the street.
• Local Access – Road with a primary function of providing access to residences. Typically, they are
only a few blocks long, are relatively narrow, and have low speeds. Local streets are generally not
designed to accommodate buses, and often do not have sidewalks. Cul-de-sacs are also
considered local access streets. All streets in Edmonds that have not been designated as an
arterial or a collector are local access streets. Local access streets make up the majority of the
miles of roadway in the city.
Higher classes (e.g. freeways and arterials) provide a high degree of mobility and have more limited
access to adjacent land uses, accommodating higher traffic volumes at higher speeds. Lower classes (e.g.,
local access streets) provide a high degree of access to adjacent land and are not intended to serve
through traffic, carrying lower traffic volumes at lower speeds. Collectors generally provide a more
balanced emphasis on traffic mobility and access to land uses.
Cities and counties are required to adopt a street classification system that is consistent with these
guidelines (RCW 35.78.010 and RCW 47.26.090). Figure 3-1 shows the existing road functional
classifications for city streets, as well as recommended classification changes.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 525 of 680
Figure 3-1 Functional Classification
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 526 of 680
Table 3-1 summarizes the total miles of roadway located within the city by existing functional
classification. The table compares the miles of roadway to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
guidelines (FHWA 1989). The table shows that miles of minor arterial are slightly lower than FHWA
guidelines, and all miles of all other classifications are within guidelines. The total miles of principal and
minor arterial are within guidelines for total amount of arterial.
Table 3-1. Miles of Roadway by Existing Federal Functional Classification
Functional Classification Miles of Roadway in Edmonds Proportion of Total Roadway Typical Proportion based on FHWA Guidelines1
Principal Arterial 12 8% 2% – 9%
Minor Arterial 14 9% 7% – 14%
Collector 17 11% 6% – 24%
Local Access 114 72 % 62% – 74%
Total 157 100%
1. Source: Federal Highway Administration 2013.
EVALUATION OF ROAD FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS
Over time, changes in traffic volumes and shifts in land use and traffic patterns may cause the function of
a road to change. Thus, it is important to periodically review the functions city roads serve, and evaluate
whether any changes in classification are warranted. The following guidelines are used for evaluating the
classifications.
1. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) – Roadways with higher functional classifications typically carry higher
traffic volumes. On high volume roadways, the demand for traffic mobility is more likely to outweigh
the need for access to abutting land. Conversely, where volumes are lower the access function of the
street will generally be more important than mobility for traffic. Traffic volumes alone do not provide
the basis for classification, but are used in conjunction with the other criteria listed below. However,
the following ranges are used as guidelines:
- Minor Arterial Street: 3,000 to 15,000 ADT
- Collector Street: 1,000 to 5,000 ADT
2. Non-motorized use – The accommodation of non-automobile modes, including walking, bicycling,
and transit use is another important measure of a road’s function. Roads with higher classifications
tend to serve more modes of travel. The more travel modes that a street accommodates, the greater
the number of people that street serves, and the more important that street is to the movement of
people, goods, and services throughout the city.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 527 of 680
3. Street length – A street that is longer in length tends to function at a higher classification. This is
due to the fact that longer (continuous) streets allow travelers to move between distant attractions
with a limited number of turns, stops, and other distractions that discourage them from using streets
of lower classification. Longer streets generally supply a higher level of mobility, compared to other
streets that provide more access.
4. Street spacing – Streets of higher classification usually have greater traffic carrying capacity and
fewer impediments to travel. Fewer facilities are needed to serve the traffic mobility demands of the
community due to their efficiency in moving traffic. This typically means that fewer streets of higher
classification are needed, so there will be greater distances between them. The farther the distance of
a street from a higher classification street, the more likely it is that the street will function at a similar
classification. A greater number of streets of lower classification are needed to provide access to
abutting land. Therefore, they must be spaced more closely and there must be many more of them. It
is considered most desirable to have a network of multiple lower classification streets feeding into
progressively fewer higher classified streets. Based on these guidelines, typical spacing for the
different classifications of roadways are as follows:
- Principal Arterials: 1.0 mile
- Minor Arterials: 0.3 to 0.7 mile
- Collectors: 0.25 to 0.5 mile
- Local Access: 0.1 mile
5. Street connectivity – Streets that provide easy connections to other roads of higher classification
are likely to function at a similar classification. This can be attributed to the ease of movement
perceived by travelers who desire to make that connection. For example, state highways are generally
interconnected with one another, to provide a continuous network of high order roadways that can
be used to travel into and through urban areas. Urban arterials provide a similar interconnected
network at the citywide level. By contrast, collectors often connect local access streets with one or two
higher-level arterial streets, thus helping provide connectivity at the neighborhood scale rather than a
citywide level. Local streets also provide a high degree of connectivity as a necessary component of
property access. However, the street lengths, traffic control, and/or street geometry are usually
designed so that anyone but local travelers would consider the route inconvenient.
The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1973 requires the use of functional highway classification to update and
modify the Federal-aid highway systems. Thus, the FHWA and WSDOT have adopted a federal functional
classification system for city roadways. Allocation of funds, as well as application of local agency design
standards, is based on the federal classification. Federal funds may only be spent on federally classified
routes.
Based upon the guidelines provided above, the following changes to functional classifications are
recommended:
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 528 of 680
• Apply for the following federal functional classification upgrade from local access to collector for
the following five road segments:
- 7th Avenue N, Main Street – Caspers Street
- 80th Avenue W, 212th Street SW – 220th Street SW
- 80th Avenue W, 200th Street SW - 196th Street SW
- 96th Avenue W, 220th Street SW – Walnut Street
- Dayton Street, 5th Avenue S – 100th Avenue W
• Apply for the following federal functional classification upgrade from collector to minor arterial
for the following six road segments:
- 76th Avenue W, 212th Street SW – NE 205th Street
- 84th Avenue W, 212th Street SW – 238th Street SW
- 220th Street SW, 100th Avenue W – SR 99
• Apply for the following federal functional classification downgrade from collector to local access
for the following road segment:
- Admiral Way, south of W Dayton Street
Under the recommended classifications, the total proportion of minor arterial would increase slightly, and
the proportion of local access street would decrease slightly, compared to existing conditions. Supporting
information can be seen in Appendix B.
ROADWAY SYSTEM INVENTORY
STATE HIGHWAYS
There are three Washington state routes located within the city.
• SR 104 (Edmonds Way) runs roughly east-west between the Edmonds-Kingston Ferry dock and I-
5.
• SR 524 (Puget Drive/196th Street SW) runs east-west connecting SR 104 to SR 99, I-5, and
ultimately SR 522.
• SR 99 runs north-south on the east side of the city, and is the highest traffic-carrying arterial in
Edmonds. From Edmonds, it runs north to Everett, and south through Shoreline to Seattle and the
Tacoma metropolitan area.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 529 of 680
In 1998, the Washington State Legislature passed Highways of Statewide Significance legislation (RCW
47.06.140). Highways of Statewide Significance promote and maintain significant statewide travel and
economic linkages. The legislation emphasizes that these significant facilities should be planned from a
statewide perspective, and thus they are not subject to local concurrency standards. (WSDOT 2007)
In Edmonds, SR 104 between the Edmonds-Kingston Ferry Dock and I-5, and SR 99 between the south
city limits and SR 104 have been designated as Highways of Statewide Significance. The Edmonds-
Kingston ferry route is considered to be part of SR 104, and is also identified as a Highway of Statewide
Significance (excluding the ferry terminal). (Washington State Transportation Commission 2009)
CITY STREETS
The city street system is comprised of a grid of principal arterials, minor arterials, collectors, and local
streets. Appendix B summarizes the city roadways currently classified as principal arterial, minor arterial,
or collector. The table shows the existing functional classification, speed limit, number of lanes, and
walkway/bikeway characteristics for each of the roadways.
SPEED LIMITS
Figure 3-2 shows speed limits on collectors and arterials in Edmonds. The speed limits range from 25
miles per hour (mph) to 45 mph. The speed limit on most local access streets is 25 mph. The speed limit
was dropped on State Route 104, between 5th Avenue S and Dayton Street, from 40 mph to 35 mph in
early 2015 (when Pine St. Pedestrian Crossing was added by WSDOT)..
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 530 of 680
Figure 3-2. Speed Limits on City Streets
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 531 of 680
TRAFFIC CONTROL
Traffic signals and stop signs are used to provide traffic controls at intersections with high traffic volume.
These devices aid in control of traffic flow. In addition, these devices help to minimize collisions at
intersections. Figure 3-3 shows the city intersections controlled by traffic signals and those controlled by
all-way stop signs. There are 29 31 signalized intersections, two emergency signals, and 43 45 all-way stop
controlled intersections in the city. The city maintains all signals except for some located on Highways of
Statewide Significance that are maintained by WSDOT.
TRAFFIC CALMING DEVICES
Traffic calming devices are physical devices installed on neighborhood residentialany classified streets, to
discourage speeding, reduce cut-through traffic, and/or improve safety. Traffic calming devices are
currently in place at many locations throughout Edmonds. These measures have been installed as part of
capital improvement projects, as opportunities were presented, and occasionally in response to citizen
requests.
The following types of traffic calming devices are currently present within the city:
• Bulb-outs – curb extensions that are used to narrow the roadway either at an intersection or at
mid- block along a street corridor. Their primary purpose is to make intersections more
pedestrian friendly by shortening the roadway crossing distance and drawing attention to
pedestrians via raised peninsula. Additionally, a bulb-out often tightens the curb radius at the
corner, which reduces the speeds of turning vehicles.
• Chicane – series of curb extensions that alternate from one side of the street to the other, which
narrows the roadway and requires drivers to slow down to travel through the chicane. Typically, a
series of at least three curb extensions is used.
• Partial closure – involves closing down one lane of a two-lane roadway along with a “Do Not
Enter” or “One Way” sign, in order to reduce cut-through traffic.
• Raised pavement markers – 4-inch diameter raised buttons placed in design sequence across a
road, causing a vehicle to vibrate and alert the motorist to an upcoming situation. Raised
pavement markers may be used in conjunction with curves, crosswalks, pavement legends and
speed limit signs. They are most effective when used to alert motorists to unusual conditions
ahead, and are most commonly used on approaches to stop signs, often in situations where the
visibility of a stop sign is limited.
• Speed hump cushions – Similar to speed humps, speed cushions are divided into sections so
that wide wheelbase vehicles can straddle them. As such, they can more easily accommodate
transit, fire engines, and other emergency response vehicles.rounded raised area placed across
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 532 of 680
the roadway that is approximately 3 to 4 inches high and 12 to 22 feet long w/ small gaps
allowing emergency vehicles to go through without delay. This treatment is used to slow vehicles
by forcing them to decelerate in order to pass over them comfortably. The design speeds for
speed humps are 20 to 25 mph.
• Traffic circle – raised island placed in the center of an intersection which forces traffic into
circular maneuvers. Motorists yield to vehicles already in the intersection and only need to
consider traffic approaching in one direction. Traffic circles prevent drivers from speeding through
intersections by impeding straight-through movement.
• Radar feedback sign – An electronic sign that notifies on coming motorists of their current
speed in miles per hour. The posted speed limit is also visible to give motorists a reference. The
intent of this device is to make drivers more conscientious of their speed in relation to the speed
limit.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 533 of 680
Figure 3-3. Existing Traffic Control Devices
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 534 of 680
PARKING
On-street parking is available throughout most of the city. Parking is accommodated on the street and in
private parking lots associated with existing development. Public parking is provided throughout the city
at no charge to drivers. In the downtown area, parking is limited to three hours along most of the
downtown streets, with certain stalls designated for handicapped parking, one-hour parking, and
loading/unloading.
The City has established an employee permit parking program to provide more parking to the general
public in high demand parking areas by encouraging Edmonds' business owners and employees to park
in lower demand parking areas. The permit authorizes permit employees to park for more than three
hours in three-hour parking areas if the parking is part of a commute to work.
A three-hour Ppublic parking lots, allowing all-day parking, are is also provided at various locations in
Downtown the Edmonds (such as Police Department/Fire Department and City Hall). that allows all-day
parking. Supply is currently adequate to accommodate parking demand. The City continues to monitor
parking demand and supply and make adjustments as needed. Figure 3-4 shows the downtown streets
on which three hour parking, one hour parking, and handicapped parking are located.
STREET STANDARDS
The Goals and Objectives of the Transportation Plan relate street design to the desires of the local
community, and advise that design be at a scale commensurate with the function that the street serves.
Guidelines are therefore important to provide designers with essential elements of street design as
desired by the community. Essential functions of streets in Edmonds include vehicle mobility, pedestrian
access, bicycle access and aesthetics.
The City has adopted street design standards (Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 18.00.040,
City of Edmonds Construction Standard Details and Specifications) for residential, business and commercial
access roads, and follows established design guidelines for other streets. These are known as the
“Edmonds Standard Details”. These standard details provide typical roadway cross-sections for different
street classifications. They provide flexibility in design to accommodate a variety of physical, operational,
and cost issues.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 535 of 680
Figure 3-4. Downtown On-Street Parking
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 536 of 680
ROADWAY CONDITIONS
EXISTING TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Traffic volumes
PM peak hour traffic counts were taken at numerous locations throughout the city in November 2014, as
shown in Figure 3-5. The analysis of existing operating conditions on city roadways is based on these
data.
Level of Service
LOS is the primary measurement used to determine the operating quality of a roadway segment or
intersection. The quality of traffic conditions is graded into one of six LOS designations: A, B, C, D, E, or F.
Table 3-2 presents typical characteristics of the different LOS designations. LOS A and B represent the
fewest traffic slow-downs, and LOS C and D represent intermediate traffic congestion. LOS E indicates that
traffic conditions are at or approaching urban congestion; and LOS F indicates that traffic volumes are at a
high level of congestion and unstable traffic flow.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 537 of 680
Figure 3-5. Study Intersections
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 538 of 680
Table 3-2. Typical Roadway Level of Service Characteristics
Level of Service Characteristic Traffic Flow
A
Free flow – Describes a condition of free flow with low volumes and high
speeds. Freedom to select desired speeds and to maneuver within the
traffic stream is extremely high. Stopped delay at intersections is minimal.
B
Stable flow – Represents reasonable unimpeded traffic flow operations at
average travel speeds. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is
only slightly restricted and stopped delays are not bothersome. Drivers are
not generally subjected to appreciable tensions.
C
Stable flow – In the range of stable flow, but speeds and maneuverability
are more closely controlled by the higher volumes. The selection of speed is
now significantly affected by interactions with others in the traffic stream,
and maneuvering within the traffic stream required substantial vigilance on
the part of the user. The general level of comfort and convenience declines
noticeably at this level.
D
Stable flow – Represents high-density, but stable flow. Speed and freedom
to maneuver are severely restricted, and the driver or pedestrian
experiences a generally poor level of comfort and convenience- Small
increases in traffic flow will generally cause operational problems at this
level.
E
Unstable flow – Represents operating conditions at or near the maximum
capacity level. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is extremely
difficult, and it is generally accomplished by forcing a vehicle or pedestrian
to "give way" to accommodate such maneuvers. Comfort and convenience
levels are extremely poor, and driver or pedestrian frustration is generally
high. Operations at this level are usually unstable, because small increases
in flow or minor disturbances within the traffic stream will cause breakdowns
F
Forced flow – Describes forced or breakdown flow, where volumes are
above theoretical capacity. This condition exists wherever the amount of
traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount that can traverse the point.
Queues form behind such locations, and operations within the queue are
characterized by stop-and-go waves that are extremely unstable. Vehicles
may progress at reasonable speeds for several hundred feet or more, and
then be required to stop in a cyclical fashion.
Source: Transportation Research Board 2000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 539 of 680
Level of Service Criteria
Methods described in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board 2010) are used to
calculate the LOS for signalized and stop-controlled intersections. Table 3-3 summarizes the LOS criteria
for signalized and stop-controlled intersections. LOS for intersections is determined by the average
amount of delay experienced by vehicles at the intersection. For stop-controlled intersections, LOS
depends on the average delay experienced by drivers on the stop-controlled approaches. Thus, for two-
way or T-intersections, LOS is based on the average delay experienced by vehicles entering the
intersection on the minor (stop-controlled) approaches. For all-way stop controlled intersections, LOS is
determined by the average delay for all movements through the intersection. The LOS criteria for stop-
controlled intersections have different threshold values than those for signalized intersections, primarily
because drivers expect different levels of performance from distinct types of transportation facilities. In
general, stop-controlled intersections are expected to carry lower volumes of traffic than signalized
intersections. Thus, for the same LOS, a lower level of delay is acceptable at stop-controlled intersections
than it is for signalized intersections.
Table 3-3. Level of Service Criteria for Intersections
Average Delay per Vehicle (seconds/vehicle)
LOS Designation Signalized Intersections Stop-Controlled Intersections
A ≤ 10 ≤ 10
B > 10 – 20 > 10 – 15
C > 20 – 35 > 15 – 25
D > 35 – 55 > 25 – 35
E > 55 – 80 > 35 – 50
F > 80 > 50
Source: Transportation Research Board 2000
Due to the complexity of calculating the LOS of Roundabouts, Sidra Solutions was used to analyze the
roundabout at 212th St. SW and 84th Ave W. The Highway Capacity Manual 2010 method is used to
determine an LOS, while geometrical variables are not taken into account, such as entry angle and lane
width. The Highway Capacity Manual criteria for stop-controlled intersections (see Table 3-3) is applied,
because drivers’ expectations for delay at a roundabout more closely resemble expectations at a stop sign
than at a signal (e.g. a lower level of delay is considered acceptable).
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 540 of 680
Concurrency and Level of Service Standard
Under GMA, concurrency is the requirement that adequate infrastructure be planned and financed to
support development as it occurs. In practice, the GMA requires that communities can demonstrate the
ability to provide adequate service levels within six years of development occurring. LOS standards are
used to evaluate the transportation impacts of long-term growth and concurrency. In order to monitor
concurrency, the jurisdictions adopt acceptable roadway operating conditions that are then used to
measure existing or proposed traffic conditions and identify deficiencies. The City has adopted LOS
standards for city streets and state routes in the city that are subject to concurrency. Table 3-4 shows the
roadway LOS standards.
Table 3-4. Roadway Level of Service Standards
Facility Standard
City Streets Arterials: LOS D or better (except state routes)
Collectors: LOS C or better
State Highways of Regional
SignificanceState Routes
SR 99 north of SR 104; SR 524: LOS E or better
State Highways of Statewide
Significance
SR 104; SR 99 south of SR 104: Not subject to City standard, but identify
situations where WSDOT standard of D is not being met
LOS is measured at intersections during a typical weekday PM peak hour, using analysis methods outlined
in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board 2010) and discussed in the previous
section. For intersections of roads with different functional classifications, the standard for the higher
classification shall apply.
Intersections that operate below these standards are considered deficient under concurrency. Deficiencies
are identified either as existing deficiencies, meaning they are occurring under existing conditions and not
as the result of future development, or as projected future deficiencies, meaning that they are expected to
occur under future projected conditions. Concurrency management ensures that development, in
conformance with the adopted land use element of the Comprehensive Plan, will not cause a
transportation facility’s operations to drop below the adopted standard. Transportation capacity
expansion or demand management strategies must be in place or financially planned to be in place within
six years of development use.
Transportation concurrency is a term that describes whether a roadway is operating at its adopted LOS
standard. The adopted standard indicates a jurisdiction’s intent to maintain transportation service at that
level, which has budgetary implications. If a city adopts a high LOS standard, it will have to spend more
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 541 of 680
money to maintain the roadways than if it adopts a low LOS standard. On the other hand, a standard that
is too low may lead to an unacceptable service level and reduce livability for the community or
neighborhood. Under the GMA, if a development would cause the LOS to fall below the jurisdiction’s
adopted standard, it must be denied unless adequate improvements or demand management strategies
can be provided concurrent with the development. The key is to select a balanced standard—not so high
as to be unreasonable to maintain, and not so low as to allow an unacceptable level of traffic congestion.
Highways of Statewide Significance (in Edmonds, SR 104, and SR 99 south of SR 104) are not subject to
local concurrency standards. However, WSDOT has established a standard of LOS D for these facilities. The
City monitors Highways of Statewide Significance, and coordinates with WSDOT to address any
deficiencies that are identified.
Existing Level of Service
Table 3-5 and Figure 3-6 presents existing PM peak hour LOS for 31 intersections throughout the city.
The analysis indicates that all Edmonds City intersections are running to the City’s adopted LOS standard.
One Highway of Statewide Significance intersection (SR 104 & 238th St SW) is currently operating below
the standard.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 542 of 680
Table 3-5. Existing PM Peak Hour Intersection LOS
Intersection
Traffic
Control
Existing
LOS
Average Delay
(sec/veh)
LOS
Standard Jurisdiction
1 174th Street SW and Olympic View Drive Side Street
Stop C 18 D Edmonds/ Lynnwood
2 Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W AWSC C 17 D Edmonds
3 196th Street SW and 76th Avenue W Signal D 51 E WSDOT / Lynnwood
4 Puget Drive (SR 524) and 88th Avenue W Side Street
Stop
EB modify
(see
Table 3-7)
35 E WSDOT / Edmonds
5 Puget Drive and Olympic View Drive Signal BC modify 13 E WSDOT/ Edmonds
6 Caspers Street and 9th Avenue N (SR 524) Side Street
Stop CA modify 20 E WSDOT / Edmonds
7 208th Street SW and 76th Avenue W Signal AD modify 6 D Edmonds
8 212th Street SW and SR 99 Signal DC
modify 49 E WSDOT / Edmonds/
Lynnwood
9 212th Street SW and 76th Avenue W Signal BD 421 D Edmonds
10 212th Street SW and 84th Avenue W Roundabout B 13 D Edmonds
11 Main Street and 9th Avenue N AWSC D 32 D Edmonds
12 Walnut Street and 9th Avenue S AWSC B 13 D Edmonds
13 Main Street and 3rd Avenue N (SR- 5524) Signal B 12 E WSDOT / Edmonds
14 220th Street SW and SR 99 Signal D 51 E WSDOT / Edmonds /
MLT
15 220th Street SW and 76th Avenue W Signal C 29 D Edmonds
16 220th Street SW and 84th Avenue W Signal A 8 D Edmonds
17 220th Street SW and 9th Avenue S Signal B 13 D Edmonds
18 Edmonds Way (SR 104) and 100th Avenue W Signal C 26 D WSDOT / Edmonds/
WSDOT
19 238th Street SW and SR 99 Signal B 16 E WSDOT / Edmonds
20 238th Street SW and Edmonds Way (SR 104) Side Street
Stop E1 50 D Edmonds/
WSDOT
21 244th Street SW (SR 104) and 76th Avenue W Signal C 23 D Shoreline/
WSDOT
22 244th Street SW (SR 104) and SR 99 Signal D 45 D
Shoreline/
Edmonds/
WSDOT
23 238th Street SW and 100th Avenue W Signal C 22 D Edmonds
24 238th Street SW and Firdale Avenue Signal B 18 D Edmonds
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 543 of 680
25 SR 104 and Main Street Signal A 7 D WSDOT
26 SR 104 and Dayton Street Signal A 8 D WSDOT
27 SR 104 and 226th Street SW Signal B 11 D WSDOTWSDOT /
Edmonds
28 SR 104 and 95th Place W Signal A 7 D WSDOT/ Edmonds
29 SR 104 and 236th Street SW Signal A 5 D WSDOT / Edmonds
30 SR 99 and 216th Street SW Signal C 35 E WSDOT / Edmonds/
Lynnwood
31 244th Street SW and Firdale Avenue Side Street
Stop B 11 D Edmonds
1. LOS exceeds WSDOT standard for Highways of Statewide Significance.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 544 of 680
Figure 3-6. Existing Level of Service
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 545 of 680
FUTURE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
This section presents the methodology used to forecast traffic operating conditions through 2035.
Travel Demand Forecasting Model
The City’s travel demand forecasting model was used to analyze future travel demand and traffic patterns
for the weekday PM peak hour. The PM peak hour is typically the hour in which the highest level of traffic
occurs, and is the time period in which concurrency assessment is based. The major elements of the
model include:
• Transportation network and zone structure
• Existing and future land use estimates
The model uses Visum software to estimate PM peak hour vehicle trips using the following steps:
• Trip generation
• Trip distribution
• Network assignment
These fundamental model elements and the key steps of the model are described in the following
sections.
Key Elements of the Travel Demand Model
Transportation Network and Zone Structure
The roadway network is represented as a series of links (roadway segments) and nodes (intersections).
Road characteristics such as capacity, length, speed, and turning restrictions at intersections are coded
into the network. The geographic area covered by the model is divided into transportation analysis zones
(TAZs) that have similar land use characteristics. Appendix C shows the TAZs that are used in the
Edmonds model. The PSRC regional transportation model was used as the basis for both transportation
network and TAZ definitions. For the more detailed Edmonds model, some larger TAZs from the regional
model were subdivided into smaller TAZs, and the roadway network was analyzed in greater detail.
Land Use Estimates
A citywide land use inventory was completed in 2008 using assessor records, supplemental aerial photos,
and field verification. Using recent data from the PSRC and Washington State Employment Security
Department, it was determined that the model’s 2008 land use assumptions remain representative of
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 546 of 680
existing (2014) conditions. External zones to the model were updated using the recently completed
Snohomish County travel demand model to ensure regional consistency. Future year land use patterns
and growth were also developed for year 2035. As with the existing year model, the Edmonds future year
model was supplemented with external zone data from the 2035 Snohomish County travel demand
model. Citywide land use is summarized in Table 3-6.
Table 3-6. City of Edmonds Existing and Future Land Use Summary
Land Use Type Unit Existing (2014) 2035
Single Family Dwelling Units 10,990 11,790
Multi-Family Dwelling Units 6,370 8,450
Retail Jobs 2,240 3,080
Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, Services & Government Jobs 6,220 7,630
Wholesale, Transportation, Utilities, Manufacturing & Construction Jobs 140 170
Education Students 5,760 6,730
3. The model also includes values for park acres, marina slips, and park-and-ride spaces.
4. Excludes land use within Esperance.
Key Steps of the Travel Demand Model
Trip Generation
The trip generation step estimates the total number of trips produced by and attracted to each TAZ in the
model area. The trips are estimated using statistical data on population and household characteristics,
employment, economic output, and land uses. Trips are categorized by their general purpose, including:
• Home-based-work, or any trip with home as one end and work as the other end;
• Home-based-other, or any non-work trip with home as one end;
• Non-home-based, or any trip that does not have home at either end.
The trip generation model estimates the number of trips generated per household and employee during
the analysis period for each of these purposes. The output is expressed as the total number of trips
produced in each TAZ and the total number of trips attracted to each TAZ, categorized by trip purpose.
Trip Distribution
The trip distribution step allocates the trips estimated by the trip generation model to create a specific
zonal origin and destination for each trip. This is accomplished using the gravity model, which distributes
trips according to two basic assumptions: (1) more trips will be attracted to larger zones (defined by the
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 547 of 680
number of attractions estimated in the trip generation phase, not the geographical size), and (2) more trip
interchanges will take place between zones that are closer together than between zones that are farther
apart. The result is a trip matrix for each of the trip purposes specified in trip generation. This matrix
estimates how many trips are taken from each zone (origin) to every other zone (destination). The trips
are often referred to as trip interchanges.
Network Assignment
Each roadway link and intersection node is assigned a functional classification, with associated
characteristics of length, capacity, and speed. This information is used to determine the optimum path
between all the zones based on travel time and distance. The trips are distributed from each of the zones
to the roadway network using an assignment process that takes into account the effect of increasing
traffic on travel times. The result is a roadway network with traffic volumes calculated for each segment of
roadway. The model reflects the effects of traffic congestion on the roadway network.
Model Calibration
A crucial step in the modeling process is the calibration of the model. The model output, which consists of
estimated traffic volumes on each roadway segment, is compared to existing traffic counts. Adjustments
are made to the model inputs until the modeled existing conditions replicate actual existing conditions,
within accepted parameters. Once the model is calibrated for existing conditions, it can be used as the
basis for analyzing future traffic conditions and the impacts of potential improvements to the roadway
network.
2035 Traffic Operations without Improvements
Table 3-7 presents projected PM peak hour LOS for city intersections by 2035, and compares them to the
2015 existing conditions. Figure 3-7 identifies the 2035 LOS conditions, showing the following locations
that are projected to operate below the City’s adopted LOS standards:
• Olympic View Drive and 174th Street SW
• Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W
• 196th Street SW and 88th Avenue W
• 212th Street SW and SR 99
• Main Street and 9th Avenue N
• 220th Street SW and SR 99
• 220th Street SW and 76th Avenue W
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 548 of 680
• SR 99 and 216th Street SW
There would also be 3 intersections along Highways of Statewide Significance that do not meet WSDOT’s
recommended LOS of D; however, these intersections are not subject to City concurrency standards. The
City still considers exceeding LOS D to be an operational deficiency, and will work with WSDOT to address
LOS conditions at these locations:
• SR 104 and 238th Street SW
• SR 104 and Meridian Avenue N
• 244th Street SW and SR 99
Table 3-7. 2035 Intersection Level of Service
Intersection 2015 LOS
2015 Average
Delay
(sec/veh)
2035 LOS*
2035 Average
Delay
(sec/veh)
Jurisdiction
1 174th Street SW and Olympic View Drive C 18 F 56
Edmonds/
LynnwoodEdmonds/
Lynnwood
2 Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W C 17 F 61 EdmondsEdmonds
3 196th Street SW and 76th Avenue W D 51 E 61 WSDOT /
LynnwoodLynnwood
4 Puget Drive (SR 524) and 88th Avenue W EDB 35 F 70 WSDOT / EdmondsEdmonds
5 Puget Drive and Olympic View Drive BC 13 D 42 WSDOT/ EdmondsEdmonds
6 Caspers Street and 9th Avenue N (SR 524) CA 20 CDD 34 WSDOT / EdmondsEdmonds
7 208th Street SW and 76th Avenue W AD 6 A 10 EdmondsEdmonds
8 212th Street SW and SR 99 DC 49 F >150
WSDOT / Edmonds/
LynnwoodEdmonds/
Lynnwood
9 212th Street SW and 76th Avenue W BD 421 D 46 EdmondsEdmonds
10 212th Street SW and 84th Avenue W B 13 C 24 EdmondsEdmonds
11 Main Street and 9th Avenue N D 32 F 73 EdmondsEdmonds
12 Walnut Street and 9th Avenue S B 13 D 31 EdmondsEdmonds
13 Main Street and 3rd Avenue N (SR 5524) B 12 B 16 WSDOT / EdmondsEdmonds
14 220th Street SW and SR 99 D 51 F 122 WSDOT / Edmonds /
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 549 of 680
MLTEdmonds / MLT
15 220th Street SW and 76th Avenue W C 29 F 93 EdmondsEdmonds
16 220th Street SW and 84th Avenue W A 8 B 13 EdmondsEdmonds
17 220th Street SW and 9th Avenue S B 13 C 23 EdmondsEdmonds
18 Edmonds Way (SR 104) and 100th Avenue W C 26 D 41 WSDOT / EdmondsEdmonds/
WSDOT
19 238th Street SW and SR 99 B 16 D 47 WSDOT / EdmondsEdmonds
20 238th Street SW and Edmonds Way (SR 104) E 50 F >150
Edmonds/
WSDOTEdmonds/
WSDOT
21 244th Street SW (SR 104) and 76th Avenue W C 23 E 77
Shoreline/
WSDOTShoreline/
WSDOT
22 244th Street SW (SR 104) and SR 99 D 45 E 78
Shoreline/
Edmonds/
WSDOTShoreline/
Edmonds/
WSDOT
23 238th Street SW and 100th Avenue W C 22 A 7 EdmondsEdmonds
24 238th Street SW and Firdale Avenue B 18 C 25 EdmondsEdmonds
25 SR 104 and Main Street A 7 A 8 WSDOTWSDOT
26 SR 104 and Dayton Street A 8 B 10 WSDOTWSDOT
27 SR 104 and 226th Street SW B 11 B 16 WSDOT /
EdmondsWSDOTEdmonds
28 SR 104 and 95th Place W A 7 B 12 WSDOT/ EdmondsWSDOT
29 SR 104 and 236th Street SW A 5 B 13 WSDOT / EdmondsWSDOT
30 SR 99 and 216th Street SW C 35 F >150
WSDOT / Edmonds/
LynnwoodEdmonds/
Lynnwood
31 244th Street SW and Firdale Avenue B 11 B 13 EdmondsEdmonds
* Bold indicates that LOS exceeds standard.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 550 of 680
Figure 3-7. 2035 Level of Service
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 551 of 680
SAFETY ASSESSMENT
Citywide efforts to provide safe transportation include enforcement of traffic regulations, provision of
crosswalks and sidewalks for pedestrians, and provision of well-designed streets for safe driving. Safety
also involves ongoing coordination with emergency service providers to ensure access for their
emergency equipment. Recommendations to address safety issues are based on assessment of historical
collision data, focused sub-area or corridor safety studies, or on citizen feedback. These assessments are
described in the following sections.
Collision History
For this Transportation Plan update, historical collision data provided by WSDOT between January 2009
and September 2014 were compiled and evaluated (WSDOT 2014). Collision analysis looks both at the
total number of collisions and the rate of collisions per million entering vehicles at an intersection. Both
are important safety indicators.
The intersections with the highest number of collisions are located along SR 99, SR 104, and in downtown
Edmonds. This pattern is shown in Figure 3-8, which is a map showing the relative magnitude of
collisions occurring throughout the city.
An intersection that carries higher traffic volumes is more likely to experience a higher level of collisions.
To account for this, and to allow collision data to be more accurately compared, the rate of collisions per
million entering vehicles was also calculated for all locations. Typically, a collision rate at or greater than
1.0 collision per million entering vehicles raises indicates that further evaluation may be warranted. Table
3-8 presents the collision data for all study locations having over 0.5 collisions per million entering
vehicles.
Edmonds’ intersection collision rates shown in Table 3-8 are total collisions per million entering
vehicles. The rate range for Edmonds is 0.6 to 1.4. This compares to regional average collision rates for
(non-Freeway) state routes of between 2.3 to 2.9.
The locations with the rates at or above 1.0 collision per million entering vehicles are as follows (from the
highest rate to the lowest rate):
• Main Street and 3rd Avenue N (SR 524)
• Edmonds Way (SR 104) and 100th Avenue W
• 220th Street SW and 76th Avenue W
• SR 104 and Main Street
• 212th Street SW and 84th Avenue W
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 552 of 680
• 238th Street SW and SR 99
Another comparison is collision rates per 1,000 population. On that basis, Edmonds has a rate of around
11.5. In comparison with 24 other cities in the state with comparable populations, this rate is the fifth
lowest and is below the average rate of 16.4. Comparative rates for other nearby cities include
Shoreline (12.0), Lynnwood (32.9), and Bothell (21.3). Rates for some smaller cities include Kenmore (19.6),
Mountlake Terrace (23.9) and Mukilteo (16.6).
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 553 of 680
Figure 3-8 Collision Map
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 554 of 680
Table 3-8. High Collision Locations
Intersection Collisions between January 2009 and September 2014 Average Collisions per Million Entering Vehicles
Main Street and 3rd Avenue N (SR 5524) 28 1.4
Edmonds Way (SR 104) & 100th Avenue W 90 1.4
220th Street SW and 76th Avenue W 51 1.2
SR 104 and Main Street 19 1.2
212th Street SW and 84th Avenue W 30 1.1
238th Street SW and SR 99 75 1.1
Main Street and 9th Avenue N 25 0.9
Walnut Street and 9th Avenue S 22 0.9
SR 104 and 95th Place W 33 0.8
SR 104 and Dayton Street 21 0.7
220th Street SW and SR 99 64 0.7
212th Street SW and 76th Avenue W 29 0.6
212th Street SW and SR 99 48 0.6
Source: WSDOT 2014.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 555 of 680
RECOMMENDED ROADWAY CAPITAL PROJECTS
Proposed roadway capital projects were identified based on the review of intersection Level of Service and
safety. These capital projects supplement the list of projects within the city’s current Transportation
Improvement Plan, including ongoing maintenance (e.g. overlays, signal and sidewalk upgrades), traffic
calming, and other operational enhancements. The proposed roadway projects are presented in Table 3-
9 and illustrated in Figure 3-9.
Level of Service Projects
Capital roadway improvement projects were developed to address situations where the intersection LOS
does not meet the city’s standards under existing or 2035 projected conditions. These projects are needed
to improve operation and capacity at intersections that do not meet the City’s LOS standards.
Safety Projects
The City considers improvements to all modes (vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit) in the design of
road projects. The proposed intersection and road improvements will include elements to support and
promote alternative mode operations and safety. Many of the projects that would improve intersection
LOS also would improve intersection safety for motorists and other users.
Actions are also recommended on the following streets to improve vehicle and pedestrian safety:
• 238th Street SW, between Edmonds Way and 84th Avenue W
• 84th Avenue W, between 212th Street S and 238th Street SW
• SR 104 Access Management and Pedestrian Crossings
• SR 99 Access Management (Tied to SR 99 Revitalization Project)
228th St. SW from Hwy.SR 99 to 95th Pl. W
• Add 228th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 95th Pl. W
State Highway Projects
Intersections located on SR 104 are not subject to City’s LOS standards; however, capital roadway
improvement projects were developed as part of the SR 104 Complete Streets Corridor Analysis to
address intersection operations and are included in the project list. Additional projects along SR 104 have
been developed to address non-motorized and safety issues. The City is working with WSDOT for
implementation of these improvements, or alternative projects to meet the same mobility objectives. The
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 556 of 680
project list also includes several intersection projects along SR 99, consistent with WSDOT’s and the city’s
LOS standards.
Table 3-9 Recommended Roadway Improvements
ID Location Improvement Jurisdiction
1 174th Street SW and Olympic
View Drive
Widen Olympic View Drive to add a
northbound left turn lane for 50-foot storage
length. Shift the northbound lanes to the east
to provide an acceleration lane for eastbound
left turns.
Edmonds/
Lynnwood
2 Olympic View Drive and 76th
Avenue W
Install traffic signal. Widen 76th to add a
westbound northbound left turn lane for 175-
foot storage length.2
Edmonds
4 Puget Drive and 88th Avenue W Install traffic signal.1 Edmonds
8 SR 99 and 212th Street SW and
SR 99
Widen 212th to add a westbound left turn lane
for 200-foot storage length and an eastbound
left turn lane for 300-foot storage length.
Provide protected left turn phase for
eastbound and westbound movements.
WSDOT /
Edmonds/
Lynnwood
11 Main Street and 9th Avenue N Install traffic signal.232 Edmonds
14 SR 99 and 220th Street SW and SR
99
Widen 220th to add a 325-foot westbound
right turn lane and a 300-foot eastbound right
turn lane. Widen 220th to add a second
westbound left turn lane.
WSDOT / MLT /
Edmonds
15 220th Street SW and 76th Avenue
W
Widen 220th to add a left turn lane for
eastbound and westbound movements.
Reconfigure eastbound lanes to a left turn lane
and a through-right lane. Change eastbound
and westbound phase to provide protected-
permitted phase for left turn. Provide right
turn phase for westbound movement during
southbound left turn phase.
Edmonds
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 557 of 680
ID Location Improvement Jurisdiction
20 238th Street SW and Edmonds
Way
Install a signal and provide protected left turn
phase for northbound and southbound.
Edmonds/
WSDOT
21 244th Street SWSR-104 and 76th
Avenue W
Widen 244th SR 104 to add second westbound
left turn lane for 325-foot storage length.
Provide right turn phase for northbound
movement during westbound left turn phase.
Shoreline
Edmonds/
WSDOT/Edmonds
30 SR 99 at 216th Street SW Widen to allow one left turn lane, one through
lane and one right turn lane in eastbound and
westbound directions, with 100-foot storage
length for turn lanes. Add eastbound right turn
overlap with northbound protected left turn.
Add additional left turn lanes to northbound
and southbound approaches.
WSDOT /
Edmonds/
Lynnwood
A 238th Street SW, between
Edmonds Way and 84th Avenue
W
Widen to three lanes with curb, gutter, bike
lanes, and sidewalk.
Edmonds
B 84th Avenue W, between 212th
Street S and 238th Street SWHwy
99
Widen to three lanes with curb, gutter, bike
lanes and sidewalk.
Edmonds/
Snohomish
County
C Add 228th Street SW, stretch from
between Hwy. 99 toand 95th Pl. W
Widen to three lanes with curb, gutter, bike
lanes and sidewalk.
Edmonds/
Snohomish
County
1. Analysis indicates that restricting northbound and southbound traffic to through and right-turn-only (prohibiting through and left-turn movements) would also
alleviate the deficiency identified. This could be implemented as an interim solution until traffic signal warrants are met.
2. An alternative that also would meet the LOS Standard would be a compact urban roundabout.
2. 3. An alternative that also would meet the LOS Standard would be a mini-roundabout.
Note that the upcoming construction project at Intersection #9 (212th Street SW/76th Avenue W) will
maintain an acceptable LOS at that location through 2035. Without that project, this intersection would
exceed the LOS in the future.
Figure 3-10 shows the 2035 LOS conditions, comparing with and without improvements. For those
intersections that do not meet the city’s LOS standard, the previously listed projects were identified to
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 558 of 680
improve the LOS conditions. Table 3-10 compares the LOS and delay values between the two 2035
conditions for the key intersections listed in Table 3-9.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 559 of 680
Figure 3-9 Recommended Capital Road Improvements
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 560 of 680
Table 3-10 Changes in 2035 Intersection Level of Service with Proposed Roadway
Improvements
Intersection 2035 LOS
2035 Average
Delay (sec/veh)
2035 LOS w/
Improvements
2035 Average
Delay w/
Improvements(sec/veh)
Jurisdiction
1 174th Street SW and Olympic View Drive F 56 C 22 Edmonds/
Lynnwood
2 Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W F 61 C 19 Edmonds
4 Puget Drive (SR 524) and 88th Avenue W F 70 A 13 Edmonds
8 212th Street SW and SR 99 F >150 F 8711427 Edmonds/
Lynnwood
11 Main Street and 9th Avenue N F 73 B 14 Edmonds
14 220th Street SW and SR 99 F 122 EDE 735361 Edmonds
15 220th Street SW and 76th Avenue W F 93 D 44 Edmonds
20 238th Street SW and Edmonds Way (SR 104) F >150 B 12 Edmonds/
WSDOT
21 244th Street SW (SR 104) and 76th Avenue W E 77 D 47 Shoreline/
WSDOT
30 SR 99 and 216th Street SW F >150 EF 6493 Edmonds/
Lynnwood
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 561 of 680
Figure 3-10. 2035 Level of Service with and without Improvements
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 562 of 680
ROADWAY PROJECT PRIORITY
The roadway projects presented in this Transportation Plan were identified to address a variety of mobility
and safety issues. The projects were prioritized according to five criteria presented in Table 3-11.
Table 3-11. Prioritization Criteria for Roadway Projects
Criteria Weight Description Points
Concurrency 3 Is the project required to meet
concurrency?
3 Existing concurrency deficiency
2 Concurrency deficiency identified in the future
1 At LOS standard, near failing
0 Does not address a concurrency deficiency
Safety 3
Does the project address identified
safety issues?
3 ≥ 1.5 collisions per million entering vehicles or among the highest
total collisions within city
2 1.0 - 1.5 collisions per million entering vehicles and/or addresses non-
motorized safety issue
1 <1.0 collisions per million entering vehicles
0 No historical vehicle safety issues identified
Grant
Eligibility 2
Does the project include elements, such
as strong safety and/or non-motorized
components, which would make it more
attractive for state or federal grant
funding?
3 High eligibility
2 Medium eligibility
1 Low eligibility
0 No eligibility
Multimodal
Elements 2
Does the project include elements that
improve safety or mobility for
pedestrians, bicyclists, and/or transit?
3 Improves transit and non-motorized travel
2 Improves non-motorized travel
1 Improves transit mobility
0 Does not include multimodal elements
Magnitude of
Improvement 1 At how many locations will the project
improve travel conditions?
3 Improves LOS at 3 or more locations and/or improves non-motorized
safety along a length of roadway
2 Improves LOS and/or improves non-motorized safety at two locations
1 Improves LOS and/or improves non-motorized safety at one location
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 563 of 680
Table 3-12 lists the roadway projects in ranked order, based upon the criteria described in Table 3-11.
Projected costs of the recommended roadway projects are provided in Chapter 6 (Implementation and
Financial Plan) of this Transportation Plan.
Table 3-12. Roadway Project Priority
Wtd = Weighted = raw score X criterion weight
Add 228th Stretch 0 0 2 6 2 4 3 6 3 3 19
Criteria Concurrency Safety Grant Eligibility Multimodal Elements Magnitude
Weight 3 3 2 2 1 Weighted Total Rank Project Raw Wtd Raw Wtd Raw Wtd Raw Wtd Raw Wtd
1 220th St & 76th Ave. 2 6 3 9 2 4 1 2 2 2 23
1 220th St & SR 99 2 6 3 9 2 4 1 2 2 2 23
3 SR 99 & 216th St SW 2 6 3 9 1 2 2 4 1 1 22
4 Main St & 9th Ave. 2 6 1 3 2 4 3 6 1 1 20
4 212th St. & SR 99 2 6 3 9 1 2 1 2 1 1 20
6 196th St SW (SR 524) &
88th Ave. 2 6 2 6 1 2 2 4 1 1 19
6 84th Ave W, between
212th St S and 238th St
SW
0 0 2 6 2 4 3 6 3 3 19
6 228th Street SW,
between Hwy. 99 and
95th Pl. W
0 0 2 6 2 4 3 6 3 3 19
98 238th St SW, between
Edmonds Way and 84th 0 0 2 6 2 4 3 6 2 2 18
910 SR 104 & 238th St 0 0 2 6 2 4 3 6 1 1 17
110 Olympic View Drive &
76th Ave W 2 6 1 3 1 2 2 4 1 1 16
110 SR 104 & Meridian Ave
N76th Ave NE 2 6 1 3 2 4 1 2 1 1 16
132 Olympic & 174th St SW 2 6 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 1 14
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 564 of 680
SR 99 Gateway / Revitalization
The City conducted a focused assessment of the SR 99 corridor in 2006. This study identified several
multi-modal and safety projects. One of the key projects, the 228th Street connection between SR 99 and
76th Avenue, will be constructed in 2016.
As part of the current transportation plan update, the City further examined traffic safety along SR 99. It
identified the need to add a center median and left turn pockets (from 238th St. SW to 212th St. SW) to
provide safer access management throughout the corridor. The ongoing SR 99 Gateway/Revitalization
project will seek to provide additional safety and urban design improvements.
TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM
The city has adopted a Neighborhood Traffic Calming
program, which is designed to assist residents and the City
staff in responding to neighborhood traffic issues related to
speeding, cut-through traffic, and safety. Implementation of
a traffic calming program allows traffic concerns to be
addressed consistently and traffic calming measures to be
efficiently developed and put into operation. This section
summarizes key elements of the traffic calming program.
The two main purposes of traffic calming techniques are to:
• Reduce the use of residential certain streets for cut-
through traffic, and
• Reduce overall speeds along residential roadways.
Traffic calming devices are currently in place at many
locations throughout Edmonds. These measures have been
installed as part of capital improvement projects, as
opportunities were presented, and occasionally in response
to citizen requests.
A key component of any successful traffic calming program is citizen initiation and ongoing resident
involvement. The traffic calming process begins when residents gather eight or more signatures on a
petition, requesting that the City initiate a study. The City then undertakes a comprehensive traffic study,
Residential Neighborhood Issues
Residents periodically express concerns
about speeding or a high level of cut-
through traffic on residential streets.
Cut-Through Traffic – When congestion
occurs on arterials and collector routes
motorists begin to use local streets as
cut-thorough routes. Maintaining the
efficiency of arterial and collector
routes is the most effective way to
avoid or reduce cut-through traffic.
However, there are times when drivers
will use residential streets as shortcuts.
Speeding Traffic – Vehicles traveling well
above the speed limit on residential
streets reduces safety and is of
concern to residents. Some residential
streets have wide travel lanes that can
encourage speeding because the
motorist perceives the street is safe
and intended for higher speeds.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 565 of 680
gathering data on vehicle speeds, traffic volumes, collision history, and nighttime lighting conditions, and
non-motorized transportation activity. If the study reveals a need for traffic calming, a three-phase
approach to remediate traffic issues is used. Phase 1 is the start of the process, with the residents filing a
petition and the City reviewing whether or not the application qualifies. Phase 2 focuses on solutions that
can be quickly deployed, including education, signage, striping modifications, and more police
enforcement. If a follow up study indicates that these solutions are not sufficiently effective, Phase 3 traffic
calming measures are considered. Phase 3 measures, which are generally more costly and require more
time to deploy, might include physical devices such as curb bulbs, chicanes, and traffic circles. The need
for citizen involvement greatly increases in Phase 3, because each potential solution requires resident
approval prior to implementation. (see 2009 Transportation Plan / Appendix B for additional details).
PRESERVATION AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS
The City’s transportation infrastructure is comprised primarily of streets with pavements, sidewalks,
illumination, and traffic control, including traffic signals, signs, and pavement marking. Transportation
infrastructure requires maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, updating, and replacement to maintain
serviceability, reliability, and safety, and to protect the public’s investment. Maintenance of existing
infrastructure enables efficiency of transportation operations, and reduces the need for more expensive
capital improvements. A detailed Citywide Pavement Rating Study was completed in 2012, and the street
condition for every street was analyzed. This allowed the City to prioritize future overlay projects.
Maintenance of the City’s transportation infrastructure is provided primarily by the City’s Public Works
Department. Activities include the following.
Annual Street OverlaysPavement Preservation Program
The projects include spot repairs of failed pavement, full surface and taper grinding of pavement, curbing
and sidewalk repairs, and minor storm water system modifications. The projects also incorporate traffic
calming measures. In coordination with this transportation plan, future projects will include retrofit of curb
ramps for ADA compliance, and may include delineating bike lanes and other bike route improvements
(see Chapter 4 for a more detailed discussion). Selection of projects includes reviewing the capital
improvement plans for water, sewer, and storm to determine if utility improvements are programmed
within the roadway segment under consideration. If there are, the projects schedules will be coordinated.
Depending of the level of failure for full surface repairs, options include an overlay, a completed
resurfacing, a chip seal, or a slurry seal.
The Principal Arterial, Minor Arterials, and Collectors are all rated once every 2 years as part of the WSDOT
Pavement Condition Survey. Those streets are assigned a Pavement Condition Index (PCI) ranging from 0-
100:
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 566 of 680
- 91– 100: Excellent (only routine maintenance necessary: activities are performed to maintain a
safe traffic condition and include pothole patching, patching around utility structures, and crack
sealing).
- 61 – 90: Good (Repair activities are done within the initial 10 year life of a new pavement helps to
prevent potholes from occurring. These activities may mean placing a new surface (2 inches or
less) on an existing road way to provide a better all-weather surfaces, a better riding surface, and
to extend or renew the pavement life).
- 41 – 619: Fair (Rehabilitation work generally consists of the preparatory work activities and either
thin or thick overlay. Preparatory work may involve digging out defective asphalt, base and sub
base. A rehab project typically extends the roadway life between 10 –15 years).
- Less than 40: Poor / Severe (Reconstruction is required as a majority of the pavement or
underlying base course has failed and can no longer serve as competent foundation for flexible
pavements like asphalt).
Under existing conditions, 70% of city arterials and collectors are in Excellent to Fair condition, based
upon these guidelines. The remaining 30% are in Poor to Fail condition. Under the ideal cycle, roads with
functional classification of collector or above receive an overlay once every 20 years; and local roads
receive an overlay once every 25 years.
Citywide Signal Improvements
As traffic signals age, their functionality becomes more limited and they become more difficult to
maintain. The City regularly upgrades traffic signals to maintain functionality, and to incorporate new
technology.
Citywide Cabinet and Controller Upgrades
A signal controller is located in a controller cabinet at each traffic signal, and determines phases and cycle
length for the signal it operates. Signal controllers are comprised of many types and many manufacturers,
and as they age, their functionality becomes more limited and they become more difficult to maintain.
The City regularly upgrades signal controllers once their life cycle has been reached, in order to maintain
functionality, and to accommodate modern traffic control equipment (when grant funds are secured).
Arterial Street Signal Coordination Improvements
The city coordinates traffic signals located within 1/2 –mile of each other, to maximize the operating
efficiency of the overall roadway system.
Signal Coordination are planned for the following stretches:
• 220th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to Hwy 99
• 76th Ave W from 220th StT. SW to 208th St. SW
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 567 of 680
• SR-104 from 226th St. SW to 236th StT.
SW
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 568 of 680
The following specific maintenance projects are also currently planned:
- Puget Drive/Olympic View Drive Signal Upgrades – Rebuild signal and install video detection.
- 238th Street SW/100th Avenue W Signal Upgrades – Rebuild complete signal system and install
video detection.
- Main St. @ 3rd Avenue Signal Upgrades – Rebuild signal
- ADA Curb ramps upgrades
Signal Coordination are planned for the following stretches:
220th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to Hwy 99
76th Ave W from 220th ST. SW to 208th St. SW
• SR-104 from 226th St. SW to 236th ST. SW
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 569 of 680
NON-MOTORIZED SYSTEM
This section provides an inventory of existing pedestrian and bicyclenon-motorized facilities and an
assessment of improvement needs. The term ‘non-motorized’ refers to pedestrians and human-powered
vehicles, which for the most part are bicycles 1. The chapter also provides recommendations to improve
pedestrian and bicycle mobility and safety.
PEDESTRIANS
In 2002, the City of Edmonds completed its Comprehensive Walkway Plan. The plan included goals and
objectives for non-motorized transportation in the city, in addition to a walkway inventory, a review of
facility standards, and recommendations for walkway projects. The Walkway Plan has been updated in
subsequent years, culminating in a full update as part of the 2015 plan.
Existing Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities within the city include sidewalks, walkways, roadway shoulders, and off-road trails.
Those facilities are typically more concentrated in areas with high pedestrian activity, such as the
downtown area, commercial and business centers, near schools and other public facilities. Figure 3-11
illustrates the locations within Edmonds that have pedestrian-intensive land uses.
Figure 3-12 illustrates the existing sidewalks and walkways within the city. The figure shows that the
sidewalk system is most complete inside the core area bounded by SR 104, 92nd Avenue W, and SR 524.
Outside of this area, sidewalks are primarily located along roads classified as collectors or arterials. Raised
and striped walkways are generally associated with schools and provide safe walking routes.
The federal ADA was passed in 1990 and amended in 2008. ADA requires jurisdictions to provide
accessible sidewalks primarily through the installation of ADA-compliant sidewalk ramps. The design
requirements address various areas of concern such as curb alignment with crosswalks, narrower sidewalk
width, obstacles such as utility poles, placement of the sidewalk adjacent to the curb, or the slope of the
ramps. Most of the city’s sidewalk ramps were constructed in the 1980s or later. As pedestrian
improvements are made along roadway corridors, the City has upgraded sidewalk ramps or installed new
ones in accordance with current standards. Of approximately 350 intersections with existing ADA curb
1 Electric Assisted Bicycles can be considered within this definition for purposes of this report.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 570 of 680
ramps in Edmonds, 65 intersections were found to fully meet ADA standards, and 24 intersections partially
met ADA standards.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 571 of 680
Figure 3-11. Pedestrian Intensive Land Uses
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 572 of 680
Figure 3-12. Existing Pedestrian Facilities
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 573 of 680
Recommended Pedestrian Improvements
This section presents recommended pedestrian improvements, which consist of new sidewalk connections
to improve pedestrian mobility and safety, and upgrades of curb ramps to conform to ADA standards.
Selected pedestrian crossing treatments are also identified.
Walkway Prioritization Process
Major gaps in the city walkway system were identified by the Transportation Committee. To address those
gaps, the committee developed criteria to evaluate and prioritize walkway improvement projects. These
criteria were used to prioritize improvements to walkway sections that were identified based on input
from public meetings, Walkway Committee meetings, and deficiencies determined from a review of the
existing city walkway inventory.
The criteria were weighted according to their importance. A system of points was developed to evaluate
each proposed project against each criterion. The result was a weighted average score that helps to
compare and prioritize proposed projects. Table 3-13 describes the walkway prioritization criteria and
their relative weights and point systems.
Table 3-13. Prioritization Criteria for Walkway Projects
Criteria Weight Description Points
Pedestrian
Safety
5 How safe is the route for pedestrians?
Does this improvement:
Separate pedestrians from vehicular
traffic, especially in high traffic areas?
Improve width of walkway and surface
conditions?
Address potential conflicts at road
crossings?
3 Strong concerns for pedestrian safety along this
route
2 Some concerns for pedestrian safety along this
route
1 This route is very similar to other routes in
Edmonds
0 Not a safety concern
Connectivity
to Services,
Facilities,
and Links
5 Does this route connect to facilities or
services such as schools, parks,
churches, community centers,
businesses, transit routes, or existing
sidewalk?
Does this improvement:
Provide direct access to facilities or
services?
Ensure that the route links to a safe
direct access to facilities or services?
3 Route provides significant access to 3 or more
services and facilities
2 Route provides access to services and facilities
1 Route provides access to 1 service or facility
0 Route does not provide access to services or
facilities
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 574 of 680
Criteria Weight Description Points
Pedestrian
Level of
Activity
3 Is this a well-traveled route, or would it
be, if improved?
Level of activity may be determined by:
Measured counts
Identification by the public and staff,
through observation and experience
3 Route is utilized by a significant number of
pedestrians
2 Route is utilized consistently by pedestrians
1 Route is occasionally used by pedestrians
0 Route is not utilized by pedestrians
Distance
from Schools
3 Is this route within a mile of a public
school?
3 Route is an Elementary school route or close
proximity to school
2 Route provides access to High school students
1 Route is within 0.5 mile of school
Connectivity
with Transit
Services
2 Is this route also a route for transit or
provide access to transit?
3 This route is on a public transit route with transit
stops
2 This route is within 650 feet from a public transit
route with transit stops
1 This route provides a principal pedestrian
access corridor to public transit where sidewalks
do not exist on adjacent pedestrian routes.
(Beyond 650 feet from a public transit route.)
Environment
al Impacts
1 Will the development of the route have
any impacts on the environment?
Environmental impacts include:
Wetlands
Shorelines
Wildlife habitat
Aesthetics
3 Route has no negative environmental impact
and aesthetically improves the area
2 Route has some negative environmental impact
but aesthetically improves the area
1 Route has some negative environmental impact
0 Route will have major negative impact on the
environment
Walkway sections were analyzed separately depending on the section length. Walkway sections longer
than 1,000 feet are defined as “long walkways” and walkway sections shorter than 1,000 feet are defined
as “short walkways”. Table 3-14 summarizes the walkways that were considered for walkway
improvements by the type of projects (i.e., short walkway or long walkway). The projects are listed in
ranked order by the total points and by priority level, and split up between short and long walkways.
Figure 3-13 shows the locations of the walkway projects. Higher priority projects are shown in green in
the figure, with lower priority projects shown in red. Projected costs of the recommended walkway
projects are provided in Chapter 4 (Implementation and Financial Plan) of this Transportation Plan. A
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 575 of 680
more detailed summary of each project’s limits, existing conditions, and point tally is provided in
Appendix D.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 576 of 680
Figure 3-13. Recommended Walkway Projects
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 577 of 680
Table 3-14. Recommended Walkway Projects
ID Street Name From To Total Points Priority
Short Walkway Projects
S1 Dayton St. 7th Ave. S 8th Ave. S 48 1
S2 2nd Ave. Main St. James St. 42 1
S3 Walnut St. 3rd Ave. S 4th Ave. S 39 1
S4 216th St. SW 72nd Ave. W Hwy 99 39 1
S5 84th Ave. W 188th St. SW 186th St. SW 38 1
S6 Elm Way 8th Ave. S 9th Ave. S 35 2
S7 80th Ave. W 218th St. SW 220th St. SW 34 2
S8 Maple St. West of 6th Ave. S 8th Ave. S 32 2
S9 Walnut St. 6th Ave. S 7th Ave. S 32 2
S10 Paved (184th St. SW) 80th Ave. W OVD 31 2
S11 190th Pl. SW 94th Ave. W OVD 27 2
S12 8th Ave. Walnut Ave. South of Walnut 24 2
Long Walkway Projects
L1 80th Ave. W 206th St. SW 212nd St. SW 49 1
L2 218th St. SW 76th Ave. W 84th Ave. W 48 1
L3 232nd St. W 100th Ave W SR-104 46 1
L34 236th St. SW / 234th St. SW SR-104 97th Pl. W 45 1
L4L5 84th Ave. W 238th St. SW 234th St. SW 44 1
L5L6 236th St. SW SR-104 East of 84th Ave.
W 44 1
L7 Sunset Ave. Bell St. Caspers St 42 1
L8L6 191st. St SW 80th Ave. W 76th Ave. W 41 1
L9L7 95th Pl. W 224th St. SW 220th St. SW 41 1
L10L8 104th St. SW / Robin Hood 238th St. SW 106th Ave. W 39 1
L11L9 236th St. SW Hwy. 99 76th Ave. W 39 1
L12L1
1 238th St. SW Hwy. 99 76th Ave. W 39 1
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 578 of 680
ID Street Name From To
Total
Points Priority
L13L1
2 80th Ave. W / 180th St. SW 188th St. SW OVD 37 1
L14L1
3 189th Pl. SW 80th Ave. W 76th Ave. W 36 1
L15L1
4 Olympic Ave. Puget Dr. Main St. 35 2
L16L1
5 192nd St. SW 84th Ave. W 88th Ave. W 35 2
L17L1
6 8th Ave. W 14th St. SW Elm Way 35 2
L18L1
7 Pine St. 9th Ave. W SR 104 32 2
L19L1
8 188th St. SW 88th Ave. W 92nd Ave. W 32 2
L20L1
9 216th St. SW 86th Ave. W 92nd Ave. W 32 2
L21L2
0 92nd Ave. W Bowndoin St. 220th St. SW 32 2
L22L2
1 Maplewood Dr. Main St. 200th St. SW 32 2
L23L2
2 72nd Ave. W OVD 176th St. SW 32 2
L24L2
3 Meadowdale Beach Rd OVD 76th Ave. W 29 2
L25L2
4 176th St. SW 72nd Ave. W OVD 27 2
L26L2
5 92nd Ave. W 189th Pl. SW 186th Pl. SW 26 2
L27L2
6 Andover St. / 184th St. SW 184th St. SW /
88th Ave. W
OVD / Andover
St. 26 2
L28L2
7 186th St. SW Seaview Park 8608 185th Pl
SW 24 2
1. Project L26 L27 is an L-shaped project in which sidewalks are proposed on either side of Andover Street (the north-south leg), and on the north side
of 184th Street SW (the east-west leg).
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 579 of 680
In addition to the walkway projects, a variety of non-motorized enhancements were identified as part of
the SR 104 Corridor Analysis. Figure 3-13 shows several proposed pedestrian crossing treatments along
SR 104 and connecting streets.
Pedestrian access to transit stops is also a critical element of the walkway improvement program. The City
will continue to work with Community Transit to ensure that access to transit stops is as convenient and
safe as possible. Community Transit offers its support in securing funds related to improving access to the
existing transit system and transit facilities.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 580 of 680
Pedestrian Level of Service Standard
The city has developed a pedestrian LOS standard that ties directly to the proposed walkway plan. As
shown in Table 3-15, the LOS measure uses a simple red, yellow, green scale to identify the whether a
pedestrian facility improvement is consistent with the proposed walkway plan. The city can use these LOS
standards to monitor how well the walkway plan is being implemented over time.
Table 3-15. Pedestrian Level of Service Standards
LOS Within Pedestrian Priority Network
Provides pedestrian facility* as shown in Walkway plan
Provides a lower-level pedestrian facility* than recommended in Walkway plan
No pedestrian facility provided
1. Pedestrian facility includes sidewalks and shoulders protected by a raised curb.
Curb Ramp Upgrade Program
In an effort to upgrade the sidewalk ramps to meet ADA requirements, the City has developed a Curb
Ramp Upgrade Program that prioritizes future sidewalk ramp improvements at sub-standard locations.
Citizen request for curb ramps are addressed as they occur, and are accommodated close to the time of
the request unless there are circumstances which would cause them to be deferred. An example would be
a pending construction project that would also provide the ramps. Priorities for future sidewalk new ramp
installations or ramp upgrades are determined based on the following priority order:
• Downtown intersections receive priority over other locations;
• Arterial streets receive priority over local access streets;
• Intersections receive higher priority if they are near community centers, senior centers, or health
facilities; transit stops, schools, or public buildings; or commercial areas and parks.
Implementation of the curb ramp upgrade program will occur over time, due to the costs of those
upgrades, and available funding. As part of asphalt overlay projects, all ramps adjacent to the paving work
must be upgraded to meet ADA standards and new ramps installed where none exist. Sidewalk ramps will
also be installed as part of street reconstruction and sidewalk construction projects. Private
redevelopment will also fund some ramp upgrades as part of required frontage improvements.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 581 of 680
BICYCLES
The City prepared a comprehensive Bikeway Plan in 2009. This plan was revised as part of the current
study to outline a list of improvement projects for the bicycle system. The types of recommended bicycle
facilities range from shared-use paths to bike lanes to bicycle parking.
• Shared use paths and trails – off-street facilities that cater to both pedestrians and cyclists.
Where paved, these facilities provide a high amenity connection for nonmotorized users of all
ages and all abilities.
• Bike lanes – portions of roadways that have been designated by striping, signing, and pavement
markings for the preferential or exclusive use by cyclists.
• Bike routes – shared streets used by bikes and cars. Signed shared roadways are shared
roadways that have been identified as preferred bike routes by posting bike route signs.
• Bike Sharrows- Some bike routes are proposed to have sharrows, which are marked within the
travel lane and identify that bicycles are sharing the roadway. Sharrows are commonly used to
indicate where on the roadway a cyclist should ride, and also to remind motorists to share the
lane with bicycles when present.
• Bike Parking- There have been many bicycle parking facilities implemented over the past several
years. Convenient bike parking is an important incentive to encourage more bicycling within the
city.
Note that these bicycle facilities can be used by human-powered and electric-assisted bicycles. Given the
hilly terrain in Edmonds, the use of electric-assisted bicycles could be expected to increase.
Bicycle Facility Inventory
Figure 3-14 shows existing bicycle facilities within the city, which include bicycle routes, bicycle lanes,
trails, sharrows and bicycle parking facilities. The Interurban Trail, which links the cities of Seattle,
Shoreline, Edmonds, Mountlake Terrace, Lynnwood, and Everett, runs through the southeastern portion of
Edmonds. Upgrades to the trail are included in the City’s capital improvement program. Trails are also
located along the city’s beaches and within city parks.
There are also easy connections for cyclists to ferries, Sound Transit’s Sounder service, and Community
Transit. Bicycles are allowed on all of these systems. WSF provides a reduced fare for bicycles, Sound
Transit provides bike racks, and all Community Transit vehicles have bike racks.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 582 of 680
Figure 3-14. Existing Bicycle Facilities
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 583 of 680
Recommended Bicycle Facilities
The city worked with the Edmonds Bike Group to develop recommended bicycle facilities. Figure 3-15
shows the recommended bicycle facilities along with the existing bicycle system for reference. The bicycle
projects include bicycle lanes or bicycle routes that can be added as part of future roadway improvement
projects. The projects are concentrated around two major efforts: creating east-west bicycle connections
between downtown Edmonds and the Interurban Trail, and creating north-south bicycle connections
between the northern and southern portions of Edmonds.
The primary east-west bicycle projects include:
• Main St, 212th St SW
• Pine St, Elm St, 220th St SW
The primary north-south bicycle projects include:
• 3rd Ave S, Woodway Park Rd
• 9th Ave S, 100th Ave W (subject to further analysis)
• 84th Avenue W
• 76th Avenue W
Other bicycle projects include:
• Olympic View Drive
• 224th St SW
• 88th Ave W, 84th Ave W
Table 3-16 shows the degree to which the bicycle plan has been implemented to date, along with the
amount needed for completion. The table shows that while pedestrian trails and paths, as well as bike
parking, is at or near full planned completion, other facilities are not as far along. Approximately 40% of
bike lane miles have been completed, and 20% of bike route miles have been completed.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 584 of 680
Table 3-16 Existing and Recommended Bike Facilities
Bicycle Facility Existing Planned Total
Bike Lane (miles) 4.45.6 88.5 12.414.1
Bike Route (miles) 6.34.9 18.119.9 24.424.8
Bike Sharrows (miles) 1.61.7 2.62.6 4.24.3
Trail/Path (miles) 2.42.4 00 2.42.4
Bike Parking/ racks
(locations) 595263 55 576468
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 585 of 680
Figure 3-15 Recommended Bicycle Facilities
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 586 of 680
Bicycle Facility Level of Service Standards
The city has developed a bicycle LOS standard that ties directly to the proposed bicycle plan. As shown in
Table 3-17 the LOS measure uses a simple red, yellow, green scale to identify the whether a bicycle
facility improvement is consistent with the proposed bicycle plan. The city can use these LOS standards to
monitor how well the bicycle plan is being implemented over time.
Table 3-17 Bicycle Level of Service Standards
LOS Within Bicycle Network
Provides bicycle facility* as shown in the Bicycle Plan
Provides a lower-level facility* than recommended in the Bicycle Plan
No bicycle facility provided
* Bicycle facilities – lowest-level to highest-level of treatment: shared; bike lanes; buffered bike facility; separated trail.
Bicycle Loops
The bicycle plan focusses on facilities needed to provide a safe and comfortable cycling environment. As
a guide to bicyclists desiring to ride around Edmonds, Figure 3-16 shows three bicycle loops of various
difficulties and lengths that are recommended along roads that have low speeds and low vehicle volumes.
The Edmonds Bike Group helped establish these three bicycle loops.
• The short bicycle loop has an easy level of difficulty and a distance of 5 miles.
• The medium bicycle loop is a medium level of difficulty route; it follows a similar route as the
short bicycle loop, but has an additional 2 miles for a total length of 7 miles.
• The long bicycle loop is a scenic route designed for experienced cyclists. The total distance for
the long bicycle loop is 20 miles with a portion located in the Town of Woodway.
Riders on these loops can take advantage of the facilities provided within the bicycle plan.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 587 of 680
Figure 3-16 Recommended Signed Bicycle Loops
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 588 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 589 of 680
TRANSIT
This section provides an inventory of existing transit facilities and services, including buses, rail and ferries.
Strategies to increase transit use are also presented.
EXISTING BUS SERVICE
Community Transit
Community Transit, the major provider of public transit for Snohomish County, operates three types of
transit service in the city:
• Fixed bus route service
• Rideshare services
• Dial-A-Ride Transit (DART) paratransit service
Fixed Route Bus Service
Fixed bus routes are local or commuter services that operate on a standardized schedule. Figure 3-17
shows the bus routes that serve the city. Most of this service is provided by Community Transit, although
Sound Transit connections are available along I-5. SWIFT Bus Rapid Transit also operates through the city
along SR 99.
Table 3-18 summarizes bus routes serving the city, which provide two-way service between destinations
in the city and surrounding areas, from morning through evening. Commuter bus routes serving the city,
which provide service to major employment destinations in Snohomish and King Counties, are also
shown. Commuter routes typically operate only during the weekday morning and evening peak commute
periods. Every Community Transit bus is equipped to accommodate wheelchairs. All buses are also
equipped with bicycle racks.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 590 of 680
Table 3-18. Community Transit Bus Routes
Route
Number Route Description
Days of
Operation
Hours of Operation
(approximate)
October 2014
Average
Weekday Daily
Boardings
101 Aurora Village (Shoreline) to
Mariner Park and Ride
Weekdays and
Saturdays
5:00 am – 11:00 pm (Weekdays);
6:00 am -10 pm (Saturdays)
1,603
115 Aurora Village Transit Center to
Mariner Park & Ride
Weekdays and
Saturdays
5:00 am – 11:00 pm (Weekdays);
6:00 am -10 pm (Saturdays)
2,424
116 Edmonds to Silver Firs Weekdays and
Saturdays
5:00 am – 11:00 pm (Weekdays);
6:00 am -10 pm (Saturdays)
2,131
119 Mountlake Terrace to Ash Way
Park & Ride
Weekdays and
Saturdays
6:00 am – 11:00 pm (Weekdays);
6:00 am -10 pm (Saturdays)
545
130 Lynnwood to Edmonds Weekdays and
Saturdays
5:20 am- 10:00 pm (Weekdays);
7:00 am-10:30 pm (Saturdays)
971
196 Alderwood Mall to Edmonds Weekdays and
Saturdays
6:00 am-10:30 pm (Weekdays);
7:00 am-10:30 pm (Saturdays)
613
405 Downtown Seattle to Edmonds
P&R
Daily (Peak
travel)
6:00 am-9:00 am & 3:00 pm – 7:00
pm (Weekdays)
277
416 Downtown Seattle to Edmonds Daily (Peak
travel)
6:00 am-9:00 am & 3:30 pm – 7:00
pm (Weekdays)
223
871 University District to Edmonds P
& R
Daily (Peak
travel)
6:00 am-10:30 am & 12:30 pm –
7:00 pm (Weekdays)
801
Swift Aurora Village to Everett Swift
Station
Weekdays and
Saturdays
5:00 am – 11:00 pm (Weekdays);
6:00 am -10 pm (Saturdays)
5,667
Source: Community Transit 2015
Accessibility to fixed route transit is considered to be ideal when transit stops are located within 0.25 mile
of residents. Figure 3-17 shows the proportion of Edmonds residents living within 0.25 mile of a fixed-
route local or commuter transit service. Approximately 60%2 of Edmonds’ population lives within 0.25 mile
of local bus service, ; and approximately 74% of the Edmonds population lives within 0.25 mile of either
local or commuter service. Transit coverage was reduced when Community Transit eliminated some bus
routes after 2010.
2 Value being confirmed and updated
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 591 of 680
Figure 3-17. Existing Access to Local and Commuter Transit
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 592 of 680
RIDESHARE SERVICES
For citizens who are disinclined or unable to use fixed-route bus service, the following rideshare services
are available:
• Commuter Vanpools – Community Transit provides vehicles, driver orientation, vehicle
maintenance, and assistance in forming vanpool groups.
• Carpools – Community Transit provides ride-matching services for people seeking carpool
partners.
DART Paratransit
DART is a specialized bus service provided by Community Transit for those who are unable to use regular
bus service due to a disability. Service is available to all origins and destinations within 0.75 mile of local,
non-commuter bus routes.
King County Metro Transit
King County Metro does not provide local service within Edmonds, but connections are available between
Community Transit and Metro routes at the Aurora Village Transit Center just south of the city.
Sound Transit Express Bus
Sound Transit provides regional bus service to the urban portions of Snohomish, King, and Pierce
counties, but does not have an established express bus stop in Edmonds. Sound Transit express bus
service is available at transit centers and park-and-ride lots in the vicinity of Edmonds (Swamp Creek,
Lynnwood Transit Center, and Mountlake Terrace Transit Center) and can be accessed by Community
Transit.
PARK-AND-RIDE FACILITIES
The primary commuter parking facility in the city is the Edmonds park-and-ride lot located at 72nd
Avenue West and 213th Place SW. This facility, which has a capacity for 255 cars, is owned by WSDOT and
operated by Community Transit. This facility offers bus service to Lynnwood, downtown Seattle, Redmond,
Everett, Shoreline and Seattle’s University District. The average utilization rate of this facility is 71%.
(Community Transit 2008)
Many routes also serve the Edmonds Senior Center, Edmonds Station and Edmonds Ferry Terminal.
Parking available in the vicinity of these facilities includes a total of 220 spaces near the ferry terminal and
156 spaces at the Edmonds Station. Edmonds Community College also serves as a transit hub, but no
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 593 of 680
public parking is available at this location. Table 3-19 summarizes the park-and-ride lots that serve
Edmonds.
Table 3-19. Park-and-Ride Facilities Serving Edmonds
Lot Name Location Routes Parking Capacity
Edgewood Baptist Church 20406 76th Avenue W 119 10
Calvary Chapel Edmonds 8330 212th Street SW 115, 116 10
Edmonds Lutheran Church 23525 84th Avenue W 115 15
United Presbyterian Church of Seattle 8506 238th Street SW 416 64
Edmonds Park-and-Ride 21300 72nd Avenue W 405, 871 255
Mountlake Terrace Transit Center 236th Street SW and
I-5 Northbound Ramp
130, 871, King County
Metro
880
Edmonds Ferry Terminal SR 104 WSF 220
Edmonds Station 210 Railroad Avenue 110, 116, 130, 196, 416,
Sounder, Amtrak
156
Source: Community Transit, Sound Transit and WSF
Outside of the city, the Lynnwood Transit Center and Aurora Village Transit Center are the major hubs for
transferring between Community Transit local routes. Other transfer hubs include Edmonds Community
College and Mountlake Terrace Transit Center. These Community Transit routes connect with King County
Metro service at Aurora Village, Mountlake Terrace, and Bothell; Everett Transit in the City of Everett; the
Washington State Ferry at the Edmonds and Mukilteo Terminals; with Sound Transit at various park-and-
ride lots in the south Snohomish County; and Island Transit in the City of Stanwood.
RAIL SERVICE
Passenger rail service in Edmonds is provided by Sound Transit’s Sounder commuter rail and Amtrak’s
intercity rail. The rail station is located at 211 Railroad Avenue and can be accessed by Community Transit.
Sounder Commuter Rail
Operated by Sound Transit, the Sounder commuter rail line operates between Seattle and Everett, with
stops in Edmonds and Mukilteo. Through a partnership with Amtrak, Amtrak trains are also available for
commuters along this route. Sounder operates four southbound trains during the morning commute
period and four northbound trains during the evening commute period. Amtrak operates one additional
train in each direction during both the morning commute period and the evening commute period.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 594 of 680
Additional parking is needed at the train station to accommodate the rising number of daily transit riders
using this service. Sound Transit currently leases a parking lot from various property owners.
Amtrak Service
Amtrak operates two routes with stops in Edmonds: the Amtrak Cascades and the Empire Builder.
Amtrak Cascades
Edmonds serves as a stop along the Seattle – Vancouver route. Service is daily, with two northbound
trains and two southbound trains stopping in Edmonds per day. From Edmonds, the two northbound
trains terminate in Vancouver, British Columbia. Both southbound Cascades trains originate in Vancouver,
BC.
The Cascades route’s northbound service provides connections to Everett, Mount Vernon, and Bellingham
in Washington State, and Surrey, Richmond, and Vancouver in British Columbia. Southbound service
terminates in Seattle. Travelers who wish to take rail south to destinations between Seattle and Portland
are best served by traveling to Seattle to take the Seattle–Portland route.
Empire Builder
The Empire Builder provides cross-country service between Seattle and Chicago. Its route traverses the
states of Washington, Idaho, Montana, North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Illinois. Service is daily,
with one eastbound train departing from Edmonds each evening (5:12 pm). One westbound train arrives
in Edmonds each morning (9:10 am).
WASHINGTON STATE FERRIES
The Edmonds-Kingston ferry route connects the northern portion of the Kitsap Peninsula and the Olympic
Peninsula with northern King and southern Snohomish Counties. The route is 4.5 nautical miles long, and
takes approximately 30 minutes to traverse. The Edmonds-Kingston route operates seven days per week
year round, with average headways ranging between 35 and 70 minutes.
In 2013, the Edmonds-Kingston route carried 3.9 million people, at an average of 12,200 passengers per
day. This is slightly less than the 4.3 million people the route carried in 2006. The annual Washington
State Ferries Traffic Statistics Report indicates that in-vehicle boardings were the most prevalent, with
about 86 percent of passengers boarding in this manner on the average weekday. Walk-on passengers
constituted 14 percent of all passengers on an average weekday.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 595 of 680
FUTURE TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS
Chapter 2 of this Transportation Plan identifies a number of specific goals and policies aimed at
enhancing transit options and operations in the City. This section describes actions the City could take to
improve transit availability and ease of use, working closely with transit service providers.
Priority Transit Corridors
Figure 3-18 depicts a future transit system with potential priority transit corridors shown in green. These
priority corridors would emphasize good daily transit service and bus stop amenities to make transit
attractive. With the expected opening of Link Light Rail to Lynnwood during the planning horizon, it is
likely that several Community Transit bus routes will be redesigned within Edmonds and surrounding
areas to integrate with light rail.
Transit Level oOf Service
A proposed Transit Level of Service policy is shown in Table 3-20. One primary LOS measure would be
related to the provision of transit stop amenities along the priority transit corridors. Providing good
pedestrian access to stops would also be a goal that the city could work cooperatively with Community
Transit to achieve. The final measure, Quality of Service, is outside of the city’s control, but the LOS policy
would guide the city’s discussions with Community Transit and other transit providers. A green LOS would
be a desired standard to strive for as the plan is implemented.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 596 of 680
Table 3-20 Transit Priority Corridor Level of Service
LOS Transit Stop
Amenities* Pedestrian Access Quality of Service
(Optional)+
More than 80% of transit
stops meet amenity
minimum provisions
Sidewalks and marked
crosswalks serving stops
All day frequent service; adequate
parking at park-and-rides and
stations
More than 60% of transit
stops meet amenity
minimum provisions
Sidewalks and marked
crosswalks serving some stops
Peak period service; may be some
parking overflow at park-and-
rides and stations
Less than 60% of transit
stops meet amenity
minimum provisions
General lack of sidewalks and
marked crosswalks N/A
* Amenities include bus stop shelter, bench, flag post, and/or concrete waiting area; these amenities are determined based on the
number of people using a transit stop as defined by a transit agency.
+Consider the adequacy of parking provided at park-and-rides and transit stations
Additional Fixed Route Transit Service
The City will continue to coordinate with Community Transit regarding additional bus transit service on
Olympic View Drive or east of 76th Avenue N.
In addition, the City adopted a policy (see Policy 8.12 in Chapter 2) to explore future funding for a city-
based circulator bus that provides local shuttle service between neighborhoods (Firdale Village, Perrinville,
Five Corners, Westgate) and downtown.
Washington State Ferries
WSDOT is planning to implement a ferry reservation system along commuter routes in the Central Puget
Sound. Depending on its design, a reservation system could have impacts on ferry traffic arrival times
and queuing areas. The City will work closely with WSDOT to implement a reservation system that meets
regional and local needs.
Edmonds Crossing Multimodal Facility
The City is also a partner in the Edmonds Crossing multimodal ferry, bus, and rail facility. Sound Transit is
planning to relocate Edmonds station as part of the larger Edmonds Crossing Multimodal project being
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 597 of 680
led by WSDOT. While there is no funding for this relocation, the multimodal facility would be an
important transit hub for the city.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 598 of 680
Figure 3-18. Future Priority Transit Corridors
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 599 of 680
GOODS MOVEMENT
In addition to the railroad line, movement of freight through Edmonds occurs primarily along SR 104, SR
99, and 76th Ave W, as shown in Figure 3-19. SR 104 provides the only truck route into downtown
Edmonds. Truck routes on 76th Ave W and Olympic View Drive connect Edmonds to cities in the north,
while SR 99 connects Edmonds to cities in the North, East and South. For connections within the city, *4th
Ave W, 220th St SW and 9th Ave S are designated for trucks. Beyond these primary routes, delivery
vehicles use many other streets to reach their final destinations.
A few areas prohibit certain types of vehicles. The downtown area between SR 104 and 9th Ave S only
allows single unit trucks, while SR 524, Olympic View Drive within the city, and a few other roads are
prohibited for hauling.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 600 of 680
Figure 3-199. Truck Routes
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 601 of 680
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT
TDM consists of strategies that seek to maximize the efficiency of the transportation system by reducing
demand on the system. The results of successful TDM can include the following benefits:
• Travelers switch from driving alone to high-occupancy vehicle modes such as transit, vanpools, or
carpools.
• Travelers switch from driving to non-motorized modes such as bicycling or walking.
• Travelers change the time they make trips from more congested to less congested times of day.
• Travelers eliminate trips altogether either through means such as compressed work weeks,
consolidation of errands, or use of telecommunications.
Within the State of Washington, alternative transportation solutions are necessitated by the objectives of
the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Law. Passed in 1991 as a section of the Washington Clean Air Act
(RCW 70.94), the CTR Law seeks to reduce workplace commute trips. The purpose of CTR is to help
maintain air quality in metropolitan areas by reducing congestion and air pollution. This law requires
Edmonds to adopt a CTR plan requiring private and public employers with 100 or more employees to
implement TDM programs. Programs provide various incentives or disincentives to encourage use of
alternative transportation modes other than the single-occupant vehicle.
The City promotes TDM through policy and/or investments that may include, but are not limited to, the
following:
• Parking management;
• Trip reduction ordinances;
• Restricted access to facilities and activity centers; and
• Transit-oriented and pedestrian-friendly design.
The City can support the CTR Law and regional vehicle trip reduction strategies by working with
employers to encourage the reduction of commuter single-occupant vehicle use. Community Transit
assists employers in developing plans that meet specific trip reduction needs as required by the CTR Law.
Flex time, parking management, vanpooling, and carpooling are some of the available options.
Community Transit offers free Employee Transportation Coordinator Training Workshops for employers
affected by CTR. Transportation consulting services are also available to interested employers not affected
by CTR. Community Transit also conducts community outreach programs that fall within the realm of
TDM.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 602 of 680
There are three employers in Edmonds that participate in the CTR program: the City of Edmonds, Stevens
Hospital, and Edmonds Family Medicine Clinic. Each employer measures its progress toward its goal of
reducing single-occupant vehicle trips by conducting an employee survey every other year. Community
Transit assists in this effort, and reviews the results to see if the employers are in compliance with CTR
goals.
SR 104 COMPLETE STREETS CORRIDOR ANALYSIS
During the development of the transportation plan, the City conducted a parallel study of the SR 104
corridor. Working with a Technical Advisory Committee and conducting extensive public outreach, the
City developed a corridor vision that is based on the following guiding principles:
• Support both local and regional mobility
• Improve circulation and safety for biking, walking, and transit access
• Reinforce land use vision, including at Westgate
• Create a sense of arrival in Edmonds and tie to the waterfront
• Coordinate with the state and other entities
• Take a phased approach that provides benefits over time
• Promote environmental sustainability and economic vitality
The City used these principles to identify and prioritize a set of 19 corridor recommendations. The projects
focused on pedestrian and vehicular safety, improved access, and corridor identity. One of the focus
areas of the study was the Westgate area. The plan identified several access and circulation improvements
in Westgate that can be tied to redevelopment of properties in the area. Details regarding the study are
found in the SR 104 Complete Streets Corridor Analysis report (2015).
Edmonds Waterfront At-Grade Crossing
Railroad use for freight transport has greatly increased and is expected to increase even more in the
future. The frequency and greater length of trains means that access between the west side and east side
of the rail is blocked for longer periods of time. This has significant implications for people needing to
access either side—whether for emergency, business, residential, recreational, or other needs.
A priority of the city has been to find a solution to the at-grade railroad crossings at Main and Dayton
Streets to the waterfront. The need is evident for providing emergency access, pedestrian/bicycle access,
and access to the ferry and other land uses. Various options have been discussed, each with certain
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 603 of 680
advantages, disadvantages, and costs. To determine the best option(s), the city is seeking studyhas
secured funds as part of the 2015 Legislative transportation package.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 604 of 680
4. IMPLEMENTATION AND FINANCIAL PLAN
This chapter provides a summary of the projects, project prioritization, total costs, projected revenue, and
implementation strategies for recommended improvements through 2035. It also includes a performance
measure, consistent with the criteria for performance measures in other parts of the Comprehensive Plan.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE
The Comprehensive Plan contains a small number of performance measures (no more than one per
element) that can be used to monitor and annually report on the implementation and effectiveness of the
Comprehensive Plan. Performance measures, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, are specific,
meaningful, and easily obtainable items that relate to sustainability and that can be reported on an annual
basis. They are intended to help assess progress toward achieving the goals and policy direction of each
major Comprehensive Plan element.
The measure identified below is specifically called out as matching the above criteria and being important
to transportation goals and will be reported annually, along with performance measures for other
Comprehensive Plan elements. It is not intended to be the only measure that the City may use for
transportation purposes.
Performance Measure: Number of linear feet of sidewalk renovated or added to the City’s sidewalk
network.
PROJECT COSTS
Preliminary costs for proposed transportation projects were estimated at a planning level, based on 2015
dollars. Estimates were based on typical unit costs, as applied to each type of improvement, and are not
the result of preliminary engineering. Annual programs such as asphalt street overlay show projected
expenditures beginning in 2010. These planning-level estimates of probable cost were the basis for the
financial plan.
Table 4-1 summarizes the estimated costs for the recommended transportation projects and programs
through 2035. The table shows that the cost of fully funding all operations, safety, and maintenance
projects and programs through 2035 is $133 151 Million.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 605 of 680
Table 4-1. Costs of Transportation Projects
ID Location Project Cost
Roadway Projects
1 174th Street SW and Olympic View Drive
Widen Olympic View Drive to add a northbound left turn lane for 50-foot
storage length. Shift the northbound lanes to the east to provide an
acceleration lane for eastbound left turns.
$610,000
2 Olympic View Drive and 76th Avenue W Install traffic signal. Widen 76th to add a westbound northbound left turn
lane for 175-foot storage length.2 $1,183,000
4 Puget Drive and 88th Avenue W Install traffic signal.1 $903,000
8 212th Street SW and SR 99
Widen 212th to add a westbound left turn lane for 200-foot storage length
and an eastbound left turn lane for 300-foot storage length. Provide
protected left turn phase for eastbound and westbound movements.
$2,806,000
11 Main Street and 9th Avenue N Install traffic signal.2 $911,000
14 220th Street SW and SR 99
Widen 220th to add a 325-foot westbound right turn lane and a 300-foot
eastbound right turn lane. Widen 220th to add a second westbound left turn
lane.
$3,215,000
15 220th Street SW and 76th Avenue W
Widen 220th to add a left turn lane for eastbound and westbound
movements.Reconfigure eastbound lanes to a left turn lane and a through-
right lane. Change eastbound and westbound phase to provide protected-
permitted phase for left turn. Add a westbound left turn lane in order to have
a left, through and right turn approach. Provide right turn phase for
westbound movement during southbound left turn phase.
$4,314,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 606 of 680
ID Location Project Cost
20 238th Street SW and Edmonds Way
Install a signal and provide protected left turn phase for northbound and
southbound. (Note; Project is also part of the SR 104 Complete Streets
Corridor)
$1,339,000
21 244th Street SWSR 104 and 76th Avenue
W
Widen 244th SR 104 to add second westbound left turn lane for 325-foot
storage length. Provide right turn phase for northbound movement during
westbound left turn phase. (Note: Project is also part of the SR 104
Complete Streets Corridor)
$3,017,000
30 SR 99 at 216th Street SW
Widen to allow one left turn lane, one through lane and one right turn lane in
eastbound and westbound directions, with 100-foot storage length for turn
lanes. Add eastbound right turn overlap with northbound protected left turn.
Add additional left turn lanes to northbound and southbound approaches.
$2,335,000
SR-99 Gateway / Revitalization
Add center median and left turn pockets along the corridor (from 238th St.
SW to 212th St. SW) to provide safer access management throughout.
Enhance urban design features.
10,000,000
A 84th Avenue W, between 212th Street S
and 238th Street SW Widen to three lanes with curb, gutter, bike lanes, and sidewalk. $15,441,000
B 238th Street SW, between Edmonds Way and 84th
Avenue WHwy 99 Widen to three lanes with curb, gutter, bike lanes and sidewalk. $3,045,000
C Add 228th ST. SW from HWY 99 to 95th Pl. Widen to three lanes with curb, gutter, bike lanes and sidewalk.Sub Total $10,146,000$48,642,000
Sub Total $4859,642265,000
Non-Motorized Projects
Citywide Walkway Projects (Short) $2,317,500
Citywide Walkway Projects (Long) $2628,460485,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 607 of 680
ID Location Project Cost
ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades and Transition
Plan
$4,189,500
Audible Pedestrian Signals $25,000
Citywide Bikeway Projects $555,000
Sub Total $3335,627652572,000
Preservation and Maintenance Programs and Projects
Annual Street Overlays 2016-
2021
Grind pavement, overlay $12,000,000
2022-
2035
$30,000,000
Citywide Signal Improvements 2016-
2021
Upgrades to existing signals, for maintenance and technology $25,000
2022-
2035
$75,000
Citywide Cabinet and Controller Upgrades
2016-
2021
Upgrades to existing traffic signal cabinets elements for maintenance and
technology
$160,000
2022-
2035
$490,000
Puget & Olympic View Drive Signal rebuild $500,000
238th / 100th Ave Signal Upgrades Rebuild complete signal system and install video detection $750,000
Main @ 3rd Ave. Signal Upgrades Rebuild completed signal system $375,000
Sub Total $44,375,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 608 of 680
ID Location Project Cost
Other Projects
Citywide Traffic Calming Program $200,000
SR 104 Complete Streets Corridor Analysis
Projects
$53,00570,0003
Operational Enhancements $240,000
Future Transportation Plan Updates $700,000
Debt Service on 220th Street SW Project
(Provide revised amount)
$616,600
4th Avenue Corridor Enhancement $4,325,000
Debt Service for 100th Ave W. Stabilization
Project
$373,000
Edmonds Waterfront At-Grade Crossing
Alternative Study
$625,000
80th Ave. W Sight Distance $292,000
Arterial Street Signal Coordination $50,000
Citywide Protective / Permissive Traffic Signal
Conversion
$20,000
Trackside Warning System $300,000
228th Corridor Improvements Project – SR 99
to 76th Ave W
See Note
Sub Total $610,743313,60011,311,600
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 609 of 680
ID Location Project Cost
GRAND TOTAL ( 2016-2035) $133149,387605,600150,523,600
1. Analysis indicates that restricting northbound and southbound traffic to through and right-turn-only (prohibiting left-turn movements) would also alleviate the deficiency identified. This could be implemented as an interim
solution until traffic signal warrants are met. Roadway re-alignment will also need to be analyzsed, in order to further increase intersection sight distance,
2. An alternative that also would meet the LOS Standard would be a roundabout.
3. Cost does not include roadway improvements at SR 104/76th Ave W, which are shown as Project 21 above, as well as the projects at SR 104/238th, which are shown as project 20 above..
Note: Will be constructed in 2016
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 610 of 680
REVENUE SOURCES
CURRENT SOURCES OF REVENUE
Revenue sources the City currently uses to pay for transportation improvements are listed below, and
Table 4-2 lists estimates of the potential amount of revenue the City may receive during 2016 – 2035
from these current sources of revenue. The estimates for 2016-2035 are based on the annual average
amount received by the City from 2008 through 2013 unless noted otherwise below.
• Grants – State and federal grants may be obtained through a competitive application process.
Each grant program is for specific types of projects, such as capacity, congestion relief, safety,
mobility, sidewalks and/or bicycle routes. Edmonds’ success in obtaining grants depends on
having projects that match each grant program’s requirements.
• Real Estate Excise Tax –This is a tax on all sales of real estate, measured by the full selling price,
and the City receives a tax of 0.5 percent. The 2016-2035 estimates are based on continuing the
recent increases for street preservation that were appropriated in 2014 and 2015. These amounts
are not guaranteed under current City policies.
• General Fund – The General Fund includes a broad range of taxes and fees such as sales tax and
property taxes. These revenue sources may be used for all City activities. The estimates for 2016-
2035 transportation costs are based on the average of the 2014 and 2015 appropriations for
street preservation. These amounts are not guaranteed under current City policies.
• Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax – The motor vehicle fuel tax is collected by the State and 2.4 cents per
gallon are distributed to cities for roadway construction purposes. The money is distributed based
on the population of each city.
• Traffic Impact / Mitigation Fees – Impact fees are paid by developers to mitigate the impacts
on the transportation system caused by their development. The 2016-2035 estimates are based
on the 2009 rates of approximately $1,000 per trip for the 4,000 additional trips that are expected
between 2016 and 2035.
• Stormwater Funds – The City’s stormwater utility uses a portion of its revenue to pay for portions
of transportation capital improvements that include stormwater control components.
• Transfers from Capital Fund – The Capital Fund for stormwater also makes transfers to pay for
eligible portions of transportation projects.
• Interest Income – The City deposits the revenues listed above in safe interest-bearing accounts
until the money is needed for capital projects. The amount of interest that is earned is used for
the same capital projects..
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 611 of 680
Table 4-2 summarizes potential revenue projected through 2035, from the current sources described
above.
Table 4-2. Potential Transportation Revenues- Current Sources
Source Amount
Grants (unsecured) $18,594,500
Real Estate Excise Tax for Street Preservation 15,810,000
Transfers from General Fund for Street Preservation 11,290,000
Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax 8,000,000
Traffic Impact / Mitigation Fees 4,000,000
Stormwater Funds 1,481,900
Transfers from Capital Fund 535,800
Interest Income 56,000
TOTAL $59,768,200
.
Based upon the total costs of recommended projects summarized in Table 4-1, and the potential revenue
from current sources listed in Table 4-2, the estimated total revenue shortfall through 2035 is $73 91
Million.
OTHER POTENTIAL FINANCING OPTIONS
The City will continue to explore new options to fund transportation projects and programs that are
important to citizens. Options that could be considered include the sources described below. Estimates
are provided for 2016-2035, and the basis for each estimate is summarized below.
• Transportation Benefit District – Edmonds has enacted a Transportation Benefit District
(TBD) in 2009 with a $20 per year vehicle license fee, which is slated to fund City Street
Operations. Washington state law allows local governments to establish a TBD and
accompanying funding sources to provide for the preservation, maintenance, and
construction of local transportation infrastructure. The City has limited funding to pay for
necessary transportation preservation and maintenance. This has resulted in the need to
provide an ever-increasing annual contribution from the City’s general fund to the street fund
in order to continue preserving and maintaining transportation infrastructure..
A TBD can also collect additional annual vehicle license fees of up to $80 (limited to a total of
$100) per license per year and/or a 0.2% sales tax, subject to voter approval. In 2010, the
voters rejected a request to add an additional $40 License Fee to fund transportation
improvements, such as walkways, intersection improvements, corridor enhancements,
roadway improvements throughout the City. In order to give the City some perspective on
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 612 of 680
future revenues should another TBD vote occur, tThe vehicle license fee estimate shown in
Table 4-3 is based on the an additional $80 license fee per year for 40,000 vehicles. The sales
tax estimate is based on an additional 0.2% sales tax extrapolated from the amount of
existing sales taxes collected in recent years by the City..
• Red light Cameras: in April 2009, a study was completed for the installation of red light
cameras at (2) City intersections. The study demonstrates that a significant number of drivers
were running the red light at those intersections. However, City Council rejected the
installation of red light cameras in a 4 - 3 vote.
• Business License Fee for Transportation – Cities have the option of including a fee to fund
transportation projects as part of business license fees. This is typically an annual fee that is
charged per full time equivalent (FTE) employee. In order for this type of fee to be successful,
cities typically collaborate very closely with business owners, to identify projects and programs for
funding that would be of most benefit to local businesses. The 2016-2035 estimate assumes $50
per year per full-time equivalent employee for 15,000 employees.
• Red Light Violation Fines– Cities can charge fines for violating red lights at signalized
intersections and use the amount of fine revenue that exceeds program costs to pay for
transportation safety projects. In April 2009, a study was completed for the installation of red
light cameras at two City intersections. The study demonstrated that a significant number of
drivers were running the red light at those intersections. At that time, the City Council rejected the
installation of red light cameras . Should this topice be addressed in the future, Tthe revenue
estimate for 2016-2035in Table 4-3 is based on a 2008 study of red light violations at specific
locations in Edmonds, and an assumption that each violation would produce $50 slated for for
transportation safety improvements (based on the experience of another Washington city).
• Transportation Levy– Cities can ask voters to approve an increase in property taxes and dedicate
the levy proceeds to transportation. . The 2016-2035 estimate assumes a levy rate of $0.20 (based
on the recent successful experience of another Washington city).
• Non-Motorized Mitigation Fees– Some Washington cities have developed a mitigation fee
program under SEPA to obtain mitigation from developers for the impacts on bicycle and
pedestrian facilities caused by their development. The estimate for 2016-2035 assumes that the
mitigation program will collect approximately 20% of the cost of the non-motorized projects.
• Local Improvement District/Roadway Improvement District –LIDs, enabled under RCW 35.43,
are a means of assisting benefitting properties in financing needed capital improvements. A
special type of LID is a Roadway Improvement District (RID). LIDs may be applied to water, sewer
and storm sewer facilities, as well as roads; but RIDs may only be applied to street improvements.
LIDs and RIDs are special assessment districts in which improvements will specially benefit
primarily the property owners in the district. They are created under the sponsorship of a
municipal government and are not self-governing special purpose districts. To the extent and in
the manner noted in the enabling statutes, they must be approved by both the local government
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 613 of 680
and benefited property owners. No estimates are made for 2016-2035 because a study has not
been conducted to determine specific projects that would meet the eligibility requirements for an
LID or RID.
• Additional Grants – Revenue projections summarized in Table 4-2 assume that the City will be
able obtain future grant funding at levels consistent with what has been obtained historically. It
may be possible for the City to obtain higher levels of grant funding than what has been
historically obtained. However, state and federal grants are obtained through a highly competitive
process, and other municipalities are also likely to increase their requests for grant funding to
address their own revenue shortfalls. It is likely that only a small portion of the City’s revenue
shortfall could be covered through additional grant funding, therefore no estimates are included
for 2016-2035.
Table 4-3 summarizes potential levels of revenue that could be obtained by these additional sources, if
they were approved by the City Council and by citizens. The table shows that the transportation funding
shortfall could be covered by a combination of these optional revenue sources.
.
Table 4-3. Potential Transportation Revenue- Additional Optional Sources
Source Amount
TBD License Fee (at $80 per license per year) $ 64,000,000
TBD Sales Tax (at 0.2%) 24,000,000
Business License Fee for Transportation (at $50 per year per full-time
equivalent employee)
15,000,000
Red Light Violation Fine (at $50 per violation after program costs) – must
be used for safety projects.
29,200,000
Transportation Levy (at $0.20 per year) 7,600,000
Non-motorized Mitigation Fee (at 20% of project costs) 4,250,000
Local Improvement District / Roadway Improvement District Not Estimated
Additional Grants Not Estimated
$144,050,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 614 of 680
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (2016-2035)
The Comprehensive Transportation Plan serves to guide the development of surface transportation within
the City, based upon evaluation of existing conditions, projection and evaluation of future conditions that
result from the City’s adopted future land use plan, and priorities stated by Edmonds citizens.
A six-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is prepared each year, which identifies
transportation projects needed to respond to planned growth of the community, and to meet safety and
mobility objectives. The TIP integrates City transportation improvement projects and resources with other
agencies in order to maximize financing opportunities such as grants, bonds, city funds, donations, impact
fees, and other available funding.
The TIP is maintained as follows:
1. Provide for annual review by the City Council as part of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) contained
in the Comprehensive Plan capital facilities element.
2. Ensure that the TIP:
Is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
Defines a project’s need, and links it to LOS and facility plans;
Includes construction costs, timing, and funding sources; and considers operations and
maintenance impacts where appropriate; and
• Establishes project development priorities.
Table 4-4 summarizes the recommended Transportation Improvement Plan, 2016 through 2035, which is
a comprehensive multimodal plan that is based on extensive public input and reflects a major update of
the 2009 Plan. The table also identifies which projects are recommended for inclusion in the 2016-2021
TIP. In comparison to revenues, the TIP has a substantial funding shortfall.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 615 of 680
Table 4-4. Transportation Improvement Plan 2016-2035
Project 2016 – 2021 2022 – 2035 Total
Annual Street Overlays $ 12,000,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 42,000,000
Citywide Signal Improvements 25,000 75,000 100,000
Citywide Cabinet and Controller Upgrades 160,000650000160,00
0
490,000490,000 650,000
Puget & Olympic View Drive 500,000
500,000
238th / 100th Ave Signal Upgrades 750,000 750236,000
Puget Drive / 196th St SW / 88th Avenue W 903,000 903,000
Main Street / 9th Avenue N 911,000 911,000
Olympic View Drive / 76th Avenue W 1,183,000 1,183,000
220th Street SW / SR 99 3,215,000 3,215,000
220th Street SW / 76th Avenue W 4,314,000 4,314,000
84th Avenue W, 212th Street SW - 238th Street SW (50%
split with Snohomish County)
15,441,000 15,441,000
80th Avenue Sight Distance 292,000 292,000
Main St / 3rd Ave signal upgrade 375,000 375,000
212th Street SW / SR 99 2,806,000 2,806,000
216th Street / SR 99 2,335,000 2,335,000
174th Street SW / Olympic View Drive 610,000 610,000
238th Street SW / Edmonds Way (SR 104) 1,339,000 1,339,000
238th Street SW, SR104 - 84th Avenue WHwy 99 23,568045,000 23,568045,000
228th St. SW, SR 99 – 95th Pl 10,146,000 10,146,000
244th Street SW (SR 104) / 76th Avenue W (50% Split
cost with Shoreline)
3,017,000 3,017,000
Citywide Walkway Projects (Update accordingly) 8,222,0008,800,500 20,555,50022,002,000 28,777,50030,802,500
ADA Transition Plan 1,571,000 2,619,500 4,189,500
Citywide Bikeway Projects 160,000 395,000 555,000
Citywide Traffic Calming Program 60,000 140,000 200,000
Future Transportation Plan Updates 250175,000 4050,000 700,000
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 616 of 680
Project 2016 – 2021 2022 – 2035 Total
Debt Service for 100th Ave. W Stabilization Project 206,000 167,000 373,000
Debt Service on 220th Street SW Project 24230,000 386,60082,500 616,600
4th Avenue Corridor Enhancement 4,325,000 4,325,000
SR-99 Gateway / Revitalization (Planning/Design phase
only)
10,000,000 10,000,000
Audible Pedestrian Signals 25,000 25,000
Edmonds Waterfront At-Grade Crossing Alternative Study 625,000 625,000
Operational Enhancements 70,000 170,000 240,000
Citywide Pedestrian Lighting 25,000 55,000 80,000
Upgrade to citywide Protected permissive phasing 20,000 20,000
Trackside Warning System 300,000 300,000
Arterial Street Signal Coordination $50,000 50,000
MODIFY TOTAL
$49,276,00052,026,50
0
$84,111,60098,081,00
0
$133,387,600150,523,60
0
Projected Revenue $17,076,630 $42,671,570 $59,768,200
Shortfall, unless alternative funding identified
$32,199,37035,029,87
0
$41,420,03055,409,43
0 $73,619,40090,755,400
INTERJURISDICTIONAL COORDINATION
The City will coordinate with the following agencies to implement projects and strategies presented in this
Transportation Plan:
• Apply to the FHWA to implement recommended updates to the federal functional classification of
some city streets, as summarized in Table 3-2.
• Coordinate with WSDOT on projects to address future operational deficiencies on SR 104.
• Coordinate with Snohomish County for joint agency funding of the proposed 84th Avenue
improvement.
• If a higher funding level of TBD is put forward and approved by voters, Ccoordinate with PSRC to
include projects in the regional transportation plan so that they will be eligible for funding.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 617 of 680
• Coordinate with WSDOT and the FHWA to move forward with the Edmonds Crossing Multimodal
Project.
• Coordinate with Community Transit to implement transit investments that are consistent with the
City’s priorities; including construction of additional bus shelters and benches, and new transit
routes.
CONTINGENCY PLAN IN CASE OF REVENUE SHORTFALL
Some revenue sources are very secure and highly reliable. However, other revenue sources are volatile,
and therefore difficult to predict with confidence. To cover the shortfall identified in the previous section,
or in the event that revenue from one or more of these sources is not forthcoming in the amounts
forecasted in this Transportation Plan, the City has several options:
• Change the LOS standard, and therefore reduce the need for road capacity improvement projects.
• Increase the amount of revenue from existing sources.
• Find new sources of revenue which could include additional TBD funding, business license fee for
transportation, red light violation fines, transportation levy, non-motorized mitigation fees,
LID/RIDs, and/or federal and state grants.
• Require developers to provide such facilities at their own expense.
• Change the Land Use Element in the Comprehensive Plan to reduce the amount of development,
and thus reduce the need for additional public facilities; or to further concentrate growth along
higher capacity roads that are served by transit.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 618 of 680
APPENDIX A
Goals and Policies Comparison Table
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 619 of 680
Old Policy
Number
New
Policy Reason
1.1 2.1
1.2 2.3
1.3 3.1
1.4 Redundant with Policy 3.1
(new reference)
1.5 Covered by Policies 1.1, 1.2,
1.3 (new references)
2.1 3.2
2.2 4.1
2.3 Covered within Policy 3.2 (new reference)
2.4 5.1
3.1 2.4
3.2 5.2
3.3 5.3
3.4 5.4
3.5 1.1
3.6 1.2
3.7 3.3
3.8 3.4
3.9 3.5
3.10 3.6
3.11 1.3
3.12 Covered within Policy 2.4
(new reference)
3.13 2.5
3.14 2.6
3.15 6.1
3.16 2.7
4.1 5.5
4.2
Overly specific, recommend
this be included in Design
Standards.
4.3 4.2
4.4 5.6
Old Policy
Number
New
Policy Reason
4.5 5.7
5.1 This should be covered in Development Standards.
5.2 5.8
5.3 4.4
5.4 3.7
6.1 5.9
6.2 1.4
6.3
The Transportation Advisory Group felt this is an ongoing process that is unnecessary to put in policy.
6.4 3.8
6.5 4.5
6.6 1.5
6.7 4.6
6.8 5.10
6.9 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a
policy.
6.10 4.8
6.11 4.7
6.12 4.9
6.13 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a policy.
6.14
This seemed like more of an
implementation item than a
policy.
6.15 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a policy.
6.16 4.10
6.17 4.11
6.18 4.12
6.19 2.8
7.1 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 620 of 680
Old Policy
Number
New
Policy Reason
policy.
7.2
This seemed like more of an
implementation item than a policy.
7.3 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a policy.
7.4
This seemed like more of an
implementation item than a policy.
8.1 1.6
8.2 4.13
8.3 6.2
8.4 4.14
8.5 4.15
8.6
8.7 4.16
9.1 6.3
9.2 6.4
9.3 6.5
9.4 6.6
9.5 6.7
9.6 Covered by Policy 6.9 (new
reference)
9.7 6.8
9.8 Covered by Policy 6.9 (new reference)
9.9 6.9
9.10 6.10
9.11 6.11
9.12 5.11
10.1 6.12
10.2 6.13
10.3 6.14
10.4 6.15
10.5 6.16
Old Policy
Number
New
Policy Reason
11.1 5.12
11.2
11.3 5.13
11.4 6.17
12.1 5.14
12.2 6.18
13.1
Overly specific, recommend
this be included in Design Standards.
13.2 Overly specific, recommend this be included in Design Standards.
13.3
Overly specific, recommend
this be included in Design Standards.
14.1 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a policy.
15.1 Replaced by new multimodal
LOS Policy
15.2 Replaced by new multimodal LOS Policy
15.3 Replaced by new multimodal LOS Policy
15.4 Replaced by new multimodal
LOS Policy
15.5 Replaced by new multimodal LOS Policy
15.6 2.9
15.7 5.15
16.1 2.10
16.2 3.9
16.3 5.16
16.4
This policy belongs more in
the Land Use Element than Transportation Element.
16.5 6.19
17.1 6.20
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 621 of 680
Old Policy
Number
New
Policy Reason
17.2 6.21
18.1 3.10
18.2 3.11
18.3 2.11
18.4 3.12
19.1
The Transportation Advisory
Group felt this is an ongoing
process that is unnecessary to put in policy.
19.2 Policy was out of date
19.3 3.13
20.1 This policy was not
considered enforceable.
20.2 3.14
21.1 Duplicative of Policy 6.11 (new reference).
21.2 Duplicative of Policy 6.11 (new reference).
22.1
This seemed like more of an
implementation item than a
policy.
22.2 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a policy.
22.3
This seemed like more of an
implementation item than a
policy.
22.4 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a policy.
22.5
This seemed like more of an
implementation item than a
policy.
22.6 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a policy.
22.7
This seemed like more of an
implementation item than a
policy.
22.8 This seemed like more of an implementation item than a
Old Policy
Number
New
Policy Reason
policy.
22.9
This seemed like more of an
implementation item than a policy.
23.1 3.15
23.2 3.16
1.7
2.2
2.12 Removed language referring
to a new transit/urban center
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 622 of 680
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 623 of 680
Appendix B
Supplemental Data
Table B-1 Summary of Existing and Recommended Federal Functional Classifications
Road Location Existing Recommended
No Recommended Changes
SR 104 (Main Street, Sunset Avenue,
Edmonds Way, 244th Street SW)
Edmonds-Kingston Ferry Dock – East City
Limits
Principal Arterial ---
244th Street SW SR 99 – SR 104 Principal Arterial ---
SR 99 244th Street SW – 208th Street SW Principal Arterial ---
SR 524 (3rd Avenue N, Caspers
Street, 9th Avenue N, Puget Drive,
196th Street SW)
Main Street – 76th Avenue W Principal Arterial ---
3rd Avenue S Pine Street – Main Street Principal Arterial ---
Pine Street Sunset Avenue – 3rd Avenue S Principal Arterial ---
Main Street Sunset Avenue – 84th Avenue W Minor Arterial ---
Olympic View Drive 76th Avenue W – 168th Street SW Minor Arterial ---
212th Street SW 84th Avenue W – SR 99 Minor Arterial ---
220th Street SW SR 99 – East City Limits Minor Arterial ---
228th Street SW 95th Place W – East City Limits Minor Arterial ---
228th Street SW SR 99 – East City Limits Minor Arterial ---
238th Street SW Edmonds Way – SR 99 Minor Arterial ---
244th Street SW Firdale Avenue – SR 99 Minor Arterial ---
5th Avenue S Edmonds Way – Main Street Minor Arterial ---
100th Avenue W, Firdale Avenue, 9th
Avenue S, 9th Avenue N
244th Street SW – Caspers Street Minor Arterial ---
76th Avenue W 212th Street SW – Olympic View Drive Minor Arterial ---
Meadowdale Beach Road 76th Avenue W – Olympic View Drive Collector ---
Olympic View Drive Puget Drive – 76th Avenue W Collector ---
Walnut Street, Bowdoin Way 9th Avenue S – 84th Avenue W Collector ---
W Dayton Street, Dayton Street Admiral Way - 5th Avenue S Collector ---
208th Street SW 76th Avenue W – SR 99 Collector ---
76th Avenue W, 95th Place W Olympic View Drive – North City Limits Collector ---
Olympic Avenue Puget Drive – Olympic View Drive Collector ---
Maplewood Drive, 200th Street SW Main Street – 88th Avenue W Collector ---
84th Avenue W 212th Street SW – 240th Street SW Collector ---
88th Avenue W 200th Street SW - Olympic View Drive Collector ---
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 624 of 680
Road Location Existing Recommended
95th Place W Edmonds Way – 220th Street SW Collector ---
226th Street SW 108th Avenue W – Edmonds Way Collector ---
3rd Avenue S Elm Street – Pine Street Collector ---
Recommended Higher Classification
7th Avenue N Main Street – Caspers Street Local Street Collector
80th Avenue W 212th Street SW - 220th Street SW Local Street Collector
80th Avenue W 200th Street SW - 196th Street SW Local Street Collector
96th Avenue W 220th Street SW – Walnut Street Local Street Collector
Dayton Street 5th Avenue S – 100th Avenue W Local Street Collector
76th Avenue W 212th Street SW – NE 205th Street Collector Minor Arterial
84th Avenue W 212th Street SW – 238th Street SW Collector Minor Arterial
220th Street SW 100th Avenue W – SR 99 Collector Minor Arterial
Recommend Lower Classification
Admiral Way South of W Dayton Street Collector Local Street
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 625 of 680
Table B-2 Inventory of City Streets
Existing City
Classification Street1 Location
Speed Limit
(mph)
Number of
Lanes Sidewalk Bikeway
Principal Arterial Edmonds Way Pine Street – 244th Street
SW
35 – 40 4 – 5 2 sides None
SR 99 244th Street SW – 212th
Street SW
45 7 2 sides None
Sunset AvenueSR-104 Pine Street – Dayton
Street
3540 4 – 5 2 sides None
Sunset Avenue Dayton Street – Main
Street
25 3 2 sides None
Main Street Sunset Avenue – Ferry
Terminal
25 4 – 5 2 sides None
244th Street SW SR 99 – East City Limits 40 4 – 5 2 sides None
Minor Arterial Caspers Street 3rd Avenue N – 9th
Avenue N
30 2 – 3 2 sides None
Firdale Avenue 244th Street SW – 238th
Street SW
25-35 3 2 sides None
Main Street Sunset Avenue – 84th
Avenue W
25 – 30 2 2 sides None
Olympic View Drive 76th Avenue W – 168th
Street SW
30 2-3 2 sides None
Puget Drive/196th Street SW 9th Avenue N – 76th
Avenue W
30 – 35 2 – 4 2 sides
partially
None
3rd Avenue N Main Street – Caspers
Street
25 – 30 2 2 sides None
5th Avenue S Edmonds Way – Main
Street
25 2 2 sides None
9th Avenue 220th Street SW –
Caspers Street
25 – 30 2 2 sides None
9th Avenue N Caspers Street – Puget
Drive
30 3 2 sides None
76th Avenue W 244th Street SW – SR 99 30 2 2 sides None
76th Avenue W SR 99 – 212th Street SW 30 2 – 4 2 sides None
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 626 of 680
Existing City Classification Street1 Location
Speed
Limit (mph)
Number
of
Lanes Sidewalk Bikeway
76th Avenue W 212th Street SW –
Olympic View Drive
30 2 – 4 2 sides None
100th Avenue W South City Limits – 238th
Street SW
35 2 2 sides None
100th Avenue W 238th Street SW –
Edmonds Way
30 – 35 4 2 sides None
100th Avenue W Edmonds Way – 220th
Street SW
30 2 – 4 2 sides None
212th Street SW 84th Avenue W – 76th
Avenue W
30 2 – 3 2 sides Bike route
212th Street SW 76th Avenue W – SR 99 30 4 2 sides None
220th Street SW 9th Avenue S – 84th
Avenue W
30 2 2 sides Bike lanes
220th Street SW 84th Avenue W – SR 99 30 2 – 3 2 sides None
228th Street SW SR 99 – East City Limits 25 2 2 sides None
228th Street. SW
238th Street SW
95th Place Way - SR-99
Edmonds Way – SR 99
25
30
2
2
Very short
2 sides
partially
None
None
228th Street SW 95th Place W – SR 99 25 2 Very short
2 sides
None
Collector Dayton Street Admiral Way – 9th
Avenue S
25 2 – 3 2 sides None
Maplewood Drive Main Street – 200th
Street SW
25 2 None None
Meadowdale Beach Road 76th Avenue W – Olympic
View Drive
25 2 None None
Olympic View Drive Puget Drive – 76th
Avenue W
25 2 1 side None
Walnut Street, Bowdoin Way 9th Avenue S – 84th
Avenue W
25 – 30 2 2 sides None
3rd Avenue S Edmonds Way – Main
Street
25 2 2 sides
mostly
None
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 627 of 680
Existing City Classification Street1 Location
Speed
Limit (mph)
Number
of
Lanes Sidewalk Bikeway
7th Avenue N Main Street – Caspers
Street
25 2 2 sides
mostly
None
76th Avenue W, 75th Place
W
Olympic View Drive –
North City Limits
25 – 30 2 1 side None
80th Avenue W 212th Street SW – 220th
Street SW; 200th Street
SW-Olympic View Drive
25 2 1 side
partially
None
84th Avenue W 238th Street SW – 212th
Street SW
25 2 Very short
2 sides
None
88th Avenue W 200th Street SW -
Olympic View Drive
25 2 1 side None
95th Place W Edmonds Way – 220th
Street SW
25 2 1 side None
96th Avenue W 220th Street SW – Walnut
Street
25 2 None None
200th Street SW Maplewood Drive – 76th
Avenue W
25 2 1 side None
208th Street SW 76th Avenue W – East
City Limits
30 2 None Bike lane
1. All other city streets not listed in this table are local access streets.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 628 of 680
APPENDIX C
Travel Model Transportation Analysis Zones
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 629 of 680
APPENDIX D
Walkway Project Ratings
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 630 of 680
Revised Figures
for body of Transportation ElementDR
A
F
T
Packet Page 631 of 680
YostPark
524
104
99
Meadowdale Beach Rd
Puget Dr
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6 t h
A v e
S
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
184th St SW
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Wa
y
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
Oly
m
p
i
c
V
i
e
w
D
r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Roadway Functional Classification
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
§¨¦5
Functional Classification
Principal Arterial
Minor Arterial
Collector
Local Street
PugetSound
Figure 3-1
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
_
F
u
n
c
C
l
a
s
s
.
m
x
d
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing County
Note: Dashed lines indicate a recommended change in functional classification.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 632 of 680
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n n
YostPark
524
104
99
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6 t h
A v e
S
Edmonds
Way
Robin
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
184th St SW
PugetDr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
Oly
m
p
i
c
V
i
e
w
D
r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
Meadowdale Beach Rd
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Speed Limits on City Streets
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
§¨¦5
Speed Limits
20
25 mph
30 mph
35 mph
40 mph
45 mph
PugetSound
Figure 3-2
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
2
_
S
p
e
e
d
L
i
m
i
t
s
.
m
x
d
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing County
n School
Note: Most local streets are 25 mph.
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 633 of 680
&A
&A &A
&A
&A
&A&A
&A&A
&A
&A
&A
&A &A
&A
&A
&A
&A&A
&A
&A
&A
99P
&A
&A
&A
&A&A&A &A&A
&A
&A
&A &A &A&A
&A
&A
&A
&A
&A
&A
&A
&A
&A
èéëìíèéëìíèéëìí
èéëìí
èéëìí èéëìí
èéëìí
èéëìíèéëìí
èéëìí
èéëìí
èéëìí
èéëìí èéëìí èéëìí èéëìí
èéëìíèéëìí
èéëìíèéëìí èéëìí
èéëìí
èéëìí
èéëìí
èéëííí
èéëìí
èéëííí
èéëìí
èéëìí èéëìí
èéëìí
èéëìíèéëìí
YostPark
524
104
99
Firdale Ave
Meadowdale Beach Rd
95
t
h
P
l
W
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6 t h
A v e
S
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
184th St SW
Puget Dr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
Oly
m
p
i
c
V
i
e
w
D
r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Existing Traffic Control Devices
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
§¨¦5
Traffic Control
èéëìí Traffic Signal
èéëííí Emergency Signal
&A All-Way Stop
99P Roundabout
PugetSound
Figure 3-3
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
3
_
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
.
m
x
d
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing County
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 634 of 680
®t
®t
®t
®t
®t
®t®t
®t
®t
®t
¬15
¬15
®t
®t¬15
¬15
¬15
¬15
¬15
®t
¬15
¬l
¬l
¬l¬l
¬l
¬l
¬l
Aloha St
4t
h
A
v
e
Sprague St
R a i l r o a d S t
Cedar St
Spruce St
Hemlock St
Laurel St
JamesSt
Glen St
Sun
s
e
t
A
v
e
S
W Dayton St
Main St
Railro
a
d
A
v
e
4t
h
A
v
e
S
2n
d
A
v
e
S
6t
h
A
v
e
S
Edmo
n
d
s
S
t
Daley St
S u n s e t A v e N
Maple St
Alder St
2nd
A
v
e
N
6t
h
A
v
e
N
3
r
d
A v e
S
3rd
A
v
e
N
7t
h
A
v
e
N
7t
h
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
E d m o n d s
W a y
Pine St
BellSt
Dayton St
5 t h A v e N4th
A
v
e
N
5t
h
A
v
e
S
Kingston-EdmondsFerry
Downtown On-Street Parking
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
4
_
D
o
w
n
t
o
w
n
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
.
m
x
d
Figure 3-4
®t Handicapped Parking
¬15 15-Minute/5-Minute Loading/Unloading Parking
¬l Bike Parking
1-Hour On-Street Parking
3-Hour On-Street Parking
Employee Permit Parking
Public Parking Lot
DRAFT
3-Hour Parking Lot
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 635 of 680
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
YostPark
1
2
345
6
7
8910
11
12
13
14151617
18
1920
2122
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
31
30
9
5
t
h
P
l
W
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
6 t h
A v e
S
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
184th St SW
Puget Dr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V i e w D r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Study Area Intersections
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
§¨¦5
PugetSound
Figure 3-5
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
5
_
S
t
u
d
y
I
n
t
s
.
m
x
d
104
99
MaplewoodPark
!(
DRAFT
!(
Snohomish CountyKing County
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 636 of 680
"
"
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(
!(
!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
YostParkMaple St
174th St SW
95
t
h
P
l
W
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
6 t h
A v e
S
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
184th St SW
Puget Dr
MeadowdaleBeachRd
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V i e w D r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
C
C
DEB
C
A
DDB
D
B
B
DCAB
C
BE
CD
C
B
A
A
B
A
A
B
C
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Existing Intersection Level of Service
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
§¨¦5
!(Meets LOS Standard
!(Highway of Statewide Significance
PugetSound
Figure 3-6
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
6
_
E
x
L
O
S
.
m
x
d
104
99
MaplewoodPark
!(
DRAFT
Level of Service (LOS) Desgination(A "Non-Edmonds City Intersection
!(
Snohomish CountyKing County
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 637 of 680
"
"
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(!(!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
YostPark
174th St SW
95
t
h
P
l
W
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
6 t h
A v e
S
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
184th St SW
Puget Dr
MeadowdaleBeachRd
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V i e w D r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
Maple St
F
F
EFD
D
A
FDC
F
D
B
FFBC
DA
C
B
F
D
F
EE
A
B
B
B
B
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
2035 Intersection Level of Service
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
§¨¦5
!(Meets LOS Standard
!(Does Not Meet LOS Standard
PugetSound
Figure 3-7
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
7
_
2
0
3
5
L
O
S
.
m
x
d
104
99
MaplewoodPark
!(
DRAFT
Level of Service (LOS) Desgination(A
!(
Snohomish CountyKing County
"Non-Edmonds City Intersection
Highway of Statewide Significance
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 638 of 680
YostPark
524
104
99
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6 t h
A v e
S
Edmonds
Way
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
184th St SW
PugetDr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
Oly
m
p
i
c
V
i
e
w
D
r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
Meadowdale Beach Rd
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Vehicle Collisions
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
§¨¦5
CollisionsHigh
Low
PugetSound
Figure 3-8
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
8
_
C
o
l
l
i
s
i
o
n
s
.
m
x
d
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing County
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 639 of 680
174th St SW
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
6 t h
A v e
S
Edmonds W a y
Robin
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
a
l
e
A
ve10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
184th St SW
PugetDr
MeadowdaleBeachRd
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin
W
a
y
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9 t h
A v e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
1 0 0 t h A v e W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V iew Dr
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
1
2
4
8
11
1415
20
21
30
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Recommended Roadway Capital Projects
Intersection Improvement Project
Roadway Improvement Project
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
9
_
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
.
m
x
d
§¨¦5
Figure 3-9
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
YostPark
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
PugetSound
104
99
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing County
#
A
B
A
C C
B
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 640 of 680
"
"
!
<
=
!
!
<
=
!
!=!!
<
=
!!=!
!=!
!=!
!=!!=!!=!
!
<
=
!
!=!
!=!
!
<
=
!!
<
=
!!=!!=!
!=!
!=!!
<
=
!
!
<
=
!!=!
!=!
!=!
!=!
!=!
!=!
!=!
!=!
!=!
!=!
174th St SW
Maple St
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
6t
h
A
v
e
S
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Sun
s
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
a
l
e
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd
A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
184th St SW
Puget Dr
MeadowdaleBeachRd
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
9 8 t h
A v e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9 t h
A v e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
Ed
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O
l y m p i c V i e w D r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
1
2
345
6
7
8910
11
12
13
14151617
18
1920
2122
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
31
30
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
2035 Intersection Level of Service with and without Improvements
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
YostPark
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
§¨¦5
PugetSound
Figure 3-10
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
0
_
2
0
3
5
L
O
S
.
m
x
d
104
99
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Meets Level of Service Standard
Highway of Statewide Significance IntersectionsIntersections not subject to Edmonds standards. LOS D is WSDOTstandard. Congestion should still be monitored in the future.
!(!
Does Not Meet Level of Service Standard!(
!(!
<
(
!#
WithoutImprovements
Non-Edmonds City Intersection"
WithImprovements
Intersection Number
Snohomish CountyKing County
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 641 of 680
YostPark
524
104
99
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6 t h
A v e
S
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave
10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
184th St SW
PugetDr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
9 8 t h
A v e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
Talbot Rd
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V i e w D r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
Meadowdale Beach Rd
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Pedestrian Intensive Land Uses
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
§¨¦5
Land Use
Government
Commercial
Medical
Park
School
PugetSound
Figure 3-11
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
1
_
L
a
n
d
u
s
e
.
m
x
d
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing County
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 642 of 680
I*I*
I*I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
I*
Snohomish CountyKing County
MaplewoodPark
186th St SW
6t
h
A
v
e
S
174th St SW
Edmonds
Way
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave
10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
184th St SW
PugetDr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin
W
a
y
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
Oly
m
p
i
c
V
i
e
w
D
r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Existing Pedestrian Facilities
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
YostPark
PineRidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
§¨¦5
PugetSound
Figure 3-12
104
99
DRAFT
Paved Walkway
Unpaved Walkway
I*Public Restroom
Park
Downtown Sidewalk Area-Sidewalks required on both sidesof the street as part of new development
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
2
_
E
x
P
e
d
.
m
x
d
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 643 of 680
$+ú$+ú
$+ú
$+ú
$+ú
Snohomish CountyKing County
MaplewoodPark
S1
2
S4
S3
S2
S10
S9
S1
S7
S5
S6
S 1 1
S8
L2
6
L19
L1
7
L5
L16
L2
L25
L8
L9
L14
L11L6
L1
L
1
0
L2
1
L28
L
4
L12
L2
2
L3
L2
3
L1
3
L27
L24
L1
5
L18 L20
L7
174th St SW
6
t
h
A
v
e
S
E d m o n d s Way
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
72
n
d
A
v
e
W
Maple St
PugetDr
MeadowdaleBeachRd
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
Oly
m
p
i
c
V
i
e
w
D
r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Recommended Pedestrian Projects
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
3
_
R
e
c
P
e
d
.
m
x
d
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
YostPark
PineRidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
§¨¦5
PugetSound
Figure 3-13
104
99
DRAFT$+ú Pedestian Crossing Treatment
Existing Paved Walkway
Existing Unpaved Walkway
84th Ave W Safety Project(includes walkway component)
Walkway Project
L/S #
Long/Short WalkwayProject Number
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 644 of 680
¬l¬l
¬l¬l
¬l¬l
¬l
¬l
¬l¬l
¬l¬l
¬l
¬l¬l¬l¬l
¬l ¬l
¬l
¬l
¬l
¬l
¾l
¾l
Puget Dr
95
t
h
P
l
W
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6 t h
A v e
S
Edmon d s W a y
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Sun
s
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
a
l
e
A
ve
10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd
A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
184th St SW
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way3rd
A v e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
1
0
0
t
h
A v e W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V i ew Dr
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
Maple St
Meadowdale Beach Rd
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Existing Bicycle Facilities
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
4
_
E
x
B
i
k
e
.
m
x
d
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
YostPark
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
§¨¦5
¬l Bike Parking
¾l Bike Locker
Trails/Path
Bike Lane
Bike Route
Sharrows
Interim Trail/Path
Street
PugetSound
Figure 3-14
104
99
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 645 of 680
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!
!!
!!
!!
Maple St
Meadowdale Beach Rd
Puget Dr
95
t
h
P
l
W
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6t
h
A
v
e
S
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Sun
s
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
a
l
e
A
ve
10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd
A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
184th St SW
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
Ed
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
244th St SW
W
o o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
1
0
0
t
h
A v e W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V i ew Dr
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Recommended Bicycle Facilities
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
5
_
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
B
i
k
e
.
m
x
d
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
YostPark
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
§¨¦5
!Existing Bike Parking/Locker
!!Proposed Bike Parking
Bike Lane
Bike Route
Trail/Path
Bike Sharrow
Existing
Proposed
PugetSound
Figure 3-15
104
99
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing County
!
!
!!!
!
!
!
!!
!!!
!
!
!!!
!!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!!!
!!CityPark 6t
h
A
v
e
S
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
7t
h
A
v
e
N
3rd
A
v
e
N
Maple St
9 t h
A v e
N
Walnut St
9t
h
A
v
e
S
5t
h
A
v
e
S
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Dayton St Main St
Ed
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
Pine St
See Downtown Inset
Downtown Inset
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 646 of 680
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
,,,
,
,
,
,,,
,,,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,,,
,,,,,,
,
,
,
,,,
YostPark
524
104
186th St SW
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6 t h
A v e
S
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
a
l
e
A
ve
10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
PugetDr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W o o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
1
0
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V i e w D r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
184th St SW
Meadowdale Beach Rd
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Recommended Signed Bicycle Loops
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
§¨¦5
Bike Routes
Short Loop (5 miles)
Medium Loop (7 miles)
Long Loop (20 miles)
,
,
,
Steep Grade/Long Hill
PugetSound
Figure 3-16
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
6
_
B
i
k
e
L
o
o
p
s
.
m
x
d
99
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing County
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 647 of 680
I1I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1I1I1
I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1
I1
I1
I1I1I1
I1
I1
I1I1
I1I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1I1
I1I1
I1 I1
I1I1I1I1I1I1 I1I1I1I1
I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1 I1
I1
I1I1 I1I1I1
I1
I1I1 I1
I1I1I1I1I1
I1I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1
I1I1I1 I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1I1
I1I1
I1I1
I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1
I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1I1
I1I1
I1 I1I1
I1I1I1I1I1
I1I1
I1I1
I1
I1I1I1I1I1 I1I1I1I1
I1 I1I1 I1
I1
I1
I1I1I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
IA
IA
Æb
Snohomish CountyKing County 95
t
h
P
l
W
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6t
h
A
v
e
S
E d m o n d s Way
Robin
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Sun
s
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
a
l
e
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd
A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
184th St SW
P u get Dr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9 t h
A v e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
1 0 0 t h A v e W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
M
a
i
n
S
t
2 1 2 t h StSW
196thSt SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V i ew Dr
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
Maple St
Meadowdale Beach Rd
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Existing Access to Transit
Sound Transit Express
Local Route
Commuter Route
Swift BRT
Sounder Commuter Rail
I1 Transit Stop
Swift BRT Stop
Park & Pool Lot
¼ mile Transit Buffer
IA Park and Ride Lot
Æb Sounder Station / Park and Ride Lot
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
7
_
E
x
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
.
m
x
d
§¨¦5
Figure 3-17
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
YostPark
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
PugetSound
416
115
130
130
416
101
104
99
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
405
871
115
116
120
115
116
119
I1 I1I1I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1
I1 I1
I1I1
I1 I1 I1 I1I1
I1
I1
I1 I1
I1I1I1 I1I1 I1I1I1
I1
I1
Æb
CityPark 6t
h
A
v
e
S
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
Admi
r
a
l
W
a
y
7t
h
A
v
e
N
3rd
A
v
e
N
Maple St
9 t h
A v e
N
Walnut St
9t
h
A
v
e
S
5t
h
A
v
e
S
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Dayton StMain St
Ed
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
Pine St
Downtown Inset
See Downtown Inset
119
130
116
196
196
416
130
116
416
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 648 of 680
""X
""X
""X
IA
IA
Æb
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
YostPark
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
524
PugetSound
104
99
MaplewoodPark
§¨¦5
Meadowdale Beach Rd
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6 t h
A v e
S
Edmonds
Way
Robin
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
a
l
e
A
ve10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
184th St SW
Puget Dr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9 t h
A v e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
200th St SW
1 0 0 t h A v e W
188th St SW
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
176th St SW
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
O l y m p i c V i e w Dr
7 6 t h
A v e W
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n ds Ferry
Future Priority Transit Corridors
Existing Bus Route
New Transit Service Options
Priority Transit Corridor
Proposed Link Light Rail
Swift BRT
Swift BRT Stop
IA Park and Ride Lot
Æb Sounder Train Station
""X Link Light Rail Station
\\
F
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
8
_
F
u
t
u
r
e
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
.
m
x
d
Figure 3-18
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing CountyNote: When Light Rail is open, several existinglocal and regional bus routes will be redesignedwithin Edmonds and surrounding areas.
44
t
h
A
v
e
W
236th St SW
Snohomish CountyKing County
ProposedProposedDR
A
F
T
Packet Page 649 of 680
YostPark
524
104
99
A
n
d
o
v
e
r
S
t
174th St SW
6 t h
A v e
S
Edmonds
Way
Ro
b
i
n
H
o
o
d
D
r
Caspers St
Suns
e
t
A
v
e
N
A d m i r a l W a y
F
i
r
d
ale
Ave10
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
7t
h
A
v
e
N
226th St SW
186th St SW
3rd A
v
e
N
11
4
t
h
A
v
e
W
95
t
h
P
l
W
Ti
m
b
e
r
L
n
7 2 n d
A v e
W
Maple St
184th St SW
PugetDr
9t
h
A
v
e
S
224th St SW
216th St SW
Bowdoin Way
3r
d
A
v
e
S
Walnut St
Dayton St
Ol
y
m
p
i
c
A
v
e
98
t
h
A
v
e
W
5t
h
A
v
e
S
244th St SW
W
o
o d w a y P a r k R d
218th St SW
96
t
h
A
v
e
W
92
n
d
A
v
e
W
Pine St
9t
h
A
v
e
N
228th St SW
T a l b o t R d
68
t
h
A
v
e
W
188th St SW
200th St SW
10
0
t
h
A
v
e
W
80
t
h
A
v
e
W
88
t
h
A
v
e
W
176th St SW
208th St SW
84
t
h
A
v
e
W
Main St
212th St SW
196th St SW
220th St SW
Oly
m
p
i
c
V
i
e
w
D
r
76
t
h
A
v
e
W
Meadowdale Beach Rd
K i n g s t o n -E d m o n d s F e r r y
Truck Haul Routes
LakeBallinger
City ofEdmonds
Pine RidgePark
LynndalePark
Southwest CountyPark
§¨¦5
Specifically Prohibited Route
Approved Haul Route
Single Unit Trucks Only
PugetSound
Figure 3-19
\\
f
p
s
e
0
3
\
f
p
s
e
2
\
D
a
t
a
2
\
2
0
1
4
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
s
\
S
E
1
4
-
0
3
6
0
_
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
_
S
R
1
0
4
_
C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
\
G
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
\
G
I
S
\
M
X
D
\
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
\
T
M
P
\
F
i
g
3
_
1
9
_
T
r
u
c
k
H
a
u
l
R
o
u
t
e
s
.
m
x
d
MaplewoodPark
DRAFT
Snohomish CountyKing County
DR
A
F
T
Packet Page 650 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 116
Appendix F – Street Tree Plan
City of Edmonds
Department of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services
2002 Street Tree Plan prepared by MacLeod Reckord
Updated by City of Edmonds staff in 2006
2006 Street Tree Plan Updated by Staff &
Approved by City Council November 5, 2010
2010 Street Tree Plan Updated by Staff &
Approved by City Council XXX, 2015
Packet Page 651 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 117
CONTENTS
Page
SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .118
VISION
ORGANIZATION
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
CONTEXT
EXISTING REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
RELATED PLANNING EFFORTS
GOALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .120
DESIGN
SPECIES SELECTION
MAINTENANCE
REGULATORY
IMPLEMENTATION
ACTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122
STREET TREE PLAN
Existing trees
View corridors waterfront connections
Retail streets
Overhead wires
Underground utilities
Downtown Plan
Gateways Plans
Key Routes Plan
TREE PLANTING PROCEDURES
STREET TREE MAINTENANCE
Procedures
Responsibility
REGULATORY LINKAGES
Coordination with Existing Plans & Codes
Design Review Procedure
STREET TREE LIST 130
DOWNTOWN STREET TREE DISTRIBUTION MAP 133
STREET TREE PRUNING GUIDELINES 134
STREET TREE PLANTING DETAILS 135
Packet Page 652 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 118
SUMMARY
Vision
The Edmonds Street Tree Plan exists to benefit the local community and business climate through
enhancement of the identity and character of the downtown, gateways, neighborhoods and
primary routes of travel. Street trees provide seasonal interest, summer shade, and a transition
between the street and adjacent buildings and properties as well as the ecological services of
providing habitat for wildlife, storm water management, and cleaning pollution from the air.
Often this is through preservation of mature and significant trees. The plan recommends species
which provide these benefits and are hardy, relatively easy to maintain, and tolerant of urban
conditions. Whenever possible consider the use of native trees and new technologies in tree and
sidewalk restoration and construction such as pervious sidewalks that drain naturally to provide
water for street trees.
Street tree planting or replacement creates opportunities to consider drainage techniques such as
bio swales and other natural storm drainage methods in new corner parks and bulb outs or by
retrofitting existing facilities.
The City may modify or amend tree species selection in the future.
Organization
This plan provides a brief overview of the existing physical context and regulatory requirements,
as well as previous planning efforts which relate to street trees. Goals and objectives are
identified relevant to street trees as urban design elements, tree species selection, maintenance,
regulatory guidelines and plan implementation. Suggested actions for the street tree plan are
discussed including these components:
Street tree list
Tree location plan
Planting standards
Maintenance responsibilities
Regulatory linkage with this plan
Packet Page 653 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 119
INTRODUCTION
Context
The City of Edmonds is gifted with a picturesque setting offering magnificent views of Puget
Sound and the Olympic Mountains. Enhancement of these views is an important consideration of
the street tree plan. The City is also a destination for people seeking enjoyment of the strong arts
community, its waterfront, and its small-town character. Edmonds is also a stopping point for
many who commute to Kitsap County via ferry. Edmonds is a certified Community Wildlife
Habitat city and street trees should contribute to the Sustainability Element of the City’s Climate
Action Plan. Street Trees also provide a stronger sense of place and city edge definition and
enhance the pedestrian environment.
Existing Regulatory Requirements
The City of Edmonds currently defines acceptable street tree species, planting methods, tree
locations, and planting and maintenance responsibilities through a variety of means. Primarily,
planting and maintenance of street trees in the city has been in response to a mixture of regulatory
requirements, legal proceedings and decisions by City Staff and public utility employees.
Responsibility for planting and maintaining the trees is not clearly defined and sometimes
conflicting.
Edmonds currently relies on the following regulatory guidelines:
Street Tree Plan, revised 2006 2015 and adopted, including a street tree list and
recommended tree locations in the downtown retail core area (subject to future
amendment).
Resolution 418, adopted 1978, governing maintenance of trees in public areas.
Ordinance 1952, created in 1977, regulating planting, maintenance and removal of trees
on City owned property.
City of Edmonds Community Development Code (CDC), Chapter 18.85 regulating street
trees.
Some references to street tree planting are also made in the comprehensive plan and the Shoreline
Master Program. The City’s Architectural Design Board (ADB) reviews and approves planting
plans for new development seeking a permit, including street tree planting as part of private
development.
Related Planning Efforts
Several previous and current planning documents identify goals and design recommendations
which directly relate to this street tree plan:
Edmonds Downtown Economic Enhancement Strategy, dated 1999.
City of Edmonds Design Guidelines. Design guidelines for private development except
for single-family zone and projects with up to two residential units.
Edmonds Downtown Waterfront Plan, dated January 1994, revised 2005. Guidelines for
downtown waterfront development.
Edmonds Streetscape Plan core document defines guidelines for streetscape development
within the public right-of-ways for Edmonds gateways (defined in Streetscape Plan), and
key routes of travel.
Packet Page 654 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 120
GOALS
Design
Within the City of Edmonds rights-of-way, location of street trees should make the following
contributions and meet these criteria:
Clarify the edges of the City.
Enhance City gateways at key intersections and retail/commercial centers.
Distinguish key routes of travel through Edmonds.
Define separate street identities within the downtown retail core.
Frame views of Puget Sound and the mountains from key viewpoints and right-of-ways.
Due to narrow street right-of-ways, species on view streets should be somewhat narrow
in form.
Placement of trees shall not obscure or impede vehicular sight distance at intersections.
Reinforce the sense of safety for pedestrians by providing an element of separation
between pedestrians and vehicles.
In retail/commercial areas, plant trees with handicapped accessible tree grates flush with
adjacent pavement to maximize width of "walking zone" on sidewalks. Avoid raised
planters that interfere with the “walking zone”.
Allow walking and window shopping to occur next to retail/commercial frontage and
allow space for weather protection over sidewalk walk zone.
Avoid overhead utilities. The City of Edmonds should recommend undergrounding
power lines in the downtown core and in the smaller retail/commercial centers.
Avoid blocking visibility of business signage, marquees and window displays.
Consider the largest tree caliper available and appropriate for each site.
Species Selection
Criteria for the tree species recommended in the Edmonds Street Tree List are listed below:
▪ Consider native species
Resistant to pests and disease
Hardy to local weather conditions
Produces minimal litter
Non-invasive roots
Resistant to breakage
Thornless
Fruitless
Resistant to drought and heat
Does not sucker
Tolerates air and water pollution and provides air/water quality benefits through
absorption of oils and other toxins
Readily available in adequate installation size and branching height
Provides seasonal interest, such as flowers and fall color
Upward branching habit
Appropriate mature size and form for their location
Packet Page 655 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 121
Maintenance
Several suggested maintenance procedures are relevant as well:
Consider and institute planting procedures, new technologies, and tools (such as root
barriers, Silva cell systems, or other underground planting mediums or structures) to
discourage lifting of pavement by tree roots by encouraging roots to grow downward or
into structures.
Use of equipment in the right-of-way other than hand tools will require a City Right-of-
Way permit prior to street tree pruning. Prune to maintain the natural form of the trees.
Avoid leaving branch stubs. Prune to direct branch growth around obstructions. Do not
top trees or pollard trees unless approved by the City. Prune frequently so that cut
branches are not substantial in size. Consider branching pattern in relationship to
potential obstructions when choosing orientation of tree at time of planting.
Contact the City Parks Division for Street True Pruning Guidelines Handout (pg 134) on
maintenance of street trees or to discuss any pruning issues.
Contact the City Engineering Division to obtain a Right-of-Way permit.
Regulatory
Except where otherwise defined by the City, the adjacent property owner is responsible
for tree planting and maintenance. Contact Park Maintenance Division for guidance.
Work within the City right-of-ways requires coordination with the City.
Institute appropriate public and private funding mechanisms to achieve goals and
implement recommended actions.
Provide incentives for private property owners to preserve substantial trees.
Implementation
When streets and sidewalks are built or reconstructed, consider existing trees individually
in regard to health of the tree and suitability for the site. Consider all reasonable
preservation alternatives to removal of the existing trees that do not jeopardize the
successful completion of the project. Plant the largest caliper of appropriate replacement
tree possible. Undergrounding of overhead utilities could occur simultaneously if species
compatibility is assessed.
Conform to the City of Edmonds adopted “Standard Details”, for example tree grates and
tree spacing.
Packet Page 656 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 122
ACTIONS
Existing Trees
Preservation of existing trees, particularly landmark trees and specimens of significant size and
age, is encouraged on both public and private properties as long as they are healthy and any
negative impacts on utilities and sidewalks can be reasonably managed.
Trees which do not conform to the street tree plan should be phased out over time. Allow new
trees to reach significant size before culling out unwanted specimens. Installation of new trees at
larger caliper size will quicken this process. Because new planting may be recommended to
occur over one or several blocks at one time, removal of existing trees may occur simultaneously
in the same areas. Removal of trees in the "prohibited" category on the street tree list should take
priority over others.
View Corridors and Waterfront Connections
In the downtown retail core area, views of Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountains occur along
streets which are perpendicular to the waterfront and where there are high points and steeper
slopes toward the water. The key downtown streets in this category are: Main St., Dayton St., and
5th Ave. south of Main.
Primary waterfront connections occur along Main Street and Dayton Street; and along Pine Street
(when the ferry terminal is relocated). Other key view corridors in the downtown include
Edmonds and Bell Streets. Trees along these streets should be more narrow in form in order to
frame but not block the views and visual connections to the waterfront.
Retail Streets
Streets with retail and commercial uses along them benefit from clear visibility from vehicles and
sidewalks to store frontage. These frontages can also provide weather protection for pedestrians
in the form of canopies. Parking may also occur directly adjacent to the sidewalk along these
streets. Trees should therefore have branching high enough to avoid awnings and allow visibility
under the canopy. High branching also avoids conflict with tall vehicles.
Overhead Utilities
Some streets or blocks in the downtown, gateway areas and along key routes have overhead
utilities. The street tree plan recommends eventual undergrounding or relocation to alleyways of
all overhead utilities in the downtown retail core area. Ideally overhead utilities in the downtown
should be undergrounded simultaneously with new street tree planting, otherwise, unsightly
pruning of the trees by utilities may occur to keep branches clear of wires.
Underground Utilities
Tree roots sometimes invade and damage city sewer and storm drainage lines. These underground
utilities occur on at least one side of the street throughout the downtown, gateway areas and along
key routes. For this reason, non-invasive species were chosen for the street list. Installation of
root barriers or other underground structures will help direct roots away from underground
utilities.
Downtown Plan
Specific street tree species are identified for planting on particular stretches of street in the
downtown. A map showing the species locations is shown on the next page. All trees shown on
the map shall be a preferred 3 inch but not less than 2 inch caliper unless otherwise approved.
Packet Page 657 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 123
Gateways to Edmonds
Gateways to Edmonds are defined in the body of the Streetscape Plan. They are key intersections
or series of intersections, and key retail/commercial nodes. All trees shall be a preferred 3inch but
not less than 2 inch caliper, as indicated, unless otherwise approved by the City.
Recommendations for specific street trees at these gateways are as follows:
FIVE CORNERS (212th Street SW at Main Street, Bowdoin Street, and 84th Avenue
West)
A roundabout is recommended in the Streetscape Plan for the center of the 5-way
intersection. If tTrees are placed in the roundabout , the tree(s) should have large
size and high branching to allow safe sight distance for drivers across the planted
area under the trees. Installation size should be a preferred 3” inches but not less
than 2 inch caliper with branching at 10 ft. height. These are possible good
choices:
Quercus rubra / Red Oak
Quercus palustris .Crownright. / Crownright Pin Oak
Cercidiphyllum japonicum / Katsura Tree
Ginko biloba .Autumn Gold. / .A.G.. Maidenhair Tree
Acer rubrum Bowhall. / Bowhall Maple
Prunus serrulata / Kwansan
Tree plantings along the five streets or spokes which extend out from the
intersection should have the same tree species planted to surround the roundabout
with a unifying element. A good choice for this tree would be Prunus serrulata
KwansanAcer rubrum ‘Bowhall,’ which is the same tree used on Main Street in
downtown. Eventually planting of this tree should extend all the way downwest
along Main Street, from Five Corners to downtown the fountain at 5th Ave. N, to
accent that important connection.
WESTGATE (Highway 104 or Edmonds Way at 100th Avenue West)
See Appendix C for gateway concept at Westgate. Medians are recommended as
well as planting at the four corners of this intersection. Median planting should
match the tree selection for Highway 104. Planting at the four corners should
accent this as a special intersection. Due to space limitations, if trees are planted,
they should allow for safe vehicular sight distance and visibility of storefronts or
store signage. These trees could be one of the following species:
Prunus serrulata .Amanagawa. / Amanagawa Cherry
Prunus sargentii .Columnaris. / Columnar Sargent Cherry
Acer rubrum ’Bowhall’ / Bowhall Maple
PERRINVILLE (Olympic View Drive at 76th Avenue West)
This intersection has native planting influences as well as retail/commercial
elements. Tree selection at the four corners of this intersection could be one
selected from the following species:
Acer rubrum ’Karpick’ / Karpick Maple
Acer rubrum ’Bowhall’ / Bowhall Maple
Fraxinus pennsylvancia ’Summit’ / Summit Ash
There is also space for a large tree species here which could be:
Packet Page 658 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 124
Cercidiphyllum japonicum / Katsura Tree
Ginkgo biloba ’Autumn Gold’ / ’A.G.’ Maidenhair Tree
HIGHWAY 99 INTERSECTIONS (at 212th Street SW, 220th Street SW, 228th Street
SW, and 236th Street SW)
Tree selection should be the same for these intersections and should match tree
selections for Highway 99 between the intersections. Due to space limitation, if
trees are planted at the intersections, they would need to go on private property in
back of the current limited right-of-way adjoining the sidewalk. Plantings within
the right-of-way would need to consider lighting and bus stop visibility issues
and be coordinated with the State. The species selected should have strong form,
and should not block safe vehicular sight distance and views to signage
identifying businesses. A medium to large columnar tree would work best such
as:
Acer platanoides ’Columnare’ / Columnar Norway Maple
Acer rubrum ’Armstrong’ / Armstrong Maple
Nyssa sylvatica / Tupelo
Key Routes
The Edmonds Streetscape study identifies important key routes through the City. Street trees
could be planted along these corridors as an element of continuity. All trees shall be a preferred 3
inch but not less than 2 inch caliper unless otherwise approved. Recommendations for specific
street trees along these routes are as follows, but may also require WSDOT approval:
SR 104
Median planting could be groupings of a mixture of small to medium formal type
trees such as:
Acer platanoides ’Globosum’ / Globe Maple
Pyrus calleryana ’Capital’ / Capital Pear
Carpinus betulus ’Fastigiata’ / Pyramidal European Hornbeam
Planting at sides could be larger boulevard type trees such as:
Liriodendron tulipifera / Tulip Tree
Cercidiphyllum japonicum / Katsura Tree
Quercus rubra / Red Oak
HIGHWAY 99
Planting at sides of Highway 99 should have a strong form and should allow
views of business signage. A medium to large narrow tree is recommended
selected from this list:
Acer rubrum ’Armstrong’ / Armstrong Maple
Acer platanoides ’Columnare’ / Columnar Norway Maple
Nyssa sylvatica / Tupelo
Packet Page 659 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 125
220TH STREET SW
Continue planting to match existing Amanagawa Cherry Trees from Highway 99
to 100th Street (9th Ave. S.).
212TH STREET SW / MAIN STREET
Continue planting of Pyrus calleryana .Glens Form‘Chanticleer’ from downtown
through Five Corners to Highway 99.
196TH STREET SW
A medium to large size tree is recommended for this stretch of roadway. The
following would work:
Tilia cordata ’Greenspire’ / Greenspire Linden
Fraxinus pennsylvanica ’Marshalls Seedless’ / Marshall Ash
OTHER ARTERIALS
Check with City for recommendations.
Tree Planting Procedures
Planting procedure recommendations address reducing tree stress, avoiding conflict of roots with
underground utilities and pavement, and minimizing conflict between tree branches and various
obstructions. Street tree planting details are included at the end of this document. Also refer to
City of Edmonds “Standards”.
In order to survive well in an urban environment trees need an adequate supply of water, nutrients
and air to the roots, as well as good drainage. Street trees are often planted in paved areas with
highly compacted, poorly drained soils. The pavement and soil compaction limits the supply of
water and air to the roots. Tree roots, which typically tend to be located in the top 1 foot of soil,
will often invade utility lines and follow the crushed rock base installed under pavements in order
to get the air and water they need.
Tree grates and tree wells allow some soil surface area to be exposed to air while protecting it
from compaction. Root barriers should be installed to direct roots downward and prevent uplifting
of surrounding pavement. An automatic irrigation system is recommended to supplement water
supply. Slow release fertilizer tablets should be added to the tree pit at installation time to assist
with tree establishment. Trees should be isolated from gas lines as gas is toxic to them.
Sharp transitions between soil types in the plant pit can discourage roots from growing out of the
pit. This can cause the tree to become root bound, thus unstable within the pit. For this reason
native soils should be mixed with planting soil in the pit. Tree pits should be large enough in size
to allow for a minimum of 6" of this soil mixture around the sides and bottom. According to the
American Standard for Nursery Stock, the root ball for a 3" caliper tree should measure 32"
minimum diameter with a depth of approximately 20". The minimum tree pit size for a 3" caliper
tree with standard root ball dimensions should be 44" diameter by 26" deep.
It is recommended that street trees not be planted during the summer or early fall. If trees must
be planted during the summer or early fall, anti-dessicants should be used to prevent water loss
through the leaves. Measures should be taken by the installer to protect the tree roots, trunk and
branches from physical damage.
Packet Page 660 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 126
At planting, the tree should be oriented in the best way possible so that branching is not aimed
toward obstructions such as awnings, buildings, signage and overhead wires.
Installation size and branching height should be chosen to maximize the trees survival rate,
resistance to vandalism, vehicle clearance under branches and aesthetic impact. The following
guidelines are suggested:
In retail/commercial and mixed use areas, install preferred 3” but not less than 2 inch
caliper street trees with minimum 7 foot branching height unless otherwise approved by
the City. Narrow and columnar trees could have lower branching height as approved.
In areas zoned by single family and multiple residential use, street trees should be
minimum 2” caliper with minimum 6 foot height branching unless otherwise approved.
Choose large shrubs or City approved small scale trees when planting underneath power
lines.
Guidelines for street tree location, spacing and clearances are defined below:
Spacing: Space trees to allow adequate area for mature crown spread. Space small scale
and narrow trees about 30 to 40 feet on center, medium scale trees about 40 to 50 feet on
center, and large scale trees about 40 to 60 feet on center. In some cases spacing may
need to be increased dependent upon tree species and its branching characteristics in
relation to planned uses adjacent to the planting. In some instances currently within the
City adjacent property owners may over-prune to provide better exposure to their
businesses or territorial view from their residence. Contact Parks Maintenance Division
for Guidance and review Street Tree Pruning Guidelines pg.134).
Tree Grates/Tree Wells: In retail/commercial and mixed use area, install trees with a 4
foot square ADA accessible cast iron tree grate per City standards. Larger or smaller 3
foot grates may be used as approved by the City. Tree grates are not required in areas
zoned for single family residential use unless determined to be needed by City staff.
Appropriate sized tree wells are recommended for each newly planted tree (usually 3-6’
in diameter).
Location:
o In the Downtown Activity Center (excluding Sunset Avenue): Center trees 2-1/2
feet back from the face of curb. A larger dimension from the face of curb may be
used with a larger tree grate as approved by the City. Maintain the same setback
from face of curb on each street so that trees will be in a straight line. Do not
plant trees in the walking zone of the sidewalk.
o In Commercial/Business/Mixed Use/Medical Use/Public Use/Multiple
Residential zones outside the Downtown Activity Center: If the majority of the
block already has an existing sidewalk and landscape strip, any new development
shall conform to the existing pattern. Otherwise, center trees 2-1/2 feet back
from the face of the curb. A larger dimension from the face of curb may be used
with a larger tree grate as approved by the City. Maintain the same setback from
face of curb on each street so that trees will be in a straight line. Do not plant
trees in the “walking zone” of the sidewalk.
o In Single-Family Residential Zones: Trees shall be installed 2.5 foot back from
the face of the curb within a landscape strip. The maximum size of the landscape
strip shall not exceed four feet unless otherwise approved by the City. A five-
foot sidewalk shall be constructed, behind the designated landscape strip, in
accordance with the current sidewalk policy within the city’s Transportation
Packet Page 661 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 127
Element. If one of the following apply, the sidewalk may be placed adjacent to
the curb:
Right-of-way width is not adequate to allow for both a sidewalk and a
landscape strip;
Topography would require retaining walls to construct the sidewalk;
The majority of the block has already had the sidewalk placed in a
different location (in which case the new should match the existing);
The street has low traffic volume, or has a parking strip between the
sidewalk and the lane of traffic.
Maintain the following minimum clearances:
5 feet from underground utilities unless adequate protection is provided for the tree and
the utility line as approved by the City. Call 1-800-424-5555 to request location of
underground utilities,
10 feet from power poles,
7-1/2 feet from driveways,
20 feet from street lights,
20 feet from other existing trees,
30 feet from street intersections except at intersections with special design treatment
and/or as approved by the City.
Exceptions from the above guidelines may be administratively approved as described below.
To request a different type of tree or different size tree, when the type of tree or required
size of tree is not available, please contact the Parks Department.
To request a location other than as recommended above, when maintaining the minimum
clearances would reduce the number of trees that could be installed, please contact the
Engineering Division.
Packet Page 662 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 128
STREET TREE MAINTENENCE
Procedures
Provisions for adequate water and nutrients, proper pruning practices, and reducing competition
from other plants will help the street trees be more resistant to pests and disease.
WATERING
Newly planted trees need supplemental water during the dry summer months
until they are established. During the first 2 years after planting an application of
about 5 gallons per week is recommended during the month of May through
October. This amount may be decreased as the tree matures except during severe
drought. An automatic irrigation system is recommended for street trees in
retail/commercial areas where individual residents/owners would be less likely to
maintain the trees. The resident/owner shall be responsible for the maintenance
of their irrigation system pipe installed in the City right-of-way. Irrigation control
and back flow system shall always remain on private property.
FERTILIZER
Newly planted trees make poor use of fertilizer during the first growing season.
A minimal application of a slow release fertilizer is recommended during the first
one or two years of growth. A moderate application of slow release fertilizer may
be applied after that for a few years. It should be applied according to
manufacturer’s instructions.
PRUNING
All pruning done by private contractors on Edmonds street trees shall conform to
International Society of Arboriculture standards and American Association of
Nurserymen standards. A City issued right-of-way permit should be acquired
when equipment other than hand tools are used in the public right-of-way to
prune street trees. Pruning should maintain the natural form of the tree. Do not
top trees and do not remove more than 25% of the tree canopy. Exceptions must
be approved by the City of Edmonds. Branches should be pruned when small to
reduce shock to tree, and avoid unnatural branch angles or a hacked off look.
Frequent annual or biannual pruning, especially during the first 5 years of
growth, will allow maintenance of a more natural growth pattern while directing
limbs away from buildings, street lights, overhead wires, vehicular traffic,
awnings and pedestrian walking zones. Prune branches according to the Street
Tree Pruning Guidelines described on page 134.
Packet Page 663 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 129
REDUCE PLANT COMPETITION
Keep competing lawn and weeds away from the tree trunk for the first 3 to 4
years after planting. Provide a 4 to 6 foot diameter clear area or tree well around
the trunk and maintain a 2" to 3" depth of mulch in this clear area. Keeping lawn
away also helps reduce damage to the trunk by lawn mowers.
AVOID DAMAGE
Cuts or nails into tree bark provides place for disease and decay to enter. Nailing
of signs, peeling bark off, carving of initials in the bark and tying of objects such
as bicycles to trees can be harmful and should be discouraged. Tree grates should
be broken out or removed before the trunk grows into them. When a tree is
wounded, use of tar or paint on the wound is not recommended. Instead, clean
the wound and remove rough edges from the bark.
TREAT FOR DISEASE
Use effective and environmentally sensitive IPM (Integrated Pest Management)
principles and approaches in dealing with pest management and disease.
Sometimes it is necessary to apply appropriate sprays to treat insects, fungus and
other problems. First it is important to identify the problem, then to treat the
specific problem in the least toxic way possible such as ladybugs to control
aphids. For more information about pests and possible treatment contact the King
County Extension Service (206) 296-3900 or the Master Gardner Program at
(206) 296-3440. Many chemicals are toxic. Follow manufacturer’s instructions.
Notify neighbors and nearby schools prior to application.
Responsibility
Unless otherwise indicated the adjacent property owner is responsible for maintenance of
street trees and any owner/resident installed irrigation system for those trees.
The City may need to explore various sources of funding to supplement the current
maintenance budget, such as formation of a Local Improvement District (L.I.D.), or other
supplemental funding source.
Regulatory Linkages
The Street Tree Plan should be coordinated with existing plans and codes and the current design
review procedure.
Packet Page 664 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 130
STREET TREE LIST
Street tree selections shall be taken from this list unless otherwise approved by the City of
Edmonds. List subject to amendment in the future. Due to the needs and nature of current street
trees most are ornamental and non-native. Where appropriate, conifers and other native trees
could be substituted.
Recommended Street Trees
Small, Spreading Trees (<25'ht)
Botanical name/Common name Height (ft.) Spread (ft.) Flowers/Fruit/Fall
Color/Remarks
Acer platanoides ’Globosum’/Globe Maple 20’ 18’ - yellow Graft at 6’ on Acer. p. understock
Fraxinus pennsylvanica ’Johnson’/Leprechaun Ash 18’ 16’ - yellow Limited availability.
Acer ginnala ’Flame’/Amur Maple 20’ 20’ yellow red Select for single stem, flowers
fragrant.
Small, Narrow Trees (<25'ht)
Botanical name/Common name Height (ft.) Spread (ft.) Flowers/Fruit/Fall
Color/Remarks
Prunus serrulata ’Amanagawa’/Amanagawa Cherry
(not recommended for downtown)
20’-25’ 6-8’ light pink bronze Fragrant flowers,
Limited availability in adequate size.
Small / Medium, Spreading Trees (25-35' ht)
Botanical name/Common name Height (ft.) Spread (ft.) Flowers/Fruit/Fall
Color/Remarks
Tilia cordata ’De Groot’/De Groot Linden 30’ 20’ yellow Limited availability.
Acer truncatum x A. platanoides/’Warrens Red’
Pacific Sunset
30’ 25’ yellow yellow . orange-red Limited
availability.
Small / Medium, Narrow Trees (25-35' ht)
Botanical name/Common name Height (ft.) Spread (ft.)/Flowers/Fruit/Fall
Color/Remarks
Carpinus betulus 'Columnanis'/Columnar European
Hornbeam
30-35’ 15-20’ - - Narrower than ’Fastigiata’, and
with strong central trunk. Limited availability in
adequate size.
Pyrus calleryana ’Capital’/Capital Pear 35’ 12’ white/1/2" diam. red . purple
Medium / Large, Spreading Trees (35-50' ht)
Botanical name/Common name Height (ft.) Spread (ft.)/Flowers/Fruit/Fall
Color/Remarks
Acer rubrum ’Karpick’/Karpick Maple 35-50’ 20’ – yellow-orange
Acer rubrum ’Scarsen’/Scarlet Sentinel Maple 40’ 20’ - yellow-orange
Acer rubrum ’Red Sunset’/Red Sunset Maple 45’ 35’ - red/orange-red
Acer rubrum ’October Glory’/October Glory Maple 40’ 35’ - deep red/red-purple
Acer pseudoplatanus ’Atropurpureum’/Spathii
Maple
40’ 30’ - - Foliage green with purple underside.
Carpinus betulus ’Fastigiata’/Pyramidal European
Hornbeam
35’ 25’ - yellow Locate only in SF residential areas
and in medians as approved by City.
Packet Page 665 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 131
Fraxinus oxycarpa ’Raywood’/Raywood Ash 35’ 25’ – reddish purple
Fraxinus pennsylvanica ’Summit’/Summit Ash 45’ 25’ - yellow
Fraxinus pennsylvanica ’Marshalls
Seedless’/Marshall Ash
50’ 40’ - yellow
Fraxinus pennsylvanica ’Urbanite’/Urbanite Ash 50’ 40’ - bronze
Gleditsia triacanthos ’Skyline’/Skyline Locust 45’ 35’ - golden
Tilia cordata ’Greenspire’/Greenspire Linden 40’ 30’ - yellow
Medium / Large, Narrow Trees (35-50' ht)
Botanical name/Common name Height (ft.) Spread (ft.)/Flowers/Fruit/Fall
Color/Remarks
Acer platanoides ’Columnare’/Columnar Norway
Maple
35’ 15’ - yellow Dense foliage.
Acer rubrum ’Bowhall’/Bowhall Maple 40’ 15’ - orange-red
Acer rubrum ’Armstrong’/Armstrong Maple 45’ 10-15’ - red-yellow Sometimes poor fall color.
Ginkgo biloba ’Princeton Sentry’/’P.S. Maidenhair
Tree
40’ 15’ - yellow Limited availability.
Pyrus calleryana ’Glens Form’/Chanticleer Pear 40’ 15’ white/1/2" diam. red-purple Thornless.
Quercus robur ’Fastigiata’/Skyrocket Oak 45-50’ 15’ - / acorns -
Tilia cordata ’Corzam’/Corinthian Linden 45’ 15’ - yellow Limited availability.
Large, Spreading Trees (<50' ht)
Botanical name/Common name Height (ft.) Spread (ft.)/Flowers/Fruit/Fall
Color/Remarks
Quercus rubra/Red Oak 50’ 45’+ -/acorns rusty red
Cercidiphyllum japonicum/Katsura Tree 40-100’ 40’+ - yellowscarlet Select single stem.
Quercus palustris ’Crownright’/Crownright Pin Oak 80’ 40’ -/acorns rusty orange-red
Quercus frainetto ’Schmidt’/Forest Green Oak 50’+ 30’+ -/acorns yellowbrown
Ginko biloba ’Autumn Gold’/’A.G.’ Maidenhair
Tree
45-120’ 35’+ - yellow
Large, Narrow Trees (<50' ht)
Botanical name/Common name Height (ft.) Spread (ft.)/Flowers/Fruit/Fall
Color/Remarks
Liriodendron tulipfera ’Fastigiatum’/Columnar
Tulip Tree
50-70’ 15-25’ -/ pods greenyellow Limited
availability; pods are 2-3".
Fagus sylvatica ’Dawyckii’/Dawyk Purple Beech 45-70’ 15-25’ Deep purple foliage. Limited
availability in adequate size.
Nyssa sylvatica/Tupelo 70-90’ 20’ - apricot-red Select male.
Packet Page 666 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 132
STREET TREES APPROVED WITH RESERVATIONS:
Albizia julibrissin/Silk Tree, Mimosa
Betula spp./Birch
Catalpa spp./Catalpa
Crataegus oxycantha (aka C. laevigata)/English Hawthorn
Gleditsia triacanthos (with thorns)/Honey Locust
Juglans nigra/Black Walnut
Juglans regia/English Walnut
Liquidambar styraciflua/Sweetgum
Platanus spp./London Plane, Sycamore
Quercus paulustris/Pin Oak (except ’Crownright’)
Sophora japonica/Pagoda Tree
Ulmus americana/American Elm
Ulmus parvifolia/Chinese Elm
Ulmus pumila/Siberian Elm
Aesculus hippocastanum/Horse Chestnut
Amanagawa/ Amanagawa Cherry
Coniferous trees
STREET TREES PROHIBITED:
Acer negundo/Box Elder
Acer saccarinum/Silver Maple
Acer macrophyllum/Big Leaf Maple
Ailanthus altissima/Tree of Heaven
Alnus rubra/Red Alder
Malus(fruiting var.)/Apple
Prunus (fruiting var.)/Cherry, Plum
Pyrus (fruiting var.)/Pear
Populus spp./Polar
Robinia pseudoacacia/Black Locust
Salix spp./Willow
Columnaris/Columnar Sargeant Cherry
Packet Page 667 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 133
Packet Page 668 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 134
CITY OF EDMONDS
STREET TREE PRUNING GUIDELINES HANDOUT
To provide uniformity of maintenance and keep the health of street trees in Edmonds thriving,
certain guidelines are used pruning any tree in the Edmonds Street Tree Plan.
All Street tree pruning performed by certified private contractors shall be licensed, bonded and
conform to International Society of Arboriculture and American Association of Nurseryman
Standards.
A city issued right-of-way permit will be required when equipment or other tools are used on city
streets or sidewalks.
Tree Pruning Guidelines:
Pruning trees should be done during dormant season between November and February.
Do not top trees and do not remove more than 25 % of tree canopy which will assist in
natural shape of tree. Exceptions must be approved by City of Edmonds.
Prune tree to it is natural look directing limbs away from buildings, street lights, overhead
utilities, vehicle traffic, pedestrian walk zones and building awnings.
When pruning avoid unnatural branch angles and pollarded look.
Cut branches directly next to branch collar and do not leave branch stubs extending out
beyond collar.
All tree limbs and debris must be hauled off site.
All tree pruning must be done safely and professionally.
Parks Maintenance staff will gladly meet with owners to discuss proper tree pruning.
Contacts:
Public Works: Tod Moles – Street Manager 425-771-0235
Parks Maintenance: Rich Lindsay – Parks Manager 425-771-0289
Right-of-Way Permits may be obtained at City Hall 121-5th Avenue Edmonds, WA. 98020
Packet Page 669 of 680
APPENDIX F – Street Tree Plan 135
Packet Page 670 of 680
CITY OF EDMONDS
121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020
Phone: 425.771.0220 • Fax: 425.771.0221 • Web: www.edmondswa.gov
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT • PLANNING DIVISION
June 11, 2015
2015 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
PUBLIC PROCESS
During the 2015 Comprehensive Plan update, the City actively encouraged public participation by
hosting thirty public meetings, ten public hearings, and two open house events between August 2014
and June 2015, with one additional meeting scheduled for July 7. Public meetings and hearings were
held during regularly scheduled City Council meetings in the Public Safety Complex located at 250 5th
Ave. N, Edmonds. The two open house events were held on the 3rd floor of City Hall and included staff
presentations and opportunities for the public to provide feedback.
As part of the process, each Comprehensive Plan element was considered sequentially, subject to
certain common assumptions for consistency, before combining all elements together into one
integrated plan.
The week prior to each hearing, public notices were published in the Edmonds Beacon,
myedmondsnews.com, and the Everett Herald and posted at City Hall, Edmonds Library, and the Public
Safety building. The agenda for each public meeting was posted on the City Council website. All public
meetings and hearings were broadcast on EdTV, available on both Comcast and Frontier cable systems,
Comcast 21/Frontier 39 and available for viewing online.
In addition, the draft Economic Development Element of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan was discussed at
public meetings of the Citizens Economic Development Commission. Updates to the Street Tree Plan
were discussed at public meetings of the Tree Board. Also, the Comprehensive Plan Update process,
especially for the Sustainability Element, was discussed at meetings of the Mayor’s Climate Protection
Committee.
Background materials and draft Comprehensive Plan documents were made available during the update
process through the City of Edmonds website. The website also included a plan update process
schedule, relevant press releases, and listed the additional opportunities for public participation.
Several press releases were issued during the update process and articles were published in the local
news media and in the City’s newsletter.
Attendance at public events varied depending on the nature of the topics discussed.
Packet Page 671 of 680
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
6
7
2
o
f
6
8
0
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
6
7
3
o
f
6
8
0
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
6
7
4
o
f
6
8
0
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
6
7
5
o
f
6
8
0
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
6
7
6
o
f
6
8
0
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
6
7
7
o
f
6
8
0
From:Hope, Shane
To:Cunningham, Diane
Subject:FW: Comprehensive Transportation Plan
Date:Thursday, June 11, 2015 11:39:03 AM
Please add the note below to the list of public comments for the June 16 public hearing.
From: kirk@maritimeconsultant.com [mailto:kirk@maritimeconsultant.com] On Behalf Of Kirk GreinerSent: Monday, May 18, 2015 9:17 AM
To: Planning
Cc: Peter Laylin; Charles Gold; Williams, Phil; Buckshnis, Diane
Subject: Comprehensive Transportation Plan
In reviewing the Comprehensive Transportation Plan dated May 2015 prepared by Fehr & Peers
(http://www.edmondswa.gov/images/COE/Government/Departments/Development_Services/PlanningDivision/Plans/CompPlan2015/Edmonds_Transportation_Plan_Review_Draft.pdf
, which comes before the Council tomorrow evening, I found no reference to the at-grade railroad crossing way-side horns.
The current 2015 budget contains $50,000 to obtain bids for the installation of these horns with the verbal comment that $300,000 would be in the 2016 budget for their installation.
Since the plan identifies transportation infrastructure and services needed to support projected land use within the city through the year 2035, should this project be included.
No mention in sections:
Recommended Roadway Capital Projects (pages 3-45 through 3-47
Edmonds Waterfront at-grade Crossing (page 3-81)
Should it be in the Plan or is it too small a project to be included.
Kirk Greiner
(206) 999-1711
Packet Page 678 of 680
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
6
7
9
o
f
6
8
0
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
6
8
0
o
f
6
8
0