2018-09-25 City Council - Full Agenda-2195Agenda
Edmonds City Council
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020
SEPTEMBER 25, 2018, 7:00 PM
Edmonds City Council Agenda
September 25, 2018
Page 1
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
2. ROLL CALL
3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
4. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
1. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of September 18, 2018
2. Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
3. Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages totaling an amount undetermined.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3-MINUTE LIMIT PER PERSON) - REGARDING MATTERS NOT LISTED ON
THE AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS PUBLIC HEARINGS
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation (30 min)
2. Public Hearing to Continue Moratorium on Development of Residential Units n the BD Zoning
District without On-Site Vehicle Parking Spaces (20 min)
3. Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands (20 min)
4. Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber Athletic Fields (20 min)
7. ACTION ITEMS
1. 2018 Sewer Replacement Change Order (15 min)
2. Interlocal Cooperative Purchasing Agreement with Sourcewell (Minnesota) (5 min)
8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Council Committee Reports and Minutes (10 min)
9. REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
12. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW
42.30.110(1)(I)
13. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE
SESSION.
Edmonds City Council Agenda
September 25, 2018
Page 2
ADJOURN
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of September 18, 2018
Staff Lead: Scott Passey
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
N/A
Attachments:
09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes
4.1
Packet Pg. 3
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
September 18, 2018
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Michael Nelson, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Don Anderson, Assistant Police Chief
Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief
Earl Yamane, Police Corporal
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir.
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Scott James, Finance Director
Mary Ann Hardie, HR Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Mike Clugston, Associate Planner
Tom Brubaker, City Attorney’s Office
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Council President Nelson requested Item 4.7, Teamsters Collective Bargaining Agreement (1/1/18 -
12/31/20), be removed from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items
approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2018
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2018
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 4 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 2
3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS
4. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES TOTALING $8486.75
($732.00; $7,754.75; AND AMOUNT UNDETERMINED)
5. JULY 2018 MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
6. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL
8. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT FOR
THE 84TH AVE OVERLAY PROJECT WITH TETRA TECH
9. APPROVE STRIPING PROJECT AT MAIN STREET AND 9TH AVE
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT
1. TEAMSTERS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT (1/1/18 - 12/31/20) (previously
Consent Agenda Item 4.7)
Council President Nelson relayed the staff recommendation section was missing from the Council packet.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE THE 2018-2020 TEAMSTERS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT AS
INCLUDED IN THE SEPTEMBER 18TH AGENDA PACKET, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO
SIGN ALL DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO EXECUTE THE CONTRACT AND RATIFYING ALL
ACTS CONSISTENT WITH THIS MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. PRESENTATIONS
1. OATH OF OFFICE/SWEARING IN CEREMONY - POLICE CORPORAL EARL M.
YAMANE
Police Chief Al Compaan commented an oath is an important public recognition of personal achievement
and a personal pledge to the highest legal, ethical and professional standards critical to the law enforcement
mission. He described Corporal Yamane’s background: hired as a lateral officer January 1, 2006 with
almost 11 years of police experience acquired with the University of Washington and Honolulu Police
Departments. He has bachelor and master’s degrees in Sociological and Criminology. While Corporal
Yamane prefers to remain out of the spotlight, he has had an impact on the Edmonds community as a
member of the Street Crimes Unit, assignments on the Alert Team, Dive Team and Domestic Nuclear
Detection Officer Response Team. He has supported Special Olympics via the Polar Plunge, the Law
Enforcement Torch Run and Tip a Cop Fundraisers. He has twice received Distinguished Citation of Valor,
several letters of commendation and a Red Cross Real Hero Aware. He also serves the department as an
armorer, a background investigator, field training officer and peer support counselor as well as one of the
faces of the Edmonds Police Department in recruitment videos. He is one of most humble but hardworking
police officers he has had the pleasure to work with. Corporal Yamane’s wife Reyne and youngest son Evan
joined him.
Chief Compaan administered the oath to Corporal Yamane. In keeping with the tradition of pinning of the
badge at the time of graduation from law enforcement academy and at the time of promotion, Corporal
Yamane’s wife Reyne pinned his badge. Chief Compaan presented Corporal Yamane a promotion
certificate that will hang in shift supervisor’s office.
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 5 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 3
Corporal Yamane thanked everyone in the attendance and looked forward to continuing to serve the
community.
7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Lisa Conley, Edmonds, a Climate Protection Committee member, explained the committee has examined
the pros and cons of I-1631 on carbon pricing and she shared excerpts from a letter to the media in support
of I-1631 from committee Co-Chair Cynthia Pruitt in support of I-1631 on the November general election
ballot. This initiative will reduce air pollution and invest in clean air and water programs. Other countries
have successfully enacted carbon pricing systems and had their greenhouse gas emissions drop. The
European Union Emissions Trading Scheme saw their emissions drop by 8% over 5 years. I-1631is a
practical and affordable next step in ensuring a safe and clean environment in Washington State for our
children and grandchildren. She found it consistent with the climate change action plan adopted by
Edmonds City Council and with Washington State Clean Air goals. The initiative is needed because while
successful in setting ambitious goals, the legislature has been unable to pass legislation to accomplish those
goals. A broad spectrum of organizations support I-1631. The opponents criticize the initiative as a
regressive tax, but it is a fee rather than a tax as the funds collected will go directly to solving the problem
with pollution and the fees is paid by the biggest corporate polluters. The initiative is not perfect but the
time for delay is long past. Climate change is the challenge of our generation and it is incumbent on us to
heal impacts of years of industrialization so we can pass on to the next generation a world where they can
live and flourish. Support for the initiative is one way to commit to reducing greenhouse gasses. She
submitted a copy of the letter.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, commented the Council has done some things recently that bother him such
as spending his money to break the law as it relates to guns. He did not understand how the Council could
make its own gun laws when it is against the rules and now the City has been sued. He opined the gun
storage law would not solve the problem, comparing it to the law prohibiting use of cell phones while
driving which many people ignore despite the penalty. He questioned whether the intent was to investigate
everyone’s home to ensure guns were locked up; pointing out the intent was actually to penalize someone
after a tragedy happens which he did not think solved the problem. He preferred money be spent on gun
safety education rather than defending an illegal law. He urged the Council to be practical and spend money
on positive steps such as advertising, public displays, information, etc., anticipating the City would lose the
lawsuit.
8. PUBLIC HEARING
1. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE EDMONDS STREET WATERFRONT CONNECTOR
PROJECT
Public Works Director Phil Williams introduced Sandy Glover, Project Manager, Parametrix; and the City’s
Project Manager Ed Sibrel. The Waterfront Connector was last discussed at August 28th Council meeting
where staff committed presenting additional information to address questions and concerns. Mr. Williams
reviewed:
Purpose and Need
o Safe, efficient, and reliable access to the waterfront for police, fire and EMS responders
o Strategic Acton Plan calls for establishing a connection to the waterfront
o Create a continuous pedestrian walkway along the waterfront
o Help pedestrians, bicyclists and emergency responders avoid level conflicts with BNSF rail
lines
o Emergency ferry off-loading during extended track shutdowns
How Does Rail Traffic Affect Waterfront Access?
o Trains block access to the waterfront 80 minutes or more daily, delaying or isolating:
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 6 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 4
Park visitors (scuba, swimming, fishing pier, dog park)
Beach and playground users
Port of Edmonds tenants (marina, yacht club)
Vehicles and freight on ferries
Senior Center users
Restaurants, businesses
Residents
Waterfront events/festival-goers
Boaters
o Gate Closures at Main Street and Dayton Street crossings:
37.5 closures average per day
80 minutes average per day (5.5% of the day)
2:12 average closure duration (3:54 for unit trains)
Of 16 daily sailings, over 10 ferry loadings/off-loadings affected daily
o Recent Extended At-Grade Crossing Closures
Date Duration Description
05/01/10 Few hours Train – pedestrian fatality
07/25/12 Over 1 hour Disabled train
10/15/12 Train – truck collision
12/29/12 Train – vehicle collision
09/11/13 45 minutes
11/15/13 4.5 hours Train – pedestrian fatality
11/17/15 3+ hours Saturated railbed closed gates
11/24/15 30 minutes Weather & high water impacts
04/19/16 Several hours Train – pedestrian fatality
04/11/18 Train – vehicle collision
06/16/18 Train – pedestrian fatality
o Growing rail traffic, plus 2nd track construction
Second track anticipated within the next 2-3 years
o Increased frequency of emergency response delays
o Greater crossing conflicts and risks for pedestrians, bicyclists
o Extended closure risks
50 emergency calls/year to the Waterfront
50 emergency calls/year to Marine Rescue
The Fire District has affirmed that there have been delays to responses caused by passing
trains
o Routine Calls to the Waterfront
Call Description # of Calls Percent of Calls
Medical/ALS/BLS 199 67%
Fire/Smoke/Electrical 21 7%
Gas/Hazmat/Flammable 8 3%
Water/Surf/Beach Rescue 8 3%
Accident/Police Assist 6 2%
Service Call/Alarm Only 30 10%
Cancelled En Route 23 8%
Other 4 1%
Total 299 100%
299 calls to the waterfront over 5 years + 5 months 1.06 calls per week
Additional 1 call per week to Marine Rescue boat
o Medical Call Breakdown
67% of calls are for medical response
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 7 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 5
Type of Medical Call # of Calls Percent
Medical Assist (no EMS) 5 2.5%
Advanced Life Support (ALS) 72 36.2%
Basic Life Support (BLS) 122 61.3%
Total 199
o Fire Call Breakdown
21 calls over 5 years, 5-month period were fire-related
Type of Fire Calls # of Calls
Electrical fire/smoke/heat 6
Brush fire 5
Watercraft fire 4
Unauthorized burning 3
Cooking fire 2
Rail vehicle fire 1
Total 21
*Calls do not include false alarms
o Who responds?
Responding Station # of Calls
#17 (downtown) 290
#16 (196th St SW) 7
#20 (88th Ave W) 2
Total 299
Ms. Glover reviewed:
Edmonds Waterfront At-Grade Crossings Analysis
o Held 4 public meetings (in person and on line) attended by over 750 community members
o Held 21 Advisory Task Force meetings
o Gave 4 City Council briefings
o Received 124 written comment cards, emails or surveys with over 450 specific points of
feedback
o Featured in 42 local media articles
Alternative Types & Locations (Total of 51)
o Emergency access by foot
Midblock overpass
Main Street underpass
Main Street overpass
o Emergency vehicle access
Admiral Way overpass
Dayton Street overpass
Edmonds Street overpass
o Emergency vehicle access and ferry load/offload
Edmonds Crossing (minimum build)
Dayton Street new ferry terminal
Main Street ferry overpass (full build)
Main Street ferry overpass (minimum build)
Main Street ferry underpass
Alternatives Evaluation Summary Table
Pros and Cons – Project Samples
Criteria Edmonds
Waterfront
Connector
Admiral Way or Pine
Street Extension
Mid-Block Crossing with
On-Site Vehicle
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 8 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 6
Reliable Emergency
Access
Superior emergency
access. Proximity to
Station 17 - closest
to waterfront with
majority of calls.
Likely be used even
if there are no
blockages at railroad
crossings
Far from fire station
making most calls
(290 out of 299 last 5
years). About 1.5 mile
circuitous route for
emergency vehicles
No emergency vehicle access.
One vehicle only on west
side. Difficulty getting patient
to hospital care. Extended
response times. Not sufficient
in multiple call response. Not
see as useful by FD1.
Pedestrian &
Bicycle Circulation
Connects Sunset
Ave directly to
beach and
waterfront
Pedestrian usage
would be much
reduced due to
location away from
downtown
Minimal circulation
connectivity and usability
advantages
Emergency
Evacuation of
Waterfront
Users/Ferry Users
Proximity to WSF
and beaches. Can
evacuate vehicles.
Longer way to travel
for most pedestrians,
bikes and ferry users.
Vehicle can use it.
Constrained for number of
users at a time. Two elevators
to negotiate. Obviously no
vehicle use.
Safe and Efficient
Multimodal
Connection
Multimodal
connections
None. Far from
multimodal
connections
Multimodal connections if
used. Additional
inconvenience and location at
mid-block severely limits
users.
Ferry Unloading Possible Possible Not possible for vehicles.
Could perhaps be used for
ferry walk-on and bicycles
associated with passenger
trains
Environmental For landbridge, park
extension on top,
new restrooms
Suspected and
confirmed hazardous
material, building of
high structure is
necessary – need 24’
clearance over tracks,
impacts views on both
sides of tracks
Best on environmental but
does NOT address need for
full emergency access,
pedestrian/bike circulation nor
swift evacuation of waterfront
Cost $29.9M. Strong
grant competitor.
Lifetime benefits
exceed $40M. 90%+
grant fundable
20% cost higher than
Waterfront Connector.
Requires ½ of new
roadway. 10-20’ deep
marsh deposits. Not a
strong grant
competitor due to
cost/benefit.
$8 million costs +
contingencies, design.
Property purchase or lease
required, ongoing operation
and maintenance costs for
elevators, additional O&M for
response vehicles, building
maintenance, etc. Medium
grant competitor based on
cost/benefit. 80%+ cost to be
shouldered by City
Fit within
Community Goals
SAP 41.6
Connecting Trails
and SAP 4a.9
Waterfront
Connection
SAP 4a.9 Waterfront
Connection
SAP 4a.9 Waterfront
Connection
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 7
Right-of-Way
Needs/Stakeholder
Operations
Minimal right-of-
way needed.
Existing grade
results in minimum
viewshed impacts
Impacts to Port
property and
operations due to
landing ramp. View
impacts from required
30+ foot tall vertical
structure on both sides
of tracks. Right-of-
way needed from
Port, BNSF and
Unocal
Brackets Landing (south)
property needed. Connection
to WSF overhead loading
would be beneficial to those
WSF users
Mr. Sibel reviewed:
Task Force recommendation for Edmonds Street Overpass
o Proximity to fire station provides immediate access to waterfront
o Provides full-time pedestrians and bicycle connection
o Offers capability to offload stranded ferry with proper traffic controls
o Lowest cost (out of pocket for City) emergency vehicle access alternative
Waterfront Connector Advanced to Preliminary Design
o Council Meetings November 7, and November 15, 2016:
Summarized the Alternatives Analysis, public engagement process and public comments
Described finalist alternatives, their evaluation, with recommendation of Edmonds Street
Overpass (now Waterfront Connector)
Recognizing the need for the project, Council unanimously voted to accept the Mayor’s
recommendation to pursue the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector and place it on the
CIP
Ms. Glover reviewed:
Waterfront Connector Preliminary Design Outreach
o 2 in-person public meetings attended by over 140 community members
o 4 neighborhood drop-in sessions (mailings to residents on Sunset and Edmonds Streets)
o 2 online open houses visited by over 700 community members
o 3 Mayor’s Advisory Committee meetings
o 2 Design Committee meetings
o 2 City Council briefings
o Received over 260 comments
o Featured in 11 local media articles
Waterfront Connector Uses
o Emergency access not interruptible by rail traffic
o Pedestrian and bicycle pathway to waterfront
o Emergency ferry offloading
o NOT open to general traffic
Evolution of the design
o Six initial concepts
With input from community and working with design committee, narrowed to two alternatives
o Land Bridge
Wider at the top to accommodate emergency vehicle turning radius
Sweeping arc
Single lane roadway, 16 feet wide
Designed with geometry and strength to accommodate all fire vehicles
Pedestrian and bicycle pathway to waterfront
Allows emergency vehicles to pass with pedestrians moved to the side
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 8
Controlled offloading when ferry users stranded by stalled train, single file with traffic
control
Land bridge YouTube tour: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hniEKLaaBbM
o Promenade
Deck over railroad tracks 1’ higher than landbridge
Top of throw barrier 3’ higher than throw barrier on landbridge
Two landing points at bottom, one for vehicles, the other for pedestrians at ADA grades
Promenade YouTube tour: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2spAFltApQ
Criteria Used to Evaluate Alternatives
o Landing Experience
o Environment
o Visual
o Reliable emergency access
o Pedestrian user experience
o Bicycle user experience
o Cost
o Neighborhood compatibility
Mr. Williams reviewed:
Estimated Total Project Cost
Project Elements Actual/Estimated Cost
Train Trench Study (2014) $10,000
At-Grade Crossing Analysis (2016) $695,000
Preliminary Design/Environmental (20180 $990,000
Final Design and BNSF Easement $2,145,000
Major Bridge Construction $18,080,000
(includes $4.5M for contingency, risk &
unknown design elements
Park and Environmental Mitigation $2,600,000
Construction Mgmt & Construction
Contingency
$2,765,000
Escalation to mid-2021 (construction) $2,600,000
Total $29,885,000
Project Funding
Project Partners Amount Year
City of Edmonds $100,000 2015
$150,000 2016
BNSF Railway $50,000 2015
$50,00 2016
Community Transit $5,000 2015
$5,000 2016
Port of Edmonds $25,000 2015
$75,000 2016
Sound Transit $10,000 2015
$10,000 2016
Washington State
$500,000 2015
$700,000 2016
$6,000,000 2018
Grant Requests
Agency Amount Year
FMSIB (State) $460,000 2018
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 9
Bicycle & Ped II (State) $1,000,000 2018
BUILD (Federal) $18,856,000 2018
INFRA (Federal) TBD 2019
RCO (State) TBD 2019
Dept. of Ecology (State) TBD 2019
PSRC (Regional) TBD 2019
Bicycle & Ped II (State) TBD 2019
Funding Outlook
o Overall Project Cost Estimate
Current Commitments
Washington State $7,200,000
City of Edmonds $265,000
BNSF, Sound Transit, Port of Edmonds,
Community Transit
$230,000
Outstanding Funding Applications
BUILD Grant $18,856,000
FMSIB Grant $460,000
Bicycle & Ped II Grant $1,000,000
Funding Gap $1,874,000
Financial Benefits Accrued
Category of Benefit Value*
Reduced Injury Outcomes (vehicle accidents, train accidents,
Waterfront emergency calls, marine rescue)
$37.9M
Time Savings (freight, passenger vehicles, ferries) $4.4M
Operating Cost Savings (freight, passenger vehicles, ferries) $0.7M
Emissions saved (freight, passenger vehicles, ferries) $0.3M
Increased recreational value (waterfront park improvements
and access)
$4.0M
Increased travel time reliability (ferry travel) $0.1M
Avoided train delays (during emergency responses) $0.1M
Total $47.5M**
*Present value, 30 years, 7% discount rate (per USDOT methods)
Mr. Sibrel reviewed cost cutting questions:
Q: If you made the connector smaller so that only an aid unit could use it, would the cost to the City
be reduced?
A: Not really.
Similar width, 16’ still required
Landbridge could be narrowed somewhat because of reduced turning radius
Designed per AASHTO standards HL-93 for vehicle loading. Inclusive of all vehicles
including fire trucks
Reduction in service to the waterfront if not providing for fire service
Lowered grant participation resulting in increased cost to the City
Q: If the connector was redesigned for pedestrian only use, would construction costs be reduced?
A: Not by much.
Design requirements for pedestrian loading are comparable to vehicle loading standards.
Reduction in service to the waterfront if not providing for fire protection and medical aid
service
Lowered grant participation resulting in increased cost to the City
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 10
Q: What are the cost considerations in erecting a pedestrian-only bridge and stationing an aid car on
the west side of the tracks?
A. 2016 estimate for Everett’s pedestrian bridge at Grand Avenue was $2.7M, of that $2M was
provided by outside sources. Per the alternatives analysis, a pedestrian mid-block bridge at the
Amtrak station would cost $6-8 M. This does not include cost of aid car, real estate (purchase or
condemnation), building cost, or operations and maintenance. City would be responsible for
approximately 81% or $4.86M to $6.48M out of pocket for the project. the City did not further
pursue cost research as this option did not meet standard for emergency service response.
Ms. Glover reviewed:
Project Schedule
o Dec 2017 – March 2018: Develop early design concepts
o April – August 2018: Develop design alternatives
o Sept – Dec 2018: Select preferred alternative
o 2019 – 2020: Finalize design and secure funding
o 2021 – 2023: Construction planned
Where we are now
o Open House and Online Open House - completed
o Neighborhood meetings - completed
o Permitting agency consultations - completed
o Review by Advisory Panel - completed
o City Council Review / Public Hearing
o Meeting of Mayor’s Advisory Committee
o Mayor’s recommendation on design concept to advance October 16
o Presentation to Council for approval and additional direction
Next Steps
o Public comment and Council comments/questions after the public hearing
o Reconvene Advisory Task Force for final recommendation after conclusion of public process
o Mayor deliberation
o Mayor’s presentation of his recommendation to Council October 16, 2018
Council President Nelson referred to Recent Extended At-Grade Crossing Closures and asked whether any
of the bridge designs would have prevented pedestrian fatalities. Mr. Williams answered it is not designed
to prevent them but rather to respond to them. Council President Nelson asked if they would prevented
vehicle collisions. Mr. Williams answered no, the use was to respond not prevent. Council President Nelson
commented the potential for pedestrian fatalities and collisions will continue even if the Waterfront
Connector is constructed. He asked whether anything was being done to prevent these suicides, such as
installing barriers to prevent suicide attempts on the train tracks. Mr. Williams answered doing anything to
restrict access would be BNSF’s responsibility. If someone is determined to get onto the tracks on purpose,
there is little that can be done to prevent that other than counseling, etc. Council President Nelson asked if
this option would do anything to prevent vehicles getting stuck on the tracks. Mr. Williams responded after
two people turned off Dayton onto the tracks in a short period of time, additional markings were provided
which has been successful.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked why the pros and cons were not included in the packet and why the pros
and cons of having emergency services on the west side were not evaluated. Mr. Williams answered that
was addressed in the Mid-Block Crossing with On-Site Vehicle option. With fire apparatus on the west
side, the first step getting personnel there via a reliable connection. The Mid-Block Crossing was the
cheapest way to get first responders to a facility plus purchasing a vehicle, property, a building to house
apparatus, etc. It is less expensive, approximately $8M but it provides much degraded service.
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 11
Councilmember Buckshnis clarified her question was satellite emergency service on the west side
somewhere near the Port. Mr. Williams said that was the Mid-Block Crossing option. If her interest was in
a staffed station, the costs increase dramatically for personnel to staff a station 24/7. That option was not
included because the Fire District has no interest in it. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the options
displayed will destroy the north beach and there will be concrete where there is now open space. What the
Council approved in 2013 and 2014 is nothing like this Waterfront Connector project and she wished the
presenters would not say the Council unanimously approved it. In 2013 the Council had a huge discussion
about what to call the project and what its purpose was and that was not what the Council was seeing today.
Mr. Williams acknowledged the project has evolved from 2012 when answers were first being sought to
November 15, 2016 when the Council unanimously voted to put this project on the CIP. Since then, a
second Mayor’s task force was formed to identify that project and alternatives. He concluded it hadn’t
changed much since then; it started and ended at the same point. Councilmember Buckshnis commented it
had changed a lot, it wasn’t 24/7 access back then.
Councilmember Tibbott commented there was no cost estimate in the presentation for the connector at
Dayton or Main. Mr. Williams answered he did not show those as there were no questions raised at the
August 28th presentation. Three overpasses and three underpasses were evaluated as part of the 51
alternatives. Costs ranged from $165M to $354M with the underpass at Main being the most expensive and
the overpass at Main the least expensive. The underpass at Dayton was estimated at $300M which would
provide completely grade-separated crossing, but those types of projects were so out of scale cost-wise, it
did not seem plausible to move forward with them.
Councilmember Tibbott understood why BNSF and WSDOT would be interested in participating in funding
but asked why the Freight Mobility Board (FMB) would be interested in providing a grant. Mr. Williams
said the FMB does not provide a great deal of money, but they provide grants for projects that help facilitate
more efficient movement of freight. The ferry connection between Edmonds and Kingston is the top freight
hauling route in the ferry system; to the extent that freight is delayed, the FMB could be interested in the
project.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what would prevent general traffic from using the connector in both
directions. Mr. Williams asked there would be a physical barrier such as bollards in place 99.9% of the time
to prevent vehicles other than emergency vehicles from entering. Emergency vehicles would trigger the
bollards to be lowered and to go back up after they drive through. Polices would also be negotiated between
WSDOT and City regarding how/when it would be opened, closed and used. There are no plans to allow
general traffic; it is a single lane roadway, not a through street and it is intended only for pedestrian, bicycle
and ADA access to the waterfront as well as occasional emergency vehicle access.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the connector could theoretically be used for on and off loading
of the ferry. Mr. Williams answered not on an ongoing basis because it is a single lane. Councilmember
Fraley-Monillas asked if it could be used to load and offload vehicles if a train were blocking for three
hours. Mr. Williams answered it could theoretically, but WSDOT is not interested in that. Councilmember
Fraley-Monillas commented WSDOT may not be interested at this point. Mr. Williams said that would be
a lot of work for WSDOT; if there were a blockage, WSDOT would stop loading boats in Kingston. If a
boat was nearing Edmonds and depending on forecasted length of the blockage, they could work with City
to unload the boat. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas summarized it was possible to use it for loading and
offloading but he believed via negotiations with WSDOT it would be only used for emergency purposes.
Mr. Williams answered absolutely.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to the estimated total project cost, commenting the cost has been the focus
of a great deal of comment by the Council and the public. The vast majority of the cost was not local funds,
but state and federal funds and it was not an either/or decision – without this project, those funds were not
available for other purposes. Mr. Williams answered that was very true. The federal government has funds
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 12
available that are allocated to states and prioritized for expenditures on transportation and are very specific
with regard to what they can fund. For example, the BUILD has specific funding categories.
Councilmember Teitzel summarized it was not a trade-off; it was not as if the money could be used for
sidewalks if it was not used for the bridge. Mr. Williams agreed that was not how it works.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to the continency levels, recognizing there was $4.5M for contingency and
$2.7M for construction contingency 20% of the total project cost. He asked why there were two
contingencies. Mr. Williams answered one is a design contingency and the other is for issues that arise
during construction after the contract is awarded. If the funds already spent and the escalation is removed
for a $25.59M project, $4.5M and portion of other the construction management and construction totals
37% contingency.
Councilmember Johnson asked if Mr. Williams had seen Ferries’ long range plan that is being developed.
Mr. Williams answered he was on the technical advisory committee. Councilmember Johnson asked where
the multimodal transportation fits into that plan such as relocating the ferry and train station and adding a
bridge at the southern edge of town. Mr. Williams answered WSF’s 2009 long range plan included
Edmonds Crossing as the answer to the future of ferries in Edmonds. In 2008 the cost estimate for that
project was $237M and significantly more today. With the economic downturn, WSF withdrew those
commitments of which approximately $80M had been assembled. The project went into the deep freeze
although it was still in WSF’s plan. In developing a new long-range plan, there has been a great deal of
discussion about what to include for Edmonds. WSF is noncommittal, such as looking at interim
improvements to the existing dock and system, acknowledging the need to work on the current location and
to work with the community to determine the long-range vision for ferries in Edmonds. The draft long range
plan pulls away from the Edmonds Crossing and states they will work with Edmonds to figure out the
future. The draft plan has not yet been adopted; a public meeting in scheduled in Edmonds on October 4.
Councilmember Johnson asked the forecast year for that plan. Mr. Williams answered it is a 20-year plan
so 2040. Councilmember Johnson said the Waterfront Connector would be the solution to many of the
City’s issues until 2040 at a minimum. Mr. Williams said Edmonds Crossing was a large structure over the
tracks that separated the ferries from the railroad operations but there would still be two at-grade crossings
in Edmonds and the potential for emergencies on the west side of the tracks. The Waterfront Connector
would still be a useful adjunct to any future ferry location project. Councilmember Johnson said a ferry
relocation project could provide waterfront access for emergencies. Mr. Williams answered it could, but it
would be a delayed response compared to the Waterfront Connector, requiring Station 17 fire vehicles to
drive to Pine Street, cross over, and drive up Admiral to reach the park or the ferry dock to respond to an
emergency. If the Waterfront Connector were built first, which it likely would be, it would still be used for
emergency response.
Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Bruce Higgins, Shoreline, coordinator of the volunteer effort for the Underwater Park, relayed his concern
that the parking lot would be closed for an extended period during construction which would impact
volunteer efforts to maintain the park. He suggested the entire parking lot not be closed, anticipating if
construction took two years, two years without maintenance of the Underwater Park would be problematic.
Scott Steffy, Edmonds, said he has family that lives on Sunset, has an office on the waterfront, and was
not in favor of the Waterfront Connector. In talking with residents on Sunset, 2nd and 3rd Streets, non-
scientifically about 80% were opposed to it. One of the biggest problems now is parking on Sunset Ave;
residents have fought the City’s efforts to make Sunset a park. Now there is a proposal for a Waterfront
Connector project that will not do anything. He anticipated beach access would be destroyed for two years
and create parking issues. The reason for the Connector seems to be safety but the facts and figures do not
bear that out. He crosses the train tracks 5-10 times a day and he and his family and his wife’s family have
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 13
lived in the community a long time. They are troubled by the $30 million cost, emphasizing it was still
taxpayer money whether it was a federal or state grant, for an unnecessary project. If safety was the issue,
a triage center, which could be manned by 2 people 24/7, that would care for the senior and waterfront
community would save lives. Building this landbridge creates a suicide risk for people jumping off. It also
creates a shelter for the homeless to camp/hang out under which will degrade the Edmonds community. He
urged the Council to look at this from a logical standpoint, $2 million to build a triage center, $1 million/year
to operate it would take 25-30 years to equal the cost of the Waterfront Connector. That option would
provide more public safety and save lives.
Daniel Sloan, Everett, urged the Council to ensure the Edmonds Underwater Park Marine Sanctuary
remains open with sufficient beachfront parking for volunteers who need access to perform year-round
maintenance The park, Brackett’s Landing Shoreline Sanctuary Conservation Area, needs to remain open
during and after Connector construction. There is no other comparable Salish Sea education location. It is
a marine science classroom visited by thousands every month. The system of safety buoys requires year-
round maintenance and parking is essential. Volunteer divers observe and report on significant Salish Sea
events including recent sea star wasting and diminished crab population due to habitat loss. Invasive species
are identified and removed. Lingcod recruitment is recorded November through March; volunteers tag and
track nearly 200 Lingcod nests annually. The Edmonds Underwater Park is the only marine sanctuary like
it in the world. It is recognized internationally as a model for environmental conservation and habitat
enhancement. The park deserves high priority attention and adequate parking is a priority consideration.
Jim Orvis, Edmonds, Port Commissioner, Co-Chair with Council President Nelson on the original task
force in 2015 and a member of the Mayor’s Advisory Committee on the Connector project, pointed out the
interest in this project beyond Edmonds. Participation in the task force by senior representatives from the
State Department of Transportation, BNSF, Sound and Community Transit and others as well as the number
of entities providing funding testify to the importance of emergency access to the west side of the tracks.
In addition to the parks, the waterfront contains the ferry landing; a 900-boat marina; 4 heavily used
restaurants, 2 of which have second story dining rooms; several businesses and the fishing pier; and attracts
tens of thousands of visitors every year. The whale watching tour alone is expected to bring in 25,000
tourists this year. The Edmonds Yacht Club holds numerous well-attended events and funds are being raised
for a community center that will also draw large numbers. If people are not concerned about an occasional
heart attack, he suggested they consider the consequences of a fire at the senior center, the marina or one
of the restaurants. The waterfront is thriving and growing and is no longer a sleepy quiet place outside the
community mainstream; the need for readily available emergency services west of tracks can no longer be
discounted. He recalled waiting at the Dayton crossing recently while a 140-car coal train passed;
Washington and Oregon are pressing to expand passenger rail service between Vancouver BC and cities in
those states. The foundation for the second track has been laid south Dayton and it is likely the double track
will run through the City in the next few years which will certainly further impair traffic passage; the worry
can no longer be just a stalled train. The proposed solution was selected from over 50 during public
workshops and through research by the technical team. The task was daunting at first, but as they looked at
what was feasible, affordable and meet the needs, the Edmond Street solution became obvious. It is close
to emergency vehicles, lands in the most acceptable place on the west side, provides within budget
significant public amenities and minimizes the adverse impact on views. The Council made a decision to
proceed three years ago; it is time to get it done.
Kurt Greiner, Edmonds, retired Coast Guard captain, said the goal of the Coast Guard is first saving lives
and second saving property. He often sees recommendations for things that do not save lives; treatment in
the first five minutes of a serious medical event determines whether a person lives or dies. Rick Schaefer,
Tetra Tech, contacted the Fire District on January 6 and learned there had been a fire engine on the other
side of the tracks at one time; it was ineffective and was removed. The Fire District will not approve a fire
station on the west side of the tracks and he recommended the Council talk to Fire District before proceeding
with that concept. He was hopeful the Waterfront Connector would be constructed as it solves all the
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 14
problems. He asked the value of a human life; commenting the Coast Guard wanted no part in determining
that.
Bob McChesney, Executive Director, Port of Edmonds, offered comments in support of the Edmonds
Street Waterfront Connector, the evaluation process and the recommended alternative on behalf of the Port.
The need is obvious; at-grade rail crossings are dangerous, but public safety on the west side of the tracks
is the number one concern. Not only is the number cars and pedestrian coming to the waterfront increasing
annually, but the number and frequency of long trains is also increasing – currently over 40 trains per day
and expected to increase to 80-100 trains per day over the next decade. BNSF also has plans to double track
through Edmonds in the not too distant future. From the Port’s perspective, as much as the train issues are
a commercial incumbrance, the real problem is public safety. The senior center is affected, ferry traffic
exacerbates the problem, tourists, day-trippers, and Port businesses are negatively impacted by train traffic
and train blockages can completely isolate the waterfront from emergency services. Several years ago there
was a fire at the marina; a few boats were lost but if not for the quick response by the Edmonds Fire
Department, there may have been loss of life and more damage. Had there been a train blockage or even a
train passing by, response could have been delayed and the fire could have been catastrophic. The Port is
partnering with the City to analyze practical remedies to alleviate this serious public safety issue. The initial
feasibility study presented to Council in November 2016 was the work product of a high professional
consulting firm and included extensive public participation and supervision by City staff and a select
oversight committee who analyzed 51 discrete alternatives over a 14-month study period. The Edmonds
Street Waterfront Connector was identified as the most cost effective, practical alternative. There is no
perfect solution, but the City must rely on the recommendation of the study. November 15, 2016 City
Council approved this project and direct it included in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan. The Port
endorses the process and supports the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector as the best solution. On behalf
of the Port, he urged the Council to keep this important project moving forward.
Doug Swartz, Edmonds, said the total blockage in the last 9 years was 12 hours. During the last five years,
residents’ property taxes have increased 40%, water/sewer bills have increased 55%, and car tabs have more
than doubled. He was concerned the City was taking on too many substantial projects at one time. He
provided a partial list: provisions for operating expenses for the Edmonds Public Facilities District; Civic
Field, acquired from the Edmonds School District when it was perfectly functioning as a park and now a
$12 million unfunded project to make it a signature park; the Waterfront Center which was to be funded by
donations and now the City is providing an undetermined amount; and the largest and most questionable
project is the Waterfront Connector. The City wants to spend $30 million to address 12 hours of blockage
in 9 years. He valued life but said there are better alternatives to the Waterfront Connector as now
envisioned. He questioned the comment in staff’s presentation that if the project costs $30 million, $18
million will be provided by the federal government, but when the projects costs $6 million, the entire cost
is paid by the City. If the project solves the same problem, he questioned why the funding percentage
differs. The idea of a pedestrian bridge with an emergency vehicle on the west side was rejected by the
evaluation committee with only the phrase, the pedestrian bridge was considered to provide little ultimate
benefit. He urged the City Council to take another look at the Waterfront Connector. If the Council is
unwilling to pursue a pedestrian bridge, the Council should at least demand that the cost of the project be
reduced.
Steve Johnston, Edmonds, Port Commissioner, read a letter from Phil Lovell. Mr. Lovell strongly urged
the Council to support and maintain efforts toward design completion and implementation of the Edmonds
Street Waterfront Connector. This project is currently at concept design status as led by a strong team
professional team originally authorized by the City Council in October 2015. He was a member of the
original formed task force in 2015 and since January 2018, has also served on the Mayor’s advisory
committee on the Waterfront Connector project, working closely with the team of Tetra Tech, Parametrix,
City staff and other key stakeholders. Subsequent working sessions of this group have led to conceptual
design of two bridge ramp schemes from Edmonds Street; the landbridge identified as the preferred option.
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 15
This design concept is widely supported by the above referenced team and the public. At this point in the
process, it is important for the Council to acknowledge two major aspects of the project, first, recognition
of the need and purpose of this project go back over five years to Council’s approval of the original Strategic
Action Plan in April 2013 and an updated plan in April 2015. Primary strategic objective 4, ranked moderate
to high within the plan calls for developing and maintaining a transportation infrastructure to meet current
and future demand. Action Item 4a.9, waterfront connection, calls for establishing an emergency and
everyday access over the railroad tracks for pedestrians bound from shoreline and waterfront attractions
from Harbor Square, Salish Crossing and downtown. This project represents the public’s and first
responders’ proposed action for meeting the 2013 SAP and the Council should recognize and support this.
Second, the current concept plan provides for everyday safe crossing for pedestrians, bikes and emergency-
only vehicles and the unlikely ferry unloading necessitated by railroad at-grade crossing blockage by a
train. Previous analyses discarded concepts of pedestrian-only track crossings and waterfront side
emergency station as not meeting the intent in the SAP. The current landbridge concept also includes the
potential for a mini park and replacement of the current Brackett’s Landing restrooms. Funding for the
project is diverse both in terms of timing and source. The planned project is a successful work effort by
professional staff and the public.
Jack Jacobson, Edmonds, said the person that dreamt this project up has been messing with Sunset
Avenue for several years; this may be his last stoke. The information provided to the Council regarding
accidents on the waterfront is not correct. He was sorry some Councilmembers may have to retract their
vote regarding this project.
Dick Van Hollebeke, Edmonds, spoke of behalf of the crossing and the urgent need. He supports the
proposal for numerous reasons including business development, visitors, and people on the waterfront
including his son who is married and has a 6-year old daughter, who has an office on the west side of the
tracks and he wants to ensure that family as well as other families are protected. The Waterfront Connector
would be a magnificent addition because 99% of the time it would be a pedestrian use access to the beach.
He understood people in the immediate proximately may feel impinged upon, but Edmonds has over 40,000
residents as well as numerous visitors who contribute to its economic success. He supported moving ahead
swiftly, noting the cost to Edmonds is relatively low as a percentage of the total cost of the project. He
recognized taxes were taxes, but most of the project would not be funded by local taxes. He encouraged the
Council to make accommodations for access to the Underwater Park as the project proceeds.
Jason Blachly, Battalion Chief, South County Fire (formerly Fire District 1), reaffirmed South County
Fire’s continued support for the Waterfront Connector project as proposed with bridge access to the west
side of the tracks for all emergency vehicles in case of a complete train blockage. South County Fire has
been involved in the study since its inception and has looked at many of the alternatives that are being
mentioned again to include placing an unstaffed fire station on the west side of the train tracks or staffing
a fire station on the west side. Those alternatives do not solve the problem and only provide a minimal
solution and are not supported by South County Fire. South County Fire understands there are many factors
to consider; their position is based on emergency response needs only. South County Fire will adjust its
emergency response to whatever solution the Council finalizes but felt it was important to reaffirm their
position that the only realistic emergency response solution to the west side is to allow access to all
emergency vehicles.
Bob Rinehart, Edmonds, Edmonds Senior Center Board, relayed concern about seniors and the increased
number of people who will be using the new Waterfront Center and the surrounding area. He supported the
Waterfront Connector because it represents a more global, holist approach and he urged the Council to
avoid problem solution approaches. He provided a personal antidote to underscore that statement: in the
late 1960s he was posted in north central Laos along with a small French military contingent headed by a
grisly old major who had lost one arm. The major cornered him one day saying you Americans, you are
wrong in Vietnam. Americans have a pattern of seeing a problem and coming up with a solution, run the
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 16
solution for a while and if it doesn’t work, identifying another problem and another solution. Americans
disagree with what General de Gaulle has done, particularly in Algeria but he looked at it as a situation that
required courses of action to move to a better situation and he extricated the French from Algeria, but
Americans are not extricating from Vietnam. Mr. Rinehart summarized the Waterfront Connector provides
a more global approach at addressing the multiplicity of things that occur on the waterfront and he urged
the Council to avoid a problem solution approach.
Rebecca Yalch, Edmonds, referred to Councilmember Buckshnis’ comment that this is not a done deal,
that funding was approved for a design process, not construction. Given that, there is nothing to say the
Council should proceed; there are a lot of things that still need to be discussed and considered. In reviewing
the alternatives, she did not see anything about using existing and new technologies to provide emergency
services. North and South Carolina are testing drone technology to deliver emergency services and they
were used in California for fire response. There are predictions that in 2-3 years, EMTs and emergency
vehicles will be able to get to emergencies via air and take patients to the best emergency room for service.
The plans also do not address environmental impacts; lighting will affect the shoreline, building on the
tideline will affect tides and currents and there will be effects from runoff and litter. An Environmental
Impact Study will be required for this project. She agreed there was a goal in the SAP to build transportation
and infrastructure, but it also says provide pedestrian access to downtown and waterfront businesses which
this project does not accomplish. There is no funding for maintenance; Seattle does not build anything that
does not include a maintenance budget.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, recalled when he and Bill Casper were on City Council, the answer to crossing
over the railroad tracks was Pt. Edwards. The design of that project never included access to the waterfront.
The cost of this project is exorbitant. With the increase in train traffic, there will be pressure on the ferry
system to do something. Ferries likely supports the Waterfront Connector, but they are not willing to
provide half the funding. He thought the concept was a great idea several years ago, but now the cost is too
high. He suggested pressuring WSDOT and the legislature to move the ferry dock and to include an
overpass to the west side which would be cheaper and more effective.
Nick Echelbarger, Edmonds, an office tenant on the west side of the tracks and a property owner on the
east side of the tracks, lauded Council President Nelson’s critique of infrastructure in the waterfront area.
He crosses the tracks several times a day by car or on foot; it is disheartening watching someone on Dayton
attempt a right turn with inadequate striping and to walk on Railroad Avenue where there are no sidewalks.
There are acute deficiencies and needs on the waterfront, but the funds to address them do not address acute
emergency needs. He commended the Council for running a robust, professional public process; this has
been as open, communicative and professional as any he has seen. Multiple scenarios were considered, the
best one selected, Edmonds’ share of the total project cost is small, and others will pay for the majority of
the project. In a perfect world those tax dollars would be spent in different ways, but this is close to a perfect
solution. He acknowledged it was not easy to take the final jump, a multiyear and robust public process has
brought the project to the point of the Council saying we trust staff, we’ve done our homework, now it’s
time to vote in favor. He encouraged the Council to start connecting the waterfront with downtown.
Farrell Fleming, Executive Director, Edmonds Senior Center, commended the Council on a
comprehensive, open, transparent, and detailed process. He attended most of the public events and
whenever written responses were invited, he continued to press the need for unrestricted emergency access
to serve the seniors. Three years ago, he had a stroke at the Senior Center and is here today because
fortunately there were no impediments to the aid car reaching the center and transporting him to Swedish
Edmonds. Edmonds Senior Center has a significant aging population; in July 374 invitations were sent to
the 7th annual 90+ year olds celebration. The population is frailer and more likely to need emergency
response in a timely manner. For many seniors, a few minutes can mean the difference between life and
death or health and disability. The new Waterfront Center being built in partnership with the City will serve
a much larger population. The rental program, key to the center’s long-term viability will greatly increase
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 17
the number of people using the center, and the need for rapid emergency response will also increase. It will
be important for prospective renters to know that the City can provide this support. The needs are genuine;
how the City chooses to meet them is the Council’s decision. The Waterfront Connector is the most robust
way to meet the need but has a real cost. Whenever there is a shortage of resources, choices have to be
made. That is the process at this stage of design, determining what we can afford and what is essential
versus what is merely desirable. He and the citizens of Edmonds expect the Council to make the most
informed and rational choice.
Terra Kelly, representing Arnies of Edmonds which has been on the waterfront for 38 years, relayed their
wholehearted support for the Waterfront Connector for obvious emergency reasons and to allow pedestrian
access to the waterfront. She has been at Arnies for 12 years; her first day solo on the job, a patron
experienced a heart attack in the restaurant. There is very swift emergency response when there are no
impediments but there have been times when the train is stopped and there are long waits to get in and out
of the restaurant. As someone who calls 911 when an emergency occurs, she always hopes the train is
operating properly. She reiterated Arnies’ support for the Waterfront Connector.
Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public
hearing. Mayor Earling relayed the Task Force will have a follow-up meeting in 1-2 weeks; they will make
a final recommendation to him which he will present to the Council in mid-October.
Councilmember Mesaros commented it was interesting to hear questions from fellow Councilmembers and
to listen to testimony and hear opinions on both sides, the importance of the project to the City and how to
best solve the problem. He referred to risk versus reward, recalling the years he has had fire insurance on
his house but fortunately has never had a fire. It was important to make the investment in fire insurance to
protect the property and the health costs of his family if they were injured in a fire. The City is evaluating
that risk; although the tracks have only been blocked for a certain number of hours, the time delay that can
occur, especially with the increase in train traffic, is a risk he was not prepared to bear and he hoped the
City would make the investment in the Waterfront Connector. He recognized the City could go 10 years
without any loss of life or significant property loss, but it may happen in the 11th year and the City needs to
be prepared. The City prepares for emergencies in many ways and needs to prepare for it on the west side
of the tracks as well.
Councilmember Mesaros recalled at his first Council meeting, hearing a report on revisions to the SAP and
the waterfront connection was a prime objective of that plan. He also recalled the November 15 vote where
the Council heard the initial task force’s report and voted to move forward with design. With regard to
comments about stationing a vehicle on the west side that would be accessed by emergency personnel; he
questioned how the patient would be transported to a hospital if the tracks are still blocked. With all those
factors in mind, he supported the City moving forward and to approve the Waterfront Connector.
Council President Nelson commented there are a lot of needs in the City; there is no question emergency
access to the waterfront if needed. His question was whether that was a priority and whether there were
other, more important priorities. A transportation safety project should not be prioritized by grant
availability; it should be prioritized on does this project have the greatest impact on citizen protection. When
he considers what is hurting or killing people, it is cars on roadways; this project does nothing to protect
them. He found it interesting the Council was discussing emergency response times to the waterfront, yet
the Council cut a dedicated paramedic at Station 17 who certainly responded to many of the waterfront
calls. Since those cuts were made, response times to the entire city for EMS, ALS, BLS, fires, car crashes,
etc. have all increased. He questioned what the City was doing to fund that, to change that response.
Council President Nelson referred to the 2018 Transportation Safety Plan that the Council approved on the
Consent Agenda. That plan states in the last five years the number of fatal and serious collisions in Edmonds
has doubled. Half those collisions occurred on Hwy 99; the number of serious and fatal car accidents is four
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 18
times the state average for that type of roadway. More pedestrians have been hit by cars than the statewide
average and 42% of serious and fatal car accidents involved pedestrians. He questioned how much the City
was spending to fund pedestrian safety and how this project helped them. If the City was serious about
transportation safety improvements, it should be looking at how to fund the sidewalk and roadway
improvements in the 2018 Transportation Safety Plan. He acknowledged there was a need for the
Waterfront Connector but there are a lot of needs and he wanted projects that protect citizens.
Councilmember Johnson said she did not plan to speak about the project as whole but wanted to provide
comment to Mayor Earling to assist him in identifying his recommended alternative. First, she suggested
streamlining either of the designs to reduce construction materials to save money such as, a) reducing the
stub from the landbridge alternative, b) reducing the two landing ramps to Brackett Landing in the
promenade alternative, or c) narrowing the width of the overpass above the railroad in the landbridge
alternative. Second, both alternatives disrupt the heavily used walkway at Brackett’s Landing along the
beach to/from the jetty. She suggested reconsidering the landing area, possibly using the turnaround area
and a few parking spaces. Third, she supported continuing the evolution for the two alternatives, paying
attention to the southern access point and considering the landbridge width over the railroad for the
promenade alternative. Fourth, she heard several speakers tonight talk about the importance of access to
the Brackett’s Landing Marine Sanctuary during and after construction. She looked forward to Mayor
Earling’s October 16 recommendation and the Council’s discussion that will follow.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Jacobson for his comments, noting the Council approved
proceeding with design and it was not called the Waterfront Connector at that point. She agreed with Ms.
Yalch, Council President Nelson and Mr. Hertrich that the monetary cost and the cost to the environment
was too high. She anticipated the Connector would create shade, the beach would no longer be an expanse
of open space, skateboarders would use it at night, and people will throw things off it. She supported having
a triage space on the west side, possibly at the marina or the new Waterfront Center. The Council needs to
establish its priorities and this project is too costly for her.
With regard to the cost of this infrastructure project Councilmember Tibbott said staff has stated the
expectation that the largest share of the cost would be paid via transportation infrastructure grants that they
are actively pursuing. This bridge is not just something that will be used for 20-30 years; this infrastructure
will last 80-100+ years so the $30M cost can be amortized over that period of time. Whether the Connector
was needed this decade, he was sure it will be needed in 20 years due to increased traffic and activity on
the waterfront and it would be exceedingly important to downtown Edmonds in 50 years. He supported
funding this project, noting if the grants are not obtained, the project would be delayed until they are
received. If the Council and public are discounting this project based on the idea the City can’t ask for and
expect grant funding, the City may as well stop looking for funding for Hwy 99 which is an estimated
$170M project.
Councilmember Tibbott wholeheartedly agreed the City is undertaking a lot of projects, but they will not
all happen at once. This is an exciting time in Edmonds history, where residents can anticipate a public park
and an expansion of infrastructure. The development anticipated on Hwy 99 will change the City in
dramatic ways, bringing new citizens and opportunity and many of them will participate in activities and
amenities on the waterfront. He foresees potential for improving Bracket Landing North and in the
animation of both designs, there is an open pathway to the north part of the beach. The bridge can be done
tastefully and in a way that it is a walking amenity for pedestrians connecting the waterfront with the bluff
but also an amenity for those who want to enjoy the beach. He thanked the City Council and staff for their
efforts as well as the citizens for their involvement in the design process. He concluded the Waterfront
Connector will serve the City for many decades, even as much as a century or more.
Mayor Earling commented there are two alternatives. One of the reasons for another Task Force meeting is
to discuss whether to blend the concepts. He relayed his belief that the City Council gave staff launching
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 19
orders and they have been diligently working on that and have developed plausible ideas. To some the costs
are frightening, but from past experience, he was certain there are ways to assemble funding for such as
project.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
9. ACTION ITEMS
1. CLOSED-RECORD REVIEW AND DECISION ON THE HEARING EXAMINER’S
RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE FOUR CONSOLIDATED LAND USE PERMITS
FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BASEBALL FIELD AND TENNIS COURTS AT
EDMONDS-WOODWAY HIGH SCHOOL (PLN20180014 –0017)
Mayor Earling explained the purpose of the closed record review hearing is for the City Council to consider
the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner to approve four consolidated land use permits on
improvements to the baseball fields and tennis courts at Edmonds-Woodway High School. The four
consolidated land use applications follow a Type III-B process because two of the four are variance
requests. When public projects like this require a variance, a Hearing Examiner holds a public meeting and
makes a recommendation to the City Council. Tonight the City Council holds a closed record review of the
Hearing Examiner’s and makes a final decision on the variance.
Mayor Earling opened the closed recording hearing, stating only parties of record are allowed to participate
in the hearing. The parties of record include the applicant, any person who testified at the open record public
hearing on the application, and any person who individually submitted written comments concerning the
application at the open record public hearing. The applicant was the Edmonds School District, represented
at the Hearing Examiner hearing by Bob Harding, Chris Fote, Cami Anderson and Angie McGuire. Mike
Clugston presented the staff report to the Hearing Examiner on behalf of the Development Services
Department. Other parties of record are Pete Bennett, Fred Shull, Edward Peters, and Stacey Hurst. No one
else will be allowed to participate in this close record review.
The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine requires that the hearing be fair in form, substance and appearance.
The hearing must not only be fair but also must appear to be fair. Mayor Earling asked whether any member
of the decision-making body had engaged in communication with opponents or proponents regarding the
issues in this matter outside the public hearing process. Councilmembers Mesaros, Teitzel, Fraley-Monillas,
Buckshnis, Tibbott, and Johnson, Council President Nelson, and Mayor Earling stated they had not had any
communication with opponents or proponents on this matter.
Mayor Earling asked if any member of the decision-making body had a conflict or believed he/she could
not hear and consider the application in a fair and objective manner. Councilmembers Johnson, Tibbott,
Buckshnis, Fraley-Monillas, Teitzel, and Mesaros, Council President Nelson, and Mayor Earling stated
they had no conflicts and could hearing the matter in a fair and objective manner.
The Council agreed to the following procedure for speakers proposed by Mayor Earling: 5 minutes each
for the staff report, applicant’s oral argument and parties of record. Mayor Earling asked if there were any
objections to his or any Councilmembers’ participation as a decision-maker in the hearing. No objections
were voiced.
Staff Presentation
Associated Planner Mike Clugston presentation in packet page 448.
Proposal:
o Install synthetic turf baseball field with ball control fencing, backstops, bleachers, dugouts,
lights and batting cage
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 20
o Tennis courts revised
o Drawing of specific improvements:
Javelin
Discus
Fields and fencing
Tennis courts
Batting cage
Permits and Processes
o Four land use permits requested
1. Design review (PLN20180014)
2. Conditional use permit (PLN20180015)
3. Variance for height of light poles (PLN20180016)
4. Variance for setback of batting cage, fence (PLN20180017)
o ADB reviews design at a public meeting and makes recommendation to Hearing Examiner,
Examiner holds public hearing and makes recommendation on the consolidated permits to City
Council, Council makes final decision after closed-record review
Design Review
o ADB met on August 1, 2018
Proposal meets Urban Design guidance in Comp Plan, design criteria in ECDC 20.11,
zoning code
Recommended approval of PLN20180014 with conditions
- Blend batting cage with EWHS buildings
- More screening east of batting cage
- ESD responded to conditions, proposing metal siding to match football stadium;
wainscoting to match school and additional screening east of batting cage
Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on August 23, 2018
o Testimony taken from several people, all who spoke in favor of the project
o Hearing Examiner’s decision issued September 11, 2018 outlines how the CUP request meets
the requirements in Chapter 20.05 as well as ECDC 16.80. Variance requests for pole heights
and setback reduction meet the criteria in Chapter 20.85
o Hearing Examiner recommended the Council approve the four land use permits with
conditions:
1. Landscaping plan proposed in Exhibit 5 shall be revised to meet the intent of Type III
landscaping criteria in ECDC 20.13, specifically incorporating the recommendations for
the ADB at its August 1, 2018 meeting
2. An automatic timer that turns the field and court lights off at 10:15 p.m. is required.
3. The conditional use permit should run with the land so long as subsequent owners are
private or public schools or public agencies.
Applicant
Bob Harding, design consultant for Edmonds School District, explained the District is long past due to
make improvements to the baseball field at Edmonds-Woodway High School. It has perennially been one
of the oddest shaped baseball fields in the area with long right and left fields and a flattened center field
with a net to keep balls in the field. The proposed improvements will reconstruct the baseball field in the
same location, reconfiguring and reorienting the field and pushing it to the north away from the fence and
216th Street to create additional outfield and allows for a more traditional baseball field shape. The site plan
shift requires encroaching onto several existing tennis courts. To maintain and expand the program to six
tennis courts, which is a district program requirement, the site plan has been modified to locate the six
tennis courts directly adjacent to the student parking lot east of the baseball field, thereby allowing enough
space to reconstruct the baseball field in a complete manner.
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 21
Mr. Harding explained the primary purpose of the project is to establish a more viable and functional
baseball field. No games have been played on the field for several years due to poor conditions. This project
will bring the field up to a standard consistent with other schools in the district and will also allow for
practice soccer and football field in the outfield. To expand use, lights have been added to both the baseball
field and tennis courts which allows for expanded public use beyond school hours and minor
reconfiguration around the perimeter of the site. The entire baseball/multipurpose field will be fenced, much
of it with a 40-foot high combination of fencing and netting which is the subject of one of the variance
requests. Upon approval of the building permits, construction will begin in the spring and be completed by
late summer/early fall. The district has no exceptions to the Hearing Examiner’s recommendation.
Parties of Record
There were no parties of record present who wished to testify.
Councilmember Teitzel commented this is an exciting project. He asked about potential light infiltration to
neighbors along 216th, recalling that the intent was for lighting to be LED, directional and baffled. Mr.
Harding responded the entire system will be the latest technology LED. A lighting analysis was completed
and there is less than1-foot candle at the sidewalk and less to the residences to the south. The new LED
lighting installed at the stadium two years ago is very directional and focused on the field of play.
Councilmember Teitzel asked whether the lighting analysis was physical or a computer model. Mr. Harding
answered it was a computer model based on photometrics available from the lighting manufacturer and
vendor. Additional lighting testing will be conducted upon installation.
Councilmember Johnson asked if the proposal included a new structure for the batting cage and
maintenance shed. Mr. Harding answered yes, there is a new structure as depicted on one of the images, it
is enclosed and covered over the batting cage portion and there is a small storage area to the east closest to
the parking lot. The batting structure will be open-sided and the adjacent structure in the setback is only a
fence and net structure, there is no associated building.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Exhibit 5, the September 10, 2018 Hearing Examiner
recommendation and Exhibit 7, the Hearing Examiner’s revised recommendation and asked why the
Hearing Examiner revised his recommendation. Mr. Clugston explained staff identified two minor
corrections, Ms. McGuire’s status as Edmonds-Woodway High School Athletic Director and the initial
decision referenced the former Woodway High School project, likely a carryover from a boilerplate
decision format.
Councilmember Johnson suggested voting on the four applications separately, specifically to separate the
fourth application from the first three.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE THREE CONSOLIDATED LAND USE APPLICATIONS, PLN20180014,
PLN20180015, PLN20180016 FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BASEBALL FIELD AND TENNIS
COURT AT EDMONDS WOODWAY HIGH SCHOOL AND THAT THE COUNCIL HEREBY
ADOPT THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SET FORTH IN THE HEARING EXAMINER’S
REVISED RECOMMENDATION WHICH IS INCLUDED AS EXHIBIT 7 TO THIS EVENING’S
AGENDA MEMO 8.1. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Johnson referred to page 3 of the Planning Division’s report and recommendation to the
Hearing Examiner which states a minimum setback of 20 feet shall be maintained from a public street or
other property line except that a setback of 25 feet shall be maintained for all structures, structural play
areas or structured athletic fields from adjacent residential zoned properties. These setbacks shall be fully
landscaped according to ECDC 16.80.030.A. The district has applied for a variance, PLN20180017, to
reduce the street setback from the batting cage from the required 20 feet to approximately 4 feet, but in fact
there is an error in the statement because it is supposed to be a 25-foot setback not a 20-foot setback. The
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 22
existing batting cage is within the street setback on 216th that has nonconforming elements. If those
remained, they could be maintained but they cannot be expanded without a variance. Given the testimony
so far, she found no justification for the setback variance except a desire by school district.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED TO DENY THE FOURTH VARIANCE. MOTION DIED
FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE THE FOURTH CONSOLIDATED LAND USE APPLICATION, PLN20180017, FOR
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE BASEBALL FIELD AND TENNIS COURT AT EDMONDS
WOODWAY HIGH SCHOOL AND THAT THE COUNCIL HEREBY ADOPT THE FINDINGS
AND CONCLUSIONS SET FORTH IN THE HEARING EXAMINER’S REVISED
RECOMMENDATION WHICH IS INCLUDED AS EXHIBIT 7 TO THIS EVENING’S AGENDA
MEMO 8.1.
Councilmember Johnson explained there is a residential area across the street from 216th, setbacks are
required to protect neighborhoods from encroachment and the development code states there should be 25-
foot setback. Staff, the applicant and the Hearing Examiner all reference a 20-foot setback which she
believed was an error; therefore, she did not agree with the Hearing Examiner’s findings.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Mr. Clugston to address Councilmember Johnson’s reference to an
error in the report. Mr. Clugston explained this is a P zoned property, a minimum landscape setback of 20
feet shall be maintained from a public street or other property line which is the situation adjacent to 216th.
A 25-foot setback is required adjacent to a residentially zoned property. He referenced page 489 where the
Hearing Examiner states why the variance is consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the
zone district in which the property is located. On line 3 on page 489, the Hearing Examiner states the batting
cage encroachment is a public necessity because, as testified by Ms. Stacey Hearst, there is very limited
space to accommodate all the improvements necessary to carry out the high school’s athletic programs and
the batting cages need to be kept at their current location next to the baseball fields to avoid disruption of
other athletic uses.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
TEITZEL, TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:15 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1),
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO.
2. FINANCE MANAGER & SENIOR ACCOUNTANT JOB DESCRIPTIONS
Finance Director Scott James reviewed:
Compensation of Senior Accountant and Public Works Financial Manager
Annual Salary Step I Step II Step III Step IV Step V Step VI Top Step
Pay Grade NE-15 74,648 78,381 82,298 86,414 90,734 95,270 100,035
Pay Grade NE-14 71,312 72,744 76,387 80,210 84,250 88,456 88,456
Annual Benefits 46,806 48,462 50,887 53,433 56,113 58,917 60,445
Total Compensation
For Both Positions 192,766 199,587 209,572 220,056 231,097 242,643 248,936
o Starting salary is projected to range between $209,231,097 depending on qualifications of
winning candidate
o Since he began as the Finance Director, investment earnings total over $2 million
2019 investment earnings are projected to top $1 million
Investment earnings will offset the cost of the two new positions
Finance Department Senior Accountant
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 23
o Under the direction of the Assistant Finance Director, perform professional accounting
activities and functions for the City. Responsibilities include overseeing project and grant
accounting; participating and acting as a financial advisor in the development of the City’s
Capital Improvement Program; participating in the preparation of the City’s annual budget and
financial report; assisting with the City’s Risk Management; assisting with the City’s
Emergency Management preparedness and response, assisting with the City’s long-range
financial planning; Apply Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), Governmental
Accounting Standards Board (GASB) principles, and guidelines established by granting or
contracting agencies; understand and apply the Washington State Budgeting, Accounting, and
Reporting System (BARS); and ensure accuracy and confidentiality of information. Provide
leadership, procedural support, and guidance to staff assigned to work on capital projects and
grants.
o Help Finance keep up with GASB Pronouncements
Years 5 Year Average
New Pronouncements
Average FTE Budget
1984-89 2.0 8 $27.4M
1990-95 3.0 8.75 $32.5M
1996-2000 2.2 10 $49.5M
2001-06 2.2 9.5 $62.8M
2007-11 3.2 7.2* $70.7M
2012-16 3.6 7.2* $86.1M
*Portions of Administrative Services moved to Mayor’s Office
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled at the PSPP Committee meeting she requested the FTEs as well
as the job titles such as accountant, senior accountant, etc. Mr. James answered there has never been a
senior accountant, there has always been a finance director and either an accounting manager or assistant
finance director. In 2008 the assistant finance director became the finance director and a replacement was
not hired. The assistant finance director was hired in the 2012-2016 period. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas observed there was no assistant finance director prior to 2007. Mr. James answered there was an
assistant finance director in 2007. When Dan Clements retired and Kathleen Younglove became the finance
director, she did not hire an assistant finance director. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how many
additional positions had been hired since Mr. James became the finance director. Mr. James answered an
accounting supervisor was promoted to assistant finance director and the accounting supervisor became a
staff accountant position, so one additional staff has been added since he was hired.
Mr. James continued his presentation:
Finance Department Senior Accountant
o Finance accounts for over $260,000,000 in capital assets
o Eliminate capital/grant related audit issues
o Improve timeliness of grant billing and reporting
o Oversee and assist other departments using Project Accounting
o Work with Risk Management to reduce claims and disseminate claim information to dept.
Directors
o Create an Emergency Management preparedness and response program for finance and IT
o Assist with the City's long-range financial planning development
o The Council packet includes the Senior Accountant job description, specific job duties and
some of their deliverables
Comparison of staffing levels
City General Fund Budget
Per FTE
FTE
Shoreline $2.75M 17
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 24
Lake Stevens $3M 5
Lacey $3.5M 11
Issaquah $4M 13
Burien $4.5M 6
Bremerton $4.6 9
Puyallup $4.9M 11
Edmonds $5.8M 8
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:25 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS
FRALEY-MONILLAS AND JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Mr. Williams reviewed:
Financial Manager for Public Works and Utilities
o Under supervision of the Public Works Director, performs professional financial functions for
the Public Works Department. Responsibilities include departmental project and grant
accounting; management of utility rate studies, rate calculations, and comparative rate
analyses; participating and acting as a financial advisor to the Director and Departmental
Managers in the development of the City’s Capital Improvement Program, Transportation
Improvement Program, and Comprehensive Plans for Water, Sewer, and Stormwater
Divisions;
o Organizing and participating in the preparation of the Department’s annual budget and financial
reports; developing the Public Works Department long-range financial planning inputs to the
Finance Department; consistently applying Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
(GAAP), Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) principles, guidelines
established by granting or contracting agencies, and City financial policies; understanding and
applying the Washington State Budgeting, Accounting, and Reporting System (BARS); and
ensuring accuracy and confidentiality of information. Provides leadership, procedural support,
and guidance to staff working with capital projects and grants.
o Works closely with PWD Managers (6) to help develop annual budget submittals, estimate
revenues, track budget performance, identify deviations from expected performance as early as
possible, and develop budget amendments when necessary. The position will also provide data
and evaluation for updating Public Works capital asset records, including recording and
documenting Public Works asset dispositions and trade-ins. Additionally, this position will be
responsible for preparing grant agency invoicing and reimbursements to ensure grant and
contract work is reimbursed to the City in a timely manner.
o PWD is managing over $45,000,000 in approved expense budgets in 2018. The City’s General
Fund is approximately $43,000,000 with 9 staff focused primarily on general governmental
revenues and expenses. PWD has no staff with either formal training or extensive experience
in financial management, theory, principles, processes, or regulations. +/- 85% of PWD
budgets are something other than general governmental dollars (taxes), primarily grants and
utility rate revenues
Graph of City Capital program 2008-2017 for sewer, storm, water, total 112, parks, facilities, and
General Fund total
Changes to Public Works Senior Accountant Job Description since 7/19/2018
o Title Changed to Financial Manager for Public Works & Utilities
o Pay range reduced to NE-14 (same level as a Staff Accountant)
o Position could and would prepare submittals for review and quality control by Finance prior to
becoming part of the CAFR or other required financial reports
Staff Recommendation
o Motion to Approve Financial Manager for Public Works and Utilities at Pay Grade 14 and
Finance Senior Accountant at Pay Grade 15
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 25
Mayor Earling said he was convinced both positions were needed, and he urge Council approval.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE PUBLIC WORKS POSITION AT LEVEL NE-14.
Councilmember Teitzel asked if the position would report to him. Mr. Williams said it would.
Councilmember Teitzel asked Mr. Williams if he had any accounting training to supervise this position.
Mr. Williams answered no, he has managed a lot of money for many years, but has no formal accounting
training. Councilmember Teitzel observed this position requires knowledge of BARS and GASB, etc.; he
asked if Mr. Williams had considered a dotted line arrangement to Mr. James to help coach this employee.
Mr. Williams answered there will need to be compatibility with Public Works, Finance and State standards.
He anticipated the Public Works Finance Manager could seek guidance from Finance when necessary.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE AN NE-14 STAFF ACCOUNTANT FOR FINANCE.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the decision package last year for a senior accountant was $132,000 with
benefits up to approximately $48,000 and was later amended to $200,000. She agreed Mr. Williams needed
additional assistance but did not agree Finance needed a senior accountant. She preferred to not approve
any additional staff or approve only an accountant position and if there was justification, it could be
revisited. She expressed concern with some of the responsibilities for the senior accountant such as long-
range planning which is a Council decision.
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO
EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:35 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS AND JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Councilmember Tibbott asked the impact of having a staff accountant versus a senior accountant Mr. James
answered he would be happy with any extra horsepower even if it was at the NE-14 level, noting
Councilmember Buckshnis mentioned if there was justification, it could be revisited. Mr. Williams
commented there are possible internal candidates in Finance who would see a senior accountant as a
promotion rather than a staff accountant. Mr. James said part of the reason for the higher pay grade was to
provide upward movement within the department which has been an ongoing request from the union for
years.
Councilmember Johnson said the Council approved one position in 2018. The Council will be considering
the 2019 budget next month and she preferred to consider this position as part of the 2019 budget.
Mayor Earling preferred the Council approve the position now so it can begin to be advertised.
Council President Nelson agreed with Councilmember Johnson that the position should be discussed as part
of the 2019 budget.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS, MESAROS,
TEITZEL AND TIBBOTT VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON AND
COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON AND FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO.
3. 2018 SEWER REPLACEMENT CHANGE ORDER
Due to the late hour, this item was omitted from the agenda.
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 28 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
September 18, 2018
Page 26
10. STUDY ITEM
11. REPORTS ON COUNCIL COMMITTEES
1. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MINUTES
Due to the late hour, this item was omitted from the agenda.
12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Earling hoped to see Councilmembers at the Snohomish County Cities meeting on Thursday at the
Embassy Suites. He commented on the memorial service for Ken Gaydos; his children and relatives did an
extraordinary job organizing a very meaningful service.
13. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Buckshnis reminded of Mayor Earling’s Town Hall tomorrow at 6:30 p.m. at North Sound
Church at 4th & Bell.
Councilmember Tibbott reported on the Green Built Conference at the Lynnwood Convention Center where
he met with city planners and developers from around the area. He found it very enlighten from the
standpoint of how different jurisdictions handle new developments and how those developments result in
new types of housing and commercial buildings. He looked forward to bringing that information to Council
and staff. He recommended Councilmembers attend if the conference is held in the area again.
14. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
This item was not needed.
15. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION
This item was not needed.
16. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:33 p.m.
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: 09-18-2018 Draft Council Meeting Minutes (Approval of Council Meeting Minutes)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
Staff Lead: Scott James
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Nori Jacobson
Background/History
Approval of claim checks #233139 through #233280 dated September 20, 2018 for $600,765.35 and
wire payment of $3,274.21.
Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #63429 through #63436 for $572,651.64, benefit checks
#63437 through #63441 and wire payments of $580,490.36 for the pay period September 1, 2018
through September 15, 2018.
Staff Recommendation
Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
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.
Attachments:
claim cks 09-20-18
wire 09-20-18
FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18
payroll summary 09-20-18
payroll benefit 09-20-18
4.2
Packet Pg. 30
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds112:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233139 9/14/2018076510 BARN PROS INC BPC-0264-DSHED REPLACEMENT CONSTRUCTION DEPOSITShed Replacement Construction Deposit125.000.64.594.76.65.00 5,000.00Total :5,000.00233140 9/20/2018076763 184TH STREET INC 3-36680#500071285-TM UTILITY REFUND#500071285-TM Utility refund - received411.000.233.000 202.39Total :202.39233141 9/20/2018076040 911 SUPPLY INC 64573INV#64573 - EDMONDS PD - B. HAIRST62 NAVY MED RED KAP S/S SHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 39.98ST310 NAVY MED SPORT TEK SHORT W/POCKETS001.000.41.521.22.24.00 31.9618000 GILDAN HVY BLEND CREW SWEATSHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 11.992000 WHITE MED GILAN ULTRA COTTON001.000.41.521.22.24.00 17.10HP40679 ACADEMY SET 2" WHITE001.000.41.521.22.24.00 15.001248196 100 MED UA L/S HEAT GEAR SHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 59.98514-N SMALL RICHARDSON PROWOOL VEL CAP001.000.41.521.22.24.00 11.996605-3-34 BOSTON AMERICAN VALUE BLET001.000.41.521.22.24.00 21.00PC90P NAVY PORT & CO ULT SWEATPANT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 18.9977736E IRON GLOVES GRAVITY GRIPP001.000.41.521.22.24.00 9.9911861 PICKETT TRAFFIC TEMPLATE GRAY001.000.41.521.22.24.00 12.00SEWN MILITARY CREASE001.000.41.521.22.24.00 16.001Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 31Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds212:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233141 9/20/2018(Continued)076040 911 SUPPLY INCHP40679 ACADEMY SET 2" BLACK001.000.41.521.22.24.00 45.0010.0% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.22.24.00 31.10INV#64574 - EDMONDS PD - D. CEBAN64574ST62 NAVY MED RED KAP S/S SHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 39.98ST310-NAVY MED SPORT TEK SHORT W/POCKETS001.000.41.521.22.24.00 31.9618000 GILDAN HVY BLND CREW SWTSHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 11.992000 WHITE MED GILAN ULTRA COTTON001.000.41.521.22.24.00 17.10HP40679 ACADEMY SET 2" WHITE001.000.41.521.22.24.00 60.001248196-100 MED UA LS HEAT GEAR SHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 59.98514 N SM RICHARDSON PROWOOL VEL CAP001.000.41.521.22.24.00 11.996605-3-34 BOSTON AMERICAN VALUE BLET001.000.41.521.22.24.00 21.00PC90P - NAVY PORT & CO ULT SWEATPANT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 18.9977736E - IRON GLOVES GRAVITY GRIPP001.000.41.521.22.24.00 9.9911861 PICKETT TRAFFIC TEMPLATE GRAY001.000.41.521.22.24.00 12.00SEWN MILITARY CREASE001.000.41.521.22.24.00 16.0010.0% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.22.24.00 31.10INV#64580 - EDMONDS PD - NEW HIRES64580CS410 ROYAL CORNERSTONE TACTICAL POLOS001.000.41.521.22.24.00 223.932Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 32Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds312:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233141 9/20/2018(Continued)076040 911 SUPPLY INC10.0% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.22.24.00 22.39INV#64581 - EDMONDS PD - T. STEFFINS64581ST62-NAVY MED RED KAP S/S SHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 39.98ST310 NAVY MED SPORT TEK SHORT W/001.000.41.521.22.24.00 31.9618000 GILDAN HEAVY BLEND CREW SWEATSHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 11.992000 WHITE MED GILAN ULTRA COTTON001.000.41.521.22.24.00 17.10HP40679 ACADEMY SET 2" WHITE001.000.41.521.22.24.00 15.001248196-100 MED UA L/S HEAT GEAR SHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 59.98514-N SMALL RICHARDSON PROWOOL VEL CAP001.000.41.521.22.24.00 11.99PC90P - NAVY PORT & CO ULT SWEATPANT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 18.9977736E - IRON GLOVES GRAVITY GRIPP001.000.41.521.22.24.00 9.9911861 PICKETT TRAFFIC TEMPLATE GRAY001.000.41.521.22.24.00 12.00SEWN MILITARY CREASE001.000.41.521.22.24.00 16.00HP40679 ACADEMY SET 2" BLACK001.000.41.521.22.24.00 45.0010.0% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.22.24.00 31.106605-3-40 BOSTON AMERICAN VALUE BELT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 21.00INV#64587 - EDMONDS PD - K. BROWN6458710.0% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.22.24.00 23.503Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 33Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds412:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233141 9/20/2018(Continued)076040 911 SUPPLY INCST62 NAVY SMALL RED KAP S/S SHIRT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 39.98ST310 NAVY SMALL SPORT TEK SHORT W/001.000.41.521.22.24.00 31.962000 WHITE SMALL GILAN ULTRA COTTON001.000.41.521.22.24.00 17.10HP40679 ACADEMY SET 2" BLACK001.000.41.521.22.24.00 45.001248196-100 SMALL UA L/S HEAT GEAR001.000.41.521.22.24.00 29.99514-N-SMALL RICHARSON PROWOOL VEL CAP001.000.41.521.22.24.00 11.996605-3-30 BOSTON AMERICAN VALUE BELT001.000.41.521.22.24.00 21.0077736E IRON GLOVES GRAVITY GRIPP001.000.41.521.22.24.00 9.9911861 PICKET TRAFFIC TEMPLATE GRAY001.000.41.521.22.24.00 12.00SEWN MILITARY CREASE001.000.41.521.22.24.00 16.00INV#64640 - EDMONDS PD - E. YAMANE64640CORPORAL CHEVRONS ADDED - 3 UNIFORMS001.000.41.521.22.24.00 18.0010.0% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.22.24.00 1.80INV#64642 - EDMONDS PD - J. GILGINAS64642REPAIR - TORN PANTS001.000.41.521.22.24.00 12.0010.0% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.22.24.00 1.20INV#64643 - EDMONDS PD - K. BROWN646431248196-100 SMALL HEAT GEAR SHIRT -001.000.41.521.22.24.00 29.9910.0% Sales Tax4Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 34Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds512:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233141 9/20/2018(Continued)076040 911 SUPPLY INC001.000.41.521.22.24.00 3.00CM64466 INV#63825CM64466MONADNOCK DOUBLE FLEX CUFF WHITE 10001.000.41.521.22.35.00 -110.0010.0% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.22.35.00 -11.00Total :1,476.06233142 9/20/2018065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 13811PM & SENIOR CENTER PEST CONTROL CUST 1-1PM & SENIOR CENTER PEST CONTROL CUST001.000.64.576.80.41.00 125.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.64.576.80.41.00 12.88Total :137.88233143 9/20/2018 000850 ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT 10328MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER CHARGESMONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER CHARGES421.000.74.534.80.33.00 229,213.44Total :229,213.44233144 9/20/2018071634 ALLSTREAM 15550881C/A 768328PR1-1 & 2 City Phone Service512.000.31.518.88.42.00 957.73001.000.61.558.70.42.00 10.16Econ Devlpmnt Toll free lines001.000.61.558.70.42.00 10.16Total :978.05233145 9/20/2018073573 ANIXTER 23K199713PW/FAC - PARTSPW/FAC - Parts001.000.66.518.30.31.00 108.8810.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 11.21Total :120.095Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 35Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds612:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233146 9/20/2018069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 1990888974WWTP: 9/12/18 UNIFORMS,TOWELS+MATSMats/Towels423.000.76.535.80.41.00 74.38Uniforms423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.5010.3% Sales Tax423.000.76.535.80.41.00 7.6610.3% Sales Tax423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.36PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE1990888975PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE001.000.64.576.80.24.00 56.86FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS1990888976FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS001.000.66.518.30.24.00 27.3110.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.24.00 2.81PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS1990892786PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.61PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS111.000.68.542.90.41.00 6.11PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS421.000.74.534.80.41.00 6.11PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS422.000.72.531.90.41.00 6.11PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS423.000.75.535.80.41.00 6.11PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS511.000.77.548.68.41.00 6.0810.3% Sales Tax001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.1710.3% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.6310.3% Sales Tax6Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 36Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds712:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233146 9/20/2018(Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.6310.3% Sales Tax422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.6310.3% Sales Tax423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.6310.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.62FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MATS1990892787FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS511.000.77.548.68.24.00 5.68FLEET DIVISION MATS511.000.77.548.68.41.00 17.3410.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.5910.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.41.00 1.78Total :233.71233147 9/20/2018 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 1303670-INWWTP: 9/4/18 DIESEL FUELULSD #2 DYED - BULK fuel (includes423.000.76.535.80.32.00 2,140.9010.3% Sales Tax423.000.76.535.80.32.00 220.52Total :2,361.42233148 9/20/2018001795 AUTOGRAPHICS 82389STORM - DECALSStorm - Decals111.000.68.542.90.49.00 281.2510.3% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.90.49.00 28.97Total :310.22233149 9/20/2018061659 BAILEY'S TRADITIONAL TAEKWON 6617 TAEKWON-DO6617 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION6617 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTION001.000.64.571.27.41.00 845.007Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 37Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds812:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount(Continued)Total :845.00233149 9/20/2018 061659 061659 BAILEY'S TRADITIONAL TAEKWON233150 9/20/2018 012005 BALL AND GILLESPIE POLYGRAPH2018-155INV 2018-155 EDMONDS PD - PRE-EMPLOY 9/1PRE-EMPLOY EXAM - CULLEN - 9/14/18001.000.41.521.10.41.00 225.00Freight001.000.41.521.10.41.00 8.00Total :233.00233151 9/20/2018075217 BASLER, ANTHONY 30969SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 8:15SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 8:15001.000.23.512.50.41.01 106.10Total :106.10233152 9/20/2018073041 BECK & ASSOCIATES PLLC 2018-EDM-08PROF SERV FOR BUILDING: BLD 2018 0811Prof Serv for Building: BLD 2018 0811001.000.62.524.20.41.00 12,123.07Total :12,123.07233153 9/20/2018076774 BELLINGHAM PASTA COMPANY Winter Market RefundREFUND FOR DUPLICATE PAYMENT WINTER MARKRefund for duplicate payment received -001.000.347.93.000.00 150.00Total :150.00233154 9/20/2018 069989 BERK CONSULTING INC 10251-08-18PROF. SERV. - HOUSING STRATEGYProf. Serv. - Housing Strategy001.000.62.524.10.41.00 15,178.38Total :15,178.38233155 9/20/2018074307 BLUE STAR GAS 0101820-INTRAFFIC - 100# CYLINDERTraffic - 100# Cylinder111.000.68.542.64.31.00 240.3410.0% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.64.31.00 24.03FLEET AUTO PROPANE 617.3 GAL12472Fleet Auto Propane 617.3 Gal511.000.77.548.68.34.12 998.808Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 38Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds912:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233155 9/20/2018(Continued)074307 BLUE STAR GASFLEET AUTO PROPANE 604.5 GAL12503Fleet Auto Propane 604.5 Gal511.000.77.548.68.34.12 986.16Total :2,249.33233156 9/20/2018073760 BLUELINE GROUP LLC 15552E7JA.SERVICES THRU 9/1/18E7JA.Services thru 9/1/18421.000.74.594.34.65.41 12,584.05E5KA/E6GC.SERVICES THRU 8/31/1815562E5KA.Services thru 8/31/18421.000.74.594.34.65.41 13,383.25E6GC.Services thru 8/31/18423.000.75.594.35.65.41 29,224.15Total :55,191.45233157 9/20/2018 002840 BRIM TRACTOR CO INC IM03168UNIT 19 - MIRRORUnit 19 - Mirror511.000.77.548.68.31.10 132.08Freight511.000.77.548.68.31.10 22.5010.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 15.92Total :170.50233158 9/20/2018066578 BROWN AND CALDWELL 14325212WWTP: 7/27-8/23/18 TO 2.20187/27-8/23/18 TO 2.2018423.000.76.535.80.41.00 3,295.75Total :3,295.75233159 9/20/2018076240 CADMAN MATERIALS INC 1629293STORM - CEMENTStorm - Cement111.000.68.542.61.31.00 409.207.7% sales tax111.000.68.542.61.31.00 31.51STORM DUMP FEES55267329Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 39Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1012:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233159 9/20/2018(Continued)076240 CADMAN MATERIALS INCStorm Dump Fees422.000.72.531.10.49.00 1,407.60STORM DUMP FEES5527123Storm Dump Fees422.000.72.531.10.49.00 919.00ROADWAY - LIQUID ASPHALT5544512Roadway - Liquid Asphalt111.000.68.542.31.31.00 518.6410.0% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.31.31.00 51.86ROADWAY - LIQUID ASPHALT5544950Roadway - Liquid Asphalt111.000.68.542.31.31.00 232.5010.0% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.31.31.00 23.25ROADWAY - LIQUID ASPHALT5546208Roadway - Liquid Asphalt111.000.68.542.31.31.00 273.3210.0% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.31.31.00 27.33Total :3,894.21233160 9/20/2018 073901 CALDWELL SCULPTURE STUDIO CALDWELL 07/31/18MAINTENANCE STAGES OF HISTORY PLAQUESMAINTENANCE STAGES OF HISTORY PLAQUES117.200.64.575.50.41.00 600.00Total :600.00233161 9/20/2018073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 19215712INV#19215712 - EDMONDS PDIRC6255 CONTRACT CHARGE 09/01 -001.000.41.521.10.45.00 151.87IRC3325 CONTRACT CHARGE 09/01 - ~001.000.41.521.10.45.00 60.70IRC5240 CONTRACT CHARGE 09/01 -~001.000.41.521.10.45.00 160.0010.3% Sales Tax10Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 40Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1112:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233161 9/20/2018(Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES001.000.41.521.10.45.00 38.38PHOTOCOPY MACHINE 09/01/2018-09/30/201819215713PHOTOCOPY MACHINE 09/01/2018-09/30/2018001.000.23.523.30.45.00 59.5210.3% Sales Tax001.000.23.523.30.45.00 6.13C/A 572105 CONTRACT# 3091/052141921571410.3% Sales Tax001.000.31.514.23.45.00 21.59Finance dept copier contract charge001.000.31.514.23.45.00 209.61CITY CLERKS COPIER LEASE 9/1/18-9/30/1819215715CITY CLERKS COPIER LEASE 9/1/18-9/30/18001.000.25.514.30.45.00 340.3910.3% Sales Tax001.000.25.514.30.45.00 35.06PARKS & REC C5250 COPIER CONTRACT 001-0519215716PARKS & REC C5250 COPIER CONTRACT001.000.64.571.21.45.00 231.20CANON 525019215717contract charges September 2018001.000.22.518.10.45.00 167.69contract charges September 2018001.000.61.557.20.45.00 20.96contract charges September 2018001.000.21.513.10.45.00 20.9610.3% Sales Tax001.000.22.518.10.45.00 17.2710.3% Sales Tax001.000.61.557.20.45.00 2.1610.3% Sales Tax001.000.21.513.10.45.00 2.16WWTP: 9/2018 MO CHG CONTRACT#001-057210519215718 9/28 Monthly Chg CONTRACT11Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 41Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1212:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233161 9/20/2018(Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES423.000.76.535.80.45.00 82.82CANON 250IF19215719contract charge September 2018001.000.21.513.10.45.00 26.4410.3% Sales Tax001.000.21.513.10.45.00 2.73P&R PRINTER IRC250IF CONTRACT 001-05721019215722P&R PRINTER IRC250IF CONTRACT001.000.64.571.21.45.00 35.67PARKS IRC250IF COPIER CONTRACT 001-0572119215723PARKS IRC250IF COPIER CONTRACT001.000.64.576.80.45.00 29.17FLEET COPIER - SEPT19215724Fleet Copier - Sept511.000.77.548.68.45.00 32.3410.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.45.00 3.33RECEPTION DESK CITY CLERKS COPIER LEASE19215725RECEPTION DESK CITY CLERKS COPIER LEASE001.000.25.514.30.45.00 13.3210.3% Sales Tax001.000.25.514.30.45.00 1.38COUNCIL CANON COPIER LEASE19215726September Contract Charge001.000.11.511.60.45.00 26.4410.3% Sales Tax001.000.11.511.60.45.00 2.73INV#19215727 - EDMONDS PD19215727IRC5550 CONTRACT CHARGE 09/01-09/30/2018001.000.41.521.10.45.00 185.7410.3% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.10.45.00 19.13WATER SEWER COPIER SEPT19215728Water Sewer Copier Sept421.000.74.534.80.45.00 54.7412Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 42Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1312:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233161 9/20/2018(Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICESWater Sewer Copier Sept423.000.75.535.80.45.00 54.7310.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.45.00 5.6410.3% Sales Tax423.000.75.535.80.45.00 5.64PW ADMIN COPIER19215729PW Office Copier for Sept001.000.65.518.20.45.00 66.16PW Office Copier for Sept111.000.68.542.90.45.00 37.49PW Office Copier for Sept422.000.72.531.90.45.00 37.49PW Office Copier for Sept421.000.74.534.80.45.00 26.46PW Office Copier for Sept423.000.75.535.80.45.00 26.46PW Office Copier for Sept511.000.77.548.68.45.00 26.4610.3% Sales Tax001.000.65.518.20.45.00 6.8110.3% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.90.45.00 3.8610.3% Sales Tax422.000.72.531.90.45.00 3.8610.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.45.00 2.7310.3% Sales Tax423.000.75.535.80.45.00 2.7310.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.45.00 2.72INC#19215730 - EDMONDS PD19215730CONTRACT CHARGE - FAX BOARD -001.000.41.521.10.45.00 36.0213Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 43Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1412:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233161 9/20/2018(Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES10.3% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.10.45.00 3.71CONTRACT CHARGE, COPIES- LARGE COPIER19219634Contract charge, copies- large copier001.000.62.524.10.45.00 345.57Total :2,756.17233162 9/20/2018 076651 CASTRO, JOHNATHAN JCASTRO.MILES9.12.18WWTP: J CASTRO MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTMiles reimbursement for 9/12/18 for423.000.76.535.80.49.71 87.91Total :87.91233163 9/20/2018003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY 264877WATER - SUPPLIESWater - Supplies421.000.74.534.80.31.00 73.6510.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.31.00 7.59Total :81.24233164 9/20/2018065403 CHAPIN, FRANCES 09/17/2018WOTS SUPPLY REIMBURSEMENTWOTS SUPPLY REIMBURSEMENT117.100.64.573.20.31.00 165.50Total :165.50233165 9/20/2018069457 CITY OF EDMONDS E5FD.ENG20180392 E5FD.ENG20180392 ROW PERMITE5FD.ENG20180392 ROW Permit422.000.72.594.31.65.41 335.00Total :335.00233166 9/20/2018 063902 CITY OF EVERETT I18003046WATER QUALITY - WATER LAB ANALYSISWater Quality - Water Lab Analysis421.000.74.534.80.41.00 1,198.80Total :1,198.80233167 9/20/2018035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 9056920000WWTP: 7-9 - 9-6-18 FLOWMETER 879026: 2207-9 - 9-6-18 FLOW METER #879026 @ 220314Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 44Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1512:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233167 9/20/2018(Continued)035160 CITY OF SEATTLE423.000.76.535.80.47.62 18.88Total :18.88233168 9/20/2018073292 COBURN, KAI COBURN091318VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT 9/13/18VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTENDANT 9/13/18001.000.64.571.25.41.00 34.50Total :34.50233169 9/20/2018075648 COVICH-WILLIAMS CO INC 0310160-INUNIT PS16 - PARTSUnit PS16 - Parts511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.6310.1 % Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.07UNIT PS16 - PARTS0310161-INUnit PS16 - Parts511.000.77.548.68.31.10 19.0810.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.93UNIT PS 16 - PARTS0310162-INUnit PS 16 - Parts511.000.77.548.68.31.10 104.7810.1 % Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.58Total :148.07233170 9/20/2018072786 CTS LANGUAGE LINK 131688MANDARIN INTERPRETER COURT 08/24/2018MANDARIN INTERPRETER COURT 08/24/2018001.000.23.512.50.41.01 26.98Total :26.98233171 9/20/2018005965 CUES INC 514969SEWER - TIRESSewer - Tires423.000.75.535.80.31.00 690.00Freight423.000.75.535.80.31.00 20.4915Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 45Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1612:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233171 9/20/2018(Continued)005965 CUES INC10.3% Sales Tax423.000.75.535.80.31.00 73.18Total :783.67233172 9/20/2018060914 CUMMINS NORTHWEST LLC 15-63586UNIT PS16 - PARTS WITH SHIPPING FEESUnit PS16 - Parts with shipping fees511.000.77.548.68.31.10 22.079.7% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 2.14Total :24.21233173 9/20/2018 076771 CURTIS, BRITNI 09/12/2018CLASS REFUNDCLASS REFUND001.000.239.200 70.00Total :70.00233174 9/20/2018063519 CUZ CONCRETE PRODUCTS INC 254356STORM - CATCH BASINS (12)Storm - Catch Basins (12)422.000.72.531.40.31.00 1,962.3810.3% Sales Tax422.000.72.531.40.31.00 202.13Total :2,164.51233175 9/20/2018061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 03 470882INV#470882 - EDMONDS PDCALIBRATE #SHD-02475 SCOUT SMD DECATUR001.000.41.521.22.48.00 70.00CALIBRATE #XE01579 GOLDEN EAGLE II001.000.41.521.22.48.00 70.00FUEL SURCHARGE001.000.41.521.22.48.00 10.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.22.48.00 15.45Total :165.45233176 9/20/2018006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY JCASTRO.INC.CERTWWTP: JCASTRO INCINERATOR CERTIFICATION16Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 46Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1712:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233176 9/20/2018(Continued)006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGYINCINERATOR OPERATOR CERTIFICATION423.000.76.535.80.49.00 200.00Total :200.00233177 9/20/2018064531 DINES, JEANNIE 18-3876INV#18-3876 - EDMONDS PDTRANSCRIPTION CASE # IA 18-001001.000.41.521.10.41.00 27.20TRANSCRIPTION CASE #IA 18-003 (MCCLURE)001.000.41.521.10.41.00 139.40TRANSCRIPTION SMART CASE #2018-04001.000.41.521.10.41.00 302.60TRANSCRIPTION CASE #18-16667001.000.41.521.10.41.00 438.60Total :907.80233178 9/20/2018064640 DMCMA09182018DMCMA STAFF CONFERENCE INCIDENTAL FEEDMCMA STAFF CONFERENCE INCIDENTAL FEE001.000.23.512.50.49.00 100.00Total :100.00233179 9/20/2018076760 DOMAN, ALAN 1-32029UTILITY PAYMENT REFUNDUtility payment made in error411.000.233.000 402.50Total :402.50233180 9/20/2018065739 DTG ENTERPRISES INC 37060CITY PARK STORAGE SHED PROJECTCITY PARK STORAGE SHED PROJECT125.000.64.594.76.65.41 1,360.00Total :1,360.00233181 9/20/2018 076772 EBI, KEVIN EBI4245BIRD FEST KEYNOTE SPEAKERBird Fest Keynote Speaker001.000.61.558.70.41.00 500.00Total :500.00233182 9/20/2018068292 EDGE ANALYTICAL 18-29793WATER QUALITY - WATER SAMPLE TESTS17Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 47Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1812:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233182 9/20/2018(Continued)068292 EDGE ANALYTICALWater Quality - Water Sample Tests421.000.74.534.80.41.00 1,108.00Total :1,108.00233183 9/20/2018007625 EDMONDS ARTS FESTIVAL 09/13/2018EVENT DEPOSIT REFUNDEVENT DEPOSIT REFUND001.000.239.200 1,000.00Total :1,000.00233184 9/20/2018074302 EDMONDS HARDWARE & PAINT LLC 2922PM YOST POOL SUPPLIES001.000.64.576.80.31.00 42.8810.3% Sales Tax001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.42Total :47.30233185 9/20/2018076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 1136SUPPLIES FOR YOST POOL HOT TUBSUPPLIES FOR YOST POOL HOT TOB (NUTS,001.000.64.576.80.31.00 55.8110.3% Sales Tax001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5.75Total :61.56233186 9/20/2018008410 EDMONDS PRINTING CO R25861WATER - GATE VALVE CARDS 500 / WATERWater - Gate Valve Cards 500 / Water421.000.74.534.80.31.00 239.0010.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.31.00 24.62WATER QUALITY - CONCERNED ABOUT LEAD?R25878Water Quality - Concerned About Lead?421.000.74.534.80.31.00 120.0010.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.31.00 12.36Total :395.9818Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 48Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1912:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233187 9/20/2018008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 5-00080IRRIGATION AT HWY 99/CITY LINEIRRIGATION AT HWY 99/CITY LINE001.000.64.576.80.47.00 47.59INTERURBAN TRAIL5-10351INTERURBAN TRAIL001.000.64.576.80.47.00 154.19Total :201.78233188 9/20/2018 075200 EDUARDO ZALDIBAR 31910SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT/PROBSPANISH INTERPRETER COURT/PROB001.000.23.523.30.41.01 108.17SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 1:0032049SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 1:00001.000.23.512.50.41.01 108.17Total :216.34233189 9/20/2018 068803 EJ USA INC 110180066919 SEWER - INVENTORY -#1122Sewer - Inventory -#1122423.000.75.535.80.34.00 1,746.60#1123 S-MHCI-25.25-020423.000.75.535.80.34.00 1,746.6010.3% Sales Tax423.000.75.535.80.34.00 359.80Total :3,853.00233190 9/20/2018031060 ELECSYS INTERNATIONAL CORP 000000000182490RADIX MONTHLY MAINT AGREEMENTRadix Monthly Maint Agreement -421.000.74.534.80.48.00 152.00Total :152.00233191 9/20/2018008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES AR112268INV#AR112268 ACCT#MK5031 - EDMONDS PDBLACK & WHITE - CONTRACT OVERAGE CHARGE001.000.41.521.10.45.00 27.6910.3% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.10.45.00 2.85Total :30.5419Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 49Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2012:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233192 9/20/2018075505 ENGINEERED PROCESS CONTROLS 9736WWTP: GASKETS (FOXBORO) GASKETS (FOXBORO)423.000.76.535.80.48.00 320.00Freight423.000.76.535.80.48.00 93.3810.3% Sales Tax423.000.76.535.80.48.00 42.58Total :455.96233193 9/20/2018 069469 ENNIS-FLINT INC 227271ENG - PINE STREET PROJECT SUPPLIESEng - Pine Street Project Supplies112.000.68.542.64.41.00 820.7610.3% Sales Tax112.000.68.542.64.41.00 84.54Total :905.30233194 9/20/2018009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD EDH824978CITY NOTICES - 9/25/18 CRIT AREA REG UPDCITY NOTICES - 9/25/18 CRIT AREA REG001.000.25.514.30.41.40 39.56CITY NOTICES - 9/25/18 MORATORIUM EXT CREDH824980CITY NOTICES - 9/25/18 MORATORIUM EXT001.000.25.514.30.41.40 34.40CITY NOTICES - 9/25/18 MOR DEV. RESIDENTEDH824983CITY NOTICES - 9/25/18 MOR DEV.001.000.25.514.30.41.40 36.12CITY NOTICES - 9/25/2018 STREET VACATIONEDH824987CITY NOTICES - 9/25/2018 STREET001.000.25.514.30.41.40 76.54CITY NOTICES - EDMONDS WATERFRONT CONNECEDH825353CITY NOTICES - EDMONDS WATERFRONT001.000.25.514.30.41.40 51.60Total :238.22233195 9/20/2018009410 EVERETT STEEL INC 228593STORM - SUPPLIESStorm - Supplies422.000.72.531.90.31.00 52.4320Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 50Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2112:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233195 9/20/2018(Continued)009410 EVERETT STEEL INCFleet Shop Supplies511.000.77.548.68.31.20 253.97Fac Maint Supplies001.000.66.518.30.31.00 220.3910.3% Sales Tax422.000.72.531.90.31.00 5.4010.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.20 26.1610.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 22.70WATER - PARTS228594Water - Parts421.000.74.534.80.31.00 125.1310.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.31.00 12.89Total :719.07233196 9/20/2018066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU49594 STORM - SAFETY GLASSESSTORM - SAFETY GLASSES422.000.72.531.90.24.00 75.6210.3% Sales Tax422.000.72.531.90.24.00 7.79FLEET SHOP SUPPLIESWAMOU50527Fleet Shop Supplies511.000.77.548.68.31.20 3.5510.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.20 0.37Total :87.33233197 9/20/2018009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0688582METER INVENTORY - 2025 M-METER-01-010Meter Inventory - 2025 M-METER-01-010421.000.74.534.80.34.30 621.0010.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.34.30 63.96METER INVENTORY #2025 M-METER-01-010068858521Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 51Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2212:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233197 9/20/2018(Continued)009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INCMeter Inventory #2025 M-METER-01-010421.000.74.534.80.34.30 621.0010.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.34.30 63.96METER INVENTORY #2025 M-METER-01-0100688587Meter Inventory #2025 M-METER-01-010421.000.74.534.80.34.30 310.5010.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.34.30 31.98Total :1,712.40233198 9/20/2018071562 FORMA06/28/2018CASPER STREET WAYFINDING SIGNFABRICATION OF WAYFINDING SIGN AT125.000.64.576.80.41.00 3,242.2510.3% Sales Tax125.000.64.576.80.41.00 333.95Total :3,576.20233199 9/20/2018071737 FOUSHEE & ASSOCIATES COMPANY 141333/334HYDRANT USE PERMIT REFUND AFTER FEESHydrant Use Permit Refund after rental421.000.245.110 168.79Total :168.79233200 9/20/2018011900 FRONTIER 253-011-1177 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINEPUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE001.000.65.518.20.42.00 6.42PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE111.000.68.542.90.42.00 24.41PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE421.000.74.534.80.42.00 24.41PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE423.000.75.535.80.42.00 24.41PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE511.000.77.548.68.42.00 24.41PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE22Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 52Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2312:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233200 9/20/2018(Continued)011900 FRONTIER422.000.72.531.90.42.00 24.41TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE425-712-0417TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE421.000.74.534.80.42.00 34.21TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE423.000.75.535.80.42.00 34.21PUBLIC WORKS OMC ALARM, FAX, SPARE LINES425-712-8251PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION001.000.65.518.20.42.00 16.46PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION111.000.68.542.90.42.00 82.32PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION421.000.74.534.80.42.00 69.15PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION423.000.75.535.80.42.00 69.15PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION511.000.77.548.68.42.00 92.20CLUBHOUSE ALARM LINES 6801 MEADOWDALE RD425-745-4313CLUBHOUSE FIRE AND INTRUSION ALARM001.000.66.518.30.42.00 133.55425-775-1344 RANGER STATION425-775-1344425-775-1344 RANGER STATION001.000.64.571.23.42.00 68.29CIVIC CENTER ALARM LINES 250 5TH AVE N425-775-2455CIVIC CENTER FIRE AND INTRUSION ALARM001.000.66.518.30.42.00 65.43UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE425-775-7865UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE TO FIVE421.000.74.534.80.42.00 68.25Total :861.69233201 9/20/2018 012199 GRAINGER 9877359654WATER - SUPPLIESWater - Supplies421.000.74.534.80.31.00 163.1210.3% Sales Tax23Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 53Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2412:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233201 9/20/2018(Continued)012199 GRAINGER421.000.74.534.80.31.00 16.79WATER - PARTS9877960808Water - Parts421.000.74.534.80.31.00 72.7010.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.31.00 7.49Total :260.10233202 9/20/2018012233 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO INC 9306121016WWTP: MAXLITE LINEAR LEDMAXLITE LINEAR LED423.000.76.535.80.31.00 91.30Freight423.000.76.535.80.31.00 25.4710.3% Sales Tax423.000.76.535.80.31.00 12.03Total :128.80233203 9/20/2018076768 GROSS FAMILY TRUST 2-16575#742057RT UTILITY REFUND#742057RT Utility refund due to411.000.233.000 138.42Total :138.42233204 9/20/2018067615 GTS INTERIOR SUPPLY 40049788-00 LIBRARY - SUPPLIESLibrary - Supplies001.000.66.518.30.31.00 137.799.7% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 13.37Total :151.16233205 9/20/2018069733 H B JAEGER COMPANY LLC 204198/1SEWER - PARTSSewer - Parts423.000.75.535.80.31.00 622.9810.3% Sales Tax423.000.75.535.80.31.00 64.17Total :687.1524Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 54Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2512:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233206 9/20/2018012560 HACH COMPANY 11124013WWTP: PRANDOLPH WIMS CONF REGISTRATIONPAMELA RANDOLPH WIMS CONF REGISTRATION423.000.76.535.80.49.71 750.00Total :750.00233207 9/20/2018010900 HD FOWLER CO INC I4894761WATER - SUPPLIESWater - Supplies421.000.74.534.80.31.00 4,497.5410.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.31.00 463.25WATER - METER BOXESI4918156Water - Meter Boxes421.000.74.534.80.31.00 418.8810.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.31.00 43.15WATER - METER BOX COVERSI4954168Water - Meter Box Covers421.000.74.534.80.31.00 777.9210.3% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.31.00 80.12Total :6,280.86233208 9/20/2018 061013 HONEY BUCKET 0550788759STANDARD UNIT SERVICED-HONEY BUCKETSTANDARD UNIT SERVICED HONEY BUCKET001.000.64.576.80.45.00 111.65Total :111.65233209 9/20/2018060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 28579E5KA.SERVICES THRU 8/25/18E5KA.Services thru 8/25/18421.000.74.594.34.65.41 1,141.55Total :1,141.55233210 9/20/2018073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 3146549PAPER AND MISC SUPPLIESPAPER AND MISC SUPPLIES001.000.23.523.30.31.00 168.6110.3% Sales Tax25Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 55Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2612:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233210 9/20/2018(Continued)073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED001.000.23.523.30.31.00 17.36WWTP: TOILET SEAT COVERS3150887TOILET SEAT COVERS423.000.76.535.80.31.00 38.0010.3% Sales Tax423.000.76.535.80.31.00 3.91Total :227.88233211 9/20/2018014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 300-10046401 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIESFleet Shop Supplies511.000.77.548.68.31.20 299.4910.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.20 30.85Total :330.34233212 9/20/2018 069366 ISSAQUAH HONDA KUBOTA 92181IPM DECK PIN, ENGINE PTO, BLADEPM DECK PIN, ENGINE PTO, BLADE001.000.64.576.80.31.00 234.9410.0% Sales Tax001.000.64.576.80.31.00 23.49Total :258.43233213 9/20/2018076767 K PANCAKE-BOWL & BRADFORD BOWL 5-16075#18-198478 UTILITY REFUND#18-198478 Utility refund due to411.000.233.000 344.68Total :344.68233214 9/20/2018073579 KINGS HEATING INC BLD20181155REFUND: ALREADY PERMITTED ON ORGINALRefund: Already permitted on orginal001.000.257.620 60.00Total :60.00233215 9/20/2018016850 KUKER RANKEN INC INV#043826INV#043826 ACCT#1005003 - EDMONDS PDSERVICE TOTAL STATION #1375857001.000.41.521.71.48.00 420.0026Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 56Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2712:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233215 9/20/2018(Continued)016850 KUKER RANKEN INC10.3% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.71.48.00 43.26Total :463.26233216 9/20/2018066522 LAKESIDE INDUSTRIES INC 60326WATER - ASPHALTWater - Asphalt421.000.74.534.80.31.00 1,529.2810.0% Sales Tax421.000.74.534.80.31.00 152.93Total :1,682.21233217 9/20/2018 074417 LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTIAN SMITH 159CONFLICT COUNSEL 8Z0936692CONFLICT COUNSEL 8Z0936692001.000.39.512.52.41.00 300.00Total :300.00233218 9/20/2018075474 LEACH, JENNIFER 09/18/2018POSTAGE REIMBURSEMENTPOSTAGE REIMBURSEMENT001.000.61.558.70.42.00 63.95Total :63.95233219 9/20/2018076756 LEGG, DAPHNE JILL LEGG7607BIRD FEST PRESENTERBird Fest presenter - Little Brown Birds001.000.61.558.70.41.00 50.00Total :50.00233220 9/20/2018073603 LIGHTHOUSE LAW GROUP PLLC Sept-1809-18 LEGALS FEES09-18 Legal fees001.000.36.515.31.41.00 46,119.42Total :46,119.42233221 9/20/2018076757 LISI, GERALD LISI5682FIRST FEST PRESENTERBird Fest presenter - Photography001.000.61.558.70.41.00 50.00Total :50.0027Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 57Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2812:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233222 9/20/2018075716 MALLORY PAINT STORE INC E0099577WADE JAMES - PAINT SUPPLIESWade James - Paint Supplies001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1,810.19Museum - Paint Supplies001.000.66.518.30.31.00 119.9810.0% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 193.02Total :2,123.19233223 9/20/2018 019582 MANOR HARDWARE 915044-00TRAFFIC - REBARTraffic - Rebar111.000.68.542.64.31.00 17.6010.4% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.64.31.00 1.83Total :19.43233224 9/20/2018020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 72992728WWTP: NUTS,HOSES,PIPE FITTINGS.CLAMPS,SONUTS,HOSES,PIPE FITTINGS.CLAMPS,SOCKET423.000.76.535.80.31.00 450.40Freight423.000.76.535.80.31.00 19.36Total :469.76233225 9/20/2018076764 MICHAEL GERKE & SUSAN CAMPBELL 1-33400#40213159 UTILITY REFUND#40213159 Utility refund - received411.000.233.000 181.89Total :181.89233226 9/20/2018074831 MILLER PAINT COMPANY 30970633TRAFFIC - YELLOW TRAFFIC MARKING PAINTTraffic - Yellow Traffic Marking Paint111.000.68.542.64.31.00 261.4010.4% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.64.31.00 27.18Total :288.58233227 9/20/2018020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 289751STORM - WEED WHIP LINE28Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 58Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2912:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233227 9/20/2018(Continued)020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INCStorm - Weed Whip Line111.000.68.542.71.31.00 74.9510.3% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.71.31.00 7.72STORM - SUPPLIES289900Storm - Supplies111.000.68.542.71.31.00 38.9510.3% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.71.31.00 4.01Total :125.63233228 9/20/2018075266 MORGAN MECHANICAL INC P18084-1WWTP: FINAL 50% CHG-CONSOLE FINAL 50% CHG-CONSOLE WATER SOURCE HEAT423.000.76.535.80.35.00 2,460.0010.3% Sales Tax423.000.76.535.80.35.00 253.38Total :2,713.38233229 9/20/2018076762 MTGLQ INVESTORS LP 7-03455#WA-2493-EO UTILITY REFUND#WA-2493-EO Utility refund due to411.000.233.000 170.06Total :170.06233230 9/20/2018076765 NANCY BYERS 5-15450#18-192370 UTILITY REFUND#18-192370 Utility refund due to411.000.233.000 137.03Total :137.03233231 9/20/2018068025 NATIONAL PEN CORPORATION 110193385WOTS LOGO PENSWOTS LOGO PENS117.100.64.573.20.31.00 265.45Total :265.45233232 9/20/2018075539 NATURE INSIGHT CONSULTING 16WILLOW CREEK DAYLIGHTING PROJ MGMTTasks 1 - 4: Parks Project Mgmt and29Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 59Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3012:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233232 9/20/2018(Continued)075539 NATURE INSIGHT CONSULTING125.000.64.576.80.41.00 1,312.50Task 5: Engineering Dept Tasks422.000.72.594.31.65.41 312.50Total :1,625.00233233 9/20/2018024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0669134-INFLEET FILTER INVENTORYFleet Filter Inventory511.000.77.548.68.34.40 13.0110.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.34.40 1.34FLEET FILTER INVENTORY0669580-INFleet Filter Inventory511.000.77.548.68.34.40 6.5710.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.34.40 0.68FLEET FILTER INVENTORY0670584-INFleet Filter Inventory511.000.77.548.68.34.40 20.0610.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.34.40 2.06Total :43.72233234 9/20/2018064215 NORTHWEST PUMP & EQUIP CO 2924527-00FLEET SHOP COMPRESSOR MAINT SVCFleet Shop Compressor Maint Svc511.000.77.548.68.48.00 427.3810.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.48.00 44.02Total :471.40233235 9/20/2018025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 855PROF. SERV. PLANNING BRD. MINUTESProf. Serv. Planning Brd. Minutes001.000.62.558.60.41.00 288.00Total :288.00233236 9/20/2018065720 OFFICE DEPOT 199635651001 PW - OFFICE SUPPLIES30Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 60Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3112:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233236 9/20/2018(Continued)065720 OFFICE DEPOTPW - Office Supplies001.000.65.518.20.31.00 73.0510.3% Sales Tax001.000.65.518.20.31.00 7.52OFFICE - OFFICE SUPPLIES199738264001Office - Office Supplies001.000.65.518.20.31.00 19.2910.3% Sales Tax001.000.65.518.20.31.00 1.99Total :101.85233237 9/20/2018068709 OFFICETEAM 51772709HR TEMP WORK FOR WEEK 9/14/18Wk End 9/14/18 - HR TEMP001.000.22.518.10.41.00 441.00Total :441.00233238 9/20/2018 073714 OLBRECHTS & ASSOC PLLC 8 & 9 2018 HE Serv. BLD20180017 ESD #15 WOODWAYBLD20180017 ESD #15 Woodway Hearing001.000.245.967 1,290.00Total :1,290.00233239 9/20/2018072739 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 3685-365595 UNIT 101 - AIR FILTERUnit 101 - Air Filter511.000.77.548.68.31.10 52.54Freight511.000.77.548.68.31.10 13.1210.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.76UNIT 66 - PARTS3685-366573Unit 66 - Parts511.000.77.548.68.31.10 53.0010.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.46UNIT PS17 - AIR FILTER3685-366681Unit PS17 - Air Filter31Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 61Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3212:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233239 9/20/2018(Continued)072739 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS511.000.77.548.68.31.10 58.1910.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.99UNIT 93 - PARTS3685-366704Unit 93 - Parts511.000.77.548.68.31.10 92.9910.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.58UNIT 93 - WIRING HARNESS3685-366742Unit 93 - Wiring Harness511.000.77.548.68.31.10 19.8010.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 2.04Total :319.47233240 9/20/2018002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00090129UNIT 106 - PARTSUnit 106 - Parts511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1,929.77Freight511.000.77.548.68.31.10 79.2710.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 206.93UNIT 106 - SUPPLIES00090186Unit 106 - Supplies511.000.77.548.68.31.10 15.96Freight511.000.77.548.68.31.10 18.3810.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 3.53Total :2,253.84233241 9/20/2018 075735 PACIFIC SECURITY 25044COURT SECURITY 08/03/2018 & 08/17/2018COURT SECURITY 08/03/2018 & 08/17/2018001.000.23.512.50.41.00 180.0032Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 62Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3312:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount(Continued)Total :180.00233241 9/20/2018 075735 075735 PACIFIC SECURITY233242 9/20/2018 069633 PET PROS 0016238-ININV#0016238-IN CUST#07-EDMONDS PD37751 - ACANA DOG HERITAGE MEAT001.000.41.521.26.31.00 59.8438372 - ACANA D MEADOWLANDS001.000.41.521.26.31.00 65.5410.4% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.26.31.00 13.04Total :138.42233243 9/20/2018 070431 PITNEYBOWES EASYPERMIT POSTAGE 8000-9090-0618-6873BULK MAILING WRITE ON THE SOUND & ANNUALBULK MAILING FOR WRITE ON THE SOUND &001.000.25.514.30.42.00 765.04Total :765.04233244 9/20/2018029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 03870PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CITYPORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CITY422.000.72.531.90.51.00 3,041.53PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CITY03870 AUGPORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CITY422.000.72.531.90.51.00 -311.11PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CITY03870 JULYPORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CITY422.000.72.531.90.51.00 -311.11PORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CITY03870 JUNEPORT RIGHT-OF-WAY LEASE FOR CITY422.000.72.531.90.51.00 -176.30Total :2,243.01233245 9/20/2018069029 PR DIAMOND PRODUCTS INC 0049967-INWATER - SUPPLIESWater - Supplies421.000.74.534.80.31.00 140.00Freight421.000.74.534.80.31.00 12.00Total :152.0033Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 63Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3412:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233246 9/20/2018064088 PROTECTION ONE 2422756ALARM MONITORING SNO-ISLE LIBRARYALARM MONITORING SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650001.000.66.518.30.42.00 256.71ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS OMC730531ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110421.000.74.534.80.42.00 36.28ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110423.000.75.535.80.42.00 36.28ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110422.000.72.531.90.42.00 32.65ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110111.000.68.542.90.42.00 41.72ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110511.000.77.548.68.42.00 18.14ALARM MONITORING PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110001.000.65.518.20.42.00 16.32Total :438.10233247 9/20/2018030400 PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY 18-038SQ4-2018 CLEAN AIR ASSESSMENTQ4-18 Clean Air Assessment per RCW001.000.39.553.70.51.00 8,975.75Total :8,975.75233248 9/20/2018 070809 PUGET SOUND EXECUTIVE 18-1829COURT SECURITY 08/27/2018-08/31/2018COURT SECURITY 08/27/2018-08/31/2018001.000.23.512.50.41.00 907.50PROBATION DV-MRT SECURITY 08/29/2018001.000.23.523.30.41.00 82.50COURT SECURITY 09/04/2018-09/05/201818-1901COURT SECURITY 09/04/2018-09/05/2018001.000.23.512.50.41.00 687.50PROBATION DV-MRT SECURITY 09/05/2018001.000.23.523.30.41.00 68.75Total :1,746.25233249 9/20/2018030455 PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL 2019028MEMBERSHIP DUES 201934Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 64Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3512:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233249 9/20/2018(Continued)030455 PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCILMembership Dues 2019 Puget Sound001.000.39.513.10.49.00 17,042.00Total :17,042.00233250 9/20/2018062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL COMPANY 0000051963STORM STREET SWEEPING DUMP FEESStorm Street Sweeping Dump Fees422.000.72.531.10.49.00 274.50STORM DUMP FEES4602-000041133Storm Dump Fees422.000.72.531.10.49.00 199.71STORM DUMP FEES4602-000041263Storm Dump Fees422.000.72.531.10.49.00 408.80Total :883.01233251 9/20/2018 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC 5-019837UNIT 776 - BATTERYUnit 776 - Battery511.000.77.548.68.31.10 101.2410.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.43UNIT 5 - BATTERY5-019856Unit 5 - Battery511.000.77.548.68.31.10 91.31Unit 35 - Battery511.000.77.548.68.31.10 99.2510.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 19.63UNIT G07 - BATTERY5-019953Unit G07 - Battery511.000.77.548.68.31.10 120.8310.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 12.45UNIT G02 - BATTERY5-019959Unit G02 - Battery511.000.77.548.68.31.10 105.4035Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 65Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3612:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233251 9/20/2018(Continued)064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC10.3% Sales Tax511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.86Total :571.40233252 9/20/2018076766 ROMAN & LORENE LEWANDOWSKI 3-34225#40214873-803-CJ2 UTILITY REFUND#40214873-803-CJ2 Utility refund due to411.000.233.000 451.26Total :451.26233253 9/20/2018067802 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQUIP CO 634326INV#634326 CUST#1733 - EDMONDS PDFED-BC223NT5A-C .223REM 55GR001.000.41.521.23.31.00 896.55Freight001.000.41.521.23.31.00 51.3010.3% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.23.31.00 97.63Total :1,045.48233254 9/20/2018070495 SEPULVEDA, PABLO 30598SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 8:30SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 8:30001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.02SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 1:0030792SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 1:00001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.02SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 1:0031871SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT 1:00001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.02SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT/JAIL32260SPANISH INTERPRETER COURT/JAIL001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.02Total :420.08233255 9/20/2018070115 SHANNON & WILSON INC 102708E4FC.SERVICES THRU 8/11/18E4FC.Services thru 8/11/18422.000.72.594.31.65.41 12,325.8036Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 66Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3712:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount(Continued)Total :12,325.80233255 9/20/2018 070115 070115 SHANNON & WILSON INC233256 9/20/2018 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-6027-1 YOST POOLYOST POOL001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1,637.72FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW / METE2003-9895-6FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW /001.000.66.518.30.47.00 932.46LIFT STATION #10 17526 TALBOT RD / METER2004-9683-4LIFT STATION #10 17526 TALBOT RD /423.000.75.535.80.47.10 70.34LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE W / METER2006-1131-7LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE W /423.000.75.535.80.47.10 133.29CITY PARK RESTROOMS2006-5085-1CITY PARK RESTROOMS001.000.64.576.80.47.00 17.74PARK MAINTENANCE SHOP2006-5164-4PARK MAINTENANCE SHOP001.000.64.576.80.47.00 751.78TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / METER 100002007-2302-1TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR / METER111.000.68.542.64.47.00 30.37HICKMAN PARK2011-8453-8HICKMAN PARK001.000.64.576.80.47.00 27.51PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9110 OLYMPIC VIEW D2014-3123-6PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9110 OLYMPIC VIEW111.000.68.542.64.47.00 18.89PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUGET DR / MET2014-3124-4PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUGET DR /111.000.68.542.64.47.00 16.60TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 99 / METER 100042014-4175-5TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 99 / METER111.000.68.542.63.47.00 190.22CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD LIGHTS2014-5305-737Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 67Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3812:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233256 9/20/2018(Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD LIGHTS001.000.64.576.80.47.00 74.16SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / METER 1002015-5174-4SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / METER001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,598.61PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW / METE2019-4248-9PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW /001.000.65.518.20.47.00 84.15PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW /111.000.68.542.90.47.00 319.76PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW /421.000.74.534.80.47.00 319.76PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW /423.000.75.535.80.47.10 319.76PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW /511.000.77.548.68.47.00 319.76PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW /422.000.72.531.90.47.00 319.759TH/CASPER LANDSCAPED BED2022-5062-79TH/CASPER LANDSCAPED BED001.000.64.576.80.47.00 18.89TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 99 / METER 100042022-8945-0TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 99 / METER111.000.68.542.64.47.00 82.22CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION #17 250 5TH2022-9166-2CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION #17 250 5TH001.000.66.518.30.47.00 5,037.30SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION 8100 190TH ST SW2025-4064-7SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION 8100 190TH ST SW001.000.64.576.80.47.00 17.17FIVE CORNERS RESERVOIR 8519 BOWDOIN WAY2036-5215-1FIVE CORNERS RESERVOIR 8519 BOWDOIN WAY421.000.74.534.80.47.00 142.47LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / METER 102044-2584-738Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 68Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3912:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233256 9/20/2018(Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / METER423.000.75.535.80.47.10 51.56PEDEST CAUTION LIGHTS 8410 MAIN ST /2202-1638-6PEDEST CAUTION LIGHTS 8410 MAIN ST /111.000.68.542.64.47.00 68.21TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 236TH ST SW / METE2205-4757-4TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 236TH ST SW /111.000.68.542.63.47.00 69.08VETERANS PLAZA METER 10005972782217-3208-4VETERANS PLAZA METER 1000597278001.000.64.576.80.47.00 102.80Total :12,772.33233257 9/20/2018063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 2018-4574INV#2018-4574 EDMONDS JAIL - JULY 2018486.83 BASE RATE - HOUSING DAYS @ $98.73001.000.39.523.60.51.00 48,064.7258.83 BOOKINGS @ $121.42001.000.39.523.60.51.00 7,143.1355.5 MEDICAL/SPECIALTY HOUSING PREMIUM001.000.39.523.60.51.00 3,149.0769.5 MENTAL HEALTH HOUSING PREMIUM @001.000.39.523.60.51.00 9,520.8111.75 VIDEO COURT HOURS @ $134.70001.000.39.523.60.51.00 1,582.73CM4527 CM45502018-45748 BASE RATE HOUSING PREMIUM @ $98.73001.000.39.523.60.51.00 -789.841 BOOKNGS @ $121.42001.000.39.523.60.51.00 -121.42Total :68,549.20233258 9/20/2018 037521 SNO CO TREASURER 004790001003022018 SECOND HALF SURFACE WATER TAX2018 Surface Water Charges - 23009 88th001.000.66.518.30.47.00 199.0839Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 69Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds4012:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount(Continued)Total :199.08233258 9/20/2018 037521 037521 SNO CO TREASURER233259 9/20/2018 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY I000478938PARKS MAINT 5005 DUMP FEESPARKS MAINT DUMP FEES001.000.64.576.80.47.00 1,392.00ILLEGAL DUMPING422.000.72.531.10.49.00 5.00PARKS MAINTENANCE DUMP FEES001.000.66.518.30.47.00 22.00Total :1,419.00233260 9/20/2018 075675 SORENSON FORENSICS LLC 46010INV#46010 - EDMPOL - EDMOND PDSTR ANALYSIS - KNOWN/REFERENCE001.000.41.521.21.41.00 225.00Total :225.00233261 9/20/2018038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 104757WWTP: 9/10/18 ROLLOFF ASH DISPOSAL+TAXE9/10/18 Ash disposal & taxes423.000.76.535.80.47.65 3,202.06Total :3,202.06233262 9/20/2018039775 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE L12698109-18 AUDIT FEES08-18 Audit Fees001.000.39.514.20.51.00 1,619.4008-18 Audit Fees111.000.68.543.30.51.00 47.8508-18 Audit Fees421.000.74.534.80.51.00 589.7308-18 Audit Fees422.000.72.531.90.51.00 316.5608-18 Audit Fees423.000.75.535.80.51.00 833.4608-18 Audit Fees423.000.76.535.80.51.00 218.4408-18 Audit Fees511.000.77.548.68.51.00 83.4640Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 70Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds4112:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount(Continued)Total :3,708.90233262 9/20/2018 039775 039775 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE233263 9/20/2018 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18214803WWTP: NUTS, SMART STRAW SPRAYS NUTS, SMART STRAW SPRAYS423.000.76.535.80.31.00 160.2910.3% Sales Tax423.000.76.535.80.31.00 16.51Total :176.80233264 9/20/2018071666 TETRA TECH INC 51346756E4GC.SERVICES THRU 8/24/18E4GC.Services thru 8/24/18423.000.75.594.35.65.41 4,535.73Total :4,535.73233265 9/20/2018076761 THE ESTATE OF ROBERT MCCONNELL 3-37525#18-185864 UTILITY REFUND#18-185864 Utility refund due to411.000.233.000 130.60Total :130.60233266 9/20/2018072649 THE WIDE FORMAT COMPANY 110636DSD - WIDE FORMAT COPIER MONTHLYDSD - Wide Format Copier monthly001.000.62.524.10.45.00 193.03Total :193.03233267 9/20/2018 076613 THOMCO CONSTRUCTION INC E6DA.Pmt 3E6DA.PMT 3 THRU 9/7/18E6DA.Pmt 3 thru 9/7/18112.000.68.595.61.65.00 6,493.00E6DA.Pmt 3 thru 9/7/18126.000.68.595.61.65.00 1,050.61E6DA.Pmt 3 thru 9/7/18422.000.72.594.31.65.20 72.70Total :7,616.31233268 9/20/2018 073274 TOMAR ELECTRONICS INC 005013UNIT M16 - LED LAMPUnit M16 - LED Lamp511.000.77.548.68.31.10 140.57Freight41Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 71Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds4212:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233268 9/20/2018(Continued)073274 TOMAR ELECTRONICS INC511.000.77.548.68.31.10 11.12Total :151.69233269 9/20/2018068724 US HEALTHWORKS MED GROUP OF WA0799613-WA PW EMPLOYMENT VACCINESHEP B VACCINE - WATER421.000.74.534.80.41.00 94.00HEP A VACCINE - WATER421.000.74.534.80.41.00 140.00TDAP VACCINE - WATER421.000.74.534.80.41.00 105.00Total :339.00233270 9/20/2018044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 8080151UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION CENTERUTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION CENTER421.000.74.534.80.41.00 137.50UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION CENTER422.000.72.531.90.41.00 137.50UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATION CENTER423.000.75.535.80.41.00 141.67Total :416.67233271 9/20/2018067216 VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER CO 55631BOYS & GIRLS CLUB - ANNUAL TEST ANDBoys & Girls Club - Annual Test and001.000.66.518.30.41.00 510.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.41.00 52.53FS 16 - ANNUAL TEST AND SERVICE55632FS 16 - Annual Test and Service001.000.66.518.30.41.00 436.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.41.00 44.91FS 17 - ANNUAL TEST AND SERVICE55633FS 17 - Annual Test and Service001.000.66.518.30.41.00 436.0010.3% Sales Tax42Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 72Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds4312:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233271 9/20/2018(Continued)067216 VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER CO001.000.66.518.30.41.00 44.91FS 20 - ANNUAL TEST AND SERVICE55634FS 20 - Annual Test and Service001.000.66.518.30.41.00 436.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.41.00 44.91FAC - ANNUAL TEST AND SERVICE55635FAC - Annual Test and Service001.000.66.518.30.41.00 510.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.41.00 52.53PW SHOP- ANNUAL TEST AND SERVICE55636PW Shop- Annual Test and Service001.000.66.518.30.41.00 747.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.41.00 76.94PW OFFICE - ANNUAL TEST AND SERVICE55637PW Office - Annual Test and Service001.000.66.518.30.41.00 717.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.41.00 73.85SR CENTER - ANNUAL TEST AND SERVICE55638SR Center - Annual Test and Service001.000.66.518.30.41.00 584.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.41.00 60.15Total :4,826.73233272 9/20/2018067195 WASHINGTON TREE EXPERTS I18-591TREE SERVICE AT WADE JAMES THEATRETREE SERVICE AT WADE JAMES THEATRE001.000.64.576.80.48.00 325.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.64.576.80.48.00 33.48Total :358.4843Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 73Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds4412:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233273 9/20/2018075635 WCP SOLUTIONS 10685133 CR FAC MAINT RETURNSFac Maint Returns001.000.66.518.30.31.00 -71.9210.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 -7.41FAC MAINT RETURNS10756651A CRFac Maint Returnsg001.000.66.518.30.31.00 -127.2010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 -13.10FAC MAINT RETURNS10756651B CRFac Maint Returns001.000.66.518.30.31.00 -79.5210.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 -8.19FAC MAINT - MAINT SUPPLIES10813186Fac Maint - Maint Supplies001.000.66.518.30.31.00 85.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 8.76FAC MAINTR - MAINT SUPPLIES10815150Fac Maintr - Maint Supplies001.000.66.518.30.31.00 993.6410.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 102.34FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES10838369Fac Maint - Supplies001.000.66.518.30.31.00 140.0010.3% Sales Tax001.000.66.518.30.31.00 14.42Total :1,036.82233274 9/20/2018073552 WELCO SALES LLC 7531INV#7531 - EDMONDS PD10K PD BUSINESS CARD MASTERS001.000.41.521.10.31.00 389.004 NEW BUSINESS CARD SET UPS ~44Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 74Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds4512:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233274 9/20/2018(Continued)073552 WELCO SALES LLC001.000.41.521.10.31.00 60.00250 BUS CARDS CLARK, HWANG, KINNEY,001.000.41.521.10.31.00 146.0210.3% Sales Tax001.000.41.521.10.31.00 61.29PW - ENVELOPE SUPPLIES7537PW - Envelope Supplies001.000.65.518.20.31.00 424.6010.3% Sales Tax001.000.65.518.20.31.00 43.73Total :1,124.64233275 9/20/2018 069605 WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANTS 2018-EDM-AUGPROF. SERV. - WESTGATE VILLAGE FIREProf. Serv. - Westgate Village Fire001.000.62.524.20.41.00 680.00Total :680.00233276 9/20/2018076755 WEST SOUND WILDLIFE CENTER WSWC9057BIRD FEST PRESENTERBird Fest Presenter -- Raptor Education001.000.61.558.70.41.00 200.00Total :200.00233277 9/20/2018069691 WESTERN SYSTEMS 0000036866TRAFFIC - ALPHA REPAIRSTraffic - Alpha Repairs111.000.68.542.64.48.00 470.4310.3% Sales Tax111.000.68.542.64.48.00 48.46Total :518.89233278 9/20/2018075743 WHISTLE WORKWEAR OF SHORELINE SHO 3258SEWER - WORK JEANS (5) D LEDERSewer - Work Jeans (5) D Leder423.000.75.535.80.24.00 211.4510.0% Sales Tax423.000.75.535.80.24.00 21.15Total :232.6045Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 75Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds4612:09:19PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount233279 9/20/2018064213 WSSUA TREASURER 565SOFTBALL UMPIRE ASSOC FEESSOFTBALL UMPIRE ASSOCIATION FEES001.000.64.571.25.41.00 3,640.00Total :3,640.00233280 9/20/2018075122 YAKIMA CO DEPT OF CORR AUG 2018 JAILAUGUST 2018 INMATE HOUSING - EDMONDS PD47 INMATE HOUSING DAYS 08/18001.000.39.523.60.51.00 2,812.95Total :2,812.95Bank total : 600,765.35142 Vouchers for bank code :usbank600,765.35Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report14246Page:4.2.aPacket Pg. 76Attachment: claim cks 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds1 1:49:54PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount9202018 9/20/2018062693 US BANK 1683PASSPORT POSTAGEPASSPORT POSTAGE001.000.23.512.50.42.00 134.00SHRED 07/25/2018001.000.23.512.50.49.00 9.66COURT PHOTOCOPY MACHINE BW COPIES001.000.23.512.50.45.00 5.07PROBATION PHOTOCOPY MACHINE BW COPIES001.000.23.523.30.45.00 13.5510.3% Sales Tax001.000.23.512.50.45.00 0.5210.3% Sales Tax001.000.23.523.30.45.00 1.404675 PARKS CREDIT CARD4675AMAZON: ARCHIVAL STORAGE PAGE FOR SLIDES001.000.64.571.21.31.00 49.88ISSUU: CRAZE DIGITAL PUBLISHING001.000.64.571.22.49.00 39.00AMAZON: SUPPLIES001.000.64.571.22.31.00 48.45AMAZON: PROTECTIVE SLEEVE, STYLUS PEN001.000.64.571.21.31.00 92.61AMAZON: LAMINATING SHEETS001.000.64.571.22.31.00 20.08AMAZON: FOLDERS001.000.64.571.22.31.00 43.20OFFICE DEPOT: DOT LABELS, NAME BADGES001.000.64.571.23.31.00 47.45AMAZON: FOLDERS WOTS117.100.64.573.20.31.00 57.72AMAZON: WATER COOLER DISPENSER WOTS117.100.64.573.20.35.00 128.25AMAZON: GLOVES, CLEAR CASTING RESIN001.000.64.576.80.31.00 108.381Page:4.2.bPacket Pg. 77Attachment: wire 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds2 1:49:54PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount9202018 9/20/2018(Continued)062693 US BANKAMAZON: FOLDERS, WATER CONTAINERS, NAME117.100.64.573.20.31.00 190.91AMAZON: COLOR PAPER WOTS117.100.64.573.20.31.00 25.65AMAZON: COPY PAPER001.000.64.571.22.31.00 40.79AMAZON: GYMNASTICS SUPPLIES001.000.64.571.28.31.00 34.67AMAZON: FANS FOR CLASSROOM001.000.64.571.22.35.00 432.32WALMART: PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES001.000.64.571.29.31.00 10.21AMAZON: GYMNASTICS SUPPLIES001.000.64.571.28.31.00 39.68AMAZON: CEMETERYS SUPPLIES130.000.64.536.50.31.00 38.78YMCA: SWIM CAMPERS001.000.64.571.28.49.00 154.00FASTSIGNS OF LYNNWOOD: BIRD FEST SIGNS001.000.61.558.70.31.00 49.46AMAZON: LABELS001.000.64.571.21.31.00 32.91AMAZON: COLOR PAPER001.000.64.571.22.31.00 9.49AMAZON: BOXES, COPY PAPER001.000.64.571.21.31.00 84.90AMAZON: RUBBER BANDS, AA BATTERIES,001.000.64.571.22.31.00 51.93AMAZON: COLOR PAPER001.000.64.571.22.31.00 9.04AMAZON: RECHARGEABLE BATTERIES FOR001.000.64.571.22.31.00 18.41AMAZON: KRAFT CATALOG ENVELOPES001.000.64.571.22.31.00 19.322Page:4.2.bPacket Pg. 78Attachment: wire 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds3 1:49:54PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount9202018 9/20/2018(Continued)062693 US BANKAMAZON: ALL WEATHER COPIER PAPER001.000.64.571.23.31.00 28.71VALUE VILLAGE: CURTAINS FOR SUPPLY001.000.64.571.22.49.00 4.40VALUE VILLAGE: CURTAINS FOR SUPPLY001.000.64.571.29.49.00 11.02COSTCO CORRECTIONS4675COSTCO RECEIPT CORRECTION001.000.64.571.22.49.00 -60.00COSTCO RECEIPT CORRECTIONS001.000.64.571.22.49.00 -120.00RECORDING FEES, MEMBERSHIPS, LEMAY, REGI5593WAPRO REGISTRATION - SUSAN QUAN001.000.25.514.30.49.00 175.00AMAZON - NOTARY PRIVACY GAURD001.000.25.514.30.31.00 26.36SNOHOMISH COUNTY RECORDING OF NOTICE001.000.25.514.30.49.00 102.00SNOHOMISH COUNTY RECORDING OF LIENS421.000.74.534.80.49.00 95.50SNOHOMISH COUNTY RECORDING OF LIENS423.000.75.535.80.49.00 95.50AMAZON - NOTARY BOOKS001.000.25.514.30.31.00 66.10AMAZON - 3 NOTARY PRIVACY PAGES001.000.25.514.30.31.00 37.61PAYPAL - WASHINGTON MUNICIPAL CLERKS001.000.25.514.30.49.00 75.00SNOHOMISH COUNTY RECORDING OF LIENS421.000.74.534.80.49.00 108.50SNOHOMISH COUNTY RECORDING OF LIENS423.000.75.535.80.49.00 108.50SNOHOMISH COUNTY RECORDING OF SHORT001.000.25.514.30.49.00 184.003Page:4.2.bPacket Pg. 79Attachment: wire 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
09/20/2018Voucher ListCity of Edmonds4 1:49:54PMPage:vchlistBank code :usbankVoucherDateVendorInvoicePO #Description/AccountAmount9202018 9/20/2018(Continued)062693 US BANKINVOICE#4576135 SHREDDING SERVICES001.000.25.514.30.41.00 9.66INVOICE#4576135 SHREDDING SERVICES001.000.31.514.23.41.00 9.66INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MUNICIPAL001.000.25.514.30.49.00 100.00WAPRO REGISTRATION - SCOTT PASSEY001.000.25.514.30.49.00 175.00Total :3,274.21Bank total : 3,274.211 Vouchers for bank code :usbank3,274.21Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report14Page:4.2.bPacket Pg. 80Attachment: wire 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 E5FE
STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave)c424 E3DC
STM 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements c521 E8FB
STM 183rd Pl SW Storm Repairs c491 E6FE
SWR 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB
SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA
STR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB
STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA
STR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA
WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC
STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E5FA
STR 2015 Overlay Program c463 E5CA
SWR 2015 Sewerline Overlays i007 E5CC
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
STR 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades i016 E6DC
STR 2016 Overlay Program i008 E6CA
SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA
SWR 2016 Sewerline Overlays i010 E6CC
WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC
WTR 2016 Waterline Overlays i009 E6CB
WTR 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA
STR 2017 Curb Ramp Upgrades i022 E7DA
STR 2017 Minor Sidewalk Program i023 E7DB
STR 2017 Overlay Program i018 E7CA
SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA
SWR 2017 Sewerline Overlays i020 E7CC
STR 2017 Traffic Calming i021 E7AA
WTR 2017 Waterline Overlays i019 E7CB
WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects i014 E6JB
STM 2018 Lorian Woods Study s018 E8FA
STR 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project i032 E8DA
STR 2018 Overlay Program i030 E8CB
SWR 2018 Sewerline Overlays i035 E8CE
SWR 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC
STR 2018 Traffic Calming i027 E8AA
WTR 2018 Waterline Overlays i034 E8CD
WTR 2018 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC
STR 2019 Overlay Program i036 E9CA
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
SWR 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project c516 E8GA
STM 2019 Storm Maintenance Project c525 E8FC
WTR 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement c523 E8JA
WTR 2019 Waterline Replacement c498 E7JA
STR 220th Adaptive i028 E8AB
STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD
STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB
WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013)c418 E3JB
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 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)c485 E6DA
STM 3rd Ave Rain Gardens i012 E6FC
STR 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements i029 E8CA
STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA
STR 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th i031 E8CC
STR 89th Pl W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD
STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB
FAC A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 E5LA
STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE
STR ADA Curb Ramps i033 E8DB
STR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB
STR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB
STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA
PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA
SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB
SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB
STR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC
STR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB
WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)c482 E5JB
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
STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC
General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 E5DB
FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB
PRK FAC Band Shell Replacement c477 E6MB
WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating c473 E5KA
STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA
STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)c405 E2AD
STR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA
STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD
SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB
STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB
SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC
STR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD
STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA
STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E6FA
STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE
STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)m013 E7FG
STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E7FA
STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN
STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC
FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E4LA
STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD
WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA
STR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB
STR SR104/City Park Mid-Block Crossing c454 E4DB
UTILITIES Standard Details Updates s010 E5NA
STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB
STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG
STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD
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
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
UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA
PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA
STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF
PRK Waterfront Restoration m103 E7MA
STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC
WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA
PRK Yost Park Spa c494 E6MC
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
STR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements
STM E1FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
STM E1FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update
STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project
STR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)
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
SWR E2GB c390 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
STR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study
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 E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study
STM E3FE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive
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
WTR E3JB c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013)
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 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
STM E4FD c436 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
STM E4FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines
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 E4JB c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
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
SWR E5CC i007 2015 Sewerline Overlays
STR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project
General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis
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)
STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility
STM E5FE c484 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements
SWR E5GA c469 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects
SWR E5GB s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
WTR E5JA c468 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects
WTR E5JB c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
WTR E5KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating
FAC E5LA c476 A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers
UTILITIES E5NA s010 Standard Details Updates
STR E6AA s014 Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
STR E6AB i015 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
STR E6CA i008 2016 Overlay Program
WTR E6CB i009 2016 Waterline Overlays
SWR E6CC i010 2016 Sewerline Overlays
STR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
STR E6DB s016 ADA Transition Plan
STR E6DC i016 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades
STR E6DD i017 Minor Sidewalk Program
STM E6FA i011 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive
STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements
STM E6FC i012 3rd Ave Rain Gardens
STM E6FD s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update
STM E6FE c491 183rd Pl SW Storm Repairs
SWR E6GA i013 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project
SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II
SWR E6GC c492 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update
WTR E6JB i014 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects
WTR E6JC c493 2018 Waterline Replacement Project
PRK E6MA c480 Veteran's Plaza
PRK E6MB c477 FAC Band Shell Replacement
PRK E6MC c494 Yost Park Spa
STR E7AA i021 2017 Traffic Calming
STR E7AB i024 Audible Pedestrian Signals
STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
STR E7CA i018 2017 Overlay Program
WTR E7CB i019 2017 Waterline Overlays
SWR E7CC i020 2017 Sewerline Overlays
STR E7CD i025 89th Pl W Retaining Wall
STR E7DA i022 2017 Curb Ramp Upgrades
STR E7DB i023 2017 Minor Sidewalk Program
STR E7DC i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements
STM E7FA m105 OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
STM E7FB c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW
STM E7FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
WTR E7JA c498 2019 Waterline Replacement
PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza
PRK E7MA m103 Waterfront Restoration
STR E8AA i027 2018 Traffic Calming
STR E8AB i028 220th Adaptive
STR E8CA i029 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements
STR E8CB i030 2018 Overlay Program
STR E8CC i031 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
WTR E8CD i034 2018 Waterline Overlays
SWR E8CE i035 2018 Sewerline Overlays
STR E8DA i032 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project
STR E8DB i033 ADA Curb Ramps
STM E8FA s018 2018 Lorian Woods Study
STM E8FB c521 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements
STM E8FC c525 2019 Storm Maintenance Project
SWR E8GA c516 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project
WTR E8JA c523 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
STR E9CA i036 2019 Overlay Program
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza
PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements
STR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
STM E1FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
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
SWR E2GB c390 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update
STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project
SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
STR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)
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 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 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 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
STM E4FD c436 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
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
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 Waterline Replacement Projects
SWR E5GA c469 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects
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
FAC E5LA c476 A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers
PRK E6MB c477 FAC Band Shell Replacement
General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis
STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility
PRK E6MA c480 Veteran's Plaza
WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
WTR E5JB c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
STM E5FE c484 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements
STR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements
SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II
STM E6FE c491 183rd Pl SW Storm Repairs
SWR E6GC c492 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project
WTR E6JC c493 2018 Waterline Replacement Project
PRK E6MC c494 Yost Park Spa
STM E7FB c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW
WTR E7JA c498 2019 Waterline Replacement
SWR E8GA c516 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project
STM E8FB c521 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements
WTR E8JA c523 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
STM E8FC c525 2019 Storm Maintenance Project
STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
SWR E5CC i007 2015 Sewerline Overlays
STR E6CA i008 2016 Overlay Program
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
WTR E6CB i009 2016 Waterline Overlays
SWR E6CC i010 2016 Sewerline Overlays
STM E6FA i011 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive
STM E6FC i012 3rd Ave Rain Gardens
SWR E6GA i013 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project
WTR E6JB i014 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects
STR E6AB i015 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
STR E6DC i016 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades
STR E6DD i017 Minor Sidewalk Program
STR E7CA i018 2017 Overlay Program
WTR E7CB i019 2017 Waterline Overlays
SWR E7CC i020 2017 Sewerline Overlays
STR E7AA i021 2017 Traffic Calming
STR E7DA i022 2017 Curb Ramp Upgrades
STR E7DB i023 2017 Minor Sidewalk Program
STR E7AB i024 Audible Pedestrian Signals
STR E7CD i025 89th Pl W Retaining Wall
STR E7DC i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements
STR E8AA i027 2018 Traffic Calming
STR E8AB i028 220th Adaptive
STR E8CA i029 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements
STR E8CB i030 2018 Overlay Program
STR E8CC i031 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
STR E8DA i032 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project
STR E8DB i033 ADA Curb Ramps
WTR E8CD i034 2018 Waterline Overlays
SWR E8CE i035 2018 Sewerline Overlays
STR E9CA i036 2019 Overlay Program
STM E7FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
PRK E7MA m103 Waterfront Restoration
STM E7FA m105 OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
UTILITIES E5NA s010 Standard Details Updates
SWR E5GB s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update
STR E6AA s014 Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
STR E6DB s016 ADA Transition Plan
STM E6FD s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update
STM E8FA s018 2018 Lorian Woods Study
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
FAC A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 E5LA
FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB
FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB
FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E4LA
General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 E5DB
PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA
PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA
PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA
PRK FAC Band Shell Replacement c477 E6MB
PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA
PRK Waterfront Restoration m103 E7MA
PRK Yost Park Spa c494 E6MC
STM 12th Ave & Sierra Stormwater System Improvements c484 E5FE
STM 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements c521 E8FB
STM 183rd Pl SW Storm Repairs c491 E6FE
STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA
STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 E5FA
STM 2018 Lorian Woods Study s018 E8FA
STM 2019 Storm Maintenance Project c525 E8FC
STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB
STM 3rd Ave Rain Gardens i012 E6FC
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 c436 E4FD
STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB
STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA
STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E6FA
STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE
STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)m013 E7FG
STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E7FA
STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN
STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC
STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD
STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB
STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG
STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD
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
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 E5FB
STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF
STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC
STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave)c424 E3DC
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 2016 Curb Ramp Upgrades i016 E6DC
STR 2016 Overlay Program i008 E6CA
STR 2017 Curb Ramp Upgrades i022 E7DA
STR 2017 Minor Sidewalk Program i023 E7DB
STR 2017 Overlay Program i018 E7CA
STR 2017 Traffic Calming i021 E7AA
STR 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project i032 E8DA
STR 2018 Overlay Program i030 E8CB
STR 2018 Traffic Calming i027 E8AA
STR 2019 Overlay Program i036 E9CA
STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD
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 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)c485 E6DA
STR 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements i029 E8CA
STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA
STR 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th i031 E8CC
STR 89th Pl W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD
STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB
STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE
STR ADA Curb Ramps i033 E8DB
STR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB
STR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB
STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA
STR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC
STR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB
STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA
STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III)c405 E2AD
STR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA
STR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD
STR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB
STR SR104/City Park Mid-Block Crossing c454 E4DB
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 91 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA
STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA
STR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA
STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA
STR 220th Adaptive i028 E8AB
SWR 2013 Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB
SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA
SWR 2015 Sewerline Overlays i007 E5CC
SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA
SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA
SWR 2016 Sewerline Overlays i010 E6CC
SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA
SWR 2017 Sewerline Overlays i020 E7CC
SWR 2018 Sewerline Overlays i035 E8CE
SWR 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC
SWR 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project c516 E8GA
SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB
SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB
SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB
SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC
UTILITIES Standard Details Updates s010 E5NA
UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA
WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC
WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 E5CB
WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4JB
WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC
WTR 2016 Waterline Overlays i009 E6CB
WTR 2016 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 E5JA
WTR 2017 Waterline Overlays i019 E7CB
WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects i014 E6JB
WTR 2018 Waterline Overlays i034 E8CD
WTR 2018 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC
WTR 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement c523 E8JA
WTR 2019 Waterline Replacement c498 E7JA
WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013)c418 E3JB
WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)c482 E5JB
WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re-coating c473 E5KA
WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA
WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA
Revised 9/20/2018
4.2.c
Packet Pg. 92 Attachment: FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.)
Payroll Earnings Summary ReportCity of EdmondsPay Period: 878 (09/01/2018 to 09/15/2018)Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class DescriptionEducational Pay CorrectionREGULAR HOURS-ed20.00 -156.28NO PAY LEAVEABSENT111-17.25 0.00NO PAY NON HIREDABSENT112128.00 0.00SICK LEAVESICK121573.75 22,165.13VACATIONVACATION1221,203.00 51,344.15HOLIDAY HOURSHOLIDAY12397.00 3,543.27FLOATER HOLIDAYHOLIDAY12427.00 894.65COMPENSATORY TIMECOMP HOURS125209.50 8,655.72Holiday Compensation UsedCOMP HOURS1309.00 306.15JURY DUTYJURY DUTY1329.00 230.35Kelly Day UsedREGULAR HOURS150162.00 6,869.20COMPTIME BUY BACKCOMP HOURS15248.00 2,293.10HOLIDAY BUY BACKHOLIDAY15360.00 2,866.37COMPTIME AUTO PAYCOMP HOURS15554.77 2,423.01SICK LEAVE PAYOFFSICK15765.60 2,526.23VACATION PAYOFFVACATION158481.84 22,022.74MANAGEMENT LEAVEVACATION1601.00 55.40REGULAR HOURSREGULAR HOURS19014,780.00 589,853.49ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVEREGULAR HOURS195160.00 7,058.50OVERTIME .5OVERTIME HOURS20552.00 842.26OVERTIME-STRAIGHTOVERTIME HOURS210140.25 5,715.37WATER WATCH STANDBYOVERTIME HOURS21548.00 2,370.14STANDBY TREATMENT PLANTMISCELLANEOUS21617.00 1,641.16OVERTIME 1.5OVERTIME HOURS220331.75 21,426.93OVERTIME-DOUBLEOVERTIME HOURS22512.00 760.50MISC PAYMISCELLANEOUS4000.00 205.00WORKING OUT OF CLASSMISCELLANEOUS4100.00 114.14SHIFT DIFFERENTIALSHIFT DIFFERENTIAL4110.00 1,084.01RETROACTIVE PAYRETROACTIVE PAY6000.00 417.72ACCRUED COMP .5COMP HOURS6011.00 0.00ACCRUED COMPCOMP HOURS60269.25 0.00Holiday Comp 1.0COMP HOURS60336.00 0.00ACCRUED COMP TIMECOMP HOURS60476.50 0.0009/20/2018Page 1 of 34.2.dPacket Pg. 93Attachment: payroll summary 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and
Payroll Earnings Summary ReportCity of EdmondsPay Period: 878 (09/01/2018 to 09/15/2018)Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class DescriptionACCRUED COMP TIMECOMP HOURS6068.00 0.00ACCREDITATION PAYMISCELLANEOUSacc0.00 104.83ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORTMISCELLANEOUSacs0.00 151.43BOC II CertificationMISCELLANEOUSboc0.00 86.48Collision ReconstructionistMISCELLANEOUScolre0.00 114.63TRAINING CORPORALMISCELLANEOUScpl0.00 156.94CERTIFICATION III PAYMISCELLANEOUScrt0.00 554.28DETECTIVE PAYMISCELLANEOUSdet0.00 108.48Detective 4%MISCELLANEOUSdet40.00 904.74EDUCATION PAY 2%EDUCATION PAYed10.00 702.76EDUCATION PAY 4%EDUCATION PAYed20.00 809.30EDUCATION PAY 6%EDUCATION PAYed30.00 5,202.12FAMILY MEDICAL/NON PAIDABSENTfmla24.75 0.00Family Medical Leave HolidayHOLIDAYfmlb31.25 1,412.50FAMILY MEDICAL/SICKSICKfmls41.25 1,864.50HOLIDAYHOLIDAYhol1,231.00 50,683.85K-9 PAYMISCELLANEOUSk90.00 206.94LONGEVITY PAY 2%LONGEVITYlg10.00 622.51LONGEVITY 5.5%LONGEVITYlg100.00 144.57LONGEVITY PAY 2.5%LONGEVITYlg110.00 995.24Longevity 9%LONGEVITYlg120.00 5,269.06Longevity 7%LONGEVITYlg130.00 2,197.17Longevity 5%LONGEVITYlg140.00 1,280.98LONGEVITY 7.5%LONGEVITYlg150.00 372.38Longevity 1%LONGEVITYlg40.00 341.05Longevity 3%LONGEVITYlg50.00 433.92Longevity .5%LONGEVITYlg60.00 293.59Longevity 1.5%LONGEVITYlg70.00 633.30Medical Leave SickSICKmels99.00 3,033.16Medical Leave VacationVACATIONmelv72.00 1,935.45MOTORCYCLE PAYMISCELLANEOUSmtc0.00 216.96Public Disclosure SpecialistMISCELLANEOUSpds0.00 99.30PHYSICAL FITNESS PAYMISCELLANEOUSphy0.00 2,197.0909/20/2018Page 2 of 34.2.dPacket Pg. 94Attachment: payroll summary 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and
Payroll Earnings Summary ReportCity of EdmondsPay Period: 878 (09/01/2018 to 09/15/2018)Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class DescriptionPROFESSIONAL STANDARDS SERGEANMISCELLANEOUSprof0.00 169.24SPECIAL DUTY PAY 5%MISCELLANEOUSsdp0.00 279.29ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANTMISCELLANEOUSsgt0.00 169.24School Resource OfficerMISCELLANEOUSsro0.00 108.48STREET CRIMESMISCELLANEOUSstr0.00 458.52TRAFFICMISCELLANEOUStraf0.00 338.69Total Net Pay: $572,651.64$842,181.3820,343.2109/20/2018Page 3 of 34.2.dPacket Pg. 95Attachment: payroll summary 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and
Benefit Checks Summary ReportCity of EdmondsPay Period: 878 - 09/01/2018 to 09/15/2018Bank: usbank - US Bank Direct Deposit Check Amt Name Payee # Date Check #63437 09/20/2018 epoa2 EPOA-POLICE5,565.00 0.0063438 09/20/2018 epoa3 EPOA-POLICE SUPPORT557.75 0.0063439 09/20/2018 flex NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS2,194.18 0.0063440 09/20/2018 teams TEAMSTERS LOCAL 7634,453.00 0.0063441 09/20/2018 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 3,843.20 0.0016,613.130.00Bank: wire - US BANK Direct Deposit Check Amt Name Payee # Date Check #2769 09/20/2018 awc AWC322,095.80 0.002772 09/20/2018 us US BANK103,707.13 0.002773 09/20/2018 mebt WTRISC FBO #N3177B1103,188.72 0.002775 09/20/2018 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 6,642.44 0.002776 09/20/2018 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER27,614.64 0.002778 09/20/2018 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT628.50 0.00563,877.230.00580,490.360.00Grand Totals:Page 1 of 19/20/20184.2.ePacket Pg. 96Attachment: payroll benefit 09-20-18 (Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages totaling an amount undetermined.
Staff Lead: WCIA Claim
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Nicholas Falk
Background/History
n/a
Staff Recommendation
Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages by minute entry.
Narrative
Dana Clifford submitted a claim for damages for an undetermined amount.
Attachments:
09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD
4.3
Packet Pg. 97
4.3.a
Packet Pg. 98 Attachment: 09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD (Claim for Damages)
4.3.a
Packet Pg. 99 Attachment: 09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD (Claim for Damages)
4.3.a
Packet Pg. 100 Attachment: 09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD (Claim for Damages)
4.3.a
Packet Pg. 101 Attachment: 09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD (Claim for Damages)
4.3.a
Packet Pg. 102 Attachment: 09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD (Claim for Damages)
4.3.a
Packet Pg. 103 Attachment: 09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD (Claim for Damages)
4.3.a
Packet Pg. 104 Attachment: 09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD (Claim for Damages)
4.3.a
Packet Pg. 105 Attachment: 09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD (Claim for Damages)
4.3.a
Packet Pg. 106 Attachment: 09-19-2018 Clifford, Dana CFD (Claim for Damages)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Staff Lead: Kernen Lien
Department: Planning Division
Preparer: Kernen Lien
Background/History
Duane Landsverk and A.P. VanMeter have submitted a petition to vacate a portion of Excelsior Place
that lies adjacent to and north of the property addressed at 19511 94th Place West. The City Council is
required to consider street vacations in a public hearing set by resolution. The City Council passed
Resolution No. 1417 setting the public hearing for September 25, 2018.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends denial of the proposed street vacation for the reasons detailed in the staff report
provided in Exhibit 1.
Narrative
The portion of Excelsior Place that is adjacent to and north of the property addressed at 19511 94th
Place West is the subject of this application. This section of right-of-way was created in 1906 with the
Edmonds Sea View Tracts plat. The right-of-way is 20 feet wide and the portion of this vacation request
is approximately 500 feet long. The City of Edmonds has sanitary sewer and water lines located within
the right-of-way. Two-thirds of property owners abutting this section of Excelsior Place have signed the
petition for street vacation.
Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.070, the City Council is to consider the vacation request at a public hearing set
by resolution. The City Council passed Resolution No. 1417 setting the public hearing for September 25,
2018.
Procedures and criteria for street vacations are detailed in Chapter 20.70 Edmonds Community
Development Code. The staff report and attachments in Exhibit 1 includes a detailed analysis of the
requested street vacation and provides a recommendation to the City Council.
Attachments:
Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments
6.1
Packet Pg. 107
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
PLN20180021 Page 1 of 11
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Project: Consideration of vacating a portion of Excelsior Place adjacent to the
property addressed at 19511 – 94th Place West
Requested Permits: PLN20180021
Date of Report: September 20, 2018
Staff Contacts: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Manager
Public Hearing: September 25, 2018
Council Chambers
250 - 5th Avenue North, Edmonds
I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND PROCESS
An application and petition has been filed with the City of Edmonds to vacate that
portion of Excelsior Place that lies adjacent to and north of the property addressed at
19511 – 94th Place West (Attachments 1 – 7). Two of the three property owners who
abut the section of Excelsior Place proposed for vacation have signed the petition to
vacate. The right-of-way is 20 feet wide and the portion of this vacation request is
approximately 500 feet in length (Attachments 4 - 5).
The City Council is required to consider street vacations in a public hearing set by
resolution. The Council passed Resolution No. 1417 (Attachment 8) which set the public
hearing for September 25, 2018.
Below is staff’s evaluation of the street vacation criteria as established in Chapter 20.70
Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC).
II. GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Location: The subject street vacation is for that portion of Excelsior Place that lies
adjacent to and north of the property addressed at 19511 – 94th Place West
(Attachment 9).
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 108 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 2 of 11
2. Zoning: Public right-of-ways are unzoned. The properties surrounding Excelsior
Place are all zoned RS-12 (Single-family Residential; 12,000 square feet minimum lot
size). See Attachment 9 for zoning and vicinity map. The Comprehensive Plan
designation for the immediately adjacent properties is “Single Family - Resource”.
Given the surrounding Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations, if the City
Council approves the proposed street vacation, the vacated right-of-way should be
zoned RS-12 with a Comprehensive Plan designation of “Single Family - Resource.”
This would be consistent with the existing zoning and Comprehensive Plan
designations of the abutting land surrounding the subject right-of-way.
3. Size: The area of the proposed vacation is approximately 10,240 square feet.
4. Existing Use: The portion of Excelsior Place that is the subject of this vacation request
primarily serves as the driveway to 19511 - 94th Place West. Public utilities are also
located within the right-of-way, including water and sanitary sewer lines
(Attachment 5). Overhead power lines run adjacent to the right-of-way just north of the
Excelsior Place right-of-way.
III. NOTICE
Public Notice requirements for street vacations are detailed in ECDC 20.70.090. A notice
for the council’s consideration of vacation was published in the Herald Newspaper on
September 9, 2018. A notice was also posted at the subject site and mailed to property
owners within 300 feet of the site. In accordance with ECDC 20.70.090, the public
notice included description of easements that may be retained during the vacation
process (Attachment 10). The City has complied with the noticing provisions of ECDC
20.70.090.
IV. PUBLIC CONCERNS
No public comments have been received as of the writing of this staff report.
V. TECHNICAL COMMITTEE
This application was reviewed and evaluated by Snohomish County Fire District #1 and
City of Edmonds Engineering and Maintenance & Operations Divisions of Public Works.
Snohomish County Fire District #1: Snohomish County Fire District #1 provided the
following comments and recommendations (Attachment 11):
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 109 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 3 of 11
1. No easement is currently required. If property in the area of vacation is
developed and the vacation area will serve three or more lots, an emergency
access road consistent with Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 Fire Lane
Standards will be required.
2. The fire hydrant located in the vacation area is to remain a public hydrant.
City of Edmonds Engineering and Maintenance & Operations Divisions: The Engineering
Division provided the following comments and recommendation regarding the proposed
street vacation (Attachment 12):
The Engineering and Maintenance & Operations Divisions of Public Works have
reviewed the subject application and recommend denial of the proposed Excelsior Place
street vacation. The reasons for denial are based upon the following:
1) Traffic flow and sight distance concerns were reviewed in consideration of the
subject Excelsior Place street vacation. That portion of Excelsior Place right-of-way
subject this street vacation, is connected to other sections of City right-of-way
(Puget Drive to the west and 196th St SW to the east) through private roadways. The
currently accessible public portions of Excelsior Place right-of-way are highlighted in
the map below:
Excelsior Place does not directly adjoin Puget Drive or 196th St SW. A couple
residents off 94th Pl W have informed of their historical use of the private roads on
the western and eastern extents of the proposed vacation, however, the
information submitted to the City as part of the street vacation indicates only
certain properties have easements of record. Please refer Attachment 15 of the
staff report. The following traffic flow and sight distance concerns exist with
vacation of the subject Excelsior Place right-of-way:
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 110 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 4 of 11
a. The proposed street vacation could force access for the properties on the
west end of the vacated Excelsior Place to enter and exit their properties
through the intersection of the 94th Pl W private road and Puget Drive. This
could impose restrictions on these properties that may otherwise have not
existed.
b. Safety at the intersection of 94th PL W and Puget Drive was expressed as a
concern by more than one resident. The City’s Transportation Engineer
reviewed the sight distance at this intersection and determined that it does
not currently comply with standards. To meet sight distance standards, a
motorist exiting 94th Pl W onto Puget Drive should have clear sight lines to
the east (be able to see up the road) for a distance of 300-ft. This lineal
footage is based upon the speed posted on the road, which is 30mph. The
current sight distance is 200-ft, which falls 100-ft short of being in
compliance. Considering this potential safety issue, it would be in the best
interest of the public to maintain the Excelsior Place right-of-way, which
would in turn allow traffic flow to continue through the private access roads
and public right-of-way as it historically has.
2) In addition, the City currently owns and maintains a sanitary sewer main and water
main, including a fire hydrant through the subject vacation area.
Operation and maintenance of utilities is more efficient when utilities are located
within a public right-of-way versus a private easement. This is found to be true as
decisions regarding the use of the right-of-way remains with the public and access to
the utility systems is not restricted by a private property owner. In addition, the
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 111 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 5 of 11
following would need to be considered with a transfer of the public utility systems to
private ownership, which further supports staff recommendation for denial of the
street vacation.
a. The subject street vacation abuts 19511 94th Pl W and within the boundaries of
these limits, there is not a clear point in the utility systems to distinguish
between public and private ownership. In finding a point at which this clear
distinction could be made, public utilities would either fall within private
property or private utilities would fall within public right-of-way.
b. If the water main were to become private, the water meters would need to be
re-located to fall within City right-of-way and new water service lines would
need to be run to the individual properties. This would create long runs of water
service line, which could create long term maintenance issues.
c. With the relocation of the water meters, the private water main and fire hydrant
would essentially serve as a private fire line. The change from a public water
main to a private fire line would spur the requirement for the property owners
to install a backflow assembly in a vault in order to provide water quality
protection between the public water system and the private fire line.
VI. ECDC 20.70 – STREET VACATIONS
A. ECDC 20.70.050 Initiation of Proceedings
Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.050.B a vacation may be initiated by petition of the owners
of more than two-thirds of property abutting the portion of the street or alley to be
vacated. Three property owners abut this portion of Excelsior Place. The two
property owners lying north and south of the right-of-way, Edgar Mallory Living
Trust (represented by Duane Landsverk) and A.P. VanMeter, that would receive half
of the vacated right-of-way should the Council approve the vacation signed the
petition to vacate (Attachment 2). A third property owner whose property (9123 –
196th Street SW) is located at the western terminus of Excelsior Place did not sign
the vacation request.
Since two-thirds of the property owners abutting the right-of-way signed the
vacation request, the initiation of vacation proceedings is compliant with ECDC
20.70.050.
B. ECDC 20.70.020 Criteria for Vacation
The City Council may vacate a street, alley or easement only if it finds the following
criteria have been met:
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 112 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 6 of 11
1. The vacation is in public interest.
The applicants submitted a statement in support of the public interest criterion
(Attachment 3). The applicants note that the proposed street vacation would
vacate a substandard road and revert the road back to private ownership. The
proposed street to be vacated was created as a 20-foot right-of-way in 1906 as
part of the Edmonds Sea View Tracts plat (Attachment 13). Since that time, the
right-of-way has not been widened or improved to current city street standards.
The portion of right-of-way to be vacated is presently maintained by the
adjoining property owners. The applicants argue it is in the public interest to
return the right-of-way to private ownership, where the current adjoining
owners will continue to maintain property that they can then lawfully own and
relieve the city of any financial burden or liability that comes with public right-of-
way.
This street vacation petition was precipitated by a lot line adjustment application
made under file number PLN20170050 (Attachment 14). The lot line adjustment
proposes to rearrange five lots of record (also created via the Edmonds Sea View
Tracts plat) in order to develop that lots in a manner that would have less impact
on the critical areas within the surrounding area (steep slopes, wetland and
stream). The lot line adjustment application had one of the newly configured
lots bisected by Excelsior Place. The City’s Engineering Division noted that in
order to approve the proposed lot line adjustment either a street vacation
request must be submitted and approved or the lot line adjustment must be
altered so no lot is bisected by the Excelsior Place right-of-way. In an effort to
avoid and minimize impacts to the critical areas, the applicants chose to pursue
the street vacation. The lot line adjustment application has been put on hold
pending the outcome of the street vacation request.
Much consideration was given to the rationale presented by the applicant for
meeting the public interest criterion; however, due to traffic safety and utility
concerns noted by the City Public Works Department (Attachment 12), staff does
not find the proposal to be within the public interest.
2. No property will be denied direct access as a result of the vacation.
The applicants indicated the portion of right-of-way requested to be vacated
serves as access to the five legal lots as noted on the lot line adjustment
application referenced above (Attachment 3). As currently configured, three of
the five properties have direct frontage on Excelsior Place, while the other two
rely on private easements for access to the Excelsior Place public right-of-way.
Should the vacation and lot line adjustment both be approved, the
rearrangement of lot lines would allow all five lots to have direct access to the
vacated portion of Excelsior Place through a shared private access road
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 113 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 7 of 11
easement. A series of private access easements (both existing and proposed
with the street vacation) would provide direct access to Puget Drive and/or 196th
Street SW.
The applicants provided a map (Attachment 15) and access easements of record
(Attachment 16) related to the private access roads serving residences on the
eastern and western extents of the proposed Excelsior Place vacation. The
western extent of this section of Excelsior Place connects to a private road, 94th
Place West, which serves five residences and provides access to Puget Drive. The
eastern extent connects to another private road which provides access to eight
houses and ultimately ties into 196th Street SW, a public street. The applicants
have noted that only 19511 – 94th Place West has legal access from the west and
east ends of the proposed Excelsior Place vacation.
In summary, no properties would be denied direct access as a result of the
vacation; however, as noted by the City Public Works Department (Attachment
12), the street vacation could place access restrictions on the properties along
the western extents of the Excelsior Place street vacation.
C. ECDC 20.70.040 Limitations on Vacations
1. Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.040.A, “the city may not vacate any street, alley,
easement, or part thereof that abuts any body of water unless all elements of
RCW 35.79.035 are complied with, and the vacated area will thereby become
available for the city or other public entity to acquire and to use for a public
purpose.”
The proposed vacation area does not abut any bodies of water.
2. Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.040.B, “the city shall not proceed with the vacation if
the owners of 50 percent or more of the property abutting the street or alley or
part thereof, or underlying the easement or part thereof, to be vacated file a
written objection in the planning division prior to the time of the hearing.”
As of the writing of this staff report, the City has not received any written
objections to the proposed street vacation.
D. ECDC 20.70.140 Final Decision
1. ECDC 20.70.140.A provides the following:
Following the public hearing, the city council shall, by motion approved by a
majority of the entire membership in a roll call vote, either:
1. Adopt an ordinance granting the vacation; or
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 114 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 8 of 11
2. Adopt a motion denying the vacation; or
3. Adopt a resolution of intent to vacate stating that the city council will, by
ordinance, grant the vacation if the owner(s) of property abutting upon
the street or alley, or part thereof so vacated, meet specific conditions
within 90 days. The city may require the following as conditions:
a. Either:
i. Monetary compensation to be paid to the city in the amount of up
to one-half the fair market value for the street, alley, or part
thereof to be vacated unless acquired at “public expense,” then
full appraised value shall be paid; or
ii. The grant of a substitute public right-of-way which has value as an
access way at least equal to the vacated street, alley, or part
thereof; or
iii. Any combination of subsections (A)(3)(a)(i) and (A)(3)(a)(ii) of this
section totaling but not more than one-half the fair market value
of the street, alley, or part thereof to be vacated.
OR
b. A grant of an easement to the city in exchange for the easement
vacated.
If the abutting property owner(s) complies with conditions imposed in the
resolution of intent to vacate within 90 days, the city council shall adopt
an ordinance granting the vacation.
2. The City Council has three options with the current street vacation application.
The Council may a) Deny the vacation petition, b) Approve the vacation subject
to the applicant assuming ownership of the utilities in the right-of-way and
require monetary compensation for the right-of-way to be vacated, or c)
Approve the vacation subject to the granting of an easement to the City of
Edmonds for the public water main located within the right-of-way. Each option
is discussed below.
a. Deny the application: Should the City Council find the street vacation
petition does not meet the criteria for vacation in ECDC 20.70.020, the City
Council may deny the street vacation. In recent street vacations before the
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 115 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 9 of 11
City Council, it has been noted that the monetary compensation for the
vacation supports the public interest criteria. If easements are retained for
the public utilities (as noted in option c below), then pursuant to ECDC
20.70.140.A.3 the City cannot receive monetary compensation. The City
could relinquish ownership of the utilities (as noted in option b below);
however, the Public Works Utilities Maintenance & Operations Division finds
it to be in the public interest to retain ownership of the utilities.. No
properties would be denied direct access, however access restrictions would
be imposed. Staff does not find the street vacation to be in the public
interest and recommends denial of the street vacation.
b. Approve the vacation subject to the applicant assuming ownership of the
utilities in the right-of-way and requiring monetary compensation for the
right-of-way to be vacated: City owned utilities are located within the
Excelsior Place right-of-way, including a water main with fire hydrant and a
sanitary sewer main (Attachment 5). Should the City Council desire to
receive monetary compensation for the street vacation, the Council could
condition vacation approval on the applicant assuming ownership of the
utilities and requiring compensation for half the appraised value of the area
to be vacated.
An appraisal prepared by an MAI certified appraiser was submitted in
support of the vacation petition (Attachment 7). The appraised value of the
right-of-way proposed for vacation is $10,800. Pursuant to ECDC
20.70.140.A.3.a.i, the city can require monetary compensation up to one-half
of the appraised value, which $5,400 the proposed vacation.
As noted, the city utilities in the right-of-way consist of a sanitary sewer main
and water main with fire hydrant (Attachment 5). The water main, besides
providing water service to several properties along Excelsior Place, supplies
water to an existing public fire hydrant which Snohomish County Fire District
No. 1 requested to remain public. In addition to the Fire District’s comments,
the Public Works Utilities Maintenance & Operations Division has indicated a
desire to retain ownership of the utilities due to the extent of modifications
to the water system that would be required to make the system private,
along with the benefits that come with operating and maintaining City
utilities located within public right-of-way.
The City Council should consider the low appraised value of the right-of-way
along with Public Works’ and the Fire District’s desire to maintain ownership
of the utilities in the right-of-way in evaluating this option.
c. Approve the vacation subject to the granting of easements to the City of
Edmonds for the utilties located within the right-of-way: While public
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 116 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 10 of 11
interest may be served through eliminating any financial burden or liability
that comes with public right-of-wayand through subsequent reconfiguration
of lots that will mitigate potential development impacts on existing critical
areas, staff has expressed their desire to maintain the utilities within public
right-of-way versus an easement on private property. In addition, even
though it has been shown that direct access will not be denied to any
properties as a result of the vacation, it has also been shown that access
could be restricted over the current condition.
VII. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The subject site is located within the “Single Family – Resource” designation of the
Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan has the following stated goals and
policies for Residential Development that apply to this project.
Residential Development
A. Goal. 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, aesthetic and
environmental considerations.
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.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.b. Traffic not directly accessing residences in a neighborhood must
be discouraged
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 habitat.
(Comprehensive Plan, Pg. 66)
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 117 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PLN20180021 – Excelsior Place Street Vacation
Page 11 of 11
Nothing in the proposed right-of-way vacation is in conflict with the goals and policies of
the Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the proposal is not in conflict with the goals and
policies of the Transportation Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed street vacation would be consistent with the City of Edmonds
Comprehensive Plan.
VIII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis in and the attachments to this report, staff does not find the
requested vacation of Excelsior Place to be in accordance with the criteria in ECDC
20.70.020. Therefore, staff recommends DENIAL of the street right-of-way vacation.
IX. ATTACHMENTS
1. Land Use Application
2. Petition for Vacation
3. Applicant Response Letter
4. Legal Description and Survey
5. Survey with Utilities
6. Applicant Location Map
7. MAI Appraisal
8. Resolution No. 1417
9. Zoning and Vicinity Map
10. Public Notice Documentation
11. Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 Comments
12. Engineering Division Comments
13. Edmonds Sea View Tracts Plat
14. Proposed Lot Line Adjustment under PLN20170050
15. Easement Access Map
16. Related Access Easements
X. PARTIES OF RECORD
City of Edmonds
121 – 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Duane and Deanne Landsverk
Edgar Mallory Living Trust
24113 – 56th Avenue West
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
A.P. VanMeter
9055 – 196th Street SW
Edmonds, WA 98020
Lee Michaelis
Puget Sound Planning
24113 – 56th Avenue West
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 118 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
City of Edmonds
Land Use Applic, tion
rrtu + PL,n/Zi2!8-0 0ÐJ zoNE
-
DArE 3' i3't€ REC'DBY vvr 3
eeu.-í GÐ- Rrceipr#
t] FIE tr STAFF tr PB ! ADB tr CC
HEARIN,jDATE
I
tr
tr
tr
l
!
ü
I
I
uÍ
ü
u
n
D
ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
CoNDITIONAL USE PERMIT
HoME OCCUPATION
FORMAL SUBDIVISION
SHORT SUBDIVISION
LoT LINE ADJUSTMENT
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT
STREET VACATION
REZONE
SHORELINE PERMIT
VARÌANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION
OTHER:
. PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL INI.oRMATIoN CoNTAINED VITHIN THE APPLICATION IS .4 PUßLIC RECORD .
pROpERTy ADDRESS OR LOCATION¡ ROw adjacent ro 19511 94th pL W
PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE)Edmonds BLA
PROPERTY OwNItR Dune Landsverk Pgo¡¡e # 42\-l42t-"t42
ADDRESS 241 13 56th Avç W Mountlake Terrace , WA 98043
E-MAIL dual€@lqh-inc.com FAX #
TAX ACCOUNT # 000043460000s805 SEC. 13 T'wP. 27 RNG. 03
DEScRrprroN oF PRoJEcr oR Pnoroslo usn IATTAcH coveR LETTER AS NECESSAR
adjacent to l95l I 94th PL W.
Street vacation ofthe ROW
DESCRIBE How THE PROJECT MEETS APPLICABLE CODES (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSAR
APPLIcANT Hmah Philbrick pHONe# 206-2s0-'t9s2
ADDRESS 241 13 56th Ave W Mountlake Tenace, WA 98043
E-MAIL hannah@pugetsoundplæning.com F¡x #
CONTACT PERgg¡/d6p,¡1 Lee A Michaelis p¡19¡g # ¿zs-szo-to¿r,
ADDRESS 24113 56th Ave W Mountlake Tenace, WA 98043
E-MAIL lee.michaelis@pugetsoundplming.com FAX #
The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to
release, indemnifr, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attomey's
fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information
fumished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees.
By my signature, I certi$r that the information
and that I am authorized to lile;his application
and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
on the behalfofthe owner as listed below.
SIGNATURE oF DATE
Property Owner's Authorization
L Dun^¿--LaJst*¿-'certify urder the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
Washington that the following is a true and conect statement: I have authorized the above ApplicanVAgent to apply for the
subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staffof the City of Edmonds to enter the
subject prope(y for the purposes of inspection and posting attendant to this application.
SIGNATIIRE oF
Questions? Call (425) 7 7 1 -0220.
Revised on 8/22/l 2 B - Land Use Application Page I of lAttachment 1
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 119 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Edgar Mallory Living Trust
247t3 56th Ave. W.
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
RECETI/Er}
l'tAR - . ZÏtg
¡:,:|ttå\lifrI[ì i.
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
Per the terms of the Edgar Mallory Living Trust dated June 24, 2008:
Duane Landsverk and or/ Deanne Landsverk are both Trustees for the Edgar Mallory Living Trust. Both
individually or both jointly may act for and conduct business on behalf of the trust without the consent
of any other Trustee.
nne Landsverk D n
Co-Trustee Co-Trustee
Attachment 1
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 120 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
PETITION F'OR STREET OR ALLEY VACATIONTO: TI{E HONORABLE Crry COLJNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WAStr{INGTON\le, lbe undersigned olvneñi of trvo-thirds of the real property abutting upon that public rigþtof-way deseribed below, pursuant to RC\ry 35.79.010,do hereby petition úe City of Edmonds to vacate said public right-of-way, rlessribod æ follows:all. siù¡¿æ inthe City of Edmonds, C¡uúy of Snohomis\ State oflfashingtorl and request thæ said City Councit by Resolution fix a time and place whenthis Petition sb¿ll be heard and determined by that authority, r¡'hich time shall not be more than sixty (60) days nor less than twenty (20) days after thepassage of such ResolutionThese pages are a group ofpages containing an identical text and prayer intenderl by the signers ofttris Petition to be presented and considered as onoPetition and rnay be filed witì other pages containing additional sþatures which cumulatively may be considered as a single Pøition.W-ARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true naÍie, or who lnowingly sig's more than one of these petitions, orsigns a petition seeking an election when he or she is not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he.or she is oúherwise not qualifiod tcr sing, or who makesherein any false statemed, shall be guilty of a nrisde¡neanor.PRAYER Otr PETIIION: Fort]evacation ofSTV¡CPEI-mC¿0ÀIOV-96f,ECE r/Ërtí/'R : " Ztlg' ,4T1#UllgË i,,FILES/ÀIASIEß/TMISC¡/t /ts//t /tQil1ii( 1?fL ?t,v)Pa;s l9(ri 54/ zØ-n, ¿n'!-.nrlsuo- [,l)i,,^n^ o.-4"/2r"2/--äø,zruPageofAttachment 26.1.aPacket Pg. 121Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for
July 11,2018
RECEMED
JUL 2 3 2rTS
DEVELOPgEilTsER\/lcES
PSP Puget Sound Planning
lalncj use ctnsuf ting
Jen Machuga, Associate Planner
City of Edmonds
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds WA 98020
Jeannie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
RE: StreetVacationRequestAdjacenttol9Sll 94thPl.W(FileNumberPLN20180021)
Jen & Jeannie
Please accept this letter on behalf of the project applicants, in response to your letter of May 3, 2018. The
review comments, from your letter, are numbered in this letter and are addressed in ihlícs as follows: Please
accept this letter and the attached documents to continue your review,
1. Provide a cover letter indicating compliance with all applicable review criteria of Edmonds Community
Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.70 and indicating how all the comments below have been
addressed with your resubmittal.
Please accept the following nanative as our cover letter addresstng the review criteria for vacation
found in Chapter 20.70.020 (Criteria forVacation) of the ECDC.
"A, The vacation is in the public interest; and" The proposed sfreef vacation would vacate a
substandard road and revertthe road back to private ownershíp. The proposed sfreef to be vacated
is a porfion of Excelsior Ptace that was created as a 20' right of way as part of the original Plat of
Ednonds Sea Víew Tractsin 1906. Since thattime,therightof wayhasnotbeenwidenedorimproved
to cunent cig standards for public residential sfreefs. The portion of roadway to be vacated is
presently maintained by the adjoining propefi owners and not the City of Ednonds. lf is in the
public inúeresf to return the right of way back to private ownership, where the current adioining
owners will continue to maintain property that they can then lawfully own and relieve the city of any
financial burden or liabilig that comes with public right of way. Vacating the portion of right of way
wilt also altow the cunent city street to became prìvate property where it can be taxed like all
residenfial property in the Ci$ of Edmonds.
"8. No property will be denied direct açcess as a result of the vacation." The portion of right of way
requesting to be vacated currently se,ves as access to îive iegal lots as sfiown on the Boundary Line
Adjustment application submitted with the vacation reguesf. Currently, fhree of fhos e five properties
have direct frontage on Excelsior Place, while the other two would rely on easemenfs for access fo
public right of way. Foltowing the Boundary Line Adiustment and creation of private ingress/egress
easemenfs all 5 lots would have dlrect access fo an access easement which provide direcf access fo
a public right of way (Puget Drive).
Chapter 20.70.040 (Limitations on Vacation)
"A. Areas thatWay NotBeVacated. The ci$ may notvacate any streel alley, easement, or partthereof
that abuts any body oî water unless all elemenfs of RCW 35.79.035 are complied with, and the vacated
area will thereby become available for the city or other publíc entity to acquire and to use for a public
Puget Sound Planning
5005 200r" Street SW, Suite 101-ts | L.ynnwood WA 98036
425 830 1 046 | lee. rnichaelrs@pugelsoundplannin g corn I www. pugetsoundplannrng.com
Attachment 3
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 122 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
P6PJuly 11 , 2018
purpose." The portion of right of way requesting to be vacated does not abut any body of water;
therefore' this code section does not apply.
"8. Objection by Propefi Owner, The city shall not proceed with the vacation iî the owners of 50
percent or more of the propefi abutting the street ar alley or part thereof , or underlying the easement
or part thereof, to be vacated file a written objection in the planning division prior to the time of the
hearing." As provided with our initial submittal, 100 percent of the proper$ owners who abut the
sfreef are in îavor of fåe sfreef vacation.
2. Provide a surveyimap that shows the proposed area of vacation along with existing improvements.
Attached lor your review is a map showing fñe proposed area of vacation along with fñe exisfing
improvements within the area to be vacated,
3. Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.020.4, one of the criteria the City Council must consider in evaluating a street
vacation is whetherthe vacation is in the public interest. Please submit a statement regarding what public
interest would be served by the vacation of this portion of right-otway.
Pleaseseefñeresponse underCommentI above. Thepublicinferesfs insummaryinclude, release
of financiat burden needed to maintain a public right of way; release of liability associated with public
right of way regarding accidenfs and injury; and increase in tax revenue as fñe propefi ls vacafed
and returned to private residential owned property.
4. Pursuant to ECDC 20.70,020.8, the City Council may vacate a street if it finds that "no property will be
denied direct access as a result of the vacation." Please provide evidence of how the proposed street
vacation would not deny direct access to any properties. The survey provided with the pending lot line
adjustment application (P1N20170050) indicates a portion of the driveway, at the NE corner of the street
vacation, is currently located within the City right-otway.
Please see fhe response under Comment I above. The portion of driveway referenced is for the
house located at 9055 196r,, Sf Sl,y. The property owner is pad .to the sfreef vacation and would
receive one hatf the width of the right of way upon sfreef vacatio¡i. The referenced driveway would
then be consolídafed with the propefi located at905519ôn' Sf Sl'y.
5. P/ease provide documentation indicating how the subject right-of-way was originally deeded to the Ctty
of Edmonds. Confirm whether the right-of-way was deeded by properties on both srdes of the right-of-
way or just one side, The appraisa/ seems to indicate the right-of-way was deeded entirely frsm the
parceltothesouth addressed as19511 94tl1Pl.W. lf thiswasnot ffiecase, theappraisalshouldbe
revised accordingly.
Excelsior Place was created in 1906 with thç recording of the Plat of Edmonds Sea View Tracts.
Neither the properties to the north, nor the property to the south dedicated land to create Excelsior
Place. The right af way and lots were created atthe same fime from the larger parcel as descnbed
on the face of the recorded plat. Pursuant to RCW 35.79.040 Title to Vacated Sfreef, it is agreed on
by atl parties of the petition, that each abutting property owner would receive one-half the width of
the vacated sfreef.
Page 2 City of Ëdmonds File No. P1N20180Û21Attachment 3
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 123 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
P$PJuly 11.2018
6. ECDC 20.70.060.G requires "an appraisal prepared by a qualified land appraiser with an M.A.l.
designation, establishing the fair market value of the street, alley, or part thereof to be vaçated." P/ease
respond to the following comnents relatsd to the appraisal provided with your application:
a. The code requiresthatthe appraisalbe prepared by an appraiserwtth an M.A.L designation.
tt is unclear if Mr, McGauhey has an M.A.l, designation. Please either provide evidence that
Mr. McGauhey has this designation or provide an appraisal by an appraiser with this
designation.
Attached úo fhis cover letter is e new appreisal prepared by James B. Price, MAI of the
Appraisal Group oîthe NW
b. The appraisal pravided with your application concludes that vacation of the subiect right-ol
way would add only $4,A00 in value to the adjacent propefty addressed 19511 94th Pl, W.
The appraisal concludes that the additional lot area would add minimal value to the subiect
site; however, the appraisal does not appear to consider the effecfs of a future proposed /of
line adjustment (referto separate pending application PLN20170050), which ts onlypossib/e
with vacation of the subject segment af right-of-way and/or any increased potential in being
able to subdivide or create additional lots in the general area,
Please see fñe attached reyised appraisal for the new appraised value and rationale
used fo appraise the portion of vacated right of way
c. The appraisal refers to the subject right-of-way as betng "the remnant of an unused road
originally platted, but never developed nar used, " However, fhrs secfíon of rþht-of-way was
in fact improved, but with a character that more closely matches a private driveway. This
should be clarified in the appraisal.
The revised report refers to the vacated portion of right of way as descrlbed and
graphically depicted by the surveyor exhibiß.
d. The City Councit recently approved a resolution of intent to vacate a portion of unopened
right-of-way appraximately 20 feet by 320 feet in size adjacent to the properties addressed
10410 and 10430 231st Sf. Stl/lF,/e No. PLN20170052) forwhich fhe assessed valuewas
$57,60A. Nthough there are differences in the circumsfances related to that application and
the subject application, the difference in assessed value between fhese two applications is
sizeable, which gives reason to question the accuracy of the subject appraisal. Please note,
future submittals may be senf fo an outside consultant for peer review,
The revised report attached to this caver letter concludes thatthe value of the portion
of right of way to be vacated is $10,800 more than two and a half times the previous
report.
7. Clfy G/S utitity maps (see below) indicate water and sewer mains exist within the existing public right'of
way. Please show exisfrng City utilities located within the proposed sfreef vacation area, as well as other
dry utitities that may exisf such as power, phone, cable, etc. Additionally, please note that should the
right-of-way be vaçated, the City will either require easomenfs to be retained for utilitíes or deternine that
ownership of City utilities should be transferred to the private propefty owners,
The map showing the area proposed for vacation also includes the city water and sewer mains.
There are utility lines iusf oufside of the right of way and other private utilities are located oufside
the portion of the right of way to be vacated.
Page 3 tity of Ëdmonds tile No. P1N20180021Attachment 3
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 124 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
P$PJuly 11,2018
Thank you for accepting and reviewing this document as part of the requested street vacation. lf you should
need additional information in the processing and review of this submittal, please contact me at
lee.michaelis@pugetsoundplanning.com or (425) 830-1 046.
Sincerely,
Puget Sound Planning
Lee A. Michaelis, AICP
Page 4 City of Edmonds File No. P1N30180û21Attachment 3
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 125 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
a^27 tt.R3.è.
H;til,{îiüffiffi.:""
' s#f$î'ffii*t""*-,
.r", tru¡iy L yrwt, tu"rt Mfi m.t¿,¡¿g!Ét.SEA VIE\V
nffi;il,i*r,ii å nn-s&' [¡Ñn í-üx¡ta' bÄtt I'o¿ì. l,J€r¡ ¿
C T S !.rèrþ^r"kh*;,,ïî*'fa *H**w&IR Fûãí|r"::íiÉM PL'r Ávdumltld trÉttr i@6 ÐßdgrNltY ouaucåI ftï+J !Wêr../ Þ¡ørr
\d¡ñ tatt d Olidd n cd4 nlrl-iñatt ¡r wHlat, cdt Mu .t tut J kt1t.lût Se ttrte L1/Asetyarop U*ttttt¡o Poa¡tot
6ot¡aoat.¡ Lot N'¿
å
t
$
TRA
Scate ltucn - SOO aÿ7.
Morch -9 -t9ôó
ÐEt
ilr
I
\
Ctut 6tetn¿aas
I\
À
E(
ò
í
/,t c
tt ,o
^r' oY
ao-
-"-
,u{
.¡
,1,
4^
'o
f5ße 7tfc
heNil 8.
0fEid ¡p-?L *ntf'
4
{tùô
¡0
o
h,. rt"¿ ./'a.-..N 5.^ v''-NtN)tÉ{
ñ,
ì.ti\ \))
\"--\\-...t'rUr{'
r*twÃtø'rw
¿æÈ,lUrRre_.vdtñ.. l, 1.1 d oflici.l âæùd, Ea. lZ.?oE^il v. wrllrAÀts. cdnty r;l|Lfrí1
f...,t' tactet.s dt. fè4.*.àt.t.t.'ttu tã¿1t i^ Sà.hd-ö a..nlt
7,.^ì!
af/
lı1¿. ..|tr. a,ù.
./
f '. N..^ ê.. á.t/ ./ d.
A
c/ J".¿..',ù c.e.ù' V.!ô,.:¿...
ñ. &.'.tt'ant a44 /.¡.haã Ò/ ar/ a'.tr
t^,il.t.6 rá¡?..ù (q'in¿n'¿F L!ãt é.,r4 (a7) úutA
C.-J¿ ,^...tr) ÈÁt. rl tÁ. f,,tt..,.¿. ùr.irÀ^
fà. Á^.'"r. ^úÍ ô/ .A. ôoed|..t tuett . (et ft' b)
t$ ./, q 1ø. f,. (¿) lltht t.t6 ./ tl. ?th|',.J d¿ü4hi
ó..,à,-t - ê.fi,..ùt ı1 ¿P.'^t .^ Á. ."ì t'. '/t'¡tS.¡a,^ Ã,,h.ã /'t), -^'.1 f..ãt ¡t f.r-/..a ^4ô ñt'ìt ^"d¿,.¿dt(la.to| ./r.,.! l.i^ ./ *. tta,f.' rftnaã co'¡t, l¡l*'¡¡ sa¡
5dàil n,.¿..^ 'tt .nJ 5.¡n.1 Ãt^t..4 l.a/ t^ 7 af N 4 + 6 ,r'/
.¡)
"sü'
. ¿ã4 .rl^út
¿a.làtt d. ,,i^¿../. -.t tt|a.r ı 4. J.â'il. Âòr' þ'a¡â¡ã R^¡"nd
a.h/.,t- éJ Ad.t H.a/.,.ttr .n¿ -,/. ,t ttl d'tN ilt¿¿-tl" ¿tt
'.eo ../ ,...>d.J ¡\ vo... /ì .f Þ..rt ai P^t. atr y' d, 4.o'dt
v
54
.'td d. d,t¡¡ "^./ /"t"î;ù .l^ilt¡'r4
'...b .;{t."èr .4 ?t!.3 .F- dr/.... /
.t ¿à¡t .^¿ c..,.û ./. Jât4 5..à.,t tal
h, ...tod ò¡.¡t á.aò t'd,../.¿ ¿t/J ã'. ¡1.-ã ". ã. ?t"t .ù¿ d. r.¡^¡¡.û o/
*^... rtu'*û. .(.,.t 1-t'.abl
"/ ¡4. d.fe/,'.
rl l,
,\
bt
i..d. aaa fht d. t,..¿ .t..'.'¿'..t ,.,
/y'.. ",. ñ/.il¿ .. .ü¿ .oñ^..ı¿
oy' .1. f.'¿¿ 1/... â¿ ú. ñea ./ Êd',
/,,¡¡ ¡4¿¿. ¡1,,¡ta
Ac'.ãt. tl.*\ .. ã,i
t'¿".¿¡, lh ø.a4àtt ¡.ro,¿.d
".^
¿r,.
||..^ tÁ. ù.'.ttâ. ed .¡ ?4, f/.¿ ê/ nd. L.^¿t
.^d¿ .J aría¿^ùa ¿r Ì¿' P^ttè' ã41 M¿.^4.'
5a
>\
ù
¡t-
''
\
\
ù¡\
¡at ì t c"httaea Ô d. ..ãh, .f 'ta'ù '. ^4 '6J".
î 2'ilRJâ
ìl\,¡>'I
t\\
N\r
{
¡.
ñ\
!¡\ 't\\
I Þ
ul
é+
óJ
6l
77
,o
8t
A?
tt
+9
te
10
05
8+
6t
--Tl
i øt I
!
as an streets,not a suryey
modifìed by endorsement,any, the CompanYdepictcd. Except to the extenl a polioy oftille insurance is expressly
or olher mÊtters shown thereon.
does not insure dimensions, distances, locatiot"
Attachment 3
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 126 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
.\Ì'\tuey<lt¿¡ v g lg.n ,rò tott .'w/ rW .;;/îr¿'¿y;"",.:Tut logrr.a oz t¡¿J tqau.,¿ ¡t- ¿i' lo6t trôa tt¿tP'' øA rt*¿'a/ Qeias y..ú.r.!î Jè ¿..,..¿ ¿d Pr.þtt r.t r-r''rgl?oe/ tf)\¿w ¡/" loPp¿tcøy¡ î-'¿t.¡uu.' pua 2 én r:tu¿,2o¡d y4.,tx,p .ttú fe't, ./'¿.t.tfa/t"¿i:4/F "tdù¿ v.ll¿tt J.rl,v'J¿¿p.!îrd qfp,o/ao'¿ 7 g; 12zttouo2 \¡tto/aotz' ' ,ot/¿to¿¿l¿o¿ vt ¡:uo ltolttzç'3'tþn-tt7--L''.1 y¿¿ût,lt î toy ."¿1,,.p"a y'o vqs 4uôêJ yt.tz'téù¡ l¿.à¡orq Çu,oJ qJooq y /1t '!ûòr',t-_-_- ¡il¿ttu¡tt¡,ust¿ t.ttr¿cla a,'ry 'y¿ /è tñtJ,q¡¿À ç ¿ttltvto"'o' "'.u*¡ro, ,r, .,rt"a úuaÐ rt'N'puc /o '2'¿a'ril.¿t'o) $uaø¿ /a pto"7 ayt t7 pao,Jlyttttt'"s,litao2¿rlo7 't"'¡3gtat d V V-bw /. ¡lutt, .'g pt..ldL pú. Pt4,u¡EtX2*.tt rt a.'rr¡tt .øa¿rñ' ''.o.eg.ilsî{ !"t -ñ.!i'""¡lv.JoÙ,qî¿a !4 .¿uJçJ"N3 T,J9O 3lMON)'9Vil80¿¿tttya ote stattutsty¿ pttt¿l/t .Ju.t¿ry /.'a 9 '19 *,-u :lozoJeot r¿t u' ptôr.,t t9o2 a¿uttt'cl tr.g ,¿.àat tîa. t.!lÞpt r.yJ rø Æ4oA p'uc/o î"2ttù o Jo pa*o</ 4.p !îÐttuu /a p.toe/o úørapil! . þ t)'n /2 *y ectouo3 Ç yo.,/aot2 lttoc r,¡1 þ*ty. s."t,^'ao¿.tw ua.?¡ t¿uo) Pu! '1ta4t'rpø.2t ,auy' zqlaJty /o ti",p E ,¿"rryr¿r lgttty c.,p tut ¿a1ë ota1r>p /9uty ît6r..rt¿tdl at'4 v'5. co.onag-./c ¿"¡/ tty¡ dutculu'ot pu.¡¿¿v¿t ** /o ¿y'q'¡ e¿¡t'u' '.uãø ¿y|t 6t', Puù | a./6.ay..4 ¡.c ¿9¡ prctqr;¿r3. /.û.D rprð ¡..u'r4t y'ø oto¡J ¡"r''.--! qt &'.uy puo'us6u1yt16 e.ts' ¿yl l¿ h.r .y¿ ..su" La,,,, pur p,,'""Lê uoyotoúo: v tzttou,q ¿,,o¿/øt"2 ¿-g ¡J!.¡.¿J ...k, t, ,.¿,u //,, Àø,.N^.-- ! a,r /, O,,")¿NOILvJlAlO tt' |,,errriv,qq¡,io¿ç,s¿oltîpu't ¿u¿p.¡s¿¿¿ c¿t p¿o¡/*¿tct..v.¿¿Ã trt?¿ ¿e"a an4 2ar att ts ,..¡ ,ù. ru.( uc r.¡ .¿ù,t¿tt t.,/¡ /t.r.lz ft.91- .l.e,!rë.¿¿., ,¿r¡ /. .rt¡',4 to ?rt.a .ø t, o.!),¿.r.¿' r.ra...t,'.t?,r¡t.P t¿r.'r¿.p't¿¡r' lu,¡ù"r'ø.'¿e t9 l-yaa>.t u' 4plrt.Jn /2Vt"t!"uùù )ùt?'..¿d t't",tyt,/" t¿- a,". ,tr rt?! ynu' v.uút,p¿o P,"¡ q ..^dù9 1Pry/ùv.t¡',ty'o lor ryrú'at t9' tr¿.'/Jþ ry y'-ry¿ -r'p.¿t"t ¡oft¡ q2 ca rút, trilti)p,ìyq-ou2tø ¿/.t¿ p'v vúlt uoao'"J"2 p'"r/o f'n¿t,tt1 pt.lltct¡ e9ft¡2 ¡ør.y¿ ,v puv prt.!¿¿ú t.'¿'.p .¿!o¿¿N Fuo 1Þ1. tyt ,.y' :¿"¿sc¿ ia ,',."/è.Q P,eieW /- /'.r/r pu, tra ..ve¿!ó^ r,.o ¿"/.v""/ P"" ¡6 eê'¿ú)tP¿o 1-.'/vú¿1"!r'.èþ t")âtù ,t,fttlt.¿ ñw¿,¿¡C tut ¿.¿)a't..? y'ô¡.v lts ¿o9'ze o¿pî¿1-tuYcvy'þ¿tívà.t.s- 9.r tþ u¿¿/t..J þvî.t) p,ar.yJ ,y PûôtJù.P"tU yt"r tu 2,o/*tt5. 7 s Þ,¿¡ rW ,V lu.'tnlrt,P¿O î¿ttt.Jþôttt .V) pt¿.trt. ólb /ù. ,¿t ltrtrrúP'.þ.//Ò ,'t,orz¿¿ou.Jçpa/^"t2 /o r,"¿*tts 'er ry oJ ua.ur tu,E p,"./^"t2 usû¡3¿,ùotlu¿l'¡ry .g.roJ .arer r- "¿ p,"./^"'2 a î P¿¿w¿¿r 't"a.!.,y'','.!îe,trrÁ!" ¿tvs',v¿ ..J pilo n' tttkl úor¿il. 2tn6ttttpua ¿vJ tu/ ¿¿ó/'1 ,o.t ø vv¿.!d /. h2 ,,é t.,y¿ ,c t"y¿ t/t.e'vs' e.v¿!t"rlì:II.t'lI./{î¡?. fl¡ìr:l'tr..,) _,2","1...ù'l"li,.lI!liril.¡tsciì{5tqlìJJII.tt I et:F_ar!lru4'n,"r¡ r o.tt,n, L-,li 'iii:*:.#îHüilr.¡¡¡,,",r r .ã¡!,u .ni,,¡,¡¡t r/,"rJ'r.þ.9ñ¡ rrì¡s¡çtrrA to Çt tat¡,rr, J, o ;?r:l:d.¿!t. ru 5ú rrr ¡o ¡vJd¡¡ ,y6¿2 atot tr¿p¿¿J 4.4:rlItt1 g îòì+æIIfItlt¿tzìeIIffittd¿f,"*.. itf ifl\.1ttatsL1t9Ag¿13¿¿tet¿ao?9¿?¿antostrccts,notsurveymod¡fiedbycndorsemenl,ifany'theCompanydepicted.Excepttoth€ €xtentpolicyof rirlernsurance tsexpresslyorÒthermãll€fsshowhthereon.doesñottnsu¡edimensions,distances,locationofeåsem€nls,Attachment 36.1.aPacket Pg. 127Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
ÐfilBlT A - Legal Description for Right-of-Way VacationTHAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST OUARTER OF SECTION 13,TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, W.M., MORE PARTICULARLY DËSCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:COMMENCING AT THE SOUTH EAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE NORTH 0O'18'06'EAST ALONG THE EAST IINE THEREOF A DISTANCE OF 37O.BO FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OFBEGINNING AND THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 1 OF CITY OF EDMONDS BOUNDARY LINEADJUSTMENT RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 199912175W7 AND CORRECTIONTHERFTO UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 2011041s0312; THENCE SOUTH 83"52'21" WEST ALONGTHE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1 A DISTANCE OF 509.23 FEET TO THE NORHTWESTERLYCORNER OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE NORTH 06"13''13" WEST 20.00 FEFI-; THENCE NORTH83"52'21" EAST 511.52 TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 13; THENCE SOUTH00'18'06" WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE A DISTANCE OF 20.13 FEET TO THE POINT OFBÊGINNING.SITUATE IN THE COUNWOF SNOHOMISH, STATE OFWASHINGTON.ÐECETT¿ErMAR i; 20lgr-ffi¡¡p;.Attachment 46.1.aPacket Pg. 128Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
A PORTON OF rHE S-E. 1/4 OF THE S-E.. 1/4 OFsEcïoN 13, ï.27N., R-5E-, w'M.SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTONï.P-O.8.O)NOOl8'06"Es.w. coR. GoyT LoT 4sEc'noN coR. 18-27-4MONUMENT NOT FOUNDPOSIÏON ESTABUSH BYTHE PLAT OF SEAVIEWPINES NO. 2, VOL 59, PG. 170Þ.ÐÞÕ¡r]Irrr'-o\ffl(¡'u,l.J\jo-É"ON'MESCALE-1"=100'^&tr{TBT?RffiËeEjvEDTri-CountyLand Surveying Company4610 200th St. S.W. Suite ALynnwood, Wo. 98036 (425\776-2926 Fox:776-2850UNE TABLEBEARINGsoola'06"wN06'1J'13"wLENG'fH20.1320-ooLINEL1L2TO BE VACA'IEDRIGHT-OF_WAY$utt$H.g¿ú20'lg"""1ffif¡¡p 1',.Attachment 46.1.aPacket Pg. 129Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 5
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 130 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
v,Ë
Ëan=og
þ luÊx
Uz v0
2rF".2ZU<É
f ñ:Éa-Z y Sa5*3:z< ¡¡ s'\I' <
-J t- trl ;ir^. lO¡¿]3\Jrrì < GØrto J ÈF-:;iEL!ñ<{U ıÈ
ô-
à=oëÈui
ËÈË
Ë=Ësi ÌË3
S Ëi.P
$ñF*qyØO È¡tòòì$sñu
JIIAWN UAIE:
oJ/12/2ots
)MWN BY:
LN
;HLCKLD BY:
Uil
INC.
TERRACE,
2411J 56TH
AVE W
MOUNTUKE
]K(NLÇI NU,
2016-48
Î'CALE
l'= 200'
ïHEET NAME
SITE MAP
ìHEET NUMBER
lofl
54
4
g-o29
UNPUTTED
UNOPENED RIGHT OF WAY
5
55
3-O38
UNPIÀTTED
3-O50
UNPUTTED59
vTO
*-r*
ROWFROMRADIUS
n*of
,*Ñ 57
56
OPEN
3-OO1
UNPIÀTTED
2
o-o99
UNPUTTED
9
3-o51\t lto
1 \3-O20
TEDVACAROW TO BE
4
SPs- l 2-81
ROW
FROM
!'f.l¡ ril¡¡l,tl,l'::.: I ¡-,; ¡,, I:
l
I
i
I
i
1
l
1
I
J
II
I
t5¡{ j
I
J
!
ì
.
i':.i:f
,ß¿4 |
i.. \, t, ,.
il
¡:iiìlj;iÌ
I
)l
')
ì
I
¡
Iì
t
ì'
J,I+
;
I
I
\.
..i'
¡
:
j
i
1
1
I
¡
I
lt
I
:
I
i i,..
:.,
it..
l:II
iì
iìili1
l
li
rlt,.i i''.
I
ii
i r¡ ¡ ì t.i \,¡r,,'
I
¡
t;".: ",i i.i,:tiil t :
II
I
I
I
I
!
¡
I
1
t
lt..
1
I
I
I
Him.
Attachment 6
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 131 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTYReport Number A-5590TOGATED AT19511 94th PIWEdmonds, WA 98020FORDeanne Landsverk19511 94rh Pr WEdmonds, WA 98020oPliltolt oF vAtuEof Risht of Way Vacation - $10,800AS OFJune 29,2018BYJames B. Price, MAl, SRM/A, Andrew F. SorbaAppraisalGroup of the NW1409 140th St NE, Suite 105Bellevue, WA 98007425453-9292jprice@appraisalg roupnw.comappraisalgroupnw.comAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 132Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
BonowerFile No. A-5590Property Address 19511 94th pt WCityEdmondsCount! g¡eþe¡¡s¡State wA Zip Code 98020Lender/Client Deanne LandsverkTABTE OF GOl{TEilTSCover PaqeGP LandAdditional Comparables 4-6Supplemental Addendum ...,Subiect PhotosSubiect PhotosAddenda AAddenda BLocation MapComparable Photos 1-3Comparable Photos 4-6Ceftifications & Limiting Conditions - ResidentialAppraise/s Oualificatrons - Page 1Appraise/s 0ualifications - Page 212367II101112131415171819Attachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 133Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Appraisal Group of the NorthWest LLP, 9 l -1 704802,(425)453'9292PRAISAL REPOFile No.:Change in Land UseX NotLikelyI Likely * f] ln Process ** To:5%2-4 UnitPresent Land Useone-Unit 70%5%Multi-UnitComm'l 10%Recreational 5%5%VacantThethistoanof: Market Value0r otherOne-Unit HousingPRICE AGE$(000) (yrs)220 Low New6 403 Hiqh 1001.200 Pred 28uqùvr ru!This reflects thevaluenolseeCunentDate is the EffectivePredominantOccupancyX OwnerE Tenant! Vacant (0-5%)! Vacant (>5%)monthHOA:OtherFeeLeaseholdLeased Fee0ther1951 IEdmondsWA98020St SW to the north. turnino south at Washinoton State Hiohwav 525 and intersectinolnterstate 5 to the east. Washinoton State Hiohwav 104 to the south. and Puoet Sound to the west.Market Area Comments: The area bounded bv 1Deanne Landsverk and Citv of Edmondslntended Use(s) (by name ortype)Client DeanneLandsverkAddress: 19s11 94th PtW, Edmonds,wA 98020Aooraiser: James B. Price. MAl. SR A/AAddress: 1409 l40th St NE Suite 105. Bellevue, WA 98007CharacteristicsLocation: IUrban XSuburban ERuralBuiltup: ffi Over75% ll25-75V, I Under2S%Growth rate: X Rapid X Sta¡te I SlowProperty values: X lncreasing E StaUe I DecliningDemand/supply: X Shortage I ln Balance I OverSupplyMarketinq time:, X Under 3 Mos. f] g-6 lt¡os. fl Over 6 Mos.ItenEmployment StabilityConvenience to EmploymentConvenience to ShoppingConvenience to SchoolsAdequacy of Public TransportationRecreational FacilitiesGoodxxxxTxAveragetrluTxnFair Poor N/At]TTTtrTTtrTTTTTTTt=lnnItenAdequacy of UtilitiesProperty CompatibilityProtection from Detrimental ConditionsPolice and Fire ProtectionGeneral Appearance of PropertiesApoeal to MarketGoodxTTxxxtrxxTtrTFairTTtrtrTTPoorunTTTTN/AnnTTTnAverageFactors Affec{in g Ma*etabilityED BLA REC AFN 1999121201104130312Assessois Parcel #:TaxYear: 2018 R.E. Tues:Assessments: $Market Area Name:ReferenceCensus Tract 0503.Cunent 0wner of Record: Deanne LandsverkBonowerProiect Type (if applicable): [l pU0 E De Minimis PUD IAre there any existing improvements to the property? E No X yes lf Yes, indicate current occupancy:X Owner I Tenant I Vacant I Nothabitableresidence with a 1 ,1 38 Sq. Ft. attachedcarnort all built in 2001. The home has three bedrooms and four bathrooms. Forino value is not imoacted bv the rioht of wav vacation: therefore the dwellinq will maintain the same valueannraiealrrñ^eêcnt.,^^^¡^¡before the riqht of wav vacation occurs and after the riqht of way isThe site is improvedoarâoe. 1.592 So.Ft. detached oaraoe. and 384Ft.a 4.132 So.Ft. AGLA 2 storv sinqle familvthe dwellof thislf Yes, give a brief description:fair markat rrah re nf lhp rinhl nf wav fn he vacafedlntended Use: Estimate theDescriotion: Section 13 Townshio 27 Ranoe 03 Quarter SE - EDMONDS SEA VIEWCITY OF ED BLA 5-9.89 REC AFN 8906200263 EXC TH PTN DAF:BEG AT SE COR OF SD PAR B THN23* 06 18W178.53FT TH N42* 18 1 1E 106.86FT TO NE COR OF SD LOTB & E LN OF SEC TH SOO* 2621W ALG SD E LN 243.25FT TOLeqalBLK OOO D-05 - PAR B OFCountv: SnohomishTÞAl1TqCopyright@ 2007 by a la mode, inc. This form may be reproduced unmodified without writtenGPLANDForm GPLND LT - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAM0DEmust312007Attachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 134Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
LANDL REPORTFile No.:Copyrìght@ 2007 by a la mode, inc. This form may be reproduced unmodified without wrìtten permission, however, a la mode, inc. nlust be acknowledgedForm GPLND LT -"T0TAL'appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAM0DEUtilitiesElectricityGasWaterSanitary SewerStorm SewerTelephoneMultimediaPublicxxxxxxStreet\/vidthSurfaceCurb/GutterSidewalkt._Corner Lotlnside LotGood0therUuateABpears Adgqnd UtilitiesFrontagePublic PrivateTopographyx¡Cul de SacOther site elementsSizeShapeDrainageViewl-0ther Provider/DescriptionlrçsllqrOtf-sitelmprovements TYPeStreet LightsSjqnifican!$loping3.28 acrerslr4th Plw-1-1234.541.5812t23t16Edmonds+1 10COMPARABLE NO. 2Snohomish/R101622175thPtW73.67mil2.81+141et Sound0007+11+Net990+50$NE-LNet2+130.06ificantFeeGoodi q .1 , 1, -0_0_,$ roo1.981Il-evelNNWMLS 6864191.13 miles NEN0. 37704 Olympic View DrwA 98026Snohomish/RS12Tr3NWMLS 861235Fee Sit16+(DESCRIPTIONNoneCOMPARABLE NO. 1DESCRIPTIONNone6.843.219.319.3X+NetNWMLS 869808Cou¡ty8eçSrdq¿lSe¡l16 XXX 76th Ave WEdmonds. WA 98026r$ 9?9,Address 19s1 1 94th Pt wnificant SlGood-Pu SoundPROPERTYnlaFeetntoViewNetmeDESCRIPTIONRecordsFEATUREwA 98020Sale PricePrice/ AcreVALUE ADJUSTMENTLocationSite AreaData Source(s)Verification Source(s)Sales or FinancingConcessionsFEMA Soec'l Flood Hazard Area r Yes X No FEMA Fl00d Zone XFEMA Map # 53061C1305EFEMA Map Date 1 1/08/1 999Site Comments: The site is deveþpedlrylllaqlnglq famrly leqidç!çq, lClached Sa@Sq, qnq privatelqedtVay- Tbe dwellinçrc¡d 4etachellevel area of the parcel, the þClê!çq Sllhq pqrcel lLaqqIS¡lIS qS¡ificallslopinq. The qite he! !ee! !!!ptoveì withmainder of the pqfcel haq lleIute tqllye gro!4h-oâraoe are built on aThe reificant landscaDo present improvements comply with existing zoning requirements? f, Yes - l\o Ll No lmprovements12Uses allowed under cunent zoning: ResidentialZoningClassification: RSDescription: l dtyellittg BCII2,000 S!.EI,Are CC&Rs applicable? I Yes [l No X Unknown Have the documents been reviewed?Comments:I Yes X No Ground Rent (if applicable) $ /The site is developed with an estate style residenceithis is the higheqt and !e9!uqe-0ther use (explain)nole Familv ResidenceHighest & Best Use as improved: X Present use, orActual Use as of Effective Date: iSummary of Highest & Best Use:Use as appraised in this reporl Vacant LqndDimensions: See Plat MSite Area:3.28 AcresooÉ,Èo.zoat,É,d=ooor¡¡(t,zot-ÈÉ,oøt¡¡c¡l¡¡tsøGDLAND312007Attachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 135Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
LAND APPRTCopyright@ 2007 by a la mode, inc. This form mayA-5590mode, inc. must be acknowledged and credited.SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (if required)E-Mail: ioricetOaooraisalorouDnw.comta¡/': 42s-4ss-974oI Did Not lnspect07to5t2019Aooraisal Grouo of the NWCompany:07to5t2018Date of Report (Signature):applicableor co-APPRAISER (ifState: WAPhone: 425-453-9292Designation:Supervisory orCo-Appraiser Name:Expiration Date of License or Certification:lnspection of Subiect N Did lnspectDate of lnspection: June 29.2018License or Certification #: 1002080Analysis of sale/transfer history and/or any cunent agreement of sale/listing:There has been no sale of the subiectl/êârcthreeneclwithin theEclmonds WA 98020Address: 19511 94th Pt W,E-Mail: deanne(@loh-inc.comClient Name: Deanne LandsverkClient Contact Deanne LandsverkName: James B. Price. MAl. SRM/AE-Mail: ioricerôaooraisalorouonw.comState: WAX Did Not lnspect (DesKop)Fal/.: 42s-4s5-974o06t13t2019Ø./^*APPRAISERPhone: 425-4sg-9292Appraiser07to5t2018Date of Report (Signature):Aooraisal Grouo of the NWCompany:MAIDesignationExpiration Date of License or Certification:lnspection of Subject f, Did tnspectDate of lnsoection: June 29.2018License or Certification #: 1100229fl This reoort is also subiect t0 other Hvoothetical Conditions and/or Extraordinary Assumptions as specified in the attached addenda.This appraisal is made X "as is", 0r I subiecttothe following conditions:Based upon an inspection of the sub¡ect property, defined Scope of Work, Statement of Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, and Appraise/s Certifications'my (ouri 0pinion öf the Market Valúe (ór ôthei specified vaiue type), as def¡ned herein, of the real property.tfa! is the--subiect.gf q!.report is: .$ - ' 1,000,000 ,asof: June 29,2018 , which is the effective date of this appraisal.If indicated above, this Ooinion of Value is subiect to Hvpothetical Conditions and/or Extraordinary Assumptions included in this repoñ. See attac[QllAdC9llla.A true and complete copy of this report contains 19 pages, including exhibits which areproperly understood without reference to the information contained in the complete report, which contains the following attached exhibits: I Scope of WorkX timiting cond./Certifications X Nanative Addendum X Location Map(s) I nooO Addendum I Additional Salesconsidered an integral part of the report. This appraisal report may not beI Hypothetical ConditionsX ParcelMaoX Photo Addendaf-l ExtraordinarvAssumotions X Aooraise/s0ualificationsMy research I did N did not reveal any prior sales or transfers of the subject property for the üree years prior to the efiective date of thisappraisalData Source(s): Countv Records. NWMLS1st Prior Subiect SaleÆransferDate: None in the previous 3 vearPriceSource(s):2nd Prior Subiect Sale/IransferDate:Price:Source(s)deweloned bêær¡se it is not a rêliâble indiætion of mârket velue: and for this tvoe of assionment. it does not produce meaninqful results. Theof a Planned Unitwh¡ch wasISTheselesbecausenotfL^fhis tvoe of Drooertv is nôt oenerâllv used for income oeneration. and the results would not bein thiswas notll. The costFinal ReconciliationDescribe common elements and recreational facilities:PROJECT INFORMATION FOR PUDsName of$lndicated Valuesize. and tooooraohv adiustments have been made based on statistical analvsis of2 3 are considered most similar to the subiect and have been oiven orimary valuation weiqht. SalesSale I isarrrentlvIS4and5fha ¡nmnafifir¡asiteisted on NWMLS 1265549 for $1.200.000. and with 464 CDOM, thelikalrr lnn hinh fnr nr rrrenl markct narticinanfsliclinn nrinphave been oiven secondarv valuationmarkel area. Sales 1indicates thelann awnacr rra limaGPLANDForm GPLND LT - "TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAM0DE312007Attachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 136Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
+G) $ Adiust$$$COMPARABLE NO.6$DESCRIPTIONll +il+Gì S Adiust+120.000-130 000-117.500+100.000$ -zz.soc$ r.r¿z.soo$ t tzs ooofl + X-anahamiah/trÞDÞQAveraoe-TerritorialCOMPARABLE NO.511521 N Dogwood LnWoodwav- WA 980202.18 miles SW$ zøzzza¡sNWMLS 965629Countv Records/AoentDESCRIPTIONNone10t27t16Fee SimoleWoodwav448Generallv Level+ l-) $ Adiust+30.000-255.000+100 000s -125.000875.000$$ r.ooo.ooo12t15t17Fee SimpleLake Forest Park5.6Sionificant SlooinoKino/RS9600Averaoe-Territorialfl+ XCOMPARABLE NO.419031 40th Pt NELake Forest Park- WA 981555.11 miles SE$ rzs 871 43NWMLS 114U15Countv Records/AoentDESCRIPTONNoneSUBJECT PROPERTYnla$$County RecordsDESCRIPTIONnlanlaFee SimoleEdmonds3.28Sionificant SlooinoSnohomish/RS12Good-Puqet SoundNet Adiustnent lTotal. in $)Adiusted Sale Price fin $ìSummary of Sales Comparison ApproachFEATUREAddress 19511 94th pt WEdmonds, WA 98020Proximitv to SubieclSale PricePrice/ AcreData Source(s)Verification Source(s)VALUE ADJUSTMENTSales or FinancingConcessionsDate of Sale/timeRiohts AopraisedLocationSite Area lin Acres)TooooraohvCountvZoninoViewNAL MPARABLE SALESmayFile No.:however, a la mode, inc. must be acknowledged and credited.GPLANDForm GPLND LT.(AC) -'T0TAL" appraisalsoftware by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAM0DE312007Attachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 137Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
RnrrnwprPrnoertvArklress 19511 94th PIWCitvEdmondsCountv SnohomishStateWA Zio Code 98020A-5590Valuation Analysis of Road Vacationln order to estimate the value of the land and percentage of value we've utilized the "across the fence" technique, we mustfind comparable land sales to the subject and determine what rights were conveyed.Fee-Simple real estate comes with a "bundle of rights", which includes the right of possession, the right of control, the rightof exclusion, the right of enjoyment, and the right of disposition. Whenever one or more of these rights is impinged upon,the value of a piece of real estate is decreased. The traditional bundle of rights is:.Right of Possession: Very basically put, this is basic use of the property. This right can be impinged upon through thegovernment's Police power, Right of Eminent Domain, Taxation, and Escheat..Right of Control: This right allows the property owner the ability to manage the use of the property in any means deemedlegal within the jurisdiction(s) in which the property exists..Right of Exclusion: This right allows the property owner the ability to limit who or what may enter their property..Right of Enjoyment: This right asserts the property owner's right to participate in any lawful activities he finds pleasurablewhile on the property..Right of Disposition: This right allows the property owner to rent, lease, or sell, permanently or temporarily, fully orpartially, the property rights owned.The owner still retains the partial right of possession and the right of enjoyment. The right of way vacation would revert allother rights back to the subject.The proposed right of way vacation area includes the area described in Exhibits A and B, an estimated total area of 10,240sq ft (20.065'x 510.375').Based on our above land value analysis, the subject land value is estimated at $7 per square foot, when all rights areconveyed in a Fee Simple lnterest. While the subject and sales are potentially sub dividable based on zoning, this wouldnot represent the highest and best use. Therefore, we must treat the the additional land is as surplus, which is typicallyless valuable than excess land. Additionally, some rights are still held by the subject owner, it would not be appropriate tovalue the reverting land rights at 100% of value. The easement itself provides little public utility as it stands; this area hasbeen left almost entirely unused by the public since the creation of the right of way. Due to significant sloping in the right ofway vacation area, and limited utility, usability, and marketability, we estimate that the value associated with the rightsreverting to the subiect owner to be 15o/o.Right of Way Vacation Area: 10,240sqftMarket Value of Land: $7/sqftReverting Value of Land: 15%10,240sqft x $7/sqft x 15o/o = $10,800 (R)$10,800 - Estimated Value of Right of Way VacationAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 138Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Subiect Photo PageBonowerProperty Address 1951 1 94th Pt WCitvEdmondsCounty SnohomishState wA Zip Code 98020Deanne LandsverkSubiect Front19511 94th Pt WSales PriceGross Living AreaTotal RoomsTotal BedroomsTotal BathroomsLocationViewSite0ualityAgeSubiect Rear$ubieet StreetAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 139Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Subiect Photo PageBonowerPropertv Address 19s11 94th Pt WCrtyEdmondsCounty SnohomishState WA ZipCode 98020Lender/Client Deanne LandsverkRight of Way to be VacatedSales PriceGross Living AreaTotal Roomsïotal BedroomsTotal BathroomsLocationViewSite0ualityAgeRight of Way to be VacatedRight of Way to be VacatedAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 140Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Addenda AÐfilBfT A - bgal Desaiptim for Rightd-\ryay VacationTHAT POR-TTON OF THE SOUTHEST SUARTER OF T}E SOUTHEAST OIIARTEF OF SECNON 13,TOWNSHIP 27 NOHTH. RANGE 3 EAST. W.M., MORE PAFITICULAFLY DESCRIBÊÐ A.S FOLLOWS:COMMÊNüNG AT.ÍT{E SC{.JT}I EAST CÛRNER OF SAID SECTON 13: T}IËNCË NORTI{ 0(118,06'FAST ALONG lHE EAST UNE 1TIERÊOF A DISTANCE OF 370.80 FEET TO THE TFUE POINT OFBEGINMNG AND TþlE NORTHEÀST CffiNEB OF LOT 1 OF CÍTY OF EDI,IOND€ BOUNDAFY UNEÄDJUSTMENT RECOFDED UNDER AUDÍIORS FltE NO. 190912175007 AtlD COBHECnONttEFE[O UNDEH AUDÍfORS F¡tE NO. æ1 104130312; THENCE SOUTH 8f5U21 " WEST ALONG.IHE NORTTI IJNE OF SAIÐ LOT 1 A D]STANCE OF s{XI.æ FEEÍ TO THE NORI-ITWESTERI.YCOHNER OF SAID LOT 1; 'IFIENCE NORIH 06"13'13" WEST 20.00 FEFf; TIIENCE NORTH8815â21" EAST 511 .52 TO A POINT ON THE EAST UNE OF SAID SECTON 13i .IHENCE SOUTHtr15!6- WEST ALONG SAID EAST UNE A DISÍANCE OF æ.13 FEET TO THE PO]NT OFEGINNING.STUA:TE IN lHE COUNTY OF g\¡OI-OM]SH, STATE OF WASHINGTON.Form SCNLTR - 'TOTAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAM0DEAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 141Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Addenda BILEtsLATIINGsÕo1a'06'wN(161-'l'13"wLLNS ¡H20.1320.00LINLL1L?"-.T"-é^ "$Y-RIGHT-OF-WAYBÊ VACAÌÊDA PORTON OF'rì-{Ë S.E. 1/4 OF THE S.E. 1/4 WsEcTroN 13. T.27N.. R.3E., W.M.SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTONT'P'O'B' NoolB'06'E370.os.w. coR. coyT LoT 4sEcnoN coR. 18-27-4MOI.IUMENT NOT FOUNDPOSÌOl.l ÊSlABUslr BY]}IE PLAÍ OF SEAVIEWPTNES NO. 2, VOL. 59. PG. 170Þ.ì-rrì{I*z\-lo-\IscALE-r"=100'.&W[RNRTri-CounLand Surveying4610 200th st. s.w.tyCompanySuite ALyrnwood, Wo. 98056 (423)776-2526 Fox:776-2850H.of\9Form SCNLTR - "T0TAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAM0DEAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 142Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Location MapCounty SnohomishDeanne LandsverkEdmondsState wA Zio Code 98020BonowerAddress 19s1 I 94th Pt wa ta mode, incjn#lhtlåf ûa¡ffiiëtKrtÉyfnrefcily ¡ùt¡,tu,PtsçessiDnAÀf,rC1ÊfoinrFråtri- 5ñffrtffrrth füÉ,TF.ü.ïMukilteoHarbour FointF7-tFdrlnsnt IiH Ì/ rfl{lrq -l-' -.ä¡':g=;';i: .î,TllJrh irriït,99..'ì4ù&E:tr3i1üii!Murp"ttysf+merMe¡dolr¡dalejJtlr.l! f'l3ûHl 5r,|{! Ë,, þ !,:¡þy.rt;-.;¡.'rzìì¡n¿lare qåj}sManorL¡kq Fqrest P-¿rk:?lSher¡d¿n BeadhBnercr.Erl¿qÈ:il{d'\¡f¡Kenmcire,Mcorl¡rndst¡kr Pút!r .'#Jlh t-5tir")U¡r;ñ'r't¡r¿tqËr-r{rE-q+¡{!î!o:'trnyon Ferk:?:lCreelr!r iE5*-4fo.::-+;'t'¿ì,qìÞf{enn¡rdCÕmEfBothelVfãyr,rù¿l¿lü¡n,J.ftbtfeEsperanceTle l{ighfanoså¡:.f,¡Jr,14¿,'dEt+R\. HrohlandsShoreltne " ;'td slr 5!il¿úÞr¡Ð=tt-]¿n rÌ,;'4oãqûÞg4rlParËwoad.tû{.rq *{il f[Il'+å lr;räÉs _ ..l.lmt.iü-3 Ê.äIaflEfiEczals fiFc¡o--ofi Êmpdion"sl¡gtnrtrÐL--COI|PARABLE Ho. il.16221 75$ Pl WZ"3o mlles NE16 XXX 76th Ave W1..52 miles 5ENo, I7704 olympic View Drl,13 mlles NE319031 4ûft pl NË5,1I miles SENo.419511 94th Pl W11521 N Dogwood Ln¿.r8 rn¡lËs 5WCOI,IPARABLE No".hS6r**,'r+dæi¡-¡¿'-ÊÊl.[:+rAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 143Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Gomparable Photo PageBonowerAddressWCouState WACodeDeanneGomparable 116 XXX 76th Ave WProx. to Subject 1.52 miles SESale Price 920,000Gross Living AreaTotal RoomsTotal BedroomsTotal BathroomsLocation EdmondsViewSite 1.980ualrtyAgeGomparable 21622175t11PlWProx. to Subject 2.30 miles NESale Price 830,000Gross Living AreaTotal RoomsTotal BedroomsTotal BathroomsLocation EdmondsViewSite 2.810ualityAgeGomparable 37704 Olympic View DrProx. to Subiect 1.13 miles NESale Price 1,100,000Gross Living AreaTotal RoomsTotal BedroomsTotal BathroomsLocation EdmondsViewSite 4.690ualityAgeAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 144Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Gomparable Photo PageBorrowerPropertv Address 1951 1 94th pt wCitvEclmondsCounty SnohomishState WA Zip Code 98020Deanne LandsverkGomparable 419031 40th Pt NEProx. to Subiect 5.1 1 miles SESale Price 1,000,000Gross Living AreaTotal RoomsTotal BedroomsTotal BathroomsLocation Lake Forest ParkViewSite 5.60ualityAgeGomparable 511521 N Dogwood LnProx. to Subiect 2.18 miles SWSale Pdce 1 ,175,000Gross Living AreaTotal RoomsTotal BedroomsTotal BathroomsLocation WoodwayViewSite 4.480ualityAgeGomparable 6Prox. to SubiectSale PdceGross Living AreaTotal RoomsTotal BedroomsTotal BathroomsLocationViewSite0ualityAge$i cr¡FAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 145Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
A-5590Deanne Landsverk19511 94th Pl W, Edmonds, WA 98020MARKET VALUE is defined as the most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditionsrequisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus.lmplicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditionswhereby:1. buyer and seller are typically motivated;2. both parties are well informed or well advised and acting in what they consider their own best interests;3. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market;4. payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and5. the price represents the normal consideration forthe property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted byanyone associated with the sale.Source: The Dictionary of Real Eslate Appraisal, 5th ed., Appraisal lnstituteThis appraisal is subjectto the following assumptions and limiting conditions:. Th¡s report is prepared using forms developed and copyrighted by the Appraisal lnstitute. However, the content, analyses, and opinions setforth in this reporl are the sole product of the appraiser. The Appraisal lnstitute is not liable for any of the content, analyses, or opinions setforth herein.. No responsibility is assumed for matters legal in character or nature. No opinion is rendered as to title, which is assumed to be good andmarketable. All existing liens, encumbrances, and assessments have been disregarded, unless otherwise noted, and the property isappraised as though free and clear, having responsible ownership and competent management.. I have examined the property described herein exclusively for the purposes of identification and description of the real property. The objectiveof our data collection is to develop an opinion of the highest and best use of the sublect property and make meaningful comparisons in thevaluation of the property. The appraiser's observations and reporting of the subject improvements are for the appraisal process and valuationpurposes only and should not be considered as a warranty of any componenl of the property. This appraisal assumes (unless otherwisespecifically stated) that the subject is structurally sound and all components are in working condition.r I will not be required to give testimony or appear in court because of having made an appraisal of the properly in question, unless specificarrangements to do so have been made in advance, or as otherwise required by law.. I have noted in this appraisal report any significant adverse conditions (such as needed repairs, depreciation, the presence of hazardouswasles, toxic substances, etc.) discovered during the data collection process in performing the appraisal. Unless otherwise stated in thisappraisal report, I have no knowledge of any hidden or unapparent physical deficiencies or adverse conditions ofthe property (such as, butnot limited to, needed repairs, deterioration, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, adverse environmenlal conditions, etc.)that would make the property less valuable, and have assumed that there are no such conditions and make no guarantees or warranties,express or implied. I will not be responsible for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineering or testing that might be required todiscover whether such conditions exist. Because I am not an expert in the field of environmental hazards, this appraisal report must not beconsidered as an environmental assessment of the property. I obtained the information, estimates, and opinions furnished by other partiesand expressed in this appraisal reportfrom reliable public and/or private sources that I believe to be true and correcl.¡ I will not disclose the contents of this appraisal report except as provided for in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice,and/or applicable federal, state or local laws.. The Client is the party or parties who engage an appraiser (by employment contract) in a specific assignment. A party receiving a copy of thisreportfrom the client does not, as a consequence, become a party to the appraiser-client relationship. Any person who receives a copy ofthis appraisal report as a consequence of disclosure requirements that apply to an appraiser's client, does not become an intended user ofthis report unless the client specifically identified them at the time of the assignment. The appraiser's written consenl and approval must beobtained before this appraisal report can be conveyed by anyone to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or othermedia.' lf this valuation conclusion is subject to satisfactory completion, repairs, or alterations, it is assumed that the improvements will becompleted compelently and without significant deviation.STATEMENT OF ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONSVALUE DEFINITIONthe data, analysis or any other work product provided by the individual appraise(s).Al Reports@ Al-900.04 Certification, Assumptions and Limiting Conditions @ Appraisal lnstitute 2013, All Righls Reserved January 2013Form A19004 - "T0TAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAM0DEAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 146Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
A-5590Client File #:AppraisalHle #:Deanne Landsverk195'11 94th Pl W, Edmonds, WA 98020ClientSubþct Property:Andrew F. SorbaØ.,/^*SR^/vADate oTtost2olqReportCO-APPRAISERAPPRAISERSignatureCertified Residential E Certified General IState WACertified Residential X Certified General EState WASignatureNameExpirationDate 06t13t2019ExpirationDate 0Tt0st201sTrainee I Licensed ELicense # 1100229Trainee X Licensed ELicense # 1002080Report Date 0710512018Name James B.' I am a Designated Member of the Appraisal lnstitute.As of the date of this report, I have completed the continuingeducation program of the Appraisal lnstitute.' I am not a Member, Candidate or Practicing Affiliate of theAppraisal lnstitute.I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and conect.r The reported analysis, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the report assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal,unbiased professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions.. I have no present (unless specified below) or prospective interest in the property that is the subiect of this report, and I have no (unlessspecified below) personal interest with respect to the parties involved.. I have no bias with respect to any property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment.. My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon the developing or reporting predetermined results.r My compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or directionin value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a slipulated result, or the occurrence of asubsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal.. My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards ofProfessional Appraisal Practice.r lndividuals who have provided significant real property appraisal assistance are named below. The specific tasks performed by those namedare outlined in the Scope of Work section of this report.X None tr Name(s)As previously identified in the Scope of Work section of this report, the signer(s) of this report certify to the inspection of the property that isthe subiect of this repoft as follows:Property inspected by Appraiser I Yes X NoProperty inspected by Co-Appraiser X Yes :l No. Services provided, as an appraiser or in any other capacity, regarding the propefi that is the subject of this report within the three-yearperiod immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment X None I Specify services provided:Appraisal lnstitute Designated Member, Candidate for Designation, or Practicing Affiliate Certify:. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements ofthe Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal lnstitute, which include the lUniformStandards of Professional Appraisal Practice.. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal lnstitute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives.the data, analysis or any other work product provided by the individual appraise(s).Al Reports@ Al-900.04 Certification, Assumptions and Limiting Condilions @ Appraisal lnstitute 2013, All Rights Reserved January 2013Form 419004 -'TOTAL" appraisalsoftware by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAM0DEAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 147Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Appraiser's Qualifications - Page 1Qulrmc.lrrons or Arrn¡rsnnJrn'ms B. Pntct, MAf, SRYWÄwww.Af?ß rsAr,GRorip¡tw.coM ; JPRTcE(AAr"ßA¡sALGnouPhIvy.coMPtroNf, No.: (425) 4ß-9Ð2Blrr #ll0; FrxNo. 625¡ 45"ntn01409 140" Pr.tcn ITE, SrT l0s,Bu^rævur" WÀ 9E0ø-3963EDUCATIONBachelor of Science in Finance, Real Estate Ernphasis; Northem lllinois Univenity/Unive,rsity of lllinois.Appraisal Institutß cou$¡es include Capitalization fr*ty, Residential Valuation, EasementValuation, Uniform Appraisal Standa¡ds for Federal Lan<l Acquisitions, and Standardsof Professional Practice.Seminars and Classes inchrde: AI Course 833- Fundamentals of Separating Real Property,Penonal Property and Intangible Business Assets, Real Estate Feasibility, Busi¡essValuation, Valuation of Easements and Litigation Skills, and Appnaisal of PartialAcquisitions,2016.PROß.ESSIONA,L MEMBERSHIPSAppraisat InstituteIVfembership: MAI Designated Member of the Appraisal Institute since 1979Formerly: President, Dircctor, and Vice President, Seattle Chryter and AlaskaChapterInternational Right of Way AssociationDesignation: SR/WA(SeniorRightoflMayAgent)Position: International Right of Way Association Valuation Committee, pastchairFormerly: Regional Chair, Region 7, International Right of WayAssociationInternational Right of Way Association Director, President, and ViceP¡esident Seattle, Washington and Fafubanks, Alaska ChaptersEXPERIHYCE: Over 43 yearcCurrently: General Partner, Appn¡rser Gnoup oF THENoRTlrwEs-T LLPDeveloper of subdivision, office building, and reside,ncesOwner of office buildings and apartuentsFormerþ: Proprietor, Appn¡ser Gnoup or runNonï{wrsrAppraisea Schueler, McKor¡m & KeenanParfirer, Price & Associates, AlaskaSeniorAppraiser, Fint State Bank of OregonAppraiser, Pacific First Fedemal Savings BankAppraiser, U.S. Smel I Br¡siness AdministrationAppraiser, rWashington State De,pt of TransportationAppraiser, U. S. Snall Business AdministrationQUalified as an expert wilness in Superior Court, Federâl Cor¡rt Master's Hearings, andFederal Bankruptcy Court Servd as an arbitrator in property valuation and lease renewals.Washington State Deparment of Transportation approved appraiser.Fee reviewer; Washington Dept of Transportation, rnajorbanls, and governmental cliEnts.Qualified as a Master; held Master's Hearings in AlaskaArrently certified rmder the cmtinuing education program of the Appraisal Inst'ttute.Curr@tly certified in Washington State as a General Apraiser (CertificateNo. I100229)Vice President- Newcastle TrailsArryn¡rs¡,r Gnoup or nm Nonïrwr'gr LLPForm SCNLTR - "T0TAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1 -800-ALAM0DEAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 148Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Appraiser's Qualifications - Page 2çualifications of JA¡,rEs B. Prucr. u¡,1 sn/WnPage2CT.IENTS SERVEI)Abeyta & Associates, R./W CompanyBenson & Mclaughlin, AccountantsBellerue CollegeBellewe SchoolDisFictBoston Private BankBricklin Neu¡man, AtûorneysBullivant, Houser, Bailey, Pendergrass &Hoffuan;Bureau of Tndian AffairsBr¡¡eau of I¿nrl Manage,nrenfCamp KoreyCherÆon Products CompanyChr¡rch of God, Western WashingtonCity ofAuburnCity ofBelleweCityofDes MoinesCity of IssaquahCþoflCrktandCity of Maple ValleyCity ofMount VernonCityofNewcastleCity of Port AngelesCityofRedmondCity of SeaTaeCity of SeattleCþof ShorelineCity ofTacomaCityofTukwilaColumbiaBankC.ostcoEastmån, Scott, Atbmey, BellernreEl CentroDel¿RazaEnumclaw Pr¡blic SchoolsFirst Sound BankHDR EngineeringJeffenonCountyJohn Lpch, CPA, BellernreJohns Monroe Mitnrnaga, Attorneys;Michael Monroe, Da¡rell MitsunagaKeating Bucklin & McCormack,Kent SchoolDistictKeyBank of WashingtonKing CountyKing County Library SptemKittitâs CountyKorea Exchange Ba¡k (KEB)O. R. Colan Assooiates, Inc.(Acquisition Specialists)Ogden Murphy W'allace, AttorneysOpenBankOverlake HospitalPerkins Coie, LLCPlazaBankPortof FridayHa$orPortof Orc.asPort of SeattleRryet SoundEnergyReid Middleton, EngineersSaehanBankSeattle City LightSeattle School DistrictSharon Cates, AtùorneySound TransitTacoma SchoolDistictTacoma UtilitiesUrnpquaBankU.S. BankU.S. Fidetity & GuaranteeU.S. Postal SenriceUniBankUnionBankUniversal Field SsvioesWashington Federal BankWashington Dept. of Transportation-Approved Appraiser & ReviswerWashington State Dept. ofNaturalResourcesWashington State Parks & RecreationC.ornmissionWasteManage, entWilliams Northwest PipelineWïlshire BankArpn¡rs¡r, Gnow or mr Nonn¡wrgr LLPForm SCNLTR - "T0TAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1 -800-ALAM0DEAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 149Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Go-Appraiser's QualificationsQualifications of AppraiserAndrew F. Sorbaw$w-Appn tIsAtGRonPNW.coM ; AsonnA@fl¡rya¡¡¡5¡lGnoupNlt¡.couPnoxr No.: 425-453-9292 x128; Flx rrto.: 425-455-97401409 140il Pr.¡,cs NE, Sunr 105, Bru¡wE, WA 98007-3693EducationBachelor of Arts - Double Major in Political Science & Laws, Societies,and Justice; Universþ of Washingtonkofessional DesþnationsLicensed RealEstaæ Appraiser Trainee, State of Vlashington;Certificate No. 1002080Appraisal CoursesGeneral Appraiser Income Approach Part I - Appraisal InstituteGeneral Appraiser Site Valuation & Cost Approach - Appraisal InstitutsBasic Appraisal Principles - App.aisal InstituteBasic Appraisal Prccedures - Appraisal lnstitr¡teUSPAP 2016-n17 - Appraisal Instiû¡tßT'.qlerience2017-Present Appraiser, Appraisal Group of the Northwest, LLPClients Served:Elliot & Corryany Appraiserstlargiss Properties, LLCHDR,IncKent School DisfictLasher Holzapfel Sperry & EbbersonLaw Ofñces of Beth A. McDaniel, PLLCPerkins Coie, LLPPierce CountySchweet Linde & Coulson" PLLCForm SCNLTR - "T0TAL" appraisal software by a la mode, inc. - 1-800-ALAM0DEAttachment 76.1.aPacket Pg. 150Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 8
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 151 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
13141912819303
9022
20021
20020
1
9
3
0
0
110510291001
20031
19128
1305 193058920
19324
1112194131324
910123519218
9116
1123 89001912019105
88181416
920
1231
1121
1241871219232
1122
20106
19722950019428
1011
931
4
1007
834
19902 19900
12139511
20018 871019111
19204
199058912
1981720029
9109 888987061961519711132719243
12161306
1224
19817
19226
90099706
19230
19311
20028
192219118
1205104119105
1025
19327
9035 88201021
19210 9220
12301118 862919308
921
1410
892019624926
20103
1015
1011 19517194051312
19801
101490008909 1911519115
192111026953119903
1303
1214
19200
19532
19309
19225
1121 1992719619
1323
123410321304
19515
131214399010
192269630
1010
193
1
6
19227
19314
153
0
19102
8826821
19213
19409
8908
1020 197039049
1108
11161225
820 197158907
19305151
5
19516
915
903155119117
9007
1430
880211038918880619805
19730
8911
93019209 19918
19928192289507
19522
19128
19524 9106110710311206
141
7
1930519306
8726
2002119215
1004
1428
1400
922
5
112012251152
19214
19905
9029420757
8718120019125
1992519312
8715891519226 1922519129
1139
1412
197141450
870419501
1201199141225 911191231141
200098909
1991214289513 88201972119918
911
19130
198242002319220
144
9 93151932
3
200301204115419222192311040 198159007
1230
19115
19219
9108
19124
1031
100619911
19401
1012
20017
102793028710
19919
19230
11201920819229
19205
14418902194011318
1309
931 890219702
19822932 9121198188721124619315
19910
197
1
0
112519105
1111
140514071409
19412
19915
1403
19210
19911 194208815131619705
124511011028102711121016 111620024
929 193031911419106
19411
920
199181114 91198932
19212
1217
9110
891119308110419301830
835918
1420
1251201041942695108812
19402
928
1008
1055
11101103
871519830
19726
19210
19904871419309
9509
1432195081009 2000219226 1971319106
1218 1931019248
1561
199281313
19311
200198820927
19102
19222
1930190551115
10101215151
2
19225
8917
11161140
19906
19804
8629193101439870419125
19228
1126
836 8925901
19509
19810
200299241440 19409131519811
1011 892811359515 9125
89198907 8720
19127
142
4 9525150
5
19727
19829
1992219211
8201923520026
19623
1313 1923119317
19520
9303
19129
1312
19109
9199608 9011
961019223
110219407
8940
10251008 870420019
8718
87111542
19110
1125 88141231913
19121 19115
8915
1305 9212892411009005
1109
1109
930
8927
19910
19902
1136 198131220200258840910219925824
1450
19917
19518
11191117
10051025
2003119228
1047 9129THESE LOTS ADDRESSED OFF 192NDPARKING
MAPLEWOODHILL PARK
8705PUDSUB STATIONROCK & GEMCLUB87128904
19507
8717
9016
1132
828 826
8719
19511
8710PUGET D R
VIEWLAND WAY
191ST PL SW
MAPLEWOOD DR194TH ST SW
192ND ST SW92ND AVE WVIEWLAND WAYOLYMPICAVE12THAVEN 88TH AVE WMAPLEWOODDROLYMPICVIEW DR200TH ST SW
VISTA WAYOLYMPIC AVEP
U
G
ET
DR91ST AVE W11TH PL N12THAVEN88TH AVE W196TH ST SW 89TH AVE W12TH PL N88TH AVE W89TH PL W192ND
PLSW94THAVEW
93RD PL WVISTA WAY
VISTA PL
EUCLID
AVE 89TH PL W89TH PLWFOREST DELL DR
192ND ST
S
W
EXCELSIOR PL
94THPLWSR 524 SR524
H
Vacation Request
Zoning and Vicinity MapExcelsior Place Street VacationPLN20180021
1 inch = 400 feet
Scale
Attachment 9
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 152 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 10
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 153 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Sign Posting Locations (Excelsior Place)
East end of the indicated area on the easement
Middle area of the indicated area on the easement
West end of the indicated area on the easement
Attachment 10
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 154 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 10
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 10
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 10
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 10
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 10
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 159 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
CITY OF EDMONDS – PLANNING DIVISION STAFF COMMENT FORM
PW-Engineering Fire PW - Maintenance Building
Project Number:
Applicant’s Name:
Property Location:
Date Application Received: Date Application Routed:
Zoning:
Project Description:
If you have any questions or need clarification on this project, please contact:
Responsible Staff: Ext.
Name of Individual Submitting Comments:
Title: Date:
I have reviewed this land use proposal for
my department and I do not have any
comments. My department may also
review this project during the building
permit process (if applicable) and reserves
the right to provide additional comments at
that time.
I have reviewed this land use proposal for
my department and have the following
comments or conditions:
Attachment 11
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 160 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Updated: Jan 2018
NOTE: Detailed plans must be submitted, and approved, prior to painting any new fire lane or modifying any existing fire lane.
Fire Lanes must:
1) Be a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet and minimum unobstructed vertical clearance of 13 feet, 6 inches. *Fire lanes shall be a minimum of 26 feet wide in the immediate vicinity of any building over 30 feet in height above grade. Such fire lanes shall be located a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 25 feet from the building.
2) Provide Fire Department access to within 150 feet of any portion of an un-sprinkled building. In
buildings that provided with an automatic sprinkler, access may be increased, at the discretion of the Fire Marshal. 3) Provide Fire Department access to all on-site fire hydrants and fire department connections (FDC) for sprinkler and standpipe. A hydrant must be located to within 25’ of a fire department
connection.
4) Have adequate turning radius to allow maneuvering of fire apparatus: inside radius 25 feet; outside radius 45 feet. 5) Be circulating or have an approved turn-around if over 150 feet long. Have grades of no more than 12%.
6) Be paved with asphalt or approved equivalent and be capable of supporting the imposed loads of
fire apparatus. 7) Be marked with words “FIRE LANE – NO PARKING.” Words to be painted on the pavement inside the lane. Letters to be a minimum of 12” high, 2” stroke, yellow in color, and alternately spaced every 50 feet.
8) Have perimeter striping/curbing to delineate the boundaries of the Fire Lane. Striping to be a
minimum of 4 inches wide and striping/curbing to be yellow in color. 9) When required by the Fire Marshal, signs shall be used in addition to or in lieu of striping. Signs, when approved, shall meet the following requirements: a) Size: 18” high x 12” wide (min.)
b) Mounting: Bottom of sign 48” to 60” above grade. c) Style: Industry standard (Vulcan %7-6-9, Rainbow 01-527, EMED TC 18816 or approved equivalent). d) Color: Red lettering on white background e) Spacing: 50’ between signs or as required by Fire Marshal.
10) Fire lanes shall be established by these requirements to provide access to buildings during construction, alteration or demolition. Fire Code Supplemental Rules and Regulations are designated interpretations of the adopted International Fire Code, Edmonds Community Development Code and national standards allowed by IFC 102.7,102.8 and 102.9 and ECDC 19.25 which provide specifics and details to aid in conformance with the intent of the governing laws, statutes, ordinances and fire- and life safety-related requirements.
FIRE LANE STANDARDS
Attachment 11
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 161 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
City of Edmonds
Date: September 20, 2018
To: Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Manager
From: Jeanie McConnell, Engineering Program Manager
Subject: PLN20180021 – Street Vacation: A Portion of Excelsior Place Landsverk – 19511 94th Pl W
The Engineering and Maintenance & Operations Divisions of Public Works have reviewed the subject application and recommend denial of the proposed Excelsior Place street vacation. The reasons for denial are based upon the following:
1) Traffic flow and sight distance concerns were reviewed in consideration of the subject Excelsior Place street vacation. That portion of Excelsior Place right-of-way subject this street vacation, is connected to other sections of City right-of-way (Puget Drive to the west and 196th St SW to the east) through private roadways. The currently accessible public portions of Excelsior Place right-of-way are
highlighted in the map below:
Excelsior Place does not directly adjoin Puget Drive or 196th St SW. A couple residents off 94th Pl W have informed of their historical use of the private roads on
the western and eastern extents of the proposed vacation, however, the information
submitted to the City as part of the street vacation indicates only certain properties have easements of record. Please refer Attachment 15 of the staff report. The
MEMORANDUM
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
following traffic flow and sight distance concerns exist with vacation of the
subject Excelsior Place right-of-way:
a. The proposed street vacation could force access for the properties on the west end of the vacated Excelsior Place to enter and exit their properties through the intersection of the 94th Pl W private road and Puget Drive. This would place access restrictions on these properties that would
otherwise have not existed.
b. Safety at the intersection of 94th PL W and Puget Drive was expressed as a concern by more than one resident. The City’s Transportation Engineer reviewed the sight distance at this intersection and determined that it does not currently comply with standards. To meet sight distance standards, a
motorist exiting 94th Pl W onto Puget Drive should have clear sight lines to
the east (be able to see up the road) for a distance of 300-ft. This lineal footage is based upon the speed posted on the road, which is 30mph. The current sight distance is 200-ft, which falls 100-ft short of being in compliance. Considering this potential safety issue, it would be in the best
interest of the public to maintain the Excelsior Place right-of-way, which
would in turn allow traffic flow to continue through the private access roads and public right-of-way as it historically has. 2) In addition, the City currently owns and maintains a sanitary sewer main and water main, including a fire hydrant through the subject vacation area.
Operation and maintenance of utilities is more efficient when utilities are located
within a public right-of-way versus a private easement. This is found to be true as decisions regarding the use of the right-of-way remains with the public and access to the utility systems is not restricted by a private property owner. In addition, the following would need to be considered with a transfer of the public utility systems
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
to private ownership, which further supports staff recommendation for denial of
the street vacation.
a. The subject street vacation abuts 19511 94th Pl W and within the boundaries of these limits, there is not a clear point in the utility systems to distinguish between public and private ownership. In finding a point at which this clear distinction could be made, public utilities would either fall within private
property or private utilities would fall within public right-of-way.
b. If the water main were to become private, the water meters would need to be re-located to fall within City right-of-way and new water service lines would need to be run to the individual properties. This would create long runs of water service line, which could create long term maintenance issues.
c. With the relocation of the water meters, the private water main and fire hydrant
would essentially serve as a private fire line. The change from a public water main to a private fire line would spur the requirement for the property owners to install a backflow assembly in a vault in order to provide water quality protection between the public water system and the private fire line.
Thank you.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 136.1.aPacket Pg. 165Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 13
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 166 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 14
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 167 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 14
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 168 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 14
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 169 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 14
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 170 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 14
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 171 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 14
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 172 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
CURRENTLYIMPROVED ROADTHIS AREA TOO STEEP FORFUTURE IMPROVEMENTUNIMPROVED RIGHT OFWAY TO BE VACATEDTHIS PROPERTY AS ACCESSRIGHTS TO BOTH THE BLUE &READ ACCESS ROADSAttachment 156.1.aPacket Pg. 173Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 174 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 187 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 188 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 189 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
Attachment 16
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Exhibit 1: PLN20180021 Staff Report with Attachments [Revision 1] (Public Hearing for Excelsior Place Street Vacation)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
Public Hearing to Continue Moratorium on Development of Residential Units n the BD Zoning District
without On-Site Vehicle Parking Spaces
Staff Lead: Shane Hope
Department: Development Services
Preparer: Diane Cunningham
Background/History
Issue
Should the City Council continue the moratorium that was adopted August 21 on the development of
new housing units that do not have on-site vehicle parking?
The current moratorium (Exhibit 1, attached) applies specifically to the BD (downtown business)
Zones, where a limited option for residential units without parking has been in the city code for
some years. (Other zones do not have this option, so on-site vehicle parking continues to be
required there.)
For the moratorium to stay in effect, while longer-term amendments to the development code are
prepared and brought through a public process, the City Council needs to hold a public hearing and
consider whether to continue the moratorium. The Council may then vote on a resolution with
findings of fact and conclusions (Exhibit 3, attached) for continuing the moratorium until February
21, 2019. Before that date, the Council also may act to shorten or extend the moratorium. If the
public hearing is not held within the legal time frame or the City Council does not vote to continue
the moratorium, the moratorium would no longer be in effect.
Catalyst for Current Moratorium
A complete application for a nine-unit apartment building in the City's Downtown Business (BD) District
was recently submitted and approved under the City's existing code. The proposed development had no
on-site vehicle parking. Approval was necessary because the existing code for the BD zone states
plainly: "No parking is required for any floor area in any building with a total building footprint of less
than 4,800 square feet." (See ECDC 16.43.D.3.)
Note that "footprint" simply means the ground area occupied by the building. Therefore, because the 9
units, which were comprised of three units on each floor, had a building footprint of less than 4,800
square feet, no parking could be required. Project approvals must be decided based on the existing
code at the time of application submittal.
Amending a city code related to development or zoning typically takes at least 3 months to be prepared
and brought through a required public process. The required process includes:
· Analysis of the issue and options to address the problem
6.2
Packet Pg. 191
· Development of specific language for the code amendment
· Review under SEPA and its timelines
· Public hearings of the proposed amendment by both the Planning Board and City Council (each
with required public notice ahead of the hearing)
· Additional meetings by the Planning Board or City Council, as needed
· A 60-day advance notice to the state (although the state will sometimes approve an expedited
notice and review process)
· Preparation or review of an ordinance by the City Attorney
· Final decision by the City Council.
Because of the possibility that, under the existing code, more residential development in a BD zone
could proceed without parking, the City chose to temporarily intervene by adopting a limited
moratorium on that type of development. (See Exhibit 2, August 21 Minutes, attached.)
Staff Recommendation
Continue the moratorium by adopting the attached Resolution.
Narrative
State law authorizes the legislative bodies of city and county governments to establish and continue
moratoria in increments of no more than 6 months, while a more permanent solution is sought. Initially
adopting a moratorium ordinance does not require a public hearing or other advance process steps.
However, a public hearing on whether to continue or change the moratorium must be held within 60
days of the ordinance's adoption.
A moratorium is a significant step that takes time and energy and should be narrowly crafted so as to
not affect other types of development.
The nine-unit apartment building recently approved without on-site parking in a BD zone may be an
anomaly. This is the first time the on-site parking exemption has been used and no other such
applications have been submitted since then. However, without a moratorium or similar legislative
action, if such an application were submitted before a code amendment can be adopted to add a
parking requirement, that application would be subject only to the existing code.
The current moratorium:
1. Precludes City acceptance of applications for new housing in the BD zone that does not have
one or more on-site parking spaces per unit; and
2. Sets a public hearing for September 25 to consider whether to continue the moratorium.
3. Became effective August 21, 2018 and stays in place for 6 months provided that the Council
takes action, consistent with state law, to continue the moratorium or to shorten or extend it.
Next Steps
· The City Council holds a public hearing (scheduled for September 25).
· The City Council decides whether to adopt findings and conclusions (in attached Resolution) to
continue the moratorium.
· If the moratorium is continued, it stays in place until February 21, 2019 unless other legislative
action is taken to shorten or extend the time period.
· City staff prepares a proposal for amending the code regarding the BD parking issue, taking it
through the required public process, and bringing it back to the City Council for consideration
6.2
Packet Pg. 192
and any action.
Attachments:
Exhibit 1: Ordinance 4124 Moritorium on Residential units in BD zone
Exhibit 2: City Council Excerpt from August 21, 2018
Exhibit 3: Resolution on Moratorium Findings
6.2
Packet Pg. 193
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Ordinance 4124 Moritorium on Residential units in BD zone (Public Hearing for Moratorium on Residential Units in BD
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Ordinance 4124 Moritorium on Residential units in BD zone (Public Hearing for Moratorium on Residential Units in BD
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 196 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Ordinance 4124 Moritorium on Residential units in BD zone (Public Hearing for Moratorium on Residential Units in BD
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 197 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Ordinance 4124 Moritorium on Residential units in BD zone (Public Hearing for Moratorium on Residential Units in BD
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 198 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Ordinance 4124 Moritorium on Residential units in BD zone (Public Hearing for Moratorium on Residential Units in BD
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 21, 2018
Page 10
All property located south of 240th St. SW, between 84th Ave. W and Edmonds Way.
Change Comprehensive Plan designation from Edmonds Way Corridor to Corridor
Development (Hwy 99) (AMD20180001).
o Comprehensive Plan amendments related to the budget will occur at a later date.
Councilmember Johnson commented these amendments are proposed in anticipation of being the only
Comprehensive Plan amendment this year; however, the City has until December to adopt the amendments
and things are afoot in other areas such as the moratorium related to parking in the BD zone and the
Council’s role in development review applications. She asked if any further 2018 Comprehensive Plan
amendments were anticipated through the end of the year. Development Services Director Shane Hope
answered these are the only Comprehensive Plan amendments proposed during the period that
Comprehensive Plan Amendments were accept for 2018. The exception would be anything related to the
CFP or CIP which are done during the budget process. The moratorium is not addressed in the
Comprehensive Plan as it is a zoning issue. The Council’s role in development review applications would
be an amendment to zoning procedures in Title 17and possibly other sections and no Comprehensive Plan
amendment would be required.
Ms. Hope clarified zoning regulations need to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, but that does not
mean the Comprehensive Plan contain everything that is in the zoning regulations, building code, etc. The
Comprehensive Plan can only be amended once a year with certain exceptions. Development regulations,
as long as they do not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, can be amended at any time.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 4123, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE 2018 AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
4. MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS WITHOUT ON-SITE
VEHICLE PARKING SPACE IN THE BD ZONING DISTRICT
Development Services Director Shane Hope explained the current code does not require a building in the
Downtown Business (BD) zone with a footprint of less than 4800 square feet current code to provide onsite
parking. Most buildings have provided onsite parking in spite of the code because the developer felt it was
needed. A complete application was submitted and approved under the City’s existing code. Although there
were concerns with that proposal, the application had to be approved as it met the code. The concern now
is whether other development could be proposed before the code is adjusted. A code amendment typically
takes three months due to public hearing, approval by the state, SEPA process, etc. Even though there are
no other applications for residential units without onsite parking in the BD zone, it seemed a good
precaution to propose a moratorium on new residential without at least one space per unit of onsite parking
while that issue is studied.
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked staff for acting swiftly, noting she was shocked when she received an
email that this had occurred, thinking a residential building would have to have onsite parking. She clarified
a commercial building with a footprint under 4800 would still follow the code. Ms. Hope agreed, explaining
the moratorium would only effect residential. The moratorium requires a public hearing within 60 days and
sets a date. Following the public hearing, the moratorium would continue for up to six months unless the
Council decides otherwise.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 4124, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE BD ZONES,
ESTABLISHING AN IMMEDIATE EMERGENCY MORATORIUM ON THE PERMITTING,
6.2.b
Packet Pg. 199 Attachment: Exhibit 2: City Council Excerpt from August 21, 2018 (Public Hearing for Moratorium on Residential Units in BD Zones without
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 21, 2018
Page 11
SITING, ESTABLISHMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF ANY NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS
WITHIN THE BD ZONES THAT DO NOT PROVIDE AT LEAST ONE PARKING SPACE PER
DWELLING UNIT, TO BE IN EFFECT UNTIL THE CITY OF EDMONDS ADOPTS ZONING
REGULATIONS ADDRESSING SUCH USES, SETTING SIX MONTHS AS THE EFFECTIVE
PERIOD OF THE MORATORIUM, ESTABLISHING THE DATE OF THE PUBLIC HEARING ON
THE MORATORIUM AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
5. CRUMB RUBBER EXTENSION OF MORATORIUM
Council President Nelson explained the City Council adopted a moratorium in December 2015 on crumb
rubber on publicly owned athletic fields within the City. The intent at that time was to extend the
moratorium until a federal study was completed by the Environmental Protection Agency Center for
Disease Control and the Consumer Product Safety Commission. A draft report, Federal Research Action
Plan on Recycled Tire Crumb Used on Playing Fields and Playgrounds, was sent to peer review in May
2018 and the next step is public comment this summer. In the meantime, he requested extending the crumb
rubber moratorium until November 15, 2018.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 4125, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, EXTENDING THE PROHIBITION OF THE INSTALLATION OF
STYRENE-BUTADIENE RUBBER (ALSO KNOWN AS SBR OR “CRUMB RUBBER”) ON
PUBLICLY-OWNED ATHLETIC FIELDS WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS UNTIL
NOVEMBER 15, 2018; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
Councilmember Teitzel agreed with extending the moratorium but was concerned about the proposed
extension to November 2018 because the moratorium also refers to the federal study as well as the study
by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment in California is due to be released in mid-2019.
The California study will study fields in hot temperatures and assessing off gassing. He preferred to extend
the moratorium through June 30, 2019 to allow the California study to be completed before a decision is
made.
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO
AMEND THE MOTION TO EXTEND THE MORATORIUM UNTIL JUNE 30, 2019.
Councilmember Johnson relayed her understanding the City was only allowed to extend a moratorium for
six months. She preferred to extend the moratorium for six months. City Attorney Tom Brubaker agreed.
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE
SECONDER.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO EXTEND THE
MORATORIUM FOR SIX MONTHS.
Mr. Brubaker said with this amendment, the moratorium would be extended for six months from the date
of publication, late February 2018.
Councilmember Mesaros suggested extending the moratorium from the expiration of the previous
moratorium. Mr. Brubaker advised the current moratorium expired on August 15, 2018.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled in the past he requested the Council consider excluding the school district
from the moratorium. At that time, he was concerned the federal study would not be completed by July
which in fact is the case and now the Council is considering extending the moratorium to February 2019.
6.2.b
Packet Pg. 200 Attachment: Exhibit 2: City Council Excerpt from August 21, 2018 (Public Hearing for Moratorium on Residential Units in BD Zones without
RESOLUTION NO. _____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT TO SUPPORT THE
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE 4124, WHICH ESTABLISHED A
MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
IN THE BD ZONES.
WHEREAS, the city council adopted Ordinance 4124 on August 21, 2018, which adopted an
immediate six-month moratorium in the BD zones on the acceptance of all development permit
applications to permit, site, establish or construct residential structures or units that do not provide
at least one on-site parking space per residential unit; and
WHEREAS, the city council held a public hearing on Ordinance 4124 on September 25, 2018 to
determine whether continued imposition of the moratorium was justified, now therefore,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. ADOPTION OF FINDINGS. The city council hereby adopts as its findings of fact to
support the adoption and continued imposition of Ordinance 4124 the Whereas clauses contained in
Ordinances 4124.
Section 2. CONTINUANCE OF MORATORIUM. In light of the findings of fact adopted in
Section 1, above, the moratorium adopted by Ordinance 4124 shall continue and not terminate until
six (6) months after the date of adoption of Ordinance 4124, or at the time all of the events
described in Section 1 of Ordinance 4124 have been accomplished, whichever is sooner. The city
council shall make the decision to terminate the moratorium by ordinance, and termination shall not
otherwise be presumed to have occurred.
RESOLVED this _____ day of ___________, 2018.
CITY OF EDMONDS
_______________________
MAYOR, DAVE EARLING
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY
6.2.c
Packet Pg. 201 Attachment: Exhibit 3: Resolution on Moratorium Findings (Public Hearing for Moratorium on Residential Units in BD Zones without Parking)
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO. ____
6.2.c
Packet Pg. 202 Attachment: Exhibit 3: Resolution on Moratorium Findings (Public Hearing for Moratorium on Residential Units in BD Zones without Parking)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands
Staff Lead: Kernen Lien
Department: Planning Division
Preparer: Kernen Lien
Background/History
The Planning Board heard an introduction to this limited code update at the June 13, 2018 meeting and
held a public hearing on July 11, 2018 after which a recommendation was forwarded to the City Council.
The day after the Planning Board's public hearing, the Department of Ecology issued updated guidance
for wetland buffers. Staff informed the City Council of the updated wetland guidance at the July 24,
2018 Council meeting and confirmed that the City Council wished to update the wetland regulations
with the most recent guidance. Staff informed the Planning Board about the updated wetland guidance
at the July 25, 2018 Planning Board meeting at which time the Planning Board scheduled another public
hearing on the updated wetland buffer guidance. The Board's new public hearing was then held on
August 22, 2018. The City Council heard an introduction to the proposed wetland updates at the
September 4, 2018 Council meeting.
Staff Recommendation
Direct staff to prepare an ordinance consistent with the updates proposed in Exhibit 4 for a future
consent agenda.
Narrative
The City of Edmonds completed a comprehensive review of its critical area ordinance (CAO) as required
by the Growth Management Act in May 2016 with the adoption of Ordinance No. 4026. The wetland
section of the CAO (ECDC 23.50) was developed from Ecology Publication No. 10-06-002 Wetlands &
CAO Updates: Guidance for Small Cities. In June 2016, Ecology issued new guidance for wetlands under
Publication No. 16-06-001 Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates (Exhibit 1). At the time, the City was also
in the process of a comprehensive update of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The City Council
desired to have to most current wetland regulations apply to shoreline jurisdiction, so certain wetland
sections of the CAO were excepted from the SMP (which means they do not apply in shoreline
jurisdiction). Within the SMP, wetland regulations consistent with Publication No. 16-06-001 were
provided to replace the excepted sections. As a result the City of Edmonds has two versions of wetland
regulations, one that applies within shoreline jurisdiction and a second that applies outside of shoreline
jurisdiction.
The City of Edmonds is required to complete a periodic review of the Shoreline Master Program by June
2019. In order to provide consistent regulations throughout the City, as part of the work program
adopted by the City Council for the SMP periodic review, the City identified updating the COA wetland
provisions excepted from the SMP to be consistent with Publication No. 16-06-001.
6.3
Packet Pg. 203
Following the July 11, 2018 Planning Board public hearing, the Department of Ecology issued updated
guidance on wetland buffers. A FAQ sheet on the updated guidance and Ecology recommendations are
included in Exhibit 2 and 3 respectively. The primary change between the 2016 and 2018 guidance is a
regrouping of the habitat scores. Wetland buffers widths are determined by the habitat score assessed
when the wetland determination is made. The 2016 wetland guidance had four potential buffer widths
based on habitat score. The 2018 guidance provides three potential buffers widths based on habitat
score. Below is a summary from the FAQ explaining why Ecology has issued the updated guidance:
We made the changes based on public feedback and our own review of the reference wetland
data used to calibrate the Washington State Wetland Rating System. We knew we needed to
make modifications in the grouping of habitat scores.
Low habitat function was previously represented by a score of 3 or 4 points and moderate
habitat function by 5-7 points. Detailed analysis of the habitat scores for the 211 reference
wetlands used to calibrate the rating system indicate that wetlands scoring 3, 4, or 5 points for
habitat are similarly distributed to those that scored <19 in the 2004 version. Habitat scores of
<19 points were considered low in the 2004 rating system. As a result, we need to adjust the
wetland buffer break points in the 2014 habitat scores. The modified tables now group habitat
scores of 3-5 into low habitat function and scores of 6-7 into moderate habitat function.
Exhibit 4 contains the proposed amendment to the City’s wetland buffer regulations consistent with
Publication No. 16-06-001 and the updated 2018 guidance.
Two other minor revisions to the CAO are also proposed at this time. The first corrects a scriveners
error in Section ECDC 23.50.040.G.3.d and the second deletes an allowed activity in section ECDC
23.50.020.E. The allowed activity related to development within the previously developed footprint for
which specific regulations were included during the CAO update (see ECDC 23.50.040.J) and this section
should have been deleted.
Attachments:
Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001
Exhibit 2: FAQ - July 2018 Modified Habitat Score Ranges
Exhibit 3: Ecology July 2018 Code Recommendations for Modified Habitat Scores
Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance
Exhibit 5: June 13, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt
Exhibit 6: July 11, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt
Exhibit 7: July 24, 2018 City Council Minutes Excerpt
Exhibit 8: July 25, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt
Exhibit 9: August 22, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt
Exhibit 10: Septebmer 4, 2018 City Council Minutes Excerpt
6.3
Packet Pg. 204
Wetland Guidance for CAO
Updates
Western Washington Version
June 2016
Publication No. 16-06-001
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Publication and Contact Information
This report is available on the Department of Ecology’s website at
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1606001.html
For more information contact:
Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program
P.O. Box 47600
Olympia, WA 98504-7600
Phone: 360-407-6600
Washington State Department of Ecology - www.ecy.wa.gov
o Headquarters, Olympia 360-407-6000
o Northwest Regional Office, Bellevue 425-649-7000
o Southwest Regional Office, Olympia 360-407-6300
o Central Regional Office, Yakima 509-575-2490
o Eastern Regional Office, Spokane 509-329-3400
To ask about the availability of this document in a format for the visually impaired, call
the Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program at 360-407-6600. Persons with
hearing loss can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. Persons with a speech disability
can call 877-833-6341.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates
Western Washington Version
By
Donna Bunten, Rick Mraz, Lauren Driscoll and Amy Yahnke
Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program
Washington State Department of Ecology
Olympia, Washington
June 2016
Publication No. 16-06-001
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
This page is purposely left blank
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Table of Contents
Summary .......................................................................................... 1
Introduction ...................................................................................... 2
Guidance on the Science of Wetland Protection ............................. 3
Relationship between the GMA and the SMA ................................ 4
Policy Discussion for Your Wetlands Chapter ................................ 4
PURPOSE ........................................................................................................................... 4
DEFINITIONS ..................................................................................................................... 4
IDENTIFYING, DESIGNATING, AND RATING WETLANDS .................................................... 5
REGULATED USES AND ACTIVITIES .................................................................................. 7
EXEMPTIONS .................................................................................................................... 7
FOREST PRACTICES .......................................................................................................... 9
AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................. 9
Strategies for Protecting Wetlands from Impacts .......................... 10
WETLANDS INVENTORY ................................................................................................. 10
ABCS ............................................................................................................................. 10
BUFFERS ......................................................................................................................... 11
BUFFER AVERAGING ...................................................................................................... 13
MITIGATION ................................................................................................................... 13
MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES .......................................................................................... 14
Mitigation Banking ............................................................................................... 15
In-Lieu Fee (ILF) .................................................................................................. 15
Off-Site Mitigation ................................................................................................ 16
Advance Mitigation ............................................................................................... 16
Conclusion ..................................................................................... 16
Appendix A - Sample Wetlands Chapter ...................................... 19
Appendix B - Wetland Definitions ................................................ 51
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
This page is purposely left blank
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 1
Summary
This publication replaces Wetlands & CAO Updates: Guidance for Small Cities (Western
Washington Version), Publication No. 10-06-002, January 2010. It also replaces the 1st
revision dated July 2011 and the 2nd revision dated October 2012.
This new publication, for the most part, contains the same guidance as the “small cities guidance” referenced above. Over the last few years, it became obvious that the
information in that document could apply to all cities and counties, not just small cities.
However, the wetland buffer table may be too restrictive for county use because it
assumes that adjacent land use intensity is high. Counties and larger cities generally have more staff and resources that allow more sophisticated approaches to assigning wetland buffers.
In addition, these jurisdictions may be able to provide additional protection for habitat
function by requiring protected wildlife corridors between the wetland and other priority habitats in exchange for buffer reduction—something that is often impossible in small, urban jurisdictions.
Check with Ecology wetland staff for more information about using this guidance in your
particular jurisdiction http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/contacts.htm.
Specific changes to this new publication include:
• Reference to the updated 2014 wetland rating system
• Updated definitions based on the updated 2014 wetland rating system
• Buffer tables that include habitat scores from the updated 2014 wetland rating
system
• Addition of buffer table to be used if minimizing measures are not used
• Emphasis on the requirement to provide wildlife corridors where possible in
exchange for buffer reduction
• Guidance on using wetlands for stormwater management facilities
• Revisions to exemptions for small wetlands
• Recommended language addressing agricultural activities in non-VSP
jurisdictions
• Addition of recent mitigation documents and guidance
• Corrected links to resource documents and web pages
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 2
Introduction
This document is intended to provide guidance and tools useful in developing a wetland
protection program for jurisdictions that are in the process of updating their critical areas
ordinances (CAOs) to meet the Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements.
Wetlands are one of the five types of critical areas identified in the GMA.
We recognize that many local governments lack the planning staff and resources
necessary to develop and implement wetland standards that are both locally appropriate
and based on best available science (BAS). Nonetheless, they must comply with the
GMA requirement to designate and protect wetlands.
The first part of this document describes the important topics that should be addressed in
the wetlands section of your CAO. It includes recommendations for wetland protection
based on BAS. Appendix A is a sample CAO chapter for wetlands that incorporates
these recommendations into a format similar to that found in many local CAOs. (Please
note that the sample CAO will need to be tailored to your jurisdiction’s naming and numbering system. There are several generic “XX” references throughout the text.)
Appendix B contains definitions that are commonly used in wetlands regulations.
This document does not include the more general provisions typically found in
regulations related to all critical areas. These can be found in Appendix A of the Critical Areas Assistance Handbook published by the Washington State Department of
Commerce (formerly the Department of Community, Trade, and Economic
Development) in November 2003 http://www.commerce.wa.gov/Documents/GMS-
Critical-Areas-Appendix-A-Sample-Code-Provisions.pdf. This document revises the
wetland-specific provisions in the Critical Areas Assistance Handbook.
The recommendations in this document and the sample ordinance may not be appropriate
for use by rural county governments. Factors to consider are the county’s rate of growth,
the nature and intensity of land uses in the county, the wetland resources at risk, and the
ability of the county to implement its CAO. We suggest that you contact us to determine whether this guidance is applicable to your county. Please use the following link to find
Ecology’s wetland specialist for your area:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/contacts.htm.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 3
Guidance on the Science of Wetland Protection
Ecology has produced several different tools that can help local governments develop a
comprehensive wetlands protection program for their jurisdictions. The Washington
Departments of Ecology (Ecology) and Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) have published a
two-volume guidance document to help local governments protect and manage wetlands:
● Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science
(Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #05-06-006, Olympia,
WA, March 2005). This volume is the result of an extensive search of over
17,000 scientific articles and synthesizes over 1,000 peer-reviewed works relevant
to the management of Washington’s wetlands.
● Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2: Managing and Protecting Wetlands
(Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #05-06-008, Olympia,
WA, April 2005). This volume was developed with the assistance of local
government planners and wetland consultants. It can be used to craft regulatory language that is based on BAS. We recommend that you review Chapter 8 and its
appendices as you begin to work on updating your existing regulations. (Please
note: Appendix 8-C was revised in October 2014.)
In October 2013, Ecology released an update of the science pertaining to wetland buffers. The new information on buffers provides a refinement of our knowledge and revisits the
conclusions and key points in the 2005 synthesis.
• Update on Wetland Buffers: The State of the Science (Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #13-06-011, Olympia, WA, October 2013.
Ecology, in coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), has also developed a two-part guidance
document aimed at improving the quality and effectiveness of compensatory mitigation in Washington State:
● Wetland Mitigation in Washington State – Part 1: Agency Policies and
Guidance (Version 1) (Washington State Department of Ecology Publication
#06-06-011a, Olympia, WA, March 2006). Part 1 provides a brief background on wetlands, an overview of the factors that go into the agencies’ permitting
decisions, and detailed guidance on the agencies’ policies of wetland mitigation,
particularly compensatory mitigation. It outlines the information the agencies use
to determine whether specific mitigation plans are appropriate and adequate.
● Wetland Mitigation in Washington State–Part 2: Developing Mitigation Plans
(Version 1) (Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #06-06-011b,
Olympia, WA, March 2006). Part 2 provides technical information on preparing
plans for compensatory mitigation.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 4
Ecology has also developed a wetland ratings system for western Washington. The rating
system is a useful tool for dividing wetlands into groups that have similar needs for
protection.
• Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-29,
Olympia, WA, October 2014).
Links to all of these documents can be found at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/gma/index.html.
Relationship between the GMA and the SMA
You may be planning to adopt a Shoreline Master Program (SMP) that will rely on the
CAO for protection of wetlands and other critical areas in shoreline jurisdiction. Ecology
does not have an approval role in the CAO adoption process; our role is advisory. The
SMP, however, is a joint document of Ecology and the local government requiring
Ecology approval. Before the SMP can be approved by Ecology, the CAO must meet the “no net loss of ecological functions” requirement (WAC 173-26-186(8)(b)(i)).
You should be aware that the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) may preclude or alter
the administration of your CAO. For example, certain activities exempted under the
CAO will not qualify for exemption under the SMP. In addition, activities allowed without permits under the CAO may require permits under the SMP.
For assistance with CAO-SMP integration, please use the following link to find the
shoreline planner for your area:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/sma/contacts/index.html.
Policy Discussion for Your Wetlands Chapter
Your wetlands chapter will exist as one of several in your critical areas ordinance. Below
we describe some of the important subsections in the wetlands chapter and include our
recommendations for protecting wetlands based on the best available science.
Purpose
The chapter typically begins with a purpose statement, followed by designation criteria, which include a definition of wetlands and the methods by which they are identified and
rated and other details listed below. The purpose statement may also state that this
chapter is intended to be consistent with the requirements of 36.70A RCW and to
implement the goals and policies of your Comprehensive Plan for protecting wetlands.
Definitions
Your wetlands chapter may include a separate list of definitions, or the definitions may be included in the general definitions section of the CAO. Appendix B is a list of
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 5
definitions relevant to your wetlands chapter. This list includes terms identified in state
law and agency guidance documents. Clarity and consistency in the use of these terms
will make ordinance implementation easier.
Identifying, Designating, and Rating Wetlands
The first steps in regulating wetlands are to define what is being regulated and specify how these areas will be identified. The GMA requires the use of the following definition of wetlands and specifies how to identify and delineate them.
In designating wetlands for regulatory purposes, counties and cities are required to use
the definition of wetlands in RCW 36.70A.030(21): “Wetland” or “wetlands” means areas that are inundated or saturated by
surface water or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to
support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-
wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage
ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater
treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may
include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland
areas created to mitigate conversion of wetlands.
Wetlands are subject to a local government’s regulatory authority if they meet the criteria in this definition. This includes Prior Converted Croplands (PCCs) and isolated
wetlands. These wetlands can provide critical functions and habitat and should be
regulated. The GMA does not allow flexibility in adopting a modified definition of
wetlands.
Irrigation practices, such as the Irrigation District ditches in Sequim, can result in human-
created wetlands. More frequently, however, irrigation practices may augment natural
sources of water to a wetland. Wetlands that form along irrigation ditches that were
intentionally created in uplands may be exempted from regulation. However, if a wetland is the unintentional by-product of irrigation activities, the wetland should be regulated. If a wetland disappears as the result of a change in irrigation practice, it will not be regulated in
the future. However, most wetlands will not disappear completely as a result of local
changes in irrigation practices because of natural sources of water or regional irrigation
influences. Please see http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/irrigation.html for more information on how Ecology regulates irrigation-influenced wetlands.
Ecology is most concerned about those changes in land use that would eliminate wetlands
as the result of fill or grading, such as a conversion to commercial or residential use.
These activities should be regulated by the CAO, and appropriate protection standards
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 6
(such as buffers and mitigation) should be required in order to minimize the loss of
wetland area and function.
Many jurisdictions use the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) to determine whether wetlands exist within their boundaries. Since the NWI is based on photographs that are
over 30 years old and provides only a general approximation of wetland location, it
cannot be used alone to designate wetlands. Wetlands are those areas that meet the above
definition of “wetland.” Wetlands are also dynamic systems that change over time. It is
important to adopt the GMA definition and to have regulations in place to protect wetland functions and values, should wetlands that do not currently appear on the NWI or other
maps be identified in the future.
State laws require that wetlands protected under the GMA and the SMA be delineated
using a manual that is developed by Ecology and adopted into rules (RCW 36.70A.175; RCW 90.58.380). The Department of Ecology adopted a wetland delineation manual in
1997 (WAC 173-22-080) that was based on the original 1987 Corps of Engineers manual
and subsequent Regulatory Guidance Letters.
During the last few years the Army Corps of Engineers has updated and expanded their delineation manual with regional supplements. To maintain consistency between the state
and federal delineations of wetlands, Ecology has repealed WAC 173-22-080 (the state
delineation manual) and replaced it with a revision of WAC 173-22-035 that states that
delineations should be done according to the currently approved federal manual and
regional supplements. The changes became effective March 14, 2011.
The GMA states that “wetlands regulated under development regulations adopted
pursuant to this chapter shall be delineated in accordance with the manual adopted by the
department pursuant to RCW 90.58.380.” RCW 90.58.380 allows the Department of
Ecology to adopt rules that incorporate changes to the manual. Therefore, the currently approved federal manual and regional supplements should be used for delineating wetlands in GMA jurisdiction. See:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/delineation.html.
Local governments are not required to rate or classify wetlands when regulating them. However, methods that classify, categorize, or rate wetlands help target the appropriate
level of protection to particular types of wetlands and avoid the “one-size-fits-all”
approach. If a local government uses a wetland rating system, it must consider the
criteria described in WAC 365-190-090(3).
The Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update
(Effective January 2015), (Ecology Publication #14-06-029, October 2014) is a useful
tool for dividing wetlands into groups that have similar needs for protection. The revised
rating system represents the best available science, as it is based on a better
understanding of wetland functions, ways to evaluate them, and what is needed to protect them. It provides a quick “snapshot” characterization of a particular wetland. In many
cases, it will provide enough information about existing wetland functions to allow
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 7
adequate plan review and land use decisions to be made without the additional expense of
a separate wetland functional assessment.
While local governments are not required to use Ecology’s revised rating system, we strongly encourage you to adopt wetland regulations that require its use. Most
qualified wetland specialists are using the revised rating system. In cases where state and
federal permits are required, the use of this rating system would benefit applicants by
eliminating the need to rate wetlands according to a different local standard. If you
choose not to use the state’s wetland rating system, you must provide a rationale for this decision according to WAC 365-190-090(3).
We recommend that you include language that describes the four categories of wetlands.
This text is different for eastern and western Washington jurisdictions. Please refer to
Appendix A, Section XX.020.B.1-4 for the specific category descriptions.
Regulated Uses and Activities
Your wetland section should list those uses and activities that are regulated under the critical areas ordinance. Some of these items include: removal, excavation, grading, or
dredging of material of any kind; draining, flooding, or disturbing of the wetland, water
level, or water table; the construction, reconstruction, demolition, or expansion of any
structure; etc. More extensive examples are provided in the sample ordinance. Wetlands are often impacted by unauthorized clearing and grading that takes place
before application for development permits. You should make sure your CAO
adequately regulates clearing and grading. If it doesn’t, you should adopt a separate
clearing and grading ordinance. The Department of Commerce (formerly Community, Trade and Economic Development) published technical guidance on developing a clearing and grading ordinance: http://www.commerce.wa.gov/Documents/GMS-
Clearing-and-Grading-Technical-Guidance-Final-2005.pdf.
Most forest practices (as defined in RCW 76.09 are exempted from the provisions of a wetlands chapter in the CAO. However, those forest practices that are Class IV general should be regulated. These activities constitute a conversion from forestry to some other
use. As such, buffers and wetland protections are appropriate.
Exemptions
Your wetlands section should identify those activities in or near wetlands that are
regulated and those that are exempt from regulation. Exemptions include activities that
will have little or no environmental effect or are an emergency that threatens public health or safety. In the case of emergency response activities that affect wetlands and
buffers, the responsible party should be required to obtain after-the-fact permits and to
rectify impacts. Some jurisdictions place the exemptions or exceptions in a general
exemptions section near the front of the CAO. However, some exemptions or exceptions
may apply only to wetlands, so it may be more practical to have these specific exemptions in the wetlands section.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 8
Exempt activities should be limited to those that will not have a significant impact on a
wetland’s structure and function (including its water, soil, or vegetation) and those that
are expected to be very short term. Local governments should, however, also consider
the cumulative impacts from exempted activities. They can result in a loss of wetland acreage and function that are not replaced through compensatory mitigation.
The scope, coverage, and applicability of a critical areas ordinance should capture the full
range of activities that are detrimental to wetland functions. Therefore, exemptions
should be supported by the scientific literature and be carefully crafted to minimize the potential for adverse impacts. However, a local government should not assume that an
exemption is appropriate in the absence of science to refute the exemption. The language
should clearly state whether a given activity is exempt from applicable standards in the
code or whether it is exempt from needing a permit but still must comply with the code.
Exemptions should be limited and construed narrowly.
For more information on this topic, please refer to Chapter 8 of Wetlands in Washington
State, Volume 2: Managing and Protecting Wetlands (Ecology Publication #05-06-008,
Olympia, WA, April 2005:
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/summarypages/0506008.html).
The GMA, in RCW 36.70a.030(21), requires local governments to regulate wetlands that
meet the GMA-required definition of “wetland” (see the definition of “wetland” in the
previous section). This includes Prior Converted Croplands (PCCs) and hydrologically isolated wetlands, two types of wetlands that have been exempt from federal regulation at times. PCCs are wetlands that have been ditched and drained for active agricultural use before December 23, 1985. Isolated wetlands are those wetlands that have no surface
hydrologic connection to waters of the United States. These wetlands must be regulated by
your CAO. Please see http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/isolated.html for
more information on how the state of Washington currently regulates isolated wetlands.
The scientific literature does not support exempting wetlands that are below a certain size.
While we recognize an administrative desire to place size thresholds on wetlands that are
to be regulated, you need to be aware that it is not possible to conclude from size alone
what functions a particular wetland may be providing. Ecology has developed a strategy for exempting small wetlands when additional criteria are considered. This language is
present in the sample ordinance. However, impacts to small wetlands are NOT
exempt from the requirement to provide compensatory mitigation for those impacts.
If an in-lieu fee (ILF) program or a mitigation bank is available in your area (see page
15), these mitigation alternatives can help prevent a net loss of wetland function from impacts to small wetlands in your jurisdiction.
Exceptions are typically addressed in a CAO in the context of reasonable use of property.
For more information about this regulatory tool, see Section VII of the Critical Areas Assistance Handbook published by the Washington State Department of Commerce: http://www.commerce.wa.gov/Documents/GMS-Critical-Areas-Assist-Handbook.pdf .
You should keep in mind that the Shoreline Management Act does not allow reasonable
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 9
use exceptions, providing instead a variance pathway to afford regulatory relief. If you
decide to incorporate your CAO into your SMP when the latter document is
updated, you will need to address this potential inconsistency.
Forest Practices
Class I, II, and III forest practices should be exempted from the wetlands section of your CAO. These activities are regulated through RCW 76.09, the Forest Practices Act.
Agricultural Activities
In 2011 the Washington Legislature created the Voluntary Stewardship Program (VSP) as
an alternative for meeting GMA requirements related to protecting critical areas and
agricultural lands. In 2015 the state provided funding for participating counties to begin the
VSP planning process. For more information on this program, see
http://www.scc.wa.gov/voluntary-stewardship/.
For the GMA update cycle beginning 2015, some counties will begin addressing critical
area issues related to agriculture through a VSP work plan.
If your jurisdiction is not in a participating county or not in a participating watershed, then you must review and revise your development regulations for protecting wetlands as they
apply to agricultural activities (see RCW 36.70A.710).
If your jurisdiction is in a VSP watershed designated by a participating county, your GMA
responsibilities to protect critical areas from agricultural activities in or near wetlands will be achieved through the VSP work plan.
However, it is important to keep in mind that federal and state regulations, such as the Clean
Water Act and the State Water Pollution Control Act are still applicable in all jurisdictions
regardless of participation or non-participation in the VSP. The VSP does not alter the responsibility of property owners to meet water quality standards, protect wetlands, and
comply with state and federal environmental regulations.
Ecology recommends the following for non-VSP jurisdictions:
“Existing and ongoing agricultural activities” are often exempted from the provisions of a
CAO. These activities should be clearly defined and should not include removing trees,
diverting or impounding water, excavation, ditching, draining, culverting, filling, grading,
or similar activities that introduce new adverse impacts to wetlands or other aquatic
resources. Maintenance of agricultural ditches should be limited to removing sediment in existing ditches to a specified depth at date of last maintenance. Conversion of wetlands
that are not currently in agricultural use to a new agricultural use should be subject to the
same regulations that govern new development.
Ecology encourages the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs), farm conservation plans, and incentive-based programs to improve agricultural practices in and near
wetlands. The goal of the BMPs should be to ensure that ongoing agricultural activities
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 10
minimize their effects on water quality, riparian ecology, salmonid populations, and
wildlife habitat.
Strategies for Protecting Wetlands from Impacts
Wetlands Inventory
You may wish to pursue accurate identification and rating of all wetlands in your
planning area based on the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western
Washington: 2014 Update (Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-
06-29, Olympia, WA, October 2014) and the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements. These documents can be downloaded at:
• http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/ratingsystems/index.html (rating
systems)
• http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/delineation.html (delineation manual and supplements)
While this approach may initially be more labor intensive and expensive, such
information will allow rapid review of development proposals and can help your jurisdiction prioritize areas for preservation or acquisition.
This approach is consistent with BAS. It can help with the development of a landscape-
analysis approach to protecting wetlands in your jurisdiction. Landscape analysis for
critical areas facilitates and informs long-range planning. The City of Aberdeen used this approach in their CAO update. (See Section XX.050.B in the sample ordinance.)
ABCs
The most basic approach to protecting wetland functions and values can be summarized
as the A-B-C Approach, or Avoid-Buffer-Compensate. This means that a CAO should
contain language to ensure that:
1. Wetlands impacts are avoided to the extent practicable.
2. Wetlands are buffered to protect them from adjacent land-use impacts.
3. Unavoidable impacts are compensated, or replaced.
Your CAO should provide requirements on how to reduce the severity of impacts to
wetlands. When an alteration to a wetland is proposed, impacts should be avoided,
minimized, or compensated for in the following sequential order of preference:
1. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 11
2. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and
its implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking
affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts;
3. Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment;
4. Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and
maintenance operations during the life of the action;
5. Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing
substitute resources or environments; and/or
6. Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures.
Buffers
Establishing standards for wetland buffers is usually the most challenging part of developing a CAO. However, developing a predictable, reasonable approach for
establishing buffers that includes the best available science is not as difficult as it may
seem.
The scientific literature is unequivocal that buffers are necessary to protect wetland functions and values. The literature consistently reports that the primary factors to
evaluate in determining appropriate buffer widths are:
1. The wetland type and functions needing protection (buffers filter sediment, nutrients, or toxics; screen noise and light; provide forage, nesting, or resting habitat for wetland-dependent species; etc.).
2. The types of adjacent land use and their expected impacts.
3. The characteristics of the buffer area (slope, soils, vegetation).
The widths of buffers needed vary widely, depending on these three factors. For
example, providing filtration of coarse sediment from residential development next to a
low-quality wetland would require only a relatively flat buffer of dense grasses or forest/shrub vegetation in the range of 20 to 30 feet. However, providing forage and nesting habitat for common wetland-dependent species such as waterfowl, herons, or
amphibians in a high-quality wetland adjacent to residential development would require a
buffer vegetated with trees and shrubs in the range of 200 to 300 feet. This illustrates the
necessity of using an approach to buffers that incorporates wetland type and functions (based on an appropriate rating system), types of land use, and the environmental characteristics of the existing buffer.
Your CAO should require buffers for activities that will impact wetland functions.
Ecology’s complete buffer recommendations are presented in Appendix 8-C of Wetlands
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 12
in Washington State, Volume 2 (revised October 2014). We recommend using the tables
shown in the sample ordinance.
Tables XX.1 and XX.3 are derived from the more-detailed tables in Volume 2. They are easy to use and are based on BAS. This approach provides the important balance of
predictability and flexibility. Determination of buffer size is simply a matter of applying
the results of the wetland rating system score to the buffer matrix, based on the wetland
category and wildlife habitat score. It generally requires smaller buffers for those
wetlands that do not have much wildlife use.
Table XX.1 requires the use of the minimizing measures in Table XX.2. These measures
are intended to reduce the impacts of the adjacent land use on the wetland. If impacts are
reduced, the size of the buffer required to protect the wetland’s functions can be reduced.
The buffer widths in Table XX.1 represent a 25% reduction in our recommended buffers in Volume 2.
Table XX.1 also requires the protection of a wildlife corridor between wetlands that score
5 or more habitat points and any other Priority Habitat. This requirement is particularly
applicable in large or rural jurisdictions where species need to have access to other habitats to meet their life needs. A buffer is the usual means of providing this necessary
habitat. However, if buffer reduction is allowed, we cannot ensure that these species will
have adequate access to habitat without providing a connective corridor. In urban areas,
the best solution is a landscape-based approach that takes into account actual species use
and spatial arrangement and connectivity of habitats. Without such an approach, jurisdictions should use the guidance provided in the sample wetland chapter.
If your jurisdiction is small and urban, providing a wildlife corridor may not be an option.
You should consult with Ecology wetland staff to determine whether using Tables XX.1
and XX.2 alone will provide adequate protection for your wetland functions.
Table XX.3 shows the buffer widths required if the minimizing measures in Table XX.2
are not implemented and if a wildlife corridor is not protected. These buffers are wider
than those in Table XX.1, because the impacts to the wetland functions are potentially
greater.
The buffer tables XX.1 and XX.3 do not consider land-use intensity in the buffer
calculation, since it is presumed that most urban land uses will be high or moderate
intensity. However, if your jurisdiction has an activity that can be considered low
intensity, such as a passive recreation area or nature park with undeveloped trails, you may wish to prescribe a smaller buffer for that area only. The buffer for an area should
be no less than 75% of the otherwise required buffer. Such a “low-intensity” buffer is not
appropriate for residential, commercial, or industrial uses. Of course, if your jurisdiction
includes rural land uses, you should consider using the buffer tables in Appendix 8-C of Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2 (revised October 2014).
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 13
Some wetland types listed in the buffer tables may not be present in your jurisdiction
(e.g., coastal lagoons, bogs, interdunal wetlands, etc.). If you are certain that these
wetlands do not occur within your jurisdiction and would not be introduced by future
annexations, you may remove those wetland types from the buffer tables.
You may wish to adopt an even simpler approach to wetland buffers, one based only on
wetland category. In this case, buffers must be large enough to protect the most-sensitive
wetlands from the most-damaging land-use impacts. Please refer to Table 8C-1 of
Appendix 8-C of Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2 (revised October 2014) for this example.
Ecology’s buffer recommendations are based on a moderate-risk approach to protecting
wetland functions. This means that there is a moderate risk that wetland functions will be
impacted. Adopting smaller buffers represents a high-risk approach, and you need to be prepared to justify why such an approach is necessary and to offer alternative means of
protecting wetland functions that help reduce the risk.
Ecology’s buffer recommendations are also based on the assumption that the buffer is well vegetated with native species appropriate to the ecoregion. If the buffer does not consist of vegetation adequate to provide the necessary protection, then either the
buffer area should be planted or the buffer width should be increased.
Buffer Averaging
Local governments often wish to allow buffer widths to be varied in certain
circumstances. This may be reasonable if your standard buffers are adequate. The width
of buffers may be averaged if this will improve the protection of wetland functions, or if it is the only way to allow for reasonable use of a parcel.
We recommend that a request for buffer averaging include a wetland report. The report
should be prepared by a qualified professional describing the current functions of the
wetland and its buffer and the measures that will be taken to ensure that there is no loss of wetland function due to the buffer averaging. The width of the buffer at any given point after averaging should be no smaller than 75% of the standard buffer.
If you choose to adopt narrower buffer widths than those supported by BAS, then further
reductions to the buffer width should not be allowed under any circumstances.
Mitigation
Applicants are required by state and federal permitting agencies to show that they have followed mitigation sequencing and have first avoided and minimized impacts to
wetlands wherever practicable. Your CAO should include the definition of mitigation
sequencing and require applicants to demonstrate that they have applied avoidance and
minimization. For more information and sample checklists, see
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/avoidance.html.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 14
Unavoidable impacts to wetlands should be offset by compensatory mitigation. Your
CAO should include standards for the type, location, amount, and timing of the
mitigation. It should also include clear guidance on the design considerations and
reporting requirements for mitigation plans.
Ecology’s recommendations for the amount of mitigation (ratios) are based on wetland
category, function, and special characteristics. Requiring a greater area for mitigation
than the wetland area that will be impacted helps offset both the risk that compensatory
mitigation will fail and the temporal loss of functions that may occur. We recommend using the ratio table shown in the sample ordinance. It is derived from the more-detailed
tables in Part 1 of the joint agency guidance on mitigation: Wetland Mitigation in
Washington State, Parts 1 and 2 (Ecology Publications #06-06-011a & b, March 2006).
As an alternative to the mitigation ratios found in the joint guidance, Ecology has developed a credit-debit tool for calculating when a proposed wetland mitigation project
adequately replaces the functions and values lost when wetlands are impacted. The tool
is designed to provide guidance for both regulators and applicants during two stages of
the mitigation process:
1. Estimating the functions and values lost when a wetland is altered (debits), and
2. Estimating the gain in functions and values that result from the mitigation
(credits).
The Department of Ecology, however, does not require the use of this credit-debit
method. It provides one method for determining the adequacy of compensatory wetland
mitigation. It does not set any new regulatory requirements. The document and
worksheets can be downloaded at:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/mitigation/creditdebit/index.html.
In 2008 the Corps and the EPA issued a rule governing compensatory mitigation. The
rule establishes performance standards and criteria to improve the quality and success of
compensatory mitigation, mitigation banks, and in-lieu fee programs. For more
information on the federal rule, see: http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/guidance/wetlands/wetlandsmitigation_index.cfm.
By adopting mitigation standards based on the state and federal guidance and rules, you
will be providing consistency for applicants who must also apply for state and federal
permits.
Mitigation Alternatives
Various options are available for mitigation, in addition to the traditional on-site concurrent option. These options include placing the mitigation away from the project
site (off-site mitigation), building mitigation in advance of project impacts, and using
third-party mitigation providers such as wetland banks and in-lieu-fee programs.
Deciding which option should be used depends on what works best for the applicant and
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 15
for the environment. Some of these options may not be available in your area at this
time. However, we recommend that your CAO allow these options. They can be
effective and valuable tools in preventing a net loss of wetland functions.
Some project applicants may propose mitigation that is consistent with sound ecological
principles but is located outside of your jurisdiction. You may wish to include language
in your CAO that enables your government to allow such out-of-jurisdiction mitigation
opportunities.
In addition to the following options, you might want to consider allowing transfer of
development rights (TDR) as a tool for protecting wetlands. The Department of
Commerce is working with four Puget Sound counties in a pilot TDR program. For more
information, contact the Commerce planner for your jurisdiction or see: Commerce
Regional Assistance Teams.
Mitigation Banking
A mitigation bank is a site where wetlands, streams, and/or other aquatic resource areas
have been restored, established, enhanced, or (in certain circumstances) preserved for the
purpose of providing compensation for unavoidable impacts to aquatic resources. A
mitigation bank may be created by a government agency, corporation, nonprofit organization, or other entity. The bank sells its credits to permittees who are required to
compensate for wetland impacts. Mitigation banks allow a permittee to simply write a
check for their mitigation obligation. It is the bank owner who is responsible for the
mitigation success. Mitigation banks require a formal agreement with the Corps,
Ecology, and the local jurisdiction to be used for federal or state permits.
Ecology adopted the final Wetland Mitigation Banks Rule (WAC 173-700) in 2009. The
purpose of the rule is to provide a framework for the certification, operation, and
monitoring of wetland mitigation banks. To learn more about wetland banking and the
rule, see Ecology’s website at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/mitigation/banking/index.html.
In-Lieu Fee (ILF)
In this approach to mitigation, a permittee pays a fee to a third party in lieu of conducting
project-specific mitigation or buying credits from a mitigation bank. ILF mitigation is used mainly to compensate for impacts to wetlands when better approaches to
compensation are not available or practicable, or when the use of an ILF is in the best
interest of the environment.
An ILF represents the expected costs to a third party of replacing the wetland functions lost or degraded as a result of the permittee’s project. Fees are typically held in trust until
sufficient funds have been collected to finance a mitigation project. Only a nonprofit
organization such as a local land trust, private conservation group, or government agency
with demonstrated competence in natural resource management may operate an ILF
program. All ILF programs must be approved by the Corps to be used for Section 404
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 16
permits. To learn more about ILF programs, see Ecology’s website at
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/mitigation/ilf.html.
Off-Site Mitigation
This refers to compensatory mitigation that is not located at or near the project that generates impacts to wetlands. Off-site mitigation is generally allowed when on-site mitigation is not practicable or environmentally preferable.
The 2008 federal rule on compensatory mitigation requires that some type of watershed
approach be used in siting mitigation. Ecology, the Corps of Engineers, and EPA have developed guidance to help applicants select potential off-site mitigation sites. To download a copy of this guidance, Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed
Approach (Western Washington) (Ecology Publication #09-06-032, December 2009),
please see https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/summarypages/0906032.html.
Advance Mitigation
When compensatory mitigation is implemented before, and in anticipation of, future
known impacts to wetlands, it is referred to as “advance mitigation.” Advance
mitigation has been used mostly for large mitigation projects that are constructed in
distinct phases where the unavoidable impacts to wetlands are known. Advance
mitigation lets an applicant provide all of the compensation needed for the entire project affecting wetlands at one time, which may result in more favorable mitigation ratios.
Although similar to mitigation banking, advance mitigation is different in several ways.
Most importantly, advance mitigation is used only to compensate for the permittee’s
specific project (or projects) with pre-identified impacts to wetlands. Wetland banks provide mitigation for unknown future impacts within a specific “service” area. The
advance mitigation can be used only by the permittee. Advance mitigation may not be
sold unless it is changed to a wetland bank. Ecology, WDFW, and the Corps have
developed guidance to help applicants develop advance mitigation proposals. To
download a copy of this guidance, Interagency Regulatory Guide: Advance Permittee-Responsible Mitigation (Ecology Publication #12-06-015, December 2012), please see
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1206015.html
Conclusion
We hope you find this information helpful. If you have questions about this document or
need additional assistance with the wetlands section of your critical areas ordinance update, please call Donna Bunten at (360) 407-7172 or donna.bunten@ecy.wa.gov.
You may also contact one of Ecology’s regional wetland specialists. They are available
to work with you during your update process. For example, they can offer presentations
to elected officials and planning commissions. They can also provide technical assistance including help with wetland delineation, wetland rating, ordinary high water
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 17
mark determination, and project review. Please use the following link to find the wetland
specialist for your area:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/wetlands/contacts.htm.
For assistance with other aspects of your critical areas ordinance update, please contact the Department of Commerce at (360) 725-3000.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 18
This page is purposely left blank
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 19
Appendix A - Sample Wetlands Chapter
(Western Washington)
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 20
This page is purposely left blank
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 21
Subchapter XX.XX
Wetlands Sections: XX.010 Purpose
XX.020 Identification and Rating
XX.030 Regulated Activities XX.040 Exemptions and Allowed Uses in Wetlands
XX.050 Wetland Buffers
XX.060 Critical Area Reports
XX.070 Compensatory Mitigation
XX.080 Unauthorized Alterations and Enforcement
XX.010 Purpose
The purposes of this Chapter are to:
A. Recognize and protect the beneficial functions performed by many wetlands,
which include, but are not limited to, providing food, breeding, nesting and/or rearing
habitat for fish and wildlife; recharging and discharging ground water; contributing to stream flow during low flow periods; stabilizing stream banks and shorelines; storing
storm and flood waters to reduce flooding and erosion; and improving water quality
through biofiltration, adsorption, and retention and transformation of sediments,
nutrients, and toxicants.
B. Regulate land use to avoid adverse effects on wetlands and maintain the functions and values of wetlands throughout (name of jurisdiction).
C. Establish review procedures for development proposals in and adjacent to
wetlands.
1. Compliance with the provisions of the Chapter does not constitute
compliance with other federal, state, and local regulations and permit requirements that may be required (for example, Shoreline Substantial
Development Permits, HPA permits, Army Corps of Engineers Section
404 permits, NPDES permits). The applicant is responsible for
complying with these requirements, apart from the process established in
this Chapter.
XX.020 Identification and Rating
A. Identification and Delineation. Identification of wetlands and delineation of
their boundaries pursuant to this Chapter shall be done in accordance with the approved
federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplement. All areas within
the City meeting the wetland designation criteria in that procedure are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this Chapter. Wetland delineations are
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 22
valid for five years; after such date the City shall determine whether a revision or
additional assessment is necessary.
B. Rating. Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington Department of
Ecology wetland rating system, as set forth in the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-029, or as
revised and approved by Ecology), which contains the definitions and methods for
determining whether the criteria below are met.
1. Category I. Category I wetlands are: (1) relatively undisturbed estuarine
wetlands larger than 1 acre; (2) wetlands of high conservation value that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage
Program/DNR; (3) bogs; (4) mature and old-growth forested wetlands
larger than 1 acre; (5) wetlands in coastal lagoons; (6) interdunal wetlands
that score 8 or 9 habitat points and are larger than 1 acre; and (7) wetlands
that perform many functions well (scoring 23 points or more). These wetlands: (1) represent unique or rare wetland types; (2) are more
sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; (3) are relatively undisturbed
and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a
human lifetime; or (4) provide a high level of functions.
2. Category II. Category II wetlands are: (1) estuarine wetlands smaller than 1 acre, or disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; (2) interdunal
wetlands larger than 1 acre or those found in a mosaic of wetlands; or (3)
wetlands with a moderately high level of functions (scoring between 20
and 22 points).
3. Category III. Category III wetlands are: (1) wetlands with a moderate level of functions (scoring between 16 and 19 points); (2) can often be
adequately replaced with a well-planned mitigation project; and (3)
interdunal wetlands between 0.1 and 1 acre. Wetlands scoring between 16
and 19 points generally have been disturbed in some ways and are often
less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands.
4. Category IV. Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions
(scoring fewer than 16 points) and are often heavily disturbed. These are
wetlands that we should be able to replace, or in some cases to improve.
However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be guaranteed in any specific case. These wetlands may provide some important functions,
and should be protected to some degree.
C. Illegal modifications. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal
modifications made by the applicant or with the applicant’s knowledge.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 23
XX.030 Regulated Activities
A. For any regulated activity, a critical areas report (see Chapter XX.060 of this
Chapter) may be required to support the requested activity.
B. The following activities are regulated if they occur in a regulated wetland or
its buffer:
1. The removal, excavation, grading, or dredging of soil, sand, gravel,
minerals, organic matter, or material of any kind.
2. The dumping of, discharging of, or filling with any material.
3. The draining, flooding, or disturbing of the water level or water table.
4. Pile driving.
5. The placing of obstructions.
6. The construction, reconstruction, demolition, or expansion of any structure.
7. The destruction or alteration of wetland vegetation through clearing,
harvesting, shading, intentional burning, or planting of vegetation that
would alter the character of a regulated wetland.
8. "Class IV - General Forest Practices" under the authority of the "1992
Washington State Forest Practices Act Rules and Regulations," WAC 222-
12-030, or as thereafter amended.
9. Activities that result in:
a. A significant change of water temperature.
b. A significant change of physical or chemical characteristics of the
sources of water to the wetland.
c. A significant change in the quantity, timing, or duration of the water
entering the wetland.
d. The introduction of pollutants.
C. Subdivisions. The subdivision and/or short subdivision of land in wetlands
and associated buffers are subject to the following:
1. Land that is located wholly within a wetland or its buffer may not be subdivided.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 24
2. Land that is located partially within a wetland or its buffer may be
subdivided provided that an accessible and contiguous portion of each new
lot is:
a. Located outside of the wetland and its buffer; and
b. Meets the minimum lot size requirements of Chapter XX.XX.
XX.040 Exemptions and Allowed Uses in Wetlands
A. The following wetlands may be exempt from the requirement to avoid impacts (Chapter XX.070.A.1), and they may be filled if the impacts are fully mitigated based on the remaining actions in Chapter XX.070.A.2 through 6. If available, impacts
should be mitigated through the purchase of credits from an in-lieu fee program or
mitigation bank, consistent with the terms and conditions of the program or bank. In
order to verify the following conditions, a critical area report for wetlands meeting the requirements in Chapter XX.060 must be submitted.
1. All isolated Category IV wetlands less than 4,000 square feet that:
a. Are not associated with riparian areas or their buffers
b. Are not associated with shorelines of the state or their associated
buffers
c. Are not part of a wetland mosaic
d. Do not score 5 or more points for habitat function based on the 2014
update to the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western
Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-029, or as
revised and approved by Ecology)
e. Do not contain a Priority Habitat or a Priority Area1 for a Priority
Species identified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife,
do not contain federally listed species or their critical habitat, or
species of local importance identified in Chapter XX.XX.
2. Wetlands less than 1,000 square feet that meet the above criteria and do not
contain federally listed species or their critical habitat are exempt from the
buffer provisions contained in this Chapter.
1See page 6 of “Priority Habitat and Species List,” Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2008, Olympia,
Washington. 177 pp.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 234 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 25
B. Activities Allowed in Wetlands. The activities listed below are allowed in
wetlands. These activities do not require submission of a critical area report, except
where such activities result in a loss of the functions and values of a wetland or wetland
buffer. These activities include:
1. Existing and ongoing agricultural activities, provided that they implement
applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs) contained in the latest
editions of the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS)
Field Office Technical Guide (FOTG); or develop a farm conservation plan in coordination with the local conservation district. BMPs and/or
farm plans should address potential impacts to wetlands from livestock,
nutrient and farm chemicals, soil erosion and sediment control and
agricultural drainage infrastructure. BMPs and/or farm plans should
ensure that ongoing agricultural activities minimize their effects on water quality, riparian ecology, salmonid populations, and wildlife habitat.
2. Those activities and uses conducted pursuant to the Washington State
Forest Practices Act and its rules and regulations, WAC 222-12-030,
where state law specifically exempts local authority, except those developments requiring local approval for Class 4 – General Forest
Practice Permits (conversions) as defined in RCW 76.09 and WAC 222-
12.
3. Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, shellfish, and/or other wildlife that does not entail changing the structure or
functions of the existing wetland.
4. The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural
reproduction of such crops and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil, planting of crops, chemical applications, or alteration of the
wetland by changing existing topography, water conditions, or water
sources.
5. Drilling for utilities/utility corridors under a wetland, with entrance/exit portals located completely outside of the wetland buffer, provided that the
drilling does not interrupt the ground water connection to the wetland or
percolation of surface water down through the soil column. Specific
studies by a hydrologist are necessary to determine whether the ground
water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column will be disturbed.
6. Enhancement of a wetland through the removal of non-native invasive
plant species. Removal of invasive plant species shall be restricted to
hand removal unless permits from the appropriate regulatory agencies have been obtained for approved biological or chemical treatments. All
removed plant material shall be taken away from the site and appropriately
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 235 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 26
disposed of. Plants that appear on the Washington State Noxious Weed
Control Board list of noxious weeds must be handled and disposed of
according to a noxious weed control plan appropriate to that species. Re-
vegetation with appropriate native species at natural densities is allowed in conjunction with removal of invasive plant species.
7. Educational and scientific research activities.
8. Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private facilities within an existing right-of-way, provided that the
maintenance or repair does not expand the footprint of the facility or right-
of-way.
9. Stormwater management facilities. A wetland or its buffer can be physically or hydrologically altered to meet the requirements of an LID, Runoff Treatment or Flow Control BMP if ALL of the following criteria
are met:
a. The wetland is classified as a Category IV or a Category III
wetland with a habitat score of 3-4 points, and
b. There will be “no net loss” of functions and values of the
wetland, and
c. The wetland does not contain a breeding population of any native amphibian species, and
d. The hydrologic functions of the wetland can be improved as
outlined in questions 3, 4, 5 of Chart 4 and questions 2, 3, 4 of
Chart 5 in the “Guide for Selecting Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach,” (available here:
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0906032.html); or the wetland is
part of a priority restoration plan that achieves restoration goals
identified in a Shoreline Master Program or other local or
regional watershed plan, and
e. The wetland lies in the natural routing of the runoff, and the
discharge follows the natural routing, and
f. All regulations regarding stormwater and wetland management are followed, including but not limited to local and state wetland
and stormwater codes, manuals, and permits, and
g. Modifications that alter the structure of a wetland or its soils
will require permits. Existing functions and values that are lost would have to be compensated/replaced.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 236 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 27
Stormwater LID BMPs required as part of New and Redevelopment
projects can be considered within wetlands and their buffers. However,
these areas may contain features that render LID BMPs infeasible. A site-
specific characterization is required to determine if an LID BMP is feasible at the project site.
XX.050 Wetland Buffers
A. Buffer Requirements. The following buffer widths have been established in
accordance with the best available science. They are based on the category of wetland
and the habitat score as determined by a qualified wetland professional using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology). The adjacent land use intensity is assumed to be high.
1. For wetlands that score 5 points or more for habitat function, the buffers in
Table XX.1 can be used if both of the following criteria are met:
• A relatively undisturbed, vegetated corridor at least 100 feet wide
is protected between the wetland and any other Priority Habitats as
defined by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
The latest definitions of priority habitats and their locations are available on the WDFW web site at:
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phshabs.htm )
The corridor must be protected for the entire distance between the
wetland and the Priority Habitat by some type of legal protection
such as a conservation easement.
Presence or absence of a nearby habitat must be confirmed by a
qualified biologist. If no option for providing a corridor is
available, Table XX.1 may be used with the required measures in
Table XX.2 alone.2
• The measures in Table XX.2 are implemented, where applicable, to minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses.
2. For wetlands that score 3-4 habitat points, only the measures in Table
XX.2 are required for the use of Table XX.1
3. If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in Table
XX.2, or is unable to provide a protected corridor where available, then
Table XX.3 must be used.
2 See discussion in the Introduction, page 12 as to whether this applies in small urban jurisdictions.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 237 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 28
4. The buffer widths in Table XX.1 and XX.3 assume that the buffer is
vegetated with a native plant community appropriate for the ecoregion. If
the existing buffer is unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with
invasive species that do not perform needed functions, the buffer should either be planted to create the appropriate plant community or the buffer
should be widened to ensure that adequate functions of the buffer are
provided.
Table XX.1 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington if Table XX.2 is Implemented and Corridor Provided
Buffer width (in feet) based on habitat score
Wetland Category 3-4 5 6-7 8-9
Category I:
Based on total score 75 105 165 225
Category I: Bogs and Wetlands of High
Conservation Value
190 225
Category I:
Coastal Lagoons 150 165 225
Category I:
Interdunal 225
Category I:
Forested 75 105 165 225
Category I:
Estuarine
150
(buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II:
Based on score 75 105 165 225
Category II:
Interdunal Wetlands 110 165 225
Category II:
Estuarine
110
(buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category III (all) 60 105 165 225
Category IV (all) 40
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 238 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 29
Table XX.2 Required measures to minimize impacts to wetlands
(Measures are required if applicable to a specific proposal)
Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights • Direct lights away from wetland
Noise • Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland
• If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation
plantings adjacent to noise source
• For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining,
establish an additional 10’ heavily vegetated buffer strip
immediately adjacent to the outer wetland buffer
Toxic runoff • Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while
ensuring wetland is not dewatered
• Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 ft of wetland
• Apply integrated pest management
Stormwater runoff • Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing
adjacent development
• Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer
• Use Low Intensity Development techniques (for more
information refer to the drainage ordinance and manual)
Change in water
regime
• Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from
impervious surfaces and new lawns
Pets and human
disturbance
• Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer
edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate
for the ecoregion
• Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a
conservation easement
Dust • Use best management practices to control dust
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 239 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 30
Table XX.3 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington
if Table XX.2 is NOT Implemented or Corridor NOT provided
Buffer width (in feet) based on habitat score
Wetland Category 3-4 5 6-7 8-9
Category I:
Based on total score 100 140 220 300
Category I:
Bogs and Wetlands of High Conservation Value
250 300
Category I: Coastal Lagoons 200 220 300
Category I: Interdunal 300
Category I: Forested 100 140 220 300
Category I: Estuarine 200 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II:
Based on score 100 140 220 300
Category II:
Interdunal Wetlands 150 220 300
Category II:
Estuarine
150
(buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category III (all) 80 140 220 300
Category IV (all) 50
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 240 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 31
5. Increased Wetland Buffer Area Width. Buffer widths shall be increased
on a case-by-case basis as determined by the Administrator when a larger
buffer is necessary to protect wetland functions and values. This
determination shall be supported by appropriate documentation showing that it is reasonably related to protection of the functions and values of the
wetland. The documentation must include but not be limited to the
following criteria:
a. The wetland is used by a state or federally listed plant or animal species or has essential or outstanding habitat for those species, or has
unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron rookeries or raptor
nesting trees; or
b. The adjacent land is susceptible to severe erosion, and erosion-control measures will not effectively prevent adverse wetland impacts; or
c. The adjacent land has minimal vegetative cover or slopes greater than
30 percent.
6. Buffer averaging to improve wetland protection may be permitted when
all of the following conditions are met:
a. The wetland has significant differences in characteristics that affect its
habitat functions, such as a wetland with a forested component adjacent to a degraded emergent component or a “dual-rated” wetland
with a Category I area adjacent to a lower-rated area.
b. The buffer is increased adjacent to the higher-functioning area of
habitat or more-sensitive portion of the wetland and decreased adjacent to the lower-functioning or less-sensitive portion as
demonstrated by a critical areas report from a qualified wetland
professional.
c. The total area of the buffer after averaging is equal to the area required without averaging.
d. The buffer at its narrowest point is never less than either ¾ of the
required width or 75 feet for Category I and II, 50 feet for Category
III, and 25 feet for Category IV, whichever is greater.
7. Averaging to allow reasonable use of a parcel may be permitted when all
of the following are met:
a. There are no feasible alternatives to the site design that could be accomplished without buffer averaging.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 241 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 32
b. The averaged buffer will not result in degradation of the wetland’s
functions and values as demonstrated by a critical areas report from a
qualified wetland professional.
c. The total buffer area after averaging is equal to the area required
without averaging.
d. The buffer at its narrowest point is never less than either ¾ of the
required width or 75 feet for Category I and II, 50 feet for Category III and 25 feet for Category IV, whichever is greater.
B. To facilitate long-range planning using a landscape approach, the
Administrator may identify and pre-assess wetlands using the rating system and establish
appropriate wetland buffer widths for such wetlands. The Administrator will prepare maps of wetlands that have been pre-assessed in this manner.
C. Measurement of Wetland Buffers. All buffers shall be measured
perpendicular from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field. The buffer for a
wetland created, restored, or enhanced as compensation for approved wetland alterations shall be the same as the buffer required for the category of the created, restored, or
enhanced wetland. Buffers must be fully vegetated in order to be included in buffer area
calculations. Lawns, walkways, driveways, and other mowed or paved areas will not be
considered buffers or included in buffer area calculations.
D. Buffers on Wetland Mitigation Sites. All wetland mitigation sites shall have
buffers consistent with the buffer requirements of this Chapter. Buffers shall be based on
the expected or target category of the proposed wetland mitigation site.
E. Buffer Maintenance. Except as otherwise specified or allowed in accordance with this Chapter, wetland buffers shall be retained in an undisturbed or enhanced
condition. In the case of compensatory mitigation sites, removal of invasive non-native
weeds is required for the duration of the mitigation bond (Section XX.070.J.2.a.x).
F. Impacts to Buffers. Requirements for the compensation for impacts to buffers are outlined in Section XX.070 of this Chapter.
G. Overlapping Critical Area Buffers. If buffers for two contiguous critical
areas overlap (such as buffers for a stream and a wetland), the wider buffer applies.
H. Allowed Buffer Uses. The following uses may be allowed within a wetland
buffer in accordance with the review procedures of this Chapter, provided they are not
prohibited by any other applicable law and they are conducted in a manner so as to
minimize impacts to the buffer and adjacent wetland:
1. Conservation or restoration activities aimed at protecting the soil, water,
vegetation, or wildlife.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 242 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 33
2. Passive recreation facilities designed and in accordance with an approved
critical area report, including:
a. Walkways and trails, provided that those pathways are limited to
minor crossings having no adverse impact on water quality. They
should be generally parallel to the perimeter of the wetland, located
only in the outer twenty-five percent (25%) of the wetland buffer area,
and located to avoid removal of significant trees. They should be limited to pervious surfaces no more than five (5) feet in width for
pedestrian use only. Raised boardwalks utilizing non-treated pilings
may be acceptable.
b. Wildlife-viewing structures.
3. Educational and scientific research activities.
4. Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or
private facilities within an existing right-of-way, provided that the
maintenance or repair does not increase the footprint or use of the facility
or right-of-way.
5. The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural
reproduction of such crops and provided the harvesting does not require
tilling of soil, planting of crops, chemical applications, or alteration of the
wetland by changing existing topography, water conditions, or water
sources.
6. Drilling for utilities/utility corridors under a buffer, with entrance/exit
portals located completely outside of the wetland buffer boundary,
provided that the drilling does not interrupt the ground water connection to
the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column.
Specific studies by a hydrologist are necessary to determine whether the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water
down through the soil column would be disturbed.
7. Enhancement of a wetland buffer through the removal of non-native
invasive plant species. Removal of invasive plant species shall be
restricted to hand removal. All removed plant material shall be taken away from the site and appropriately disposed of. Plants that appear on
the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board list of noxious weeds
must be handled and disposed of according to a noxious weed control plan
appropriate to that species. Revegetation with appropriate native species
at natural densities is allowed in conjunction with removal of invasive plant species.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 243 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 34
8. Repair and maintenance of non-conforming uses or structures, where
legally established within the buffer, provided they do not increase the
degree of nonconformity.
I. Signs and Fencing of Wetlands and Buffers:
1. Temporary markers. The outer perimeter of the wetland buffer and the
clearing limits identified by an approved permit or authorization shall be
marked in the field with temporary “clearing limits” fencing in such a way
as to ensure that no unauthorized intrusion will occur. The marking is
subject to inspection by the Administrator prior to the commencement of permitted activities. This temporary marking shall be maintained
throughout construction and shall not be removed until permanent signs, if
required, are in place.
2. Permanent signs. As a condition of any permit or authorization issued
pursuant to this Chapter, the Administrator may require the applicant to install permanent signs along the boundary of a wetland or buffer.
a. Permanent signs shall be made of an enamel-coated metal face and
attached to a metal post or another non-treated material of equal
durability. Signs must be posted at an interval of one (1) every fifty
(50) feet, or one (1) per lot if the lot is less than fifty (50) feet wide, and must be maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. The
signs shall be worded as follows or with alternative language approved
by the Administrator:
Protected Wetland Area Do Not Disturb Contact [Local Jurisdiction]
Regarding Uses, Restrictions, and Opportunities for Stewardship
b. The provisions of Subsection (a) may be modified as necessary to assure protection of sensitive features or wildlife.
3. Fencing
a. The applicant shall be required to install a permanent fence around the
wetland or buffer when domestic grazing animals are present or may be introduced on site.
b. Fencing installed as part of a proposed activity or as required in this
Subsection shall be designed so as to not interfere with species
migration, including fish runs, and shall be constructed in a manner
that minimizes impacts to the wetland and associated habitat.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 244 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 35
XX.060 Critical Area Report for Wetlands
A. If the Administrator determines that the site of a proposed development includes, is likely to include, or is adjacent to a wetland, a wetland report, prepared by a qualified professional, shall be required. The expense of preparing the wetland report
shall be borne by the applicant.
B. Minimum Standards for Wetland Reports. The written report and the accompanying plan sheets shall contain the following information, at a minimum:
1. The written report shall include at a minimum:
a. The name and contact information of the applicant; the name, qualifications, and contact information for the primary author(s) of the wetland critical area report; a description of the proposal;
identification of all the local, state, and/or federal wetland-related
permit(s) required for the project; and a vicinity map for the project.
b. A statement specifying the accuracy of the report and all assumptions made and relied upon.
c. Documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site, including field
data sheets for delineations, rating system forms, baseline hydrologic data, etc.
d. A description of the methodologies used to conduct the wetland
delineations, wetland ratings, or impact analyses, including references.
e. Identification and characterization of all critical areas, wetlands, water bodies, shorelines, floodplains, and buffers on or adjacent to the
proposed project area. For areas off site of the project site, estimate
conditions within 300 feet of the project boundaries using the best
available information. f. For each wetland identified on site and within 300 feet of the project
boundary, provide: the wetland rating, including a description of and
score for each function, per Wetland Ratings (Section XX.020.B) of
this Chapter; required buffers; hydrogeomorphic classification; wetland acreage based on a professional survey from the field delineation (acreages for on-site portion or estimate entire wetland
area including off-site portions); Cowardin classification of vegetation
communities; habitat elements; soil conditions based on site
assessment and/or soil survey information; and to the extent possible, hydrologic information such as location and condition of inlets/outlets (if they can be legally accessed), estimated water depths within the
wetland, and estimated hydroperiod patterns based on visual cues (e.g.,
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 245 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 36
algal mats, drift lines, flood debris, etc.). Provide acreage estimates,
classifications, and ratings based on entire wetland complexes, not
only the portion present on the proposed project site.
g. A description of the proposed actions, including an estimation of
acreages of impacts to wetlands and buffers based on the field
delineation and survey and an analysis of site development
alternatives, including a no-development alternative.
h. An assessment of the probable cumulative impacts to the wetlands and
buffers resulting from the proposed development.
i. A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation
sequencing pursuant to Mitigation Sequencing (Chapter XX.070.A) to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to critical areas.
j. A discussion of measures, including avoidance, minimization, and
compensation, proposed to preserve existing wetlands and restore any
wetlands that were degraded prior to the current proposed land-use activity.
k. A conservation strategy for habitat and native vegetation that
addresses methods to protect and enhance on-site habitat and wetland
functions.
l. An evaluation of the functions of the wetland and its buffer. Include
references for the method used and data sheets.
2. A copy of the site plan sheet(s) for the project must be included with the written report and must include, at a minimum:
a. Maps (to scale) depicting delineated and surveyed wetland and
required buffers on site, including buffers for off-site critical areas that
extend onto the project site; the development proposal; other critical areas; grading and clearing limits; and areas of proposed impacts to
wetlands and/or buffers (include square footage estimates).
b. A depiction of the proposed stormwater management facilities and
outlets (to scale) for the development, including estimated areas of intrusion into the buffers of any critical areas. The written report shall
contain a discussion of the potential impacts to the wetland(s)
associated with anticipated hydroperiod alterations from the project.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 246 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 37
XX.070 Compensatory Mitigation.
A. Mitigation Sequencing. Before impacting any wetland or its buffer, an
applicant shall demonstrate that the following actions have been taken. Actions are listed in the order of preference:
1. Avoid the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an
action. 2. Minimize impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative
steps to avoid or reduce impacts.
3. Rectify the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment.
4. Reduce or eliminate the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations. 5. Compensate for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing
substitute resources or environments.
6. Monitor the required compensation and take remedial or corrective measures when necessary.
B. Requirements for Compensatory Mitigation:
1. Compensatory mitigation for alterations to wetlands shall be used only for impacts that cannot be avoided or minimized and shall achieve equivalent
or greater biologic functions. Compensatory mitigation plans shall be
consistent with Wetland Mitigation in Washington State–Part 2:
Developing Mitigation Plans—Version 1, (Ecology Publication #06-06-
011b, Olympia, WA, March 2006, or as revised), and Selecting Wetland Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Western Washington)
(Publication #09-06-32, Olympia, WA, December 2009).
2. Mitigation ratios shall be consistent with Subsection H of this Chapter.
3. Mitigation requirements may also be determined using the credit/debit tool
described in Calculating Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation
in Wetlands of Western Washington: Final Report (Ecology Publication
#10-06-011, Olympia, WA, March 2012, or as revised) consistent with
subsection H of this Chapter.
C. Compensating for Lost or Affected Functions. Compensatory mitigation shall
address the functions affected by the proposed project, with an intention to achieve
functional equivalency or improvement of functions. The goal shall be for the
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 247 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 38
compensatory mitigation to provide similar wetland functions as those lost, except when
either:
1. The lost wetland provides minimal functions, and the proposed compensatory mitigation action(s) will provide equal or greater functions or will provide functions shown to be limiting within a watershed through
a formal Washington state watershed assessment plan or protocol; or
2. Out-of-kind replacement of wetland type or functions will best meet
watershed goals formally identified by the City, such as replacement of historically diminished wetland types.
D. Approaches to Compensatory Mitigation. Mitigation for lost or diminished
wetland and buffer functions shall rely on the approaches listed below.
1. Wetland mitigation banks. Credits from a certified wetland mitigation bank may be used to compensate for impacts located within the service area specified in the mitigation bank instrument. Use of credits from a
wetland mitigation bank certified under Chapter 173-700 WAC is allowed
if:
a. The approval authority determines that it would provide appropriate
compensation for the proposed impacts; and
b. The impact site is located in the service area of the bank.
c. The proposed use of credits is consistent with the terms and conditions
of the certified mitigation bank instrument.
d. Replacement ratios for projects using bank credits is consistent with
replacement ratios specified in the certified mitigation bank instrument.
2. In-Lieu Fee Mitigation: Credits from an approved in-lieu-fee program
may be used when all of the following apply:
a. The approval authority determines that it would provide environmentally appropriate compensation for the proposed impacts.
b. The proposed use of credits is consistent with the terms and conditions
of the approved in-lieu-fee program instrument.
c. Projects using in-lieu-fee credits shall have debits associated with the
proposed impacts calculated by the applicant’s qualified wetland
professional using the credit assessment method specified in the
approved instrument for the in-lieu-fee program.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 248 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 39
d. The impacts are located within the service area specified in the
approved in-lieu-fee instrument.
3. Permittee-responsible mitigation. In this situation, the permittee performs the mitigation after the permit is issued and is ultimately responsible for
implementation and success of the mitigation. Permittee-responsible
mitigation may occur at the site of the permitted impacts or at an off-site
location within the same watershed. Permittee-responsible mitigation
shall be used only if the applicant’s qualified wetland professional demonstrates to the approval authority’s satisfaction that the proposed
approach is ecologically preferable to use of a bank or ILF program,
consistent with the criteria in this section.
E. Types of Compensatory Mitigation. Mitigation for lost or diminished wetland and buffer functions shall rely on a type listed below in order of preference. A lower-
preference form of mitigation shall be used only if the applicant’s qualified wetland
professional demonstrates to the approval authority’s satisfaction that all higher-ranked
types of mitigation are not viable, consistent with the criteria in this section.
1. Restoration: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural or historic
functions to a former or degraded wetland. For the purpose of tracking net
gains in wetland acres, restoration is divided into:
a. Re-establishment: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural or
historic functions to a former wetland. Re-establishment results in a
gain in wetland acres (and functions). Activities could include
removing fill material, plugging ditches, or breaking drain tiles.
b. Rehabilitation: The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or
biological characteristics of a site with the goal of repairing natural or
historic functions of a degraded wetland. Rehabilitation results in a
gain in wetland function but does not result in a gain in wetland acres.
Activities could involve breaching a dike to reconnect wetlands to a floodplain or return tidal influence to a wetland.
2. Establishment (Creation): The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or
biological characteristics of a site to develop a wetland on an upland or
deepwater site where a wetland did not previously exist. Establishment results in a gain in wetland acres. Activities typically involve excavation
of upland soils to elevations that will produce a wetland hydroperiod,
create hydric soils, and support the growth of hydrophytic plant species.
a. If a site is not available for wetland restoration to compensate for expected wetland and/or buffer impacts, the approval authority may
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 249 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 40
authorize creation of a wetland and buffer upon demonstration by the
applicant’s qualified wetland professional that:
i. The hydrology and soil conditions at the proposed mitigation site are conducive for sustaining the proposed wetland and that
creation of a wetland at the site will not likely cause hydrologic
problems elsewhere;
ii. Adjacent land uses and site conditions do not jeopardize the viability of the proposed wetland and buffer (e.g., due to the
presence of invasive plants or noxious weeds, stormwater runoff,
noise, light, or other impacts); and
iii. The proposed wetland and buffer will eventually be self-sustaining with little or no long-term maintenance.
3. Enhancement. The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological
characteristics of a wetland site to heighten, intensify, or improve specific
function(s) or to change the growth stage or composition of the vegetation present. Enhancement is undertaken for specified purposes such as water
quality improvement, flood water retention, or wildlife habitat.
Enhancement results in a change in some wetland functions and can lead
to a decline in other wetland functions, but does not result in a gain in
wetland acres. Activities typically consist of planting vegetation, controlling non-native or invasive species, modifying site elevations or the
proportion of open water to influence hydroperiods, or some combination
of these activities. Applicants proposing to enhance wetlands or
associated buffers shall demonstrate how the proposed enhancement will
increase the wetland’s/buffer’s functions, how this increase in function will adequately compensate for the impacts, and how existing wetland
functions at the mitigation site will be protected.
4. Protection/Maintenance (Preservation). Removing a threat to, or
preventing the decline of, wetland conditions by an action in or near a wetland. This includes the purchase of land or easements, or repairing
water control structures or fences. This term also includes activities
commonly associated with the term preservation. Preservation does not
result in a gain of wetland acres. Permanent protection of a Category I or
II wetland and associated buffer at risk of degradation can be used only if:
a. The approval authority determines that the proposed preservation is the
best mitigation option;
b. The proposed preservation site is under threat of undesirable ecological change due to permitted, planned, or likely actions that will not be
adequately mitigated under existing regulations;
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 250 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 41
c. The area proposed for preservation is of high quality or critical for the
health of the watershed or basin due to its location. Some of the
following features may be indicative of high-quality sites:
i. Category I or II wetland rating (using the wetland rating system for
western Washington)
ii. Rare or irreplaceable wetland type (for example, bogs, mature forested wetlands, estuarine wetlands) or aquatic habitat that is rare
or a limited resource in the area;
iii. The presence of habitat for priority or locally important wildlife
species; or also list has provides biological and/or hydrological connectivity;
iv. Provides biololgical and/or hydrological connectivity;
v. Priority sites in an adopted watershed plan.
d. Permanent preservation of the wetland and buffer will be provided
through a conservation easement or tract held by an appropriate natural
land resource manager, such as a land trust.
e. The approval authority may approve other legal and administrative
mechanisms in lieu of a conservation easement if it determines they are
adequate to protect the site.
f. Ratios for preservation in combination with other forms of mitigation generally range from 10:1 to 20:1, as determined on a case-by-case
basis, depending on the quality of the wetlands being impacted and the
quality of the wetlands being preserved. Ratios for preservation as the
sole means of mitigation generally start at 20:1.
F. Location of Compensatory Mitigation. Compensatory mitigation actions shall generally be conducted within the same sub-drainage basin and on the site of the
alteration except when the applicant can demonstrate that off-site mitigation is
ecologically preferable. The following criteria will be evaluated when determining
whether the proposal is ecologically preferable. When considering off-site mitigation, preference should be given to using alternative mitigation, such as a mitigation bank, an
in-lieu-fee program, or advance mitigation.
1. There are no reasonable opportunities on site or within the sub-drainage
basin (e.g., on-site options would require elimination of high-functioning
upland habitat), or opportunities on site or within the sub-drainage basin do not have a high likelihood of success based on a determination of the
capacity of the site to compensate for the impacts. Considerations should
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 251 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 42
include: anticipated replacement ratios for wetland mitigation, buffer
conditions and required widths, available water to maintain anticipated
hydrogeomorphic classes of wetlands when restored, proposed flood
storage capacity, and potential to mitigate riparian fish and wildlife impacts (such as connectivity);
2. On-site mitigation would require elimination of high-quality upland
habitat.
3. Off-site mitigation has a greater likelihood of providing equal or improved
wetland functions than the altered wetland.
4. Off-site locations shall be in the same sub-drainage basin unless:
a. Established watershed goals for water quality, flood storage or
conveyance, habitat, or other wetland functions have been established by the City and strongly justify location of mitigation at another site;
or
b. Credits from a state-certified wetland mitigation bank are used as
compensation, and the use of credits is consistent with the terms of the certified bank instrument;
c. Fees are paid to an approved in-lieu-fee program to compensate for the
impacts.
5. The design for the compensatory mitigation project needs to be
appropriate for its location (i.e., position in the landscape). Therefore,
compensatory mitigation should not result in the creation, restoration, or
enhancement of an atypical wetland. G. Timing of Compensatory Mitigation. It is preferred that compensatory
mitigation projects be completed prior to activities that will impact wetlands. At the
least, compensatory mitigation shall be completed immediately following disturbance and
prior to use or occupancy of the action or development. Construction of mitigation
projects shall be timed to reduce impacts to existing fisheries, wildlife, and flora.
1. The Administrator may authorize a one-time temporary delay in
completing construction or installation of the compensatory mitigation
when the applicant provides a written explanation from a qualified
wetland professional as to the rationale for the delay. An appropriate rationale would include identification of the environmental conditions that
could produce a high probability of failure or significant construction
difficulties (e.g., project delay lapses past a fisheries window, or installing
plants should be delayed until the dormant season to ensure greater
survival of installed materials). The delay shall not create or perpetuate hazardous conditions or environmental damage or degradation, and the
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 252 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 43
delay shall not be injurious to the health, safety, or general welfare of the
public. The request for the temporary delay must include a written
justification that documents the environmental constraints that preclude
implementation of the compensatory mitigation plan. The justification must be verified and approved by the City.
H. Wetland Mitigation Ratios3:
Category and Type of Wetland Creation or Re-establishment Rehabilitation Enhancement
Category I:
Bog, Natural
Heritage site
Not considered
possible Case by case Case by case
Category I:
Mature Forested 6:1 12:1 24:1
Category I:
Based on functions 4:1 8:1 16:1
Category II 3:1 6:1 12:1
Category III 2:1 4:1 8:1
Category IV 1.5:1 3:1 6:1
I. Credit/Debit Method. To more fully protect functions and values, and as an
alternative to the mitigation ratios found in the joint guidance Wetland Mitigation in
Washington State Parts I and II (Ecology Publication #06-06-011a-b, Olympia, WA,
March 2006), the administrator may allow mitigation based on the “credit/debit” method developed by the Department of Ecology in Calculating Credits and Debits for
Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington: Final Report, (Ecology
Publication #10-06-011, Olympia, WA, March 2012, or as revised).
3 Ratios for rehabilitation and enhancement may be reduced when combined with 1:1 replacement through
creation or re-establishment. See Table 1a, Wetland Mitigation in Washington State – Part 1: Agency Policies and Guidance –Version 1, (Ecology Publication #06-06-011a, Olympia, WA, March 2006 or as
revised). See also Paragraph D.4 for more information on using preservation as compensation.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 253 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 44
J. Compensatory Mitigation Plan. When a project involves wetland and/or
buffer impacts, a compensatory mitigation plan prepared by a qualified professional shall
be required, meeting the following minimum standards:
1. Wetland Critical Area Report. A critical area report for wetlands must
accompany or be included in the compensatory mitigation plan and include
the minimum parameters described in Minimum Standards for Wetland
Reports (Section XX.060.B) of this Chapter.
2. Compensatory Mitigation Report. The report must include a written report
and plan sheets that contain, at a minimum, the following elements. Full
guidance can be found in Wetland Mitigation in Washington State– Part 2:
Developing Mitigation Plans (Version 1) (Ecology Publication #06-06-
011b, Olympia, WA, March 2006 or as revised).
a. The written report must contain, at a minimum:
i. The name and contact information of the applicant; the name,
qualifications, and contact information for the primary author(s)
of the compensatory mitigation report; a description of the proposal; a summary of the impacts and proposed compensation
concept; identification of all the local, state, and/or federal
wetland-related permit(s) required for the project; and a vicinity
map for the project.
ii. Description of how the project design has been modified to avoid, minimize, or reduce adverse impacts to wetlands.
iii. Description of the existing wetland and buffer areas proposed to
be altered. Include acreage (or square footage), water regime,
vegetation, soils, landscape position, surrounding land uses, and
functions. Also describe impacts in terms of acreage by Cowardin classification, hydrogeomorphic classification, and
wetland rating, based on Wetland Ratings (Section XX.XX) of
this Chapter.
iv. Description of the compensatory mitigation site, including
location and rationale for selection. Include an assessment of existing conditions: acreage (or square footage) of wetlands and
uplands, water regime, sources of water, vegetation, soils,
landscape position, surrounding land uses, and functions.
Estimate future conditions in this location if the compensation
actions are NOT undertaken (i.e., how would this site progress through natural succession?).
v. Surface and subsurface hydrologic conditions, including an
analysis of existing and proposed hydrologic regimes for
enhanced, created, or restored compensatory mitigation areas.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 254 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 45
Include illustrations of how data for existing hydrologic
conditions were used to determine the estimates of future
hydrologic conditions
vi. A description of the proposed actions for compensation of wetland and upland areas affected by the project. Include overall
goals of the proposed mitigation, including a description of the
targeted functions, hydrogeomorphic classification, and
categories of wetlands.
vii. A description of the proposed mitigation construction activities and timing of activities.
viii. Performance standards (measurable standards for years post-
installation) for upland and wetland communities, a monitoring
schedule, and a maintenance schedule and actions proposed by
year.
ix. A discussion of ongoing management practices that will protect
wetlands after the development project has been implemented,
including proposed monitoring and maintenance programs (for
remaining wetlands and compensatory mitigation wetlands).
x. A bond estimate for the entire compensatory mitigation project, including the following elements: site preparation, plant
materials, construction materials, installation oversight,
maintenance twice per year for up to five (5) years, annual
monitoring field work and reporting, and contingency actions for
a maximum of the total required number of years for monitoring.
xi. Proof of establishment of Notice on Title for the wetlands and
buffers on the project site, including the compensatory mitigation
areas.
b. The scaled plan sheets for the compensatory mitigation must contain,
at a minimum:
i. Surveyed edges of the existing wetland and buffers, proposed
areas of wetland and/or buffer impacts, location of proposed
wetland and/or buffer compensation actions.
ii. Existing topography, ground-proofed, at two-foot contour
intervals in the zone of the proposed compensation actions if any grading activity is proposed in the compensation area(s). Also
include existing cross-sections (estimated one-foot intervals) of
wetland areas on the development site that are proposed to be
altered and for the proposed areas of wetland or buffer
compensation.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 255 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 46
iii. Conditions expected from the proposed actions on site, including
future hydrogeomorphic types, vegetation community types by
dominant species (wetland and upland), and future water
regimes.
iv. Required wetland buffers for existing wetlands and proposed
compensation areas. Also identify any zones where buffers are
proposed to be reduced or enlarged outside of the standards
identified in this Chapter.
v. A planting plan for the compensation area, including all species by proposed community type and water regime, size and type of
plant material to be installed, spacing of plants, typical clustering
patterns, total number of each species by community type, and
timing of installation.
K. Buffer Mitigation Ratios. Impacts to buffers shall be mitigated at a minimum 1:1 ratio. Compensatory buffer mitigation shall replace those buffer functions lost from
development.
L. Protection of the Mitigation Site. The mitigation area and any associated
buffer shall be located in a critical area tract or a conservation easement consistent with
Chapter XX.XX.
M. Monitoring. Mitigation monitoring shall be required for a period necessary to
establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five
years. If a scrub-shrub or forested vegetation community is proposed, monitoring may be
required for ten years or more. The project mitigation plan shall include monitoring
elements that ensure certainty of success for the project’s natural resource values and functions. If the mitigation goals are not obtained within the initial five-year period, the
applicant remains responsible for restoration of the natural resource values and functions
until the mitigation goals agreed to in the mitigation plan are achieved.
N. Advance Mitigation. Mitigation for projects with pre-identified impacts to wetlands may be constructed in advance of the impacts if the mitigation is implemented
according to federal rules, state policy on advance mitigation, and state water quality
regulations consistent with Interagency Regulatory Guide: Advance Permittee-
Responsible Mitigation (Ecology Publication #12-06-015, Olympia, WA, December
2012).
O. Alternative Mitigation Plans. The Administrator may approve alternative
wetland mitigation plans that are based on best available science, such as priority
restoration plans that achieve restoration goals identified in the SMP. Alternative
mitigation proposals must provide an equivalent or better level of protection of wetland functions and values than would be provided by the strict application of this chapter.
The Administrator shall consider the following for approval of an alternative
mitigation proposal:
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 256 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 47
1. The proposal uses a watershed approach consistent with Selecting Wetland
Mitigation Sites Using a Watershed Approach (Western Washington)
(Ecology Publication #09-06-32, Olympia, WA, December 2009).
2. Creation or enhancement of a larger system of natural areas and open
space is preferable to the preservation of many individual habitat areas.
3. Mitigation according to Section E is not feasible due to site constraints such as parcel size, stream type, wetland category, or geologic hazards.
4. There is clear potential for success of the proposed mitigation at the
proposed mitigation site.
5. The plan shall contain clear and measurable standards for achieving
compliance with the specific provisions of the plan. A monitoring plan
shall, at a minimum, meet the provisions in Section J.
6. The plan shall be reviewed and approved as part of overall approval of the proposed use.
7. A wetland of a different type may be justified based on regional needs or
functions and values; the replacement ratios may not be reduced or
eliminated unless the reduction results in a preferred environmental alternative.
8. Mitigation guarantees shall meet the minimum requirements as outlined in
Section J.2.a.viii.
9. Qualified professionals in each of the critical areas addressed shall prepare
the plan.
10. The City may consult with agencies with expertise and jurisdiction over
the critical areas during the review to assist with analysis and identification of appropriate performance measures that adequately
safeguard critical areas.
XX.080 Unauthorized Alterations and Enforcement
A. When a wetland or its buffer has been altered in violation of this Chapter, all
ongoing development work shall stop, and the critical area shall be restored. The City
shall have the authority to issue a “stop-work” order to cease all ongoing development
work and order restoration, rehabilitation, or replacement measures at the owner’s or other responsible party’s expense to compensate for violation of provisions of this
Chapter.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 257 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 48
B. Requirement for Restoration Plan. All development work shall remain
stopped until a restoration plan is prepared and approved by the City. Such a plan shall
be prepared by a qualified professional using the currently accepted scientific principles
and shall describe how the actions proposed meet the minimum requirements described in Subsection C below. The Administrator shall, at the applicant or other responsible
party’s expense, seek expert advice in determining the adequacy of the plan. Inadequate
plans shall be returned to the applicant or other responsible party for revision and re-
submittal.
C. Minimum Performance Standards for Restoration. The following minimum performance standards shall be met for the restoration of a wetland, provided that if the
applicant or other responsible party can demonstrate that greater functions and habitat
values can be obtained, these standards may be modified:
1. The historic structure, functions, and values of the affected wetland shall
be restored, including water quality and habitat functions.
2. The historic soil types and configuration shall be restored to the extent
practicable.
3. The wetland and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation that replicates the vegetation historically found on the site in species types,
sizes, and densities. The historic functions and values should be replicated
at the location of the alteration.
4. Information demonstrating compliance with other applicable provisions of this Chapter shall be submitted to the Administrator.
D. Site Investigations. The Administrator is authorized to make site inspections
and take such actions as are necessary to enforce this Chapter. The Administrator shall
present proper credentials and make a reasonable effort to contact any property owner before entering onto private property.
E. Penalties. Any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity convicted
of violating any of the provisions of this Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
1. Each day or portion of a day during which a violation of this Chapter is
committed or continued shall constitute a separate offense. Any
development carried out contrary to the provisions of this Chapter shall
constitute a public nuisance and may be enjoined as provided by the
statutes of the state of Washington. The City may levy civil penalties against any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity for
violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter. The civil penalty shall
be assessed at a maximum rate of $XX dollars per day per violation.
2. If the wetland affected cannot be restored, monies collected as penalties shall be deposited in a dedicated account for the preservation or
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 258 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 49
restoration of landscape processes and functions in the watershed in which
the affected wetland is located. The City may coordinate its preservation
or restoration activities with other cities in the watershed to optimize the
effectiveness of the restoration action.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 259 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 50
This page is purposely left blank
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 260 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 51
Appendix B - Wetland Definitions
(Western Washington)
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 261 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version
Page 52
This page is purposely left blank
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 262 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 53
Appendix B – Wetland Definitions
Agricultural Activities, Existing and Ongoing – Those activities conducted on lands
defined in RCW 84.34.020(2), and those activities involved in the production of crops
and livestock, including but not limited to operation, maintenance and conservation
measures of farm and stock ponds or drainage ditches, irrigation systems, changes
between agricultural activities, and normal operation, maintenance or repair of existing serviceable structures, facilities or improved areas. Activities which bring an area into
agricultural use are not part of an ongoing activity. An operation ceases to be ongoing
when the area in which it was conducted is proposed for conversion to a nonagricultural
use or has lain idle for a period of longer than five years, unless the idle land is registered
in a federal or state soils conversation program. Alteration – Any human-induced change in an existing condition of a critical area or its
buffer. Alterations include, but are not limited to, grading, filling, channelizing,
dredging, clearing of vegetation, construction, compaction, excavation, or any other
activity that changes the character of the critical area.
Best Available Science – Current scientific information used in the process to designate,
protect, or restore critical areas; that is, derived from a valid scientific process as defined
by WAC 365-195-900 through 925.
Best Management Practices (BMPs) – Conservation practices or systems of practices and management measures that:
(a) Control soil loss and reduce water quality degradation caused by high
concentrations of nutrients, animal waste, toxics, or sediment;
(b) Minimize adverse impacts to surface water and ground water flow and
circulation patterns and to the chemical, physical, and biological characteristics of wetlands;
(c) Protect trees, vegetation, and soils designated to be retained during and
following site construction and use native plant species appropriate to the
site for re-vegetation of disturbed areas; and
(d) Provide standards for proper use of chemical herbicides within critical areas.
Bog – A low-nutrient, acidic wetland with organic soils and characteristic bog plants, as
described in Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014
Update (Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-29, Olympia, WA,
October 2014).
Buffer or Buffer Zone – The area contiguous with a critical area that maintains the
functions and/or structural stability of the critical area.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 263 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 54
Coastal Lagoon – A shallow body of water partly or completely separated from the sea
by a barrier beach that receives periodic influxes of salt water, as described in
Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update
(Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-29, Olympia, WA, October 2014).
Critical Areas – Critical areas include any of the following areas or ecosystems: critical
aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, geologically
hazardous areas, frequently flooded areas, and wetlands, as defined in RCW 36.70A and this Chapter.
Creation – The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics to
develop a wetland on an upland or deepwater site where a wetland did not previously
exist. Creation results in a gain in wetland acreage and function. A typical action is the
excavation of upland soils to elevations that will produce a wetland hydroperiod and hydric soils, and support the growth of hydrophytic plant species.
Cumulative Impacts or Effects – The combined, incremental effects of human activity
on ecological or critical area functions and values. Cumulative impacts result when the
effects of an action are added to or interact with the effects of other actions in a particular
place and within a particular time. It is the combination of these effects, and any resulting environmental degradation, that should be the focus of cumulative impact
analysis and changes to policies and permitting decisions.
Development – A land use consisting of the construction or exterior alteration of
structures; grading, dredging, drilling, or dumping; filling; removal of sand, gravel, or minerals; bulk heading; driving of pilings; or any project of a temporary or permanent
nature which modifies structures, land, wetlands, or shorelines and which does not fall
within the allowable exemptions contained in the City Code.
Enhancement – The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics
of a wetland to heighten, intensify, or improve specific function(s) or to change the growth stage or composition of the vegetation present. Enhancement is undertaken for
specified purposes such as water quality improvement, flood water retention, or wildlife
habitat. Enhancement results in a change in wetland function(s) and can lead to a decline
in other wetland functions, but does not result in a gain in wetland acres. Examples are
planting vegetation, controlling non-native or invasive species, and modifying site elevations to alter hydroperiods.
Estuarine Wetland – A vegetated wetland with a water regime that is predominately
tidal, as described in Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Washington State Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-29, Olympia, WA, October 2014).
Functions and Values – The services provided by critical areas to society, including, but
not limited to, improving and maintaining water quality, providing fish and wildlife
habitat, supporting terrestrial and aquatic food chains, reducing flooding and erosive
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 264 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 55
flows, wave attenuation, historical or archaeological importance, educational
opportunities, and recreation.
Growth Management Act – RCW 36.70A and 36.70B, as amended.
Hazardous Substances – Any liquid, solid, gas, or sludge, including any material, substance, product, commodity, or waste, regardless of quantity, that exhibits any of the
physical, chemical, or biological properties described in WAC 173-303-090 or 173-303-
100.
Impervious Surface – A surface area which either prevents or retards the entry of water
into the soil mantle as under natural conditions prior to development. A non-vegetated surface area which causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities or at an
increased rate of flow from the flow present under pre-development or pre-developed
conditions. Common impervious surfaces include, but are not limited to, roof tops,
walkways, patios, driveways, parking lots or storage areas, concrete or asphalt paving,
gravel roads, packed earthen materials, and oiled, macadam or other surfaces which similarly impede the natural infiltration of stormwater.
In-Kind Compensation – To replace critical areas with substitute areas whose
characteristics and functions closely approximate those destroyed or degraded by a
regulated activity.
In-Lieu-Fee Program – An agreement between a regulatory agency (state, federal, or local) and a single sponsor, generally a public natural resource agency or non-profit
organization. Under an in-lieu-fee agreement, the mitigation sponsor collects funds from
an individual or a number of individuals who are required to conduct compensatory
mitigation required under a wetland regulatory program. The sponsor may use the funds
pooled from multiple permittees to create one or a number of sites under the authority of the agreement to satisfy the permittees’ required mitigation.
Infiltration – The downward entry of water into the immediate surface of soil.
Interdunal Wetland – A wetland that forms in the deflation plains and swales that are
geomorphic features in areas of coastal dunes, as described in Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Washington State Department of Ecology.
Isolated Wetland – A wetland that is hydrologically isolated from other aquatic
resources, as determined by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
Isolated wetlands may perform important functions and are protected by state law (RCW 90.48) whether or not they are protected by federal law.
Mature and Old-Growth Forested Wetland – A wetland having at least 1 contiguous
acre of either old-growth forest or mature forest, as described in Washington State
Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Washington State
Department of Ecology Publication #14-06-29, Olympia, WA, October 2014).
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 265 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 56
Mitigation – Avoiding, minimizing, or compensating for adverse critical areas impacts.
Mitigation, in the following sequential order of preference, is:
(a) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an
action;
(b) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and
its implementation by using appropriate technology or by taking
affirmative steps to avoid or reduce impacts;
(c) Rectifying the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, and
habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the conditions existing at the time of the initiation
of the project;
(d) Reducing or eliminating the impact or hazard over time by preservation
and maintenance operations during the life of the action;
(e) Compensating for the impact to wetlands, critical aquifer recharge areas, and habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing
substitute resources or environments; and
(f) Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial
action when necessary.
Mitigation for individual actions may include a combination of the above measures.
Monitoring – Evaluating the impacts of development proposals on the biological,
hydrological, and geological elements of such systems, and assessing the performance of
required mitigation measures through the collection and analysis of data by various
methods for the purpose of understanding and documenting changes in natural ecosystems and features. Monitoring includes gathering baseline data.
Native Vegetation – Plant species that occur naturally in a particular region or
environment and were present before European colonization.
Off-Site Compensation – To replace critical areas away from the site on which a critical
area has been impacted.
On-Site Compensation – To replace critical areas at or adjacent to the site on which a
critical areas has been impacted.
Ordinary High Water Mark – That mark which is found by examining the bed and
banks of water bodies and ascertaining where the presence and action of waters are so
common and usual, and so long continued in all ordinary years, that the soil has a character distinct from that of the abutting upland in respect to vegetation.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 266 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 57
Preservation – The removal of a threat to, or preventing the decline of, wetland
conditions by an action in or near a wetland. This term includes the purchase of land or
conservation easements, repairing water control structures or fences, or structural
protection. Preservation does not result in a gain of wetland acres but may result in a gain in functions over the long term.
Project Area – All areas, including those within fifty (50) feet of the area, proposed to be
disturbed, altered, or used by the proposed activity or the construction of any proposed
structures. When the action binds the land, such as a subdivision, short subdivision, binding site plan, planned unit development, or rezone, the project area shall include the
entire parcel, at a minimum.
Prior Converted Croplands – Prior converted croplands (PCCs) are defined in federal
law as wetlands that were drained, dredged, filled, leveled, or otherwise manipulated,
including the removal of woody vegetation, before December 23, 1985, to enable production of an agricultural commodity, and that: 1) have had an agricultural
commodity planted or produced at least once prior to December 23, 1985; 2) do not have
standing water for more than 14 consecutive days during the growing season, and 3) have
not since been abandoned.
Qualified Professional – A qualified professional for wetlands must be a professional
wetland scientist with at least two years of full-time work experience as a wetlands
professional, including delineating wetlands using the federal manual and supplements,
preparing wetlands reports, conducting function assessments, and developing and
implementing mitigation plans.
Re-establishment – The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological
characteristics of a site with the goal of returning natural or historic functions to a former
wetland. Re-establishment results in rebuilding a former wetland and results in a gain in
wetland acres and functions. Activities could include removing fill, plugging ditches, or
breaking drain tiles.
Rehabilitation – The manipulation of the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics
of a site with the goal of repairing natural or historic functions and processes of a
degraded wetland. Rehabilitation results in a gain in wetland function but does not result
in a gain in wetland acres. Activities could involve breaching a dike to reconnect wetlands to a floodplain or returning tidal influence to a wetland.
Repair or Maintenance – An activity that restores the character, scope, size, and design
of a serviceable area, structure, or land use to its previously authorized and undamaged
condition. Activities that change the character, size, or scope of a project beyond the original design and drain, dredge, fill, flood, or otherwise alter critical areas are not
included in this definition.
Restoration – Measures taken to restore an altered or damaged natural feature, including:
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 267 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 58
(a) Active steps taken to restore damaged wetlands, streams, protected habitat,
or their buffers to the functioning condition that existed prior to an
unauthorized alteration; and
(b) Actions performed to re-establish structural and functional characteristics of a critical area that have been lost by alteration, past management
activities, or catastrophic events.
SEPA – Washington State Environmental Policy Act, 43.21C RCW.
Service Area – The geographic area within which impacts can be mitigated at a specific
mitigation bank or an in-lieu-fee program, as designated in its instrument.
Soil Survey – The most recent soil survey for the local area or county by the National
Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Species – Any group of animals or plants classified as a species or subspecies as
commonly accepted by the scientific community.
Species of Local Importance – Those species of local concern designated by the City in Chapter XX.XX due to their population status or their sensitivity to habitat manipulation.
Species, Listed -- Any species listed under the federal Endangered Species Act or state
endangered, threatened, and sensitive, or priority lists (see WAC 232-12-297 or page 6 of
“Priority Habitat and Species List,” Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2008,
Olympia, Washington. 177 pp.)
Stream – An area where open surface water produces a defined channel or bed, not
including irrigation ditches, canals, storm or surface water runoff devices, or other
entirely artificial watercourses, unless they are used by salmonids or are used to convey a
watercourse naturally occurring prior to construction. A channel or bed need not contain
water year-round, provided there is evidence of at least intermittent flow during years of normal rainfall.
Unavoidable Impacts – Adverse impacts that remain after all appropriate and
practicable avoidance and minimization has been achieved.
Washington Administration Code (WAC) – Administrative rules implementing state
laws.
Wetlands – Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a
frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do
support, a prevalence of vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands
generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include
those artificial wetlands intentionally created from non-wetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities,
wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands
created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 268 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Wetlands Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Page 59
of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands
intentionally created from non-wetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands.
Wetland of High Conservation Value – A wetland that has been identified by scientists
from the Washington Natural Heritage Program (WHNHP) as an important ecosystem for maintaining plant diversity in Washington State. See http://www.dnr.wa.gov/data-
information-natural-heritage-features .
Wetland Mitigation Bank – A site where wetlands are restored, created, enhanced, or in
exceptional circumstances, preserved, expressly for the purpose of providing compensatory mitigation in advance of unavoidable impacts to wetlands or other aquatic
resources that typically are unknown at the time of certification to compensate for future,
permitted impacts to similar resources.
Wetland Mosaic – An area with a concentration of multiple small wetlands, in which each patch of wetland is less than one acre; on average, patches are less than 100 feet
from each other; and areas delineated as vegetated wetland are more than 50% of the total
area of the entire mosaic, including uplands and open water.
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 269 Attachment: Exhibit 1: Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Publication No. 16-06-001 (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
6.3.b
Packet Pg. 270 Attachment: Exhibit 2: FAQ - July 2018 Modified Habitat Score Ranges (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
6.3.b
Packet Pg. 271 Attachment: Exhibit 2: FAQ - July 2018 Modified Habitat Score Ranges (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
July 2018 Modifications for Habitat Score Ranges
July 2018 Modified from Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Ecology Publication No. 16-06-001
Section XX.040 Exemptions and Allowed Uses in Wetlands
A.1.d Do not score 6 or more points for habitat function based on the 2014 update to the Washington State
Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-029, or
as revised and approved by Ecology) B.9.a The wetland is classified as a Category IV or a Category III wetland with a habitat score of 3-5 points, and
XX.050 Wetland Buffers
A. Buffer Requirements. The following buffer widths have been established in
accordance with the best available science. They are based on the category of wetland and the
habitat score as determined by a qualified wetland professional using the Washington State
Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology). The adjacent land use intensity is assumed to be high.
1. For wetlands that score 6 points or more for habitat function, the buffers in Table XX.1 can be used if both of the following criteria are met:
• A relatively undisturbed, vegetated corridor at least 100 feet wide is
protected between the wetland and any other Priority Habitats as defined by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. The latest definitions of priority habitats and their locations are available on the WDFW web site at: http://wdfw.wa.gov/hab/phshabs.htm )
The corridor must be protected for the entire distance between the wetland and the Priority Habitat by some type of legal protection such as a conservation easement.
Presence or absence of a nearby habitat must be confirmed by a qualified
biologist. If no option for providing a corridor is available, Table XX.1 may be used with the required measures in Table XX.2 alone.1
1 See discussion in the Introduction, page 12 as to whether this applies in small urban jurisdictions.
6.3.c
Packet Pg. 272 Attachment: Exhibit 3: Ecology July 2018 Code Recommendations for Modified Habitat Scores (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
July 2018 Modifications for Habitat Score Ranges
July 2018 Modified from Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Ecology Publication No. 16-06-001
• All of the measures in Table XX.2 are implemented, where applicable, to
minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses. 2. For wetlands that score 3-5 habitat points, only the measures in Table XX.2 are required for the use of Table XX.1
3. If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in Table XX.2, or is unable to provide a protected corridor where available, then Table XX.3 must be used.
4. The buffer widths in Table XX.1 and XX.3 assume that the buffer is vegetated
with a native plant community appropriate for the ecoregion. If the existing buffer is unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with invasive species that do not perform needed functions, the buffer should either be planted to create the appropriate plant community or the buffer should be widened to ensure that
adequate functions of the buffer are provided.
6.3.c
Packet Pg. 273 Attachment: Exhibit 3: Ecology July 2018 Code Recommendations for Modified Habitat Scores (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
July 2018 Modifications for Habitat Score Ranges
July 2018 Modified from Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Ecology Publication No. 16-06-001
Table XX.1 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington if Table XX.2 is Implemented and Corridor Provided
Buffer width (in feet) based on habitat
score
Wetland Category 3-5 6-7 8-9
Category I:
Based on total score 75 110 225
Category I:
Bogs and Wetlands of High Conservation Value
190 225
Category I: Interdunal 225 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category I: Forested 75 110 225
Category I: Estuarine and Coastal Lagoons
150 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II: Based on score 75 110 225
Category II: Interdunal Wetlands 110 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II:
Estuarine and Coastal
Lagoons
110
(buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category III (all) 60 110 225
Category IV (all) 40
6.3.c
Packet Pg. 274 Attachment: Exhibit 3: Ecology July 2018 Code Recommendations for Modified Habitat Scores (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
July 2018 Modifications for Habitat Score Ranges
July 2018 Modified from Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Ecology Publication No. 16-06-001
Table XX.2 Required measures to minimize impacts to wetlands
(All measures are required if applicable to a specific proposal)
Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights • Direct lights away from wetland
Noise • Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland
• If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source
• For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining,
establish an additional 10’ heavily vegetated buffer strip
immediately adjacent to the outer wetland buffer
Toxic runoff • Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while
ensuring wetland is not dewatered
• Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 ft of wetland
• Apply integrated pest management
Stormwater runoff • Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing
adjacent development
• Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer
• Use Low Intensity Development techniques (for more
information refer to the drainage ordinance and manual)
Change in water
regime
• Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns
Pets and human
disturbance
• Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer
edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion
• Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement
Dust • Use best management practices to control dust
6.3.c
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: Exhibit 3: Ecology July 2018 Code Recommendations for Modified Habitat Scores (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
July 2018 Modifications for Habitat Score Ranges
July 2018 Modified from Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates Western Washington Version Ecology Publication No. 16-06-001
Table XX.3 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington
if Table XX.2 is NOT Implemented or Corridor NOT provided
Buffer width (in feet) based on habitat
score
Wetland Category 3-5 6-7 8-9
Category I:
Based on total score 100 150 300
Category I:
Bogs and Wetlands of High Conservation Value
250 300
Category I: Interdunal 300 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category I: Forested 100 150 300
Category I: Estuarine and Coastal Lagoons
200 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II: Based on score 100 150 300
Category II:
Interdunal Wetlands
150
(buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II:
Estuarine and Coastal Lagoons
150 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category III (all) 80 150 300
Category IV (all) 50
6.3.c
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Exhibit 3: Ecology July 2018 Code Recommendations for Modified Habitat Scores (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for
Edmonds Page 1/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
23.50.010 Designation, rating and mapping – Wetlands. A. Designating Wetlands. Wetlands are those areas, designated in accordance with the approved federal delineation manual and applicable regional supplements as set forth in WAC 173-22-035, that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. All areas within the city of Edmonds meeting the wetland designation criteria, regardless of any formal identification, are hereby designated critical areas and are subject to the provisions of this title.
B. Wetland Ratings. Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington Department of Ecology wetland rating system, as set forth in the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology), which contains the definitions and methods for determining whether the criteria below are met. Wetlands shall be rated according to the Washington State Department of Ecology wetland rating system found in the 2014 Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington Ecology Publication No. 14-06-029. Consistent with the wetland rating system criteria and parameters within this document, wetlands that are rated for ecological functions with highest point totals (23 points or higher) perform ecological functions associated with water flow, water quality and habitat at highest levels, whereas wetlands that are rated with lowest point totals (15 points or lower) perform ecological functions at lowest levels. Wetlands that are rated with points between 16 and 22 points perform ecological functions at moderate to high levels.
1. Category I. Category I wetlands are: (1) relatively undisturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; (2) wetlands of high conservation value that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR; (3) bogs; (4) mature and old-growth forested wetlands larger than 1 acre; (5) wetlands in coastal lagoons; (6) interdunal wetlands that score 8 or 9 habitat points and are larger than 1 acre; and (7) wetlands that perform many functions well (scoring 23 points or more). These wetlands: (1) represent unique or rare wetland types; (2) are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; (3) are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or (4) provide a high level of functions.
2. Category II. Category II wetlands are: (1) estuarine wetlands smaller than 1 acre, or disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than 1 acre; (2) interdunal wetlands larger than 1 acre or those found in a mosaic of wetlands; or (3) wetlands with a moderately high level of functions (scoring between 20 and 22 points).
3. Category III. Category III wetlands are: (1) wetlands with a moderate level of functions (scoring between 16 and 19 points); (2) can often be adequately replaced with a well-planned mitigation project; and (3) interdunal wetlands between 0.1 and 1 acre. Wetlands scoring between 16 and 19 points generally have been disturbed in some ways and are often less diverse or more isolated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands.
4. Category IV. Category IV wetlands have the lowest levels of functions (scoring fewer than 16 points) and are often heavily disturbed. These are wetlands that we should be able to replace, or in some cases to improve. However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be guaranteed in any specific case. These wetlands may provide some important functions, and should be protected to some degree.
5. Illegal modifications. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal modifications made by the applicant or with the applicant’s knowledge.
1. The City of Edmonds Wetland Rating Categories:
a. Category I Wetlands. Category I wetlands are those that represent a unique or rare wetland type; are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands; are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime; or provide a high level of function. The following types of wetlands are Category I:
i. Relatively undisturbed estuarine wetlands larger than one acre;
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 2/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
ii. Wetlands of high conservation value that are identified by scientists of the Washington Natural Heritage Program/DNR;
iii. Bogs;
iv. Wetlands with mature and old-growth forests larger than one acre;
v. Wetlands in coastal lagoons;
vi. Wetlands that perform functions at high levels as indicated by a score of 23 points or more based on functions.
b. Category II Wetlands. Category II wetlands are those that are difficult, though not impossible, to replace, and provide high levels of some functions. The following types of wetlands are Category II:
i. Estuarine wetlands smaller than one acre, or disturbed estuarine wetlands larger than one acre;
ii. Wetlands with a moderately high level of functions as indicated by a score of 20 to 22 points based on functions.
c. Category III Wetlands. Category III wetlands are wetlands with a moderate level of functions as indicated by a score of 16 to 19 points based on functions.
d. Category IV Wetlands. Category IV wetlands are those with the lowest levels of functions as indicated by scores below 16 points based on functions.
All wetlands should be rated consistent with the 2014 Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington using the 2014 Western Washington Rating Form.
C. Date of Wetland Rating. Wetland rating categories shall be applied as the wetland exists on the date of adoption of the rating system by the local government, as the wetland naturally changes thereafter, or as the wetland changes in accordance with permitted activities. Wetland rating categories shall not change due to illegal modifications.
D. Mapping. The approximate location and extent of wetlands are shown on the city of Edmonds critical areas inventory. In addition, the National Wetlands Inventory and Soil Maps produced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Resources Conservation Service may be useful in helping to identify potential wetland areas. The inventory and cited resources are to be used as a guide for the city of Edmonds, project applicants, and/or property owners, and may be continuously updated as new critical areas are identified. They are a reference and do not provide a final critical area designation.
E. Delineation. The exact location of a wetland’s boundary shall be determined through the performance of a field investigation by a qualified professional wetland scientist applying the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements. Wetland delineations are valid for five years; after such date the city shall determine whether a revision or additional assessment is necessary.
F. Lake Ballinger. Lake Ballinger is designated on the U.S. National Wetlands Inventory as a lacustrine (lake) environment and should not be delineated as a wetland in its entirety. Lake fringe wetlands existing along the periphery of Lake Ballinger shall be identified according to specific criteria provided in this section. Consistent with guidance for delineating lake fringe wetlands provided in these resources, the existence of jurisdictional wetlands along Lake Ballinger shorelines shall be largely based upon the presence of persistent emergent vegetation in shoreline areas less than 6.6 feet in depth. Provisions for protection of Lake Ballinger shorelines not meeting criteria for jurisdictional wetlands are provided in the city of Edmonds shoreline master program.
G. Edmonds Marsh. The city has a 23-acre Edmonds marsh wetland which in addition to a wildlife habitat and natural resource sanctuary is also classified by the state as a priority habitat.
H. Other Significant Wetland.
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 3/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
1. Good Hope Pond.
2. Mouth of Shell Creek. [Ord. 4026 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004].
Part II. Allowed Activities – Wetlands
23.50.020 Allowed activities – Wetlands. The activities listed below are allowed in wetlands in addition to those activities listed in, and consistent with, the provisions established in ECDC 23.40.220, and do not require submission of a critical areas report, except where such activities result in a loss to the functions and values of a wetland or wetland buffer. These activities include:
A. Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish, shellfish, and other wildlife that does not entail changing the structure or functions of the existing wetland.
B. The harvesting of wild crops in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of such crops and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil, planting of crops, chemical applications, or alteration of the wetland by changing existing topography, water conditions, or water sources.
C. Drilling for utilities under a wetland; provided, that the drilling does not interrupt the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column. Specific studies by a hydrologist are necessary to determine whether the ground water connection to the wetland or percolation of surface water down through the soil column could be disturbed.
D. Enhancement of a wetland through the removal of nonnative invasive species. Weeding shall be restricted to hand removal and weed material shall be removed from the site. Bare areas that remain after weed removal shall be revegetated with native shrubs and trees at natural densities. Some hand seeding may also be done over the bare areas with native herbs. Noxious weeds listed on the Washington State Noxious Weed Control Board list must be handled and disposed of according to a noxious weed control plan appropriate to that species.
E. Permitted alteration to a legally constructed structure existing within a wetland or wetland buffer that does not increase the footprint of development or impervious surfacing or increase the impact to a wetland or wetland buffer. [Ord. 4026 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004].
Part III. Additional Report Requirements – Wetlands
23.50.040 Development standards – Wetlands. A. Activities may only be permitted in a wetland buffer if the applicant can show that the proposed activity will not degrade the functions and functional performance of the wetland and other critical areas.
B. Activities and uses shall be prohibited in wetlands and wetland buffers, except as provided for in this title.
C. Category I Wetlands. Activities and uses shall be prohibited from Category I wetlands, except as provided for in the public agency and utility exception, reasonable use exception, and variance sections of this title.
D. Category II Wetlands. With respect to activities proposed in Category II wetlands, the following standards shall apply:
1. Water-dependent activities may be allowed where there are no practicable alternatives that would have a less adverse impact on the wetland, its buffers and other critical areas.
2. Where non-water-dependent activities are proposed, it shall be presumed that alternative locations are available, and activities and uses shall be prohibited, unless the applicant demonstrates that:
a. The basic project purpose cannot be accomplished as proposed and successfully avoid, or result in less adverse impact on, a wetland on another site or sites in the general region; and
b. All alternative designs of the project as proposed, such as a reduction in the size, scope, configuration, or density of the project, would not avoid or result in less of an adverse impact on a wetland or its buffer.
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 4/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
E. Category III and IV Wetlands. Activities and uses that result in unavoidable and necessary impacts may be permitted in Category III and IV wetlands and associated buffers in accordance with an approved critical areas report and mitigation plan.
F. Wetland Buffers.
1. Buffer Requirements. The following buffer widths have been established in accordance with the best available science. They are based on the category of wetland and the habitat score as determined by a qualified wetland professional using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology). The adjacent land use intensity is assumed to be high.
a. For wetlands that score 6 points or more for habitat function, the buffers in subsection F.1.e can be used if both of the following criteria are met:
i. A relatively undisturbed, vegetated corridor at least 100 feet wide is protected between the wetland and any other Priority Habitats as defined by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife.
The corridor must be protected for the entire distance between the wetland and the Priority Habitat by some type of legal protection such as a conservation easement.
Presence or absence of a nearby habitat must be confirmed by a qualified biologist. If no option for providing a corridor is available, subsection F.1.e may be used with the required measures in subsection F.1.f alone.
ii. The measures in subsection F.1.f are implemented, where applicable, to minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses.
b. For wetlands that score 3-5 habitat points, only the measures in subsection F.1.f are required for the use of subsection F.1.e
c. If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in subsection F.1.f, or is unable to provide a protected corridor where available, then subsection F.1.g must be used.
d. The buffer widths in subsection F.1.e and subsection F.1.fg assume that the buffer is vegetated with a native plant community appropriate for the ecoregion. If the existing buffer is unvegetated, sparsely vegetated, or vegetated with invasive species that do not perform needed functions, the buffer should either be planted to create the appropriate plant community or the buffer should be widened to ensure that adequate functions of the buffer are provided.
e. Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington if subsection F.1.f is Implemented and Corridor Provided
Buffer Width (in Feet) Based on Habitat Score
Wetland Category 3-5 6-7 8-9
Category I: Based on total score 75 110 225
Category I: Bogs and wetlands of high conservation value 190 225
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 5/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
Category I: Forested 75 110 225
Category I: Interdunal 225 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category I: Estuarine and Coastal Lagoons
150 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II: Based on score 75 110 225
Category II: Interdunal wetlands 110 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II: Estuarine and Coastal Lagoons
110 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category III (all) 60 110 225
Category IV (all) 40
f. Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands (All measures are required if applicable to a specific proposal).
Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights • Direct lights away from wetland
Noise • Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland • If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation planting adjacent to noise source • For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining, establish an additional 10-foot heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the outter wetland buffer
Toxic runoff • Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered • Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetland • Apply integrated pest management
Stormwater runoff • Retrofit stormwater detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development • Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer • Use low intensity development techniques (for more information see stormwater ordinance and manual)
Change in water regime • Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 6/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
Pets and human disturbance • Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for ecoregion • Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract to protect with a conservation easement
Dust • Use best management practices to control dust
g. Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington if subsection F.1.f is NOT Implemented or Corridor NOT provided
Buffer Width (in Feet) Based on Habitat Score
Wetland Category 3-5 6-7 8-9
Category I: Based on total score 100 150 300
Category I: Bogs and wetlands of high conservation value 250 300
Category I: Forested 100 150 300
Category I: Interdunal 300 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category I: Estuarine and Coastal Lagoon
200
(buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II: Based on score 100 150 300
Category II: Interdunal wetlands 150 (buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category II: Estuarine and Coastal Lagoons
150
(buffer width not based on habitat scores)
Category III (all) 80 150 300
Category IV (all) 50
1. Standard Buffer Widths. The standard buffer widths in subsection (F)(1)(d) of this section have been established in accordance with best available science. The buffers are based on the category of wetland and the habitat score as determined by a qualified wetland professional using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington.
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 7/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
a. The use of the standard buffer widths requires the implementation of the measures in subsection (F)(2) of this section, where applicable, to minimize the impacts of the adjacent land uses.
b. If an applicant chooses not to apply the mitigation measures in subsection (F)(2) of this section, then a 33 percent increase in the width of all buffers is required.
c. The standard buffer widths presume the existence of a relatively intact native vegetation community in the buffer zone adequate to protect the wetland functions and values at the time of the proposed activity. If the buffer is composed of nonnative vegetation, lawn, or bare ground, then, at the discretion of the director, the buffer width may be increased or an applicant may be required to either develop and implement a wetland buffer enhancement plan to maintain the standard width or widen the standard width to ensure that adequate functions of the buffer are provided.
d. Standard Wetland Buffer Widths Table.
Wetland Category Minimum Buffer Width (Wetland scores 3 – 4 habitat points)
Buffer Width (Wetland scores 5 habitat points)
Buffer Width (Wetland scores 6 – 7 habitat points)
Buffer Width (Wetland scores 8 – 9 habitat points)
Category I: Based on total score 75 ft 105 ft 165 ft 225 ft
Category I: Bogs and wetlands of high conservation value
190 ft 190 ft 190 ft 225 ft
Category I: Forested 75 ft 105 ft 165 ft 225 ft
Category I: Estuarine 150 ft 150 ft 150 ft 150 ft
Category II: Based on score 75 ft 105 ft 165 ft 225 ft
Category III (all) 60 ft 105 ft 165 ft 165 ft
Category IV (all) 40 ft 40 ft 40 ft 40 ft
2. Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands. The standard wetland buffer widths in subsection
(F)(1)(d) of this section assumes implementation of the following measures, where applicable to a specific proposal:
Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts
Lights • Direct lights away from wetland
Noise • Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland • If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source • For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining, establish an additional 10 ft heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the outer wetland buffer
Toxic runoff • Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered • Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 ft of wetland • Apply integrated pest management
Storm water runoff • Retrofit storm water detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development • Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer • Use low impact development techniques (per Puget Sound Action Team publication on LID techniques)
Change in water regime • Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns
Pets and human disturbance • Use privacy fencing OR plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion • Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a conservation easement
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 8/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts
Dust • Use best management practices to control dust
Disruption of corridors or connections • Maintain connections to off-site areas that are undisturbed • Restore corridors or connections to off-site habitats by replanting
3. Increased Wetland Buffer Widths. The director shall require increased buffer widths in accordance with the recommendations of an experienced, qualified professional wetland scientist and the best available science on a case-by-case basis when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetland functions and values based on site-specific characteristics. This determination shall be based on one or more of the following criteria:
a. A larger buffer is needed to protect other critical areas;
b. The buffer or adjacent uplands has a slope greater than 15 percent or is susceptible to erosion and
standard erosion control measures will not prevent adverse impacts to the wetland; or
c. The buffer area has minimal vegetative cover. In lieu of increasing the buffer width where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the wetland functions and values, development and implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan in accordance with this subsection (F)(3) may substitute.
d. The wetland and/or buffer is occupied by a federally listed threatened or endangered species, a bald eagle nest, a great blue heron rookery, or a species of local importance; and it is determined by the director that an increased buffer width is necessary to protect the species.
4. Measurement of Wetland Buffers. All buffers shall be measured from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field. The buffer for a wetland created, restored, or enhanced as compensation for approved wetland
alterations shall be the same as the buffer required for the category of the created, restored, or enhanced wetland.
5. Buffer Consistency. All mitigation sites shall have buffers consistent with the buffer requirements of this chapter.
6. Buffer Maintenance. Except as otherwise specified or allowed in accordance with this title, wetland buffers shall be retained in an undisturbed or enhanced condition. Removal of invasive nonnative weeds is required for the duration of the mitigation bond.
G. Wetland Buffer Modifications and Uses.
1. Where wetland or buffer alterations are permitted by the city of Edmonds, the applicant shall mitigate impacts to achieve no net loss of wetland acreage and functions consistent with ECDC 23.50.050 and other applicable provisions of this title.
2. At the discretion of the director, standard wetland buffers may be averaged or reduced when consistent with all criteria in this subsection (G). Wetland buffer averaging with enhancement shall be preferred over wetland buffer reduction with enhancement. Wetland buffer reduction shall only be approved by the director when
buffer averaging cannot be accomplished on site.
3. Wetland Buffer Width Averaging with Buffer Enhancement. The director may allow modification of a standard wetland buffer width in accordance with an approved critical areas report and the best available science on a case-by-case basis by averaging buffer widths. Any allowance for averaging buffer widths shall only be granted concomitant to the development and implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for areas of buffer degradation. Only those portions of a wetland buffer existing within the project area or subject parcel shall be considered the total standard buffer for buffer averaging. Averaging of buffer widths may only be allowed where a qualified professional wetland scientist demonstrates that:
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 9/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
a. The buffer averaging and enhancement plan provides evidence that wetland functions and values will be:
i. Increased or retained through plan implementation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is generally intact; or
ii. Increased through plan implementation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the functions and values of the wetland;
b. The wetland contains variations in sensitivity due to existing physical characteristics or the character of the buffer varies in slope, soils, or vegetation, and the wetland would benefit from a wider buffer in places and would not be adversely impacted by a narrower buffer in other places;
c. The total area contained in the buffer area, or the total buffer area existing on a subject parcel for wetlands extending off site, after averaging is no less than that which would be contained within a standard buffer; and
d. The buffer width at any single location is not reduced by more than 25 percent to less than 50 percent of the standard buffer width.
4. Buffer Width Reductions through Buffer Enhancement. At the discretion of the director, and only when buffer averaging cannot be accomplished on site, wetland buffer width reductions (or approval of standard buffer widths for wetlands where existing buffer conditions require increased buffer widths) may be granted concomitant to the development and implementation of a wetland buffer enhancement plan for Category III and IV wetlands only. Approval of a wetland buffer enhancement plan shall, at the discretion of the director, allow for wetland buffer width reductions by no more than 25 percent of the standard width; provided, that:
a. The plan provides evidence that wetland functions and values will be:
i. Increased or retained through plan implementation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is generally intact; or
ii. Increased through plan implementation for those wetlands where existing buffer vegetation is inadequate to protect the functions and values of the wetland;
b. The plan documents existing native plant densities and provides for increases in buffer native plant densities to no less than three feet on center for shrubs and eight feet on center for trees;
c. The plan requires monitoring and maintenance to ensure success in accordance with ECDC 23.40.130(D); and
d. The plan specifically documents methodology and provides performance standards including but not limited to:
i. Percent vegetative cover;
ii. Percent invasive species cover;
iii. Species richness; and
iv. Amount of large woody debris.
5. Buffer Uses. The following uses may be permitted within a wetland buffer in accordance with the review procedures of this title; provided, they are not prohibited by any other applicable law and they are conducted in a manner so as to minimize impacts to the buffer and adjacent wetland:
a. All activities allowed by ECDC 23.50.020, Allowed activities – Wetlands.
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 10/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
b. Conservation and Restoration Activities. Conservation or restoration activities aimed at protecting the soil, water, vegetation, or wildlife.
c. Passive Recreation. Passive recreation facilities designed and in accordance with an approved critical area report, including:
i. Walkways and trails; provided, that those pathways are generally constructed with a surface that does not interfere with substrate permeability, are generally located only in the outer 25 percent of wetland buffers, and are located to avoid removal of significant trees. Where existing legally established development has reduced the width of the wetland buffer, trails may be placed in the outer 25 percent of the remaining wetland buffer. The trail shall be no more than five feet in width and for pedestrian use only. Raised boardwalks utilizing nontreated pilings may be acceptable. The director may allow trails within the inner 25 percent of wetland buffers when required to provide access to wildlife viewing structures, fishing access areas, or connections to other trail facilities;
ii. Wildlife viewing structures; and
iii. Fishing access areas down to the water’s edge that shall be no larger than six feet.
d. Storm Water Management Facilities. Storm water management facilities, limited to outfalls, pipes and conveyance systems, storm water dispersion outfalls and bioswales, may be allowed within the outer 25 percent of a standard or modified buffer for Category III or IV wetlands only; provided, that:
i. No other location is feasible; and
ii. The location and function of such facilities will not degrade the functions or values of the wetland.
iii. Storm water management facilities are not allowed in buffers of Category I or II wetlands.
iv. Projects shall also comply with all applicable requirements in Chapter 18.30 ECDC, Storm Water Management, including Minimum Requirement No. 8, Wetland Protection.
H. Signs and Fencing of Wetlands.
1. Temporary Markers. The outer perimeter of the wetland or buffer and the limits of those areas to be disturbed pursuant to an approved permit or authorization shall be marked in the field in such a way as to ensure that no unauthorized intrusion will occur and is subject to inspection by the director prior to the commencement of permitted activities. The director may require the use of fencing to protect wetlands from disturbance and intrusion. Temporary marking shall be maintained throughout construction and shall not be removed until permanent signs, if required, are in place.
2. Permanent Signs. As a condition of any permit or authorization issued pursuant to this chapter, the director may require the applicant to install permanent signs along the boundary of a wetland or buffer.
a. Permanent signs shall be made of an enamel-coated metal face and attached to a metal post or another nontreated material of equal durability. Signs must be posted at an interval of one per lot or every 50 feet, whichever is less, and must be maintained by the property owner in perpetuity. The sign shall be worded as follows or with alternative language approved by the director:
Protected Wetland Area
Do Not Disturb
Contact the City of Edmonds
Regarding Uses and Restrictions
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 11/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
b. The provisions of subsection (H)(2)(a) of this section may be modified as necessary to assure protection of sensitive features or wildlife.
3. Permanent Fencing. Permanent fencing shall be required at the outer edge of the critical area buffer under the following circumstances; provided, that the director may waive this requirement:
a. As part of any development proposal for single-family plats, single-family short plats, multifamily, mixed use, and commercial development where the director determines that such fencing is necessary to protect the functions of the critical area; provided, that breaks in permanent fencing may be allowed for access to permitted buffer uses (subsection (G)(5) of this section);
b. As part of development proposals for parks where the adjacent proposed use is active recreation and the director determines that such fencing is necessary to protect the functions of the critical area;
c. When buffer averaging is employed as part of a development proposal;
d. When buffer reductions are employed as part of a development proposal; or
e. At the director’s discretion to protect the values and functions of a critical area.
I. Additions to Structures Existing within Wetlands and/or Wetland Buffers.
1. Additions to legally constructed structures existing within wetlands or wetland buffers that increase the footprint of development or impervious surfacing shall be permitted consistent with the development standards of this section; provided, that a wetland and/or buffer enhancement plan is provided to mitigate for impacts consistent with this title; and provided, that all impacts from temporary disturbances within the critical area buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration. Provisions for standard wetland buffers, wetland buffer averaging with enhancement, and buffer reductions with enhancement require applicants to locate such additions in accordance with the following sequencing:
a. Outside of the standard wetland buffer;
b. Outside of a wetland buffer averaged (with enhancement) per subsection (G)(3) of this section;
c. Outside of a wetland buffer reduced (with enhancement) per subsection (G)(4) of this section;
d. Outside of the inner 25 percent of the standard wetland buffer width with no more than 300 square feet of structure addition footprint within the inner 50 percent of the standard wetland buffer width; provided, that enhancement is provided at a minimum three-to-one (3:1) ratio (enhancement-to-impact);
e. Outside of the inner 25 percent of the standard wetland buffer width with no more than 500 square feet of new footprint within the inner 50 percent of the standard wetland buffer width; provided, that enhancement is provided at a minimum five-to-one (5:1) ratio (enhancement-to-impact), and that storm water low impact development (LID) techniques and other measures are included as part of the wetland/buffer enhancement plan.
2. Where meeting wetland buffer enhancement requirements required by subsection (I)(1) of this section would result in enhancement that is separated from the critical area due to uncommon property ownership, alternative enhancement approaches may be approved by the director. Alternative approaches could include a vegetated rain garden that receives storm runoff, replacement of existing impervious surfaces with pervious materials, or other approaches that provide ecological benefits to the adjacent critical area.
3. Additions to legally constructed structures existing within wetlands or wetland buffers that cannot be accommodated in accordance with the sequencing in subsection (I)(1) of this section (i.e., additions proposed within a wetland or the inner 25 percent of a standard buffer width) may be permitted at the director’s discretion as a variance subject to review by the city hearing examiner and the provisions of ECDC 23.40.210.
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 12/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
J. Development Proposals within the Footprint of Existing Development. New development shall be allowed within the footprint of existing development occurring within a wetland buffer; provided, that the following conditions are met:
1. The footprint of existing development was legally established, and is consistent with the definition provided in ECDC 23.40.005;
2. The proposed development within the footprint of existing development is sited as far away from the wetland edge as is feasible;
3. As part of the development proposal, opportunities to reduce the footprint of existing development are implemented where such reduction would increase the buffer width adjacent to the wetland and not represent an undue burden given the scale of the proposed development;
4. The proposed development includes enhancement to the adjacent wetland and associated buffer in order to improve functions degraded by previous development;
5. Enhancement is provided as wetland or buffer enhancement for an equivalent area of the footprint of the newly proposed development within the footprint of existing development occurring in a wetland buffer, or through an alternative approach approved by the director that restores degraded functions of the wetland and remaining buffer; and
6. Impacts from temporary disturbances within the wetland buffer shall be addressed through use of best management plans and buffer enhancement plantings during and following construction of the allowed alteration.
K. Exemptions and Allowed Uses in Wetlands. The following wetlands may be exempt from the requirement to avoid impacts (ECDC 23.40.120.B.1), and they may be filled if the impacts are fully mitigated based on the remaining actions in ECDC 23.40.120.B.2 through 6. If available, impacts should be mitigated through the purchase of credits from an in-lieu fee program or mitigation bank, consistent with the terms and conditions of the program or bank. In order to verify the following conditions, a critical area report for wetlands meeting the requirements in ECDC 23.50.030 must be submitted.
1. All isolated Category IV wetlands less than 4,000 square feet that:
a. Are not associated with riparian areas or their buffers
b. Are not associated with shorelines of the state or their associated buffers
c. Are not part of a wetland mosaic
d. Do not score 6 or more points for habitat function based on the 2014 update to the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update (Ecology Publication #14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology)
e. Do not contain a Priority Habitat or a Priority Area1 for a Priority Species identified by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, do not contain federally listed species or their critical habitat, or species of local importance identified in Chapter 23.90 ECDC.
2. Wetlands less than 1,000 square feet that meet the above criteria and do not contain federally listed species or their critical habitat are exempt from the buffer provisions contained in this Chapter.
K. Small, Hydrologically Isolated Wetlands. The director may allow small, hydrologically isolated Category III or IV wetlands under 1,000 square feet in area to be exempt from the avoidance sequencing provisions of ECDC 23.40.120 and the wetland development standards provisions of subsection (F) of this section. At the discretion of
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
Edmonds Page 13/13
The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4110, passed April 17, 2018.
the director such wetlands may be altered; provided, that a submitted critical areas report and mitigation plan provides evidence that all of the following conditions are met:
1. The wetland is less than 1,000 square feet in area;
2. The wetland does not provide significant habitat value for wildlife;
3. The wetland is not adjacent to a riparian area;
4. The wetland has a score of three to four points for habitat in the adopted Western Washington rating system; and
5. A mitigation plan to replace lost wetland functions and values is developed, approved and implemented consistent with ECDC 23.50.050. [Ord. 4026 § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3527 § 2, 2004].
6.3.d
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: Exhibit 4: Proposed Amendments to Edmonds Wetland Regulations based on 2018 Guidance (Public Hearing on Critical Area
APPROVED Planning Board Minutes June 13, 2018 Page 12
ADUs can be a key strategy, and he is glad to see the concept reflected in the draft document. He emphasized that the Housing Strategy is the beginning of the conversation, and any kind of real structural change will have to go through another process, including an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process where issues such as infrastructure impacts will be discussed. Chair Monroe asked if the fire and police departments have been involved in the Housing Strategy process. Mr. Shipley said the draft document is intended to provide broad-level list of housing strategies. As the City begins to select strategies for implementation, the fire and police departments will be invited to engage in the discussions and share their thoughts on potential impacts. Mr. Lien announced that there is a link to the Housing Strategy website on the City’s homepage, and the Housing Strategy website has a link for written comments. All written comments will be incorporated into the record. The Board took a short break at 9:07 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:13 p.m. INTRODUCTION OF CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE (CAO) UPDATE – WETLANDS Mr. Lien reviewed that the City completed a comprehensive review of its Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) as required by the Growth Management Act (GMA) in May 2016, with adoption of Ordinance No. 4026. The wetland section (ECDC 23.50) of that document was based on the Department of Ecology’s (DOE) “Wetlands and CAO Updates: Guidance for Small Cities.” However, in June of 2016, the DOE subsequently issued new guidance for wetlands in a publication titled, “Wetland Guidance for CAO Updates.” When the more recent guidance was published, the City was in the process of completing a comprehensive update of its Shoreline Master Program (SMP), and the City Council indicated a desire to incorporate the most current regulations within the SMP, which means that the regulations in the SMP are different than what’s in the CAO. Mr. Lien explained that the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) and the Growth Management Act (GMA) conflict with each other. The SMA rules in shoreline jurisdictions within 200 feet of shorelines, and the GMA rules outside of the shoreline jurisdictions. The CAO implements the GMA and the SMP implements the SMA. Currently, the City has two versions of wetland regulations, one that applies within shoreline jurisdiction and another that applies outside of shoreline jurisdiction. The City is required to complete a periodic review of the SMP by June 2019, and the overall plan is to update the CAO before
completing the periodic review of the SMP and then adopt the CAO again. Mr. Lien advised that the SMP adopted most of the CAO regulations, but there were some that were excepted out. In particular, the wetland ratings were excepted out because the new guidance came out after the CAO was adopted. The proposed amendments would update the CAO to be consistent with the most recent wetland guidance from the DOE. When the SMP is revised, the City will adopt the updated CAO and then one set of wetland regulations will apply to the entire City. Mr. Lien advised that two other minor revisions to the CAO are also being proposed. He reviewed that during the last CAO update, a new provision was added that dealt with adding or developing within the footprint of existing development that required some enhancement. A proposed amendment would delete the “allowed activity” section in ECDC 23.50.020.E, to be consistent with the updated regulations. Another amendment would correct a scrivener’s error in the Wetland Buffer Averaging section. As part of the CAO update, the wetland buffer cannot be reduced by more than 25%, but language was inadvertently
left in that said a buffer could be reduced by 50%. He summarized that the main intent of the amendments is to make sure that the wetland regulations, ratings, buffers and mitigation measures, as well as a section dealing with small wetlands, are updated consistent with the most recent wetland guidance. Board Member Rosen asked if the proposed amendments would maintain, strengthen or weaken the protection of wetlands. Mr. Lien answered that because the changes are based on the DOE’s newest guidance document that is based on Best Available Science (BAS), the City’s regulations would be strengthened to provide greater protection. The first change has to do with how wetlands are categorized, and the proposed amendment would simply add more description without significantly changing the protection. He explained how wetland determinations and categorizations are done using the Wetland Rating System for Western Washington and advised that the buffer requirements in the DOE’s newest guidance document are similar to those in the current CAO. However, the newest guidance requires certain mitigation measures for each wetland classification. If the mitigation measures are not met, the buffers are enlarged. To make this clear, the update includes two buffer tables, one to identify the buffers that apply if you do the required mitigation measures and a second table with wider buffers that would
6.3.e
Packet Pg. 290 Attachment: Exhibit 5: June 13, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
APPROVED Planning Board Minutes June 13, 2018 Page 13
apply if you don’t do the mitigation measures. He noted that most of the wetlands in Edmonds are Category III or IV, and the Edmonds Marsh is a Category II. The SMP update established a 125-foot setback around the Edmonds Marsh (110-foot buffer and a 15-foot building setback). Mr. Lien advised that a public hearing on the proposed amendments is scheduled for July 11th. Chair Monroe asked if there are any cons to the proposed amendments. Mr. Lien said he could not come up with any. The amendments will provide greater protection and are consistent with the latest guidance from the DOE. Chair Monroe asked if the proposed amendments would further limit a developer’s ability to develop near a wetland. Mr. Lien answered, provided a developer does the mitigation measures, the buffer requirements would not change. He briefly reviewed the mitigation measures, noting that none of them are particularly onerous over what is currently required. There is also flexibility in the code via buffer averaging and buffer width reductions. In addition, development is allowed within the previously developed footprint with enhancement, and there is flexibility for some small additions within the buffers. He reminded the Board that much of Edmonds was developed before any environmental regulations, and a lot of the current development is within the buffer areas. Board Member Lovell asked if the City has a map that identifies the wetlands areas by category. Mr. Lien answered that this would be a very expensive proposition. However, the web map includes all of the critical area layers. It is a generalized map and not a regulatory map. The most prevalent critical areas in Edmonds are geologically hazardous areas. Anytime development is proposed within a critical area, the applicant is required to fill out a Critical Area Checklist and City staff does a quick map review and site visit. When an applicant applies for a Development Permit, staff takes a closer look at the critical area to determine whether or not a Critical Area Report will be required. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Chair Monroe reviewed that the June 27th agenda will be a continued discussion and possible recommendation on the Housing Strategy and an introduction to the SMP periodic review. The July 11th agenda will be public hearings on the CAO update and code updates for permit decision making. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Monroe commented that the public hearing went well, and the comments were evenly split between pros and cons. He heard support for the ADU concept. However, the City needs to do a better job of educating the public on the housing issues. There seems to be a perception that homelessness equals crime and drugs, which is an unfair representation of that population. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Lovell cautioned that the Board will face challenges when and if the Strategy is adopted by the City Council and it comes back to them to develop a specific implementation plan that includes regulation and zoning changes. These changes will require a lot of work by the Board. Board Member Crank recalled comments she made early in the Housing Strategy discussion about the importance of educating
and communicating with the public. When people hear the term affordable housing, they tend to think crime-ridden projects. She challenged the Planning Board and the City Council to be very intentional with what this term means and not just leave it to interpretation. They have to do a better of job of conveying the intent to provide housing opportunities for people who already live in Edmonds. They are not trying to move people into Edmonds from other communities. The community she lived in in the Bay Area used in-lieu fees to purchase property when it became available to accommodate affordable housing complexes that were owned by the city. A process was established that the first people who could apply to live in the units were teachers, public safety workers, and certain long-term residents. These complexes are now full of people who already lived or worked in the City. She hopes the Board will use this example and keep in mind who they are trying to serve with the strategies. Board Member Rubenkonig said that during the break, numerous people commented on how much they appreciated how well the meeting was conducted and the information that was provided. Several specifically said that what they felt got the people
most concerned was the graphic in the Housing Strategy of the tiny homes that are similar to those that have been used in
6.3.e
Packet Pg. 291 Attachment: Exhibit 5: June 13, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
APPROVED Planning Board Minutes July 11, 2018 Page 11
Board Member Robles expressed his belief that the public might be misunderstanding Strategies 4 and 5 and an additional education component might be appropriate to better communicate their intent. In his opinion, the best way to deal with homelessness and crime is to have social workers and police officers who can live in the community. Board Member Rosen supported Chair Monroe’s recommendation relative to Strategies 4 and 5 but felt the Board should go further to encourage a better forum for public input, perhaps with a combination of open house and public hearing. Director Hope agreed it would be helpful to provide an example of the process for implementing a strategy or action, but she recommended that it not become part of the actual draft Housing Strategy. Chair Monroe clarified that Board Member Lovell’s recommendation would add an explanation of the public process that would be required before the action items under each of the strategies could be implemented. This additional information would make it clear that the document is a strategy plan and not an action plan. Director Hope said the strategy mentions that public processes would be required before any code amendments could occur. Chair Monroe agreed, but suggested that the language should walk through the actual steps that will be required. Rather than providing the process for every single action item, one example would be sufficient. CHAIR MONROE MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE DRAFT HOUSING STRATEGY TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES AND OBSERVATIONS:
• ADD AN EXPLANATION AND EXAMPLE OF THE PROCESS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT ANY CODE CHANGES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACTION ITEMS.
• MAKE THE LANGUAGE LESS PRESCRIPTIVE (REPLACE SHOULD WITH COULD).
• ENCOURAGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO DO MORE PUBLIC OUTREACH VIA A PUBLIC HEARING, PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE AND/OR PUBLIC SURVEY.
• THERE IS STRONG PUBLIC CONCERN RELATIVE TO STRATEGIES 4 AND 5. BEFORE MAKING ANY DECISIONS, THE BOARD ENCOURAGES THE CITY COUNCIL TO SEEK ADDITIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR FURTHER CITIZEN INPUT, DIALOGUE AND EDUCATION. BOARD MEMBER CRANK SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The Board took a short break at 9:08 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:15 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING ON CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE UPDATES TO SPECIFIC WETLAND REGULATIONS Mr. Lien reviewed that the City completed the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) Update in May of 2016, and the Department
of Ecology (DOE) issued new guidance on wetlands in June of 2016. At that time, the City was in the process of doing a comprehensive update of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP), and the Council wanted it to include the most recent
regulations, so certain wetland sections of the CAO were excepted from the SMP. This means they do not apply in the shoreline jurisdictions. Wetland sections consistent with the new guidance were provided to replace the excepted sections. As a result,
the City now has two versions of wetland regulations; one that applies within the shoreline jurisdiction and a second that applies outside of the shoreline jurisdictions.
Mr. Lien advised that the City is required to complete a periodic review of the SMP by June of 2019. In order to provide
consistent regulations throughout the City, the work program for the SMP update will include updating the CAO wetland provisions excepted from the SMP to be consistent with the most recent guidance. When the SMP is revised, the City will
adopt the updated CAO and then one set of wetland regulations will apply to the entire City. He referred the Board to the DOE’s new wetland guidance (Attachment 1), as well as the draft amendments to the CAO, which are outlined in Attachment 2. He reviewed that, as proposed, the following sections would be amended to match what is currently in the SMP:
• ECDC 23.50.010.B – Wetland Ratings
• ECDC 23.50.040.F.1 – Standard Buffer Widths
• ECDC 23.50.040.F.2 – Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands
• ECDC 23.50.040.K – Small, Hydrologically Isolated Wetlands
6.3.f
Packet Pg. 292 Attachment: Exhibit 6: July 11, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
APPROVED Planning Board Minutes July 11, 2018 Page 12
Mr. Lien explained that once these sections have been updated, the SMP will be amended to reference the CAO. The result would be one set of regulations that apply throughout the City. In addition to updating the four sections listed above, staff is proposing changes to ECDC 23.50.020.E to remove an older reference that should have been deleted when the CAO was last updated and a new section was added having to do with development within the footprint of development. In addition, ECDC 23.50.040.G.3.d would be amended to correct a scrivener’s error. He summarized that the proposed changes are straightforward, basically adopting the regulations that are already in the SMP into the CAO. The amendments to the CAO will be adopted into the SMP as part of the periodic update. Mr. Lien recommended the Commission forward the proposed amendments to the CAO to the City Council with a recommendation of approval. Board Member Rubenkonig asked Mr. Lien to share information about his new position and his background and experience relative to SMP and CAO issues. She also asked Mr. Lien to share whether or not the proposed amendments are consistent with the DOE’s process for adopting revisions. Lastly, she commented that none of the proposed amendments would alter the City Council’s previous tailored approach to buffers. Mr. Lien said his new title is Environmental Programs Manager, and he has been working in planning and environmental regulations for close to 20 years. He has worked on two or three complete CAO updates and has been with the City of Edmonds for about 10 years. During that time, he has worked on comprehensive reviews of both the CAO and SMP. His current responsibilities include a mix of current and long-range planning. He is well versed in the City’s code and processes and how the code provisions are applied on the ground. Mr. Lien explained that the SMP is under the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) and the CAO is under the Growth Management Act (GMA). The two documents do not play together. Within the shoreline jurisdiction, the SMP and the SMA rule and outside of shoreline jurisdiction the GMA and CAO rule. Updating the CAO is not a DOE process and the DOE does not have to approve it. However, they must follow the regular code update process, which involves a public hearing by the Planning Board, a recommendation from the Planning Board to the City Council, a notice to the Department of Commerce, etc. The City Council will make the final decision regarding the proposed amendments. The SMP periodic review process is outlined by the DOE, and the City’s process is consistent. This public hearing is strictly related to the CAO. Mr. Lien said Board Member Rubenkonig’s third comment is more related to the SMP than the CAO, particularly as it pertains to the Urban Mixed Use 4 shoreline environment. The proposed amendments would not change the SMP or the Urban Mixed Use 4 shoreline environment. However, the overall intent is to do the CAO update in conjunction with the SMP period review so they can readopt the CAO and have one set of regulations that apply throughout the City as opposed to two. No one in the audience indicated a desire to participate in the public hearing, so the public hearing portion of the meeting was closed. BOARD MEMBER CRANK MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE CITY OF EDMONDS CRITICAL AREAS WETLAND REGULATIONS BE UPDATED CONSISTENT WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY PUBLICATION NUMBER 16.06.001. VICE CHAIR CHEUNG SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Chair Monroe announced that the July 25th agenda will include a presentation on the SMP periodic review, a public hearing on a proposed rezone from RS-8 to RM-1.5 (File No. PLN20160044), and a public hearing on a code update for permit decision making. He reminded the Board that the public hearing for the rezone application will be quasi-judicial. He asked that a discussion about the Board’s retreat also be placed on the July 25th agenda.
PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS
Chair Monroe did not provide any additional comments.
6.3.f
Packet Pg. 293 Attachment: Exhibit 6: July 11, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 24, 2018
Page 22
fortunate that opportunity was available when they wanted to make that move. The economics of families
moving in will provide additional revenue for City. He emphasized the Housing Strategy is a strategy, a lot
of planning will follow. He summarized people are moving here and the City needs to prepare.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented there was not much in the strategy about senior housing and
veteran housing. She suggested coalition building to create that type of housing was important. Ms. Hope
responded diverse housing needs includes veterans, seniors, families, etc.
Councilmember Mesaros commented Compass Housing Alliance who is partnering with Edmonds
Lutheran Church on their project have been meeting housing needs in the community for 100 years.
Approximately 12-15 years ago, Compass built a facility specifically for veterans on 200th, south of Costco
in Shoreline. The firm he was associated with for 22 years helped raise $4 million in private philanthropy
for that facility and the project received a number of government grants. The building looks like a nice,
ordinary apartment building and it is not apparent it is subsidized housing for veterans. He anticipated with
partners like Compass, there will be other quality projects.
Councilmember Teitzel commented he was very partial to the needs of the senior population, noting he was
Medicare eligible. Edmonds has the highest average age in Snohomish County and a lot of seniors want to
age in place in Edmonds. For that reason, he likes the proposal related to ADUs and DADUs which will
enable people to stay in Edmonds.
Councilmember Johnson commented the State of Washington has a deferred tax program for low income
seniors; application forms are available from the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office. For anyone having
difficulty paying their utility bills, she suggested contacting the utility for a reduce rate; Edmonds, the PUD
and Snohomish County all have programs.
Mayor Earling asked Ms. Hope to pass on his thanks to the Edmonds Housing Strategic Task Force. He
was encouraged by the draft strategy, noting there was still time in the process to answer questions. He
emphasized this was a strategy, not immediate direction. He recognized the man who spoke tonight who
said he read the entire report and it answered most of his questions. He encouraged the public to take the
time to read the report.
2. SENIOR CENTER LEASE AMENDMENT PROPOSAL
This item was rescheduled to the August 7 Council meeting.
3. CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE UPDATE
Environmental Program Manager Kernen Lien reviewed.
Background
o Completed CAO update in May 2016
o June 2016 Department of Ecology Issues updated Wetland Guidance in Publication No. 16-06-
001
o Updated Wetland Guidance Incorporated into Shoreline Management Program
o Shoreline Management Act vs. Growth Management Act
Within shoreline jurisdiction, the SMA rules
Outside of shoreline jurisdiction, the GMA and CAO rule
As a result, the City had two wetland regulations, one that applied in shoreline jurisdiction
and one that applied outside of shoreline jurisdiction
o SMP Periodic Review
SMP Excepted Sections
6.3.g
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Exhibit 7: July 24, 2018 City Council Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 24, 2018
Page 23
o ECDC 23.50.010.B, Wetland Ratings.
o ECDC 23.50.040.F.1, Standard Buffer Widths.
o ECDC 23.50.040.F.2, Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands.
o ECDC 23.50.040.K, Small, Hydrologically Isolated Wetlands
History Repeats Itself (almost)
o Public Hearing before Planning Board on July 11, 2018 and forwarded recommendation to City
Council to update to the 2016 guidance
o Ecology issues new wetland guidance on July 12, 2018
“If you are a local planner in the process of updating your CAO, we recommend that you
use these modified wetland buffer tables in your update.”
o Staff is seeking verification of the Council’s intent to have the most recent wetland guidance
incorporated within the City’s wetland regulations
Ecology 2018 Wetland Guidance
o “We made the changes based on public feedback and our own review of the reference wetland
data used to calibrate the Washington State Wetland Rating System. We knew we needed to
make modifications in the grouping of habitat scores.”
Wetland Buffer Requirement Tables
2016
Table XX.1 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington
If Table XX.2 is Implemented and Corridor Provided
Buffer Width (in feet) based on habitat score
Wetland Category 3-4 5 6-7 8-9
Category 1: Based on total score 75 105 165 225
2018
Table XX.1 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington
If Table XX.2 is Implemented and Corridor Provided
Buffer Width (in feet) based on habitat score
Wetland Category 3-5 6-7 8-9
Category 1: Based on total score 75 110 225
Does the Council wish to have staff update the wetland regulations consistent with the most recent
wetland guidance from the Department of Ecology?
It was the consensus of the Council that they wanted staff to update the wetland regulations consistent with
the most recent guidance from Department of Ecology.
10. REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARD AND COMMITTEE MEETINGS
Due to the late hour, this item was omitted from the agenda.
11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Earling encouraged the public to attend the Police Department open house on Thursday from 6 to 8
p.m. at the police station. He reported hundreds of people enjoyed the Sand Sculpture Contest at the beach
today. For the first time, he judged the great artwork created by younger participants.
12. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Mesaros reported he also had a delightful time at the Sand Sculpture Contest at Marina
Beach this afternoon. He completed a triathlon on Sunday and came in third out of four in his age group.
6.3.g
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Exhibit 7: July 24, 2018 City Council Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
APPROVED AUGUST 8TH
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
July 25, 2018
Chair Monroe called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 – 5th Avenue North.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Nathan Monroe, Chair Matthew Cheung, Vice Chair Phil Lovell Daniel Robles Mike Rosen
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Todd Cloutier (excused) Alicia Crank (excused) Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig (excused)
STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Manager Brad Shipley, Planner Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Jerrie Bevington, Video Recorder Karin Noyes, Recorder
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF JULY 11, 2018 BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED. VICE CHAIR CHEUNG SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA The agenda was modified to add a discussion about the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) as Item 5b and a discussion about the Board’s retreat as Item 8a. The remainder of the agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS No one in the audience indicated a desire to comment during this portion of the meeting. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD Chair Monroe referred the Board Members to the written Development Services Director’s Report and invited Board Members to comment. Board Member Lovell announced that he attended the July 18th Economic Development Commission meeting where they agreed to cancel their August 15th meeting. AMENDMENTS TO THE CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE (CAO) Mr. Lien reviewed that the Planning Board held a public hearing on CAO updates to specific wetland regulations on July 11th and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City Council. He recalled that the purpose of the proposed amendments was to bring the wetland regulations in the CAO up to date with the Department of Ecology’s (DOEs) 2016 Guidance. The intent was to adopt the updated CAO sections as part of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) during the upcoming periodic
6.3.h
Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: Exhibit 8: July 25, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
APPROVED Planning Board Minutes July 25, 2018 Page 2
review resulting in one set of wetland regulations that apply citywide. However, he received an email from the DOE on July 12th, announcing new wetland guidance. He has since verified the City Council’s intent to update the wetland regulations with the most recent guidance, which requires the Board to consider additional updates. The additional updates will be presented to the Board on August 22nd, and the Board will need to hold another public hearing before forwarding a recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Lien reviewed the four sections of the CAO that were part of the update to be consistent with the 2016 guidance. He explained that the new 2018 guidance pertains primarily to the buffer sections and the wetland ratings would remain nearly the same. The 2016 guidance has four sets of wetland buffers based on habitat scores, and the 2018 guidance only has three sets of buffers and the habitat scores are calculated differently. In the 2016 guidance, the lower Category 5 habitat score was not much different than the Category 3 and 4 habitat scores, so it was combined with Category 4. PUBLIC HEARING ON PERMIT DECISION MAKING-QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESSES Mr. Lien reviewed that the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1367 (Attachment 1) in 2016, expressing the intent to adopt revisions to the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) that will remove quasi-judicial decision-making responsibility from the City Council and other volunteer citizen boards to the extent allowed by law. The resolution requests that the staff and Planning Board prepare and forward to the City Council code revisions that are consistent with the resolution. Mr. Lien explained that the City currently has 5 decision processes as spelled out in the table in ECDC 20.01.003:
• Type I are staff decisions with no notice and include lot line adjustments, critical area determinations, shoreline exemptions minor amendments to planned residential development (PRD), minor preliminary plat amendments and staff administrative design review.
• Type II are staff decisions with notice and include accessory dwelling units (ADUs), State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) determinations, preliminary short plats, land clearing and grading, revisions to shoreline management permits, administrative variances, and shoreline substantial development permits where a public hearing is not required.
• Type III are quasi-judicial decisions. Type III-A decisions include critical area variances, contingent critical area review if a public hearing is required, shoreline substantial development permits where a public hearing is required, shoreline variances, and shoreline conditional uses. Type III-A decisions are not appealable to the City Council. Type III-B decisions include outdoor dining, contingent critical area review if a public hearing is requested, shoreline substantial development permits where a public hearing is required and shoreline conditional uses and variances. Type III-B decisions are appealable to the City Council and include essential public facilities, design review where a public hearing by the ADB is required, conditional use permits and home occupation permits where a public hearing by the Hearing Examiner is required, variances, preliminary formal plats and preliminary planned residential developments (PRDs).
• Type IV are quasi-judicial decisions that are appealable to the City Council. They include final formal plats, final PRDs and site-specific rezones.
• Type V are legislative decisions that include development agreements, zoning text amendments, area-wide zoning map amendments, Comprehensive Plan amendments, annexations and development regulations. Mr. Lien explained that legislative decisions establish policies for future application and quasi-judicial decisions are the application of those policies. Quasi-judicial decisions have stricter procedural requirements that include proper notice of hearing, providing everyone with an interest in the proceedings an opportunity to be heard and to hear what others have to say, full disclosure of all facts being considered by the decision-making body, impartial decision makers free from bias and conflicts of interest, and decisions that are based on the facts of the case rather than on political pressure or vocal opposition. Mr. Lien reviewed that during the City Council’s discussions relative to Resolution No. 1367, Councilmembers voiced frustration with the ex-parte contact prohibitions and concern about potential liability issues. They asked the staff and Planning Board to prepare and forward revisions to the code that would remove the City Council from quasi-judicial decision-making
6.3.h
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: Exhibit 8: July 25, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
APPROVED SEPTEMBER 12TH
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
August 22, 2018
Chair Monroe called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 – 5th Avenue North.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Nathan Monroe, Chair Todd Cloutier Phil Lovell Daniel Robles Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Matthew Cheung, Vice Chair (excused) Alicia Crank (excused) Mike Rosen (excused)
STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Manager Jerrie Bevington, Video Recorder Karin Noyes, Recorder
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2018 BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER RUBENKONIG SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA A discussion about the Planning Board Retreat was added under “Unfinished Business,” and the remainder of the agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS There was no one in the audience. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD Chair Monroe referred the Board to the Development Services Director’s Report and invited Board comments. Board Member Lovell strongly recommended that a member of the Board attend the public open house on the Housing Strategy on August 27th at 7 p.m. in the Brackett Room on the 3rd Floor of City Hall. Board Member Rubenkonig agreed to attend. PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENTS TO THE CRITICAL AREA ORDINANCE (CAO) UPDATES TO SPECIFIC WETLAND REGULATIONS Mr. Lien reviewed that the City completed a comprehensive review of its Critical Area Ordinance (CAO) as required by the Growth Management Act (GMA) in May of 2016. In June of 2016, the Department of Ecology (DOE) issued new guidance
6.3.i
Packet Pg. 298 Attachment: Exhibit 9: August 22, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 22, 2018 Page 2
for wetlands (Publication No. 16-06-001). At that time, the City Council was also in the process of a comprehensive update of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). The City Council indicated a desire to have the most current wetland regulations apply to shoreline jurisdictions, so certain wetland sections of the CAO were excepted from the SMP and wetland regulations consistent with the new guidance was added to the SMP to replace the excepted sections. This resulted in the City having two versions of wetland regulations: one that applies within shoreline jurisdictions and another that applies outside of shoreline jurisdictions. Mr. Lien advised that the City is required to complete a periodic review of the SMP by June 2019. In order to provide consistent wetland regulations throughout the City, the City Council asked that the CAO wetland provisions that were excepted from the SMP be updated to be consistent with Publication No. 16-06-001. The Board had a public hearing on the proposed amendments to the CAO on July 11th, but the DOE issued new guidance for wetlands on July 12th. He notified the City Council of the new guidance, and the City Council confirmed that they wanted the most up-to-date guidance incorporated into the CAO. Mr. Lien referred to a FAQ sheet on the updated guidance and the DOE’s recommendations (Attachments 2 and 3 in the Staff Report). He reviewed that the primary change between the 2016 and 2018 guidance is a regrouping of the habitat scores. Wetland buffer widths are determined by the habitat score assessed when wetland determination is made. The 2016 guidance has four potential buffer widths based on habitat score, and the 2018 guidance provides three. He explained that a low habitat function was previously represented by a score of 3 or 4 points and moderate habitat function by a score of 6 or 7 points. A habitat score of 8 or 9 was classified as high habitat function. The DOE has regrouped the scores so that the habitat score of 5 was combined with scores of 3 and 4 into the low habitat function category and scores of 6 or7 falls into the moderate habitat function. Mr. Lien advised that two other revisions to the CAO are also proposed. The first corrects a scrivener’s error in ECDC 23.50.040.G.3.d and the second deletes an allowed activity in ECDC 23.50.020.E. The allowed activity relates to development within the previously developed footprint for which specific regulations were included during the CAO update. ECDC 23.50.020.E is no longer applicable and should be deleted. Mr. Lien reported that he was notified via email that the DOE has reviewed the update and approves of the proposed changes. Board Member Lovell recalled that, at their last meeting, he proposed some changes to ECDC 20.80.100 to provide greater clarity as to who is responsible to pay fees when appeals are filed. Mr. Lien indicated that the language has been updated, but noted that the changes to ECDC 20.80.100 are related to the SMP periodic review and not the CAO update. Chair Monroe opened the public hearing. As there was no one in the audience to participate, he subsequently closed the hearing and returned to the Board for deliberation and a recommendation. Board Member Rubenkonig referred to the minutes of August 8th, noting Mr. Lien’s comment that following the public hearing and public comment period, staff would respond to comments received and then the Board could formalize its recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Lien advised that this comment was related to the SMP periodic review and not the CAO update. To clarify for the Board, Mr. Lien explained that the current SMP excepts four provisions that are contained in the City’s current CAO:
• ECDC 23.50.010.B – Wetland Ratings
• ECDC 23.50.040.F.1 – Buffer Requirements
• ECDC 23.50.040.F.2 – Standard Buffer Widths
• ECDC 23.50.040.K – Wetland Buffer Modifications and Uses
He further explained that the City adopted a specific version of the CAO into the SMP that did not include these four provisions.
Instead, similar versions of these sections, consistent with Publication No. 16.06.001, were added to the SMP. The CAO is used outside of shoreline jurisdictions and the SMP is used inside shoreline jurisdictions. As part of the work program adopted
by the City Council, they agreed to amend the four provisions in the CAO that were excepted from the SMP to bring them up to date with the DOE’s 2016 guidance and then the 2018 guidance. When the SMP periodic review is done, it will readopt the
6.3.i
Packet Pg. 299 Attachment: Exhibit 9: August 22, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 22, 2018 Page 3
CAO with the changes that are currently proposed (Attachment 4). This will result in one set of wetland regulations that apply throughout the City. Mr. Lien reviewed that, at the Board’s last meeting, he presented proposed amendments to the SMP, noting that they are waiting for the Edmonds Marsh Study to get further along before moving them forward to a public hearing. He summarized that the CAO amendments must be adopted first before they can be incorporated into the SMP. Although the CAO amendments relate to the SMP update, they are separate and require a separate action. BOARD MEMBER LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE CRITICAL AREA WETLAND REGULATIONS BE UPDATED CONSISTENT WITH WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY PUBLICATION NO 16-06-001 (WETLAND GUIDANCE FOR CAO UPDATES) AND THE UPDATED BUFFER GUIDANCE ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ON JULY 12, 2018 AS PROVIDED IN ATTACHMENT 4 OF THE STAFF REPORT. BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING BOARD RETREAT Chair Monroe suggested that the retreat be scheduled for September 12th. However, a few Board Members indicated they would be unavailable on that date. Chair Monroe agreed to poll the Board Members to identify a date that works best, likely either September 12th or September 26th. Board Member Lovell recalled the Board’s discussion at their last meeting about potential retreat topics. Two ideas were to bring in a guest speaker to talk about Blockables or conducting a review of a property that might be appropriate for affordable housing to see what would be required. He agreed with the point made by Board Member Cloutier that these two discussions should be held at a working meeting so the public has an opportunity to participate. However, he suggested it might be appropriate to invite a guest speaker to talk about the housing situation within Snohomish County in general. Board Member Lovell said some of the other topics discussed relate to economic development and tourism, which fall under the Economic Development Commission’s purview. Board Member Rubenkonig recalled that the City Council recently considered a proposal from the Economic Development Commission to amend the BD zoning provisions to allow three-story development. The Historic Preservation Commission voiced opposition to this change, and particularly voiced concern about how it could change the historic character of the downtown. She suggested it might be helpful to discuss historic areas and the steps that other communities have taken to preserve them. Board Member Robles recalled that the Board did well anticipating the housing issue. They recognized potential problems early on and put their heads together to talk about solutions. Perhaps the Board could do the same with other hot-button issues and get ahead of them with anticipatory policies. For example, short-term rentals could become a hot-button issue in Edmonds. While it is a small issue now, it is a growing problem in other areas as more opportunities for this type of use become available. Board Member Lovell suggested it might also be worthwhile to invite a guest speaker to discuss the Buildable Lands Analysis as a place to start when looking at viable options for housing alternatives in Edmonds. Mr. Chave said he could explore the potential of someone from the County coming to the retreat to present this information to the Board. Board Member Rubenkonig suggested another topic might be the impact of Snohomish County’s urban centers on the City of Edmonds boundaries, since code in Snohomish County allow a different type of development. Mr. Chave said the Board could also have a discussion with staff about the subjects that are coming down the pike. He said staff is currently working to establish a list of projects that will need to be added to the Board’s extended agenda. Chair Monroe agreed to meet with Ms. Hope and Vice Chair Cheung to finalize agenda topics and a date for the retreat. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA
6.3.i
Packet Pg. 300 Attachment: Exhibit 9: August 22, 2018 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 4, 2018
Page 9
fence was measured. Mr. Lien clarified it was a fence on top of a retaining wall. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas recalled that decision was reversed. Mr. Lien advised it was upheld. With regard to ex-parte
contact, in all the years she was on Council and heard appeals, she had only been contacted twice about
cases and in both she very professionally said she could not discuss it and that stopped the conversation.
She recalled during the process Councilmembers are asked to reveal ex-parte contact and on occasion a
Councilmember recused themselves.
Councilmember Mesaros recalled visiting City Hall and upon seeing Mr. Lien, asking him about a project
and if there were any problems. Mr. Lien responded they should not talk about it because if there were
problems and they were appealed, Councilmember Mesaros could be required to make a decision in a quasi-
judicial hearing. That was insightful on Mr. Lien’s part. As Councilmember Tibbott said, a Councilmember
may be talking to citizens about a project in its infancy and unknowingly be tainted by that discussion later
in the process. As Mr. Taraday said, Councilmembers pride themselves on their accessibility to citizens;
however, citizens may offer input early in the process before an appeal, resulting in a Councilmember being
involved in ex-parte contact before the appeal process even begins.
Mr. Lien said in reviewing the three meetings in 2016 agendas, none of them were public hearings. This
item is on the extended agenda for September 18; the Council could have further discussion prior to a public
hearing or schedule a public hearing. Mayor Pro Tem Nelson offered to work with Mr. Lien to select a date
for the public hearing. Councilmembers were agreeable to that approach.
2. INTRODUCTION TO UPDATING CRITICAL AREA REGULATIONS FOR WETLANDS
Environmental Program Manager Kernen Lien said this is the third time this topic has been presented to
the Council. He reviewed:
Background
o Completed comprehensive CAO update in May 2016
o June 2016 Department of Ecology Issues updated Wetland Guidance in Publication No. 16-06-
001
o Updated Wetland Guidance Incorporated into Shoreline Management Program
o Shoreline Management Act vs. Growth Management Act
Shoreline Master Program applies in shoreline jurisdiction
CAO applies outside of shoreline jurisdiction
o SMP Periodic Review
This updated focuses on SMP Excepted Sections
o ECDC 23.50.010.B, Wetland Ratings.
o ECDC 23.50.040.F.1, Standard Buffer Widths.
o ECDC 23.50.040.F.2, Required Measures to Minimize Impacts to Wetlands.
o ECDC 23.50.040.K, Small, Hydrologically Isolated Wetlands
History repeats itself (almost)
o Public Hearing before Planning Board on July 11, 2018
o Ecology issues new wetland guidance on July 12, 2018
“If you are a local planner in the process of updating your CAO, we recommend that you
use these modified wetland buffer tables in your update.”
Ecology 2018 Wetland Guidance
o “We made the changes based on public feedback and our own review of the reference wetland
data used to calibrate the Washington State Wetland Rating System. We knew we needed to
make modifications in the grouping of habitat scores.”
o Wetland Buffer Requirement Tables
2016
Table XX.1 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington
6.3.j
Packet Pg. 301 Attachment: Exhibit 10: Septebmer 4, 2018 City Council Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
September 4, 2018
Page 10
If Table XX.2 is Implemented and Corridor Provided
Buffer Width (in feet) based on habitat score
Wetland Category 3-4 5 6-7 8-9
Category 1: Based on total score 75 105 165 225
2018
Table XX.1 Wetland Buffer Requirements for Western Washington
If Table XX.2 is Implemented and Corridor Provided
Buffer Width (in feet) based on habitat score
Wetland Category 3-5 6-7 8-9
Category 1: Based on total score 75 110 225
Councilmember Johnson asked the wetland category for the Edmonds Marsh. Mr. Lien said the Edmonds
Marsh is a Category II estuarian wetland. The buffers do not change from 2016 to the 2018 Guidance. The
buffers for estuarian wetland is not based on the wetland habitat score.
Mr. Lien continued his presentation:
Other minor amendments
o ECDC 23.50.020.E – Wetland activities
Related to expansion of a structure that does not increase “footprint of development”
New section ECDC 23.50.040.J – Development Proposals with the Footprint of Existing
Development
o ECDC 23.50.040.G.3.d – buffer averaging scrivener’s error
Public hearing scheduled for September 25
Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis said although this is a minor update, there are a lot of code changes.
She complimented Mr. Lien on very good packet.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to ECDC 23.50.020.E related to expansion of a structure that does not
increase the footprint of the development. He asked if footprint of the development applied to the structure
or the structure and the paved area. Mr. Lien answered it does not apply to just the structure which is why
he suggested deleting that section. When the CAO was updated in 2016, a definition of footprint of
development was added which includes legally established impervious surface. The new section still allows
development within the developed footprint but requires enhancement as well. That was discussed in 2016
and should have been deleted at that time.
3. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) - CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN (CFP)
DISCUSSION
City Engineer Rob English provided a diagram showing components found only in the CIP and only in the
CFP and components found in both the CIP and CFP. The CIP contains 6-year maintenance projects with
funding sources, the CFP contains long range (20-year) capital project needs, and both contain 6-year
capital projects with funding sources. He explained several sources are used to select projects for both the
CIP and CFP, the first, the Comprehensive Plan which contains nine elements, four of which are used in
developing the CIP and CFP (Utilities Plan, Transportation, Plan, Parks & Recreation Open Space Plan and
Capital Facilities Plan). He reviewed:
Comprehensive Plan elements
o Establish goals and policies
o Assessment of future needs based on land use and modeling
o Identifies infrastructure and services to support future needs
o Public participation
6.3.j
Packet Pg. 302 Attachment: Exhibit 10: Septebmer 4, 2018 City Council Minutes Excerpt (Public Hearing on Critical Area Regulations for Wetlands)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber Athletic Fields
Staff Lead: Mike Nelson/Maureen Judge
Department: City Council
Preparer: Maureen Judge
Background/History
The City Council adopted the first ordinance 4013 on December 8th, 2015 prohibiting certain
installations of SBR until July 11, 2017. The City Council extended this prohibition of SBR installations on
April 11, 2017; this extension expired on February 28, 2018. The City Council extended this prohibition
of SBR (styrene-butadiene rubber) installations on February 20, 2018; this extension expired on August
15, 2018. On August 21, 2018, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 4125, extending the prohibition on
SBR installations for a period of six months.
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
A public hearing is required within 60 days of a moratorium extension. The City Council originally
adopted the crumb rubber (SBR) moratorium with Ordinance 4013 on December 8, 2015. That
moratorium has been extended several times, most recently in Ordinance 4125 on August 21, 2018 to
extend the prohibition of certain installations of SBR (styrene-butadiene rubber) on public lands in the
City of Edmonds. The Council's intent has been to extend it until the Federal study was completed and a
report issued. The Federal study is still being conducted by the US Environmental Protection Agency and
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Environmental Health/Agency for
Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. The draft report was sent for external peer-review in May 2018.
It was expected to be released for public comment mid-summer 2018, but the report has not yet been
released. In addition, the Council was monitoring the OEHHA Synthetic Turf Study from the California
EPA. The OEHHA study hopes to release their report this year as well.
The purpose of this item is to hold a public hearing on Ordinance No. 4125, extending the moratorium
for six months.
Attachments:
Ordinance 4125
6.4
Packet Pg. 303
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 304 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 305 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 306 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 307 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 308 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 309 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 310 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 311 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 312 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 313 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 314 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 315 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 316 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 317 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 318 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 319 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 320 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 321 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 322 Attachment: Ordinance 4125 (Public Hearing on Moratorium Extension on Crumb Rubber)
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
2018 Sewer Replacement Change Order
Staff Lead: Rob English
Department: Engineering
Preparer: Megan Luttrell
Background/History
On September 11, 2018, staff presented this item to the Parks and Public Works Committee and it was
forwarded to the full Council for review.
On August 7, 2018, the City Council approved a Change Order for $175,000 related to dewatering and
authorized an additional $250,000 in management reserve for the project.
On April 24, 2018, the City Council authorized the award of a construction contract to McCann
Construction Enterprises and a $232,000 management reserve for changes and unforeseen conditions.
Staff Recommendation
Authorize additional funding for the project and change order for the sewer installation in Edmonds St.
Narrative
The original construction plans for this project called for the new sanitary sewer pipe to be installed in
an envelope of lightweight aggregate due to the presence of peat in the underlying soil. Peat is a highly
compressible material that will settle over time if overloaded and the lightweight envelope was
intended to mitigate the compressive effect of the peat.
After installation of the first 150 feet of sewer pipe in Edmonds St, the contractor had a video performed
on the line and found that it was settling despite the proper installation of the lightweight envelope.
Further testing by the geotechnical engineer revealed that the peat in this area exhibited different
physical characteristics from the sample that was analyzed during the design phase. A lightweight
envelope will not suffice in this area so City staff, along with consulting engineers, developed the
following solution:
· Excavate and remove the peat until competent soil capable of bearing the sewer pipe is
reached.
· Backfill the trench with lean concrete to establish a foundation for the new sewer pipe.
· Install the sewer pipe and backfill
The contractor was able to install only 70 feet of new pipe using this approach because the underlying
soil beneath the peat changed as the excavation continued east in Edmonds St. The excavation depth to
reach competent soil became too deep (in excess of 20 feet) and could not be excavated with the
contractor’s equipment.
7.1
Packet Pg. 323
The design team and staff have now developed a second approach to install the remaining 100 feet of
pipe replacement. The contractor will install wood piling with a support system in lieu of the lean
concrete foundation. The wood piling can be driven deep enough to reach the bearing soil beneath the
existing peat layer.
Staff has also reduced the amount of sewer pipe replacement in Edmonds St. by substituting a cured-in-
place liner for the last 150 feet of pipe replacement. Lining this section of existing pipe is a viable
alternative, since the slope in this section is significantly steeper.
It is currently estimated that this additional effort to install the sewer pipe in Edmonds St. will cost
approximately $235,000 plus tax (total=$259,200). The substitution of CIPP rehabilitation for pipe
replacement is estimated to save $41,400. Staff will provide an update on the project budget and a
recommendation to increase the management reserve and construction management cost.
7.1
Packet Pg. 324
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
Interlocal Cooperative Purchasing Agreement with Sourcewell (Minnesota)
Staff Lead: Phil Williams
Department: Public Works & Utilities
Preparer: Phil Williams
Background/History
NA
Staff Recommendation
Authorize the Mayor to sign the interlocal agreement with Sourcewell (Minnesota) for cooperative
purchasing
Narrative
State law and local purchasing policies require an interlocal agreement be entered into to be able to use
competitive local and state government purchasing cooperatives. This option allows the City to buy
products off of the Washington State purchasing contract system as well as leveraging national
purchasing contracts for major purchases where recent competitive bidding has been used to establish
the lowest price. This allows the City to save time and still be certain we are getting the best price.
7.2
Packet Pg. 325
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 09/25/2018
Council Committee Reports and Minutes
Staff Lead: Council
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
N/A
Narrative
This is an opportunity for the Council to report on items discussed in their committee meetings. The
committee meeting minutes are attached.
Attachments:
FC091118
PPW091118
PSPP091118
8.1
Packet Pg. 326
Minutes
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING
September 11, 2018
_________________________________________________________________________________
Elected Officials Present Staff Present
Councilmember Diane Buckshnis Scott James, Finance Director
Council President Mike Nelson Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director
Councilmember Tom Mesaros Scott Passey, City Clerk
Mayor Dave Earling Jeannie Dines, Recorder
The meeting was called to order at 7:13 p.m. in the Jury Meeting Room. The order of Items 8.3 and
8.2 was reversed.
1. Business License Minimum Threshold and Definition of Engaging in Business
City Clerk Scott Passey explained in 2017 the State legislature passed legislation requiring cities who
have a business license to partner with the State or FileLocal to administer business licenses which he
noted will streamline the process. Partnering with the State requires the City adopt amendments to the
business license code with regard to, 1) business license minimum threshold, and 2) definition of
engaging in business. All cities with a B&O tax operate under the definition of engaging in business
(definition provided in Council packet); there is no option to change that language. The minimum
threshold is the amount of income a business generates to require a City business license. Few cities
in the State have established thresholds, of the cities that have, their threshold is $12,000/year which
staff found reasonable. Options within the threshold include 1) exempting businesses below the
threshold from obtaining a business license, or 2) a fee free/registration business license. Most other
cities are leaning toward exempting businesses generating $12,000 or less from a business license.
When the State takes over business licensing, compliance will increase; the State will generate a
mailing list and send letters encouraging businesses to apply for a business license.
Discussion followed regarding why a $12,000 threshold was selected by other cities, staff time to handle
business licenses, the State’s fee to administer business licenses, the City’s current business license
fee, current business licenses, and businesses that potentially need to be licensed. Committee agreed
with the threshold exemption of $12,000.
Action: Schedule adoption of ordinance for full Council by year end
3. July 2018 Monthly Financial Report
Mr. Turley responded to questions regarding the Contingency Reserve Fund, grant billing, decrease in
telephone utility tax, court revenues, and the CBDG repayment for the Senior Center.
Action: Schedule on Consent Agenda
2. Review of UB Penalty Adjustment Policy
Mr. Turley explained this was in response to a concern expressed at a Council meeting with the City’s
inability to accept vouchers. He explained a $25 late fee is charged on water bills; if the bill is not paid,
the water is turned off and a $20 fee charged and when the bill is paid, a $20 fee is charged to turn the
water back on. With regard to payment via a voucher, acceptance of vouchers requires additional effort
and the City does not have a policy regarding forms of payment other than the statement states check,
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 327 Attachment: FC091118 (Council Committee Reports)
09/11/18 Finance Committee Minutes, Page 2
cash or money orders. The process for a voucher is a person requests a voucher from an agency, the
agencies issues the voucher up to an amount, the person brings the voucher to the City, the City
completes the voucher stating the amount due, and the agency then issues a check. Because the
process a long time, it is likely the person’s water would be shut off. Issues to be discussed include, 1)
forms of payment the City accepts, and 2) amount of the late fee and discretion to waive the late fee
based on circumstances.
Committee members supported accepting vouchers and suggested staff investigate how voucher
payments are handled by other cities. Discussion followed regarding how often vouchers would be used
and whether to waive the late fee and turn off/on fee when agreeing to accept a voucher.
Action: Staff draft policy with options for Finance Committee review.
The meeting was recessed at 7:37 p.m. awaiting a staff member and reconvened at 7:50 p.m. in the
Public Safety Training Room
4. Public Facilities District (PFD) Bond Refinancing
Several members of the ECA and PFD Boards, ECA staff and representatives of First Financial
Northwest Bank were present.
Mr. James explained the PFD issued bonds in 2008, 7 years remain with an average rate of 4.25%.
The PFD received an offer from First Financial Northwest Bank to refinance the bonds at a lower rate
and to extend the term from 7 years to 10 years. He referred to Options A and B on the term sheet in
the Council packet; staff recommends Option A which has a fixed 3% loan rate for 10 years. The current
bonds require a Contingent Loan Agreement (CLA); with acceptance of this offer, the CLA will be
replaced with a collateralized certificate of deposit to offset the amount of debt issued. For example, if
the debt issued is $2,747,000; the City would deposit the same amount. Benefits include the City’s
receives a 2.1% return on investment and the PFD receives financial flexibility via a longer term to repay
the debt at a lower interest rate resulting in more cash flow. ECA/PFD Executive Director Joe McIalwain
advised this has been approved by the PFD Board.
Discussion followed regarding the offer expiration date, savings to the PFD of Option A, the City’s
investment earnings, the PFD’s plans to begin repaying the contingent loan, Snohomish County PFD’s
recalculation of sales tax allocation resulting in additional funds to the Edmonds PFD, and timing of the
refinancing. Mr. The Committee requested the staff provide the City their financials including sales tax
revenue projections every six months.
Action: Schedule for full Council on September 25
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 328 Attachment: FC091118 (Council Committee Reports)
Minutes
PARKS & PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING
September 11, 2018
Elected Officials Present Staff Present
Councilmember Neil Tibbott (Chair) Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Councilmember Kristiana Johnson Rob English, City Engineer
Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir.
Todd Cort, Recreation Supervisor
Terri Arnold, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dep. Dir.
Jerrie Bevington, Recorder
The meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Main & 9th Restriping Project
was added as Agenda Item 3 and Project Updates was added as Agenda Item 4.
1. Interlocal Agreement with Edmonds School District for Meadowdale Preschool
Mr. Cort reported the City has had an ILA with the Edmonds School District for many years which allows
the District to place three children in the Meadowdale Preschool program. The proposed ILA continues
that arrangement. The District conducts an application process, selects the students and pays the
enrollment fees. The program accommodates 16 children and here are 13 on the waiting list. Ms. Hite
advised the 2019 budget includes revenues and expenses for an additional preschool program to
address the demand. Discussion followed regarding the option for the District to add children to the
program and the preschool staff’s education.
Action: Schedule on Consent Agenda.
2. 2018 Sewer Replacement Change Order
Mr. English recalled a presentation was made to full Council in August related to dewatering, pavement
restoration in 7th Avenue and requesting an additional $250,000 management reserve. Additional costs
were incurred to remove the existing pile system and to address contamination created by the two
creosote-treated utility poles that supported the foundation. The original plan for this project was a
lightweight aggregate envelope due to peat in the underlying soil. After installation of the first 150 feet
of sewer main in Edmonds Street, the contractor discovered the pipe was settling. When testing
revealed peat with different physical characteristics than the sample analyzed in the design phase, staff
and the consultant developed Option 1, excavating to remove peat to solid bearing soil and backfilling
the trench with lean concrete to establish a foundation for the new pipe. That worked for the first 70 feet
but then the bearing soil became deeper and could not be excavated with the contractor’s equipment.
Option 2 was then developed with the contractor installing wood piling into bearing soil and a support
system for the pipe. The last 100 feet of replacement on Edmonds Street was changed from pipe
replacement to a cured-in-place pipe rehabilitation due to the grade. He anticipated an overlay in 1-2
years with a fabric-glass grid due to settling of the underlying peat. He described:
Extra work items
Description Original
Estimate
Current
Estimate
Dewatering System Estimate $175,000
Pavement Repairs Estimate $80,000 $45,000
Contaminated Materials TBD $75,000
Edmonds Street Sewer $235,000
CIPP Substitution ($49,000)
8.1.b
Packet Pg. 329 Attachment: PPW091118 (Council Committee Reports)
09/11/18 PPW Committee Minutes, Page 2
Total $480,600
2018 Sewer Replacement Project
Description Original
Budget
Current
Budget
Construction Contract $1,159,091 $1,159,091
Management Reserve $ 232,000 $ 232,000
Construction Mgmt $ 147,000 $ 254,000
Additional Mgmt Reserve
(August 7, 2018)
$ 250,000
Additional Mgmt Reserve $ 75,000
Total $1,565,091 $1,970,091
Staff is requesting Council approval of, 1) increase in construction management, 2) additional
management reserve, and 3) approval of the change order for work in Edmonds Street. The cost is paid
from the Sewer Utility Fund. Discussion followed regarding soil removal around the creosote-treated
poles, history of this peat bog, settling caused by dewatering, presence of peat below Civic Field, and
residents’ response to the additional work.
Action: Schedule for full Council
3. Main & 9th Striping Project
Mr. English advised this intersection is currently LOS D, nearly LOS E. A mini-roundabout/signal is
included in the CIP. Restriping to add right-turn lanes on all four approaches would be an interim solution
and would improve the LOS to C. Similar restriping was done at Walnut & 9th. Restriping would remove
on-street parking in front of the first two houses on the west leg of the intersection. The corner house is
okay with the change; staff has not yet had an opportunity to speak with the second house. The
restriping does not require modification of curbs, the stop signs will be enlarged, restriping will be done
by in-house staff and the total cost is approximately $5,000.
Action: Schedule on Consent Agenda
4. Project Update
Mr. English reported the strike is over and contractors have returned to work. Mr. Williams advised it is
unknown how the loss of time during good weather will affect completion of projects such as Seaview,
pavement overlay program, and waterline replacement.
Mr. Williams reported on the public meeting regarding Pine Street. Solutions included additional traffic
enforcement, installation of solar powered flashing stop signs on Pine Street at 7th and 6th, reflective
material on the posts, hot tape approaching the stop bar, wider stop bars, trimming vegetation, hot tape
fog line near the park to discourage cutting the corner, and a sign on westbound 220th directing traffic
to turn left to the ferry. The right-of-way is not wide enough to install sidewalks. Discussion followed
regarding relocating the school bus stop and GPS directions. Committee suggested staff follow up with
the school district about relocating the bus stop.
Action: Information only
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
8.1.b
Packet Pg. 330 Attachment: PPW091118 (Council Committee Reports)
Minutes
PUBLIC SAFETY, PERSONNEL & PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING
September 11, 2018
Elected Officials Present Staff Present
Councilmember Tom Mesaros (Chair) Scott James, Finance Director
Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Mayor Dave Earling Mary Ann Hardie, HR Director
The meeting was called to order at 7:13 p.m. in the Police Training Room.
1. Finance Manager & Senior Accountant Job Descriptions
Mr. James reviewed annual compensation and benefit costs for the Public Works Finance Manager
and the Finance Department Senior Accountant positions and investment earnings that will offset the
positions. He described the rationale for the Senior Accountant position including eliminating
capital/grant related audit issues, improving the timeliness of grant billings and reporting, overseeing
and assisting other departments with project accounting, and working with risk management to reduce
claims and disseminate claim information to department directors. The Senior Accountant position will
also assist with implementing pronouncements, preparing financial statements, creating an
Emergency Management Preparedness and Response program for Finance and IT, long range
financial planning development, finding ways to improve monthly and quarterly reporting of financial
results and communicating long-term financial needs to the City’s stakeholders, position the City to
receive the GFOA Budget Award, and position the City to receive a AAA bond rating.
Mr. James responded to questions and discussion followed regarding who currently does long range
financial planning and communicates long term financial needs to the City’s stakeholders, how the
additional employee would help position the City to receive a AAA bond rating, benefits of a AAA bond
rating, rationale for a Senior Accountant instead of an Accountant, and the increasing complexity of
finance. Committee requested Mr. James provide the Finance Department FTEs 1984 to 2016 and
clarify in the presentation why a Senior Accountant position is needed.
Mr. Williams referenced the tasks the Public Works Finance Manager will perform, advising the job
description had been revised slightly since the previous presentation to the Council. He summarized
Public Works has 86 employees and a budget of $43 million, yet no one on his staff has financial
education, background or experience.
Mr. Williams responded to questions and discussion followed regarding rationale for a Finance
Manager in Public Works instead of an Accountant, previous Council concern with an Accountant in
Public Works, rationale for two positions – one in Finance and one in Public Works, and these
positions generating savings and reducing risk.
Action: Schedule for full Council next week
The meeting was adjourned at 7:46 p.m.
8.1.c
Packet Pg. 331 Attachment: PSPP091118 (Council Committee Reports)