2006.10.17 CC Community_Development Services CommiAGENDA
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Council Chambers
250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds
October 17, 2006
7:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.
7:00 p.m. - Call to Order and Flag Salute
1.Approval of Agenda
2.Consent Agenda Items
A.Roll Call
B.AM-635 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2006.
C.AM-642 Approval of claim checks #91183 and #91189 through #91425
for October 5, 2006 in the amount of $761,443.14. Approval of
claim checks #91426 through #91578 for October 12, 2006 in
the amount of $168,084.49. Approval of payroll direct deposits
and checks in the amount of $761,825.84 for the period of
September 16 through September 30, 2006.
D.AM-633 Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages from William J. and
Linda A. Chase ($295.00).
E.AM-631 Authorization for the Mayor to sign Change Order #3 with
Harbor Pacific Contractors in the amount of $45,081 for the
Screenings Improvement Project at the Treatment Plant.
F.AM-634 Proclamation in honor of Make a Difference Day, Saturday,
October 28, 2006.
G.AM-640 Authorization to contract with James Murphy Auctioneers to
surplus seized and forfeiture city vehicles.
3.AM-641 Annual Report of the Hearing Examiner
3.AM-641
(10
Min)
Annual Report of the Hearing Examiner
4.AM-643
(15
Min)
Transmittal of 2007-08 Budget: Mayor's Budget Address
5.AM-638
(45
Min)
Public hearing on the Planning Board's recommendation of denial
on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone for Jennifer
Mantooth, located a approximately 97th Avenue West and 231st
Place Southwest. (File No. CDC-05-3 and R-06-67)
6.AM-632
(30
Min)
Public hearing on the Planning Board's recommendation
regarding amendments to the Edmonds Community
Development Code Chapter 16.77, MPOR Zone.
7.AM-637
(45
Min)
Closed Record Review of an appeal by Elisabeth Larman on the
Architectural Design Board approval of the refurbishment of Old
Milltown, located at 201 5th Avenue South. (File No.
APL-20060003 and PLN-20060094)
8.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)
9.AM-639
(15
Min)
Report on City Council Committee Meetings.
10.(5 Min)Mayor's Comments
11.(15
Min)
Council Comments
12.Adjourn
AM-635 2.B.
Approval of Minutes
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Sandy Chase, City Clerk's Office Time:Consent
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action
Review
Committee:
Action:
Agenda Memo
Subject
Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2006.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Please refer to the attached draft minutes.
Recommendation
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Draft Minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/11/2006 04:37 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 07:11 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 08:01 AM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 10/11/2006 04:34 PM
Final Approval Date: 10/12/2006
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
October 3, 2006
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
Deanna Dawson, Council President
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Richard Marin, Councilmember
Mauri Moore, Councilmember
Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Ron Wambolt, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
David Stern, Chief of Police
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director
Kathleen Junglov, Asst. Admin. Services Dir.
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Dave Gebert, City Engineer
Don Sims, Traffic Engineer
Debi Humann, Human Resources Manager
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mayor Haakenson requested the addition of a 10-minute Executive Session regarding potential litigation
as Agenda Item 13 and relayed Councilmember Marin’s request to add a Proclamation in honor of Live
Theater Week, October 16 – 22, 2006, as Agenda Item 4b.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, FOR
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Wambolt requested Item F be removed from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, FOR
APPROVAL OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
(A) ROLL CALL
(B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2006.
(C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #91034 THROUGH #91182 FOR SEPTEMBER 28,
2006 IN THE AMOUNT OF $183,812.56.
(D) APPROVAL OF TAXI OPERATOR'S LICENSE FOR LOW FARE AIRPORT AND
LOCAL FOR HIRE VEHICLES.
(E) RESOLUTION NO. 1131 - OPPOSE INITIATIVE 933 ENTITLED "AN ACT RELATING
TO PROVIDING FAIRNESS IN GOVERNMENT REGULATION OF PROPERTY."
(G) PIERCE STORM WATER BILLING ADJUSTMENT
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 2
Item F: Non-Represented 2007-2008 Compensation Plan
Councilmember Wambolt explained he pulled this item from the Consent Agenda in order to provide
further clarification and explanation. As a member of the Council Finance Committee, he voted to
recommend that the Council approve budgets for 2007 and 2008 that provide for cost of living increases
and merit increases for non-represented employees, a total of approximately 42 employees. Budgeting a
6-7% pay increase when most industries plan increases of only approximately 4% in 2007 was not
pleasing to him. Staff proposed a new policy to replace the current L5 policy but the policy was not
accepted by the Council.
Staff and the Council Finance Committee propose a compensation consultant be retained in 2007 to assist
with developing a new policy. A variety of goals will be established for the new policy including the
development of a policy that focuses on job performance for merit pay rather than inflation as the
dominant factor that determines pay increases. Until a new policy can be developed and adopted, the
non-represented employees need to be treated fairly; several have not had a pay increase in 2006 because
their pay was at the top of the pay range. The reason was because the salary ranges were too narrow, with
only a 25% spread from the top to the bottom. As a result the pay ranges do not extend either high
enough or low enough.
He explained the interim remedy was as proposed in Item F. He requested recommendation #3 be
amended to read “a 3% merit pool for employees not at the top of their salary range be established in the
2007 and 2008 budgets” which would allow employees at the top of their salary range to receive cost of
living increases in 2007 but not a merit increase.
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, FOR
APPROVAL OF ITEM F.
Mayor Haakenson clarified the recommended action did not include setting aside $100,000 in the budget
for the study. Councilmember Wambolt agreed it did not.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF CHANGE A LIGHT DAY IN EDMONDS, OCTOBER 4, 2006
Mayor Haakenson explained global warming would not be stopped overnight. It is a very complicated
problem that will take many solutions by many people. A good way to start is to take small steps. As
part of the City’s energy reduction and climate protection efforts, he proclaimed Wednesday, October 4 as
“Change a Light Day” in Edmonds to encourage citizens to take a simple but important step toward
reducing energy usage.
He explained the energy used in an average home contributes more than twice the greenhouse gas
emissions of the average car. This is because the electricity is typically generated by burning fossil fuels,
and this burning releases greenhouse gases into our air. By switching the light bulbs used the most to
Energy Star bulbs, would do a little bit to help.
Mayor Haakenson noted that 20% of the nation’s electricity usage is from lighting homes. Last year over
70,000 people nationwide signed a pledge to change one light bulb in their homes to an Energy Star-
qualified light bulb. That action avoided using 23 million kWh’s of energy and in turn prevented more
than 33 million pounds of greenhouse gas emissions. That also saved over $2 million on America’s
utility bills. If we changed one light bulb for every child in America, we would save enough energy to
light more than 15 million homes for an entire year and prevent more than 30 billion pounds of
greenhouse gas emissions.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 3
One light bulb changed to an Energy Star bulb will save more than $30 in electricity cost over the life of
the bulb and will prevent the release of 450 pounds of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere. The goal of
the Change a Light, Change the World campaign is for 500,000 people nationwide to take the online
pledge, which can be found on the Energy Star website at www.energystar.gov/changealight.
Mayor Haakenson then read a proclamation declaring October 4, 2006 as Change a Light Day in
Edmonds and encouraged citizens to join him in making this pledge to change one light bulb in their
homes. He pointed out if everyone changed the five most used bulbs in their homes to florescent bulbs,
the amount saved would be equivalent to taking 8 million cars off the road.
4A. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH, OCTOBER
2006.
Mayor Haakenson read a proclamation declaring October 2006 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month
and urging all residents to support the work of the Snohomish County Task Force in serving the needs of
families impacted by domestic violence and work toward the elimination of domestic violence in our
community.
4B. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF LIVE THEATRE WEEK, OCTOBER 16 – 22, 2006.
Councilmember Marin read a proclamation declaring the week of October 16 – 22, 2006 Live Theatre
Week in Edmonds and urged everyone to celebrate the performing arts by attending a performance in a
local theater or by taking part in the many activities offered in Seattle and around the region. The
proclamation announced a free performance by the Driftwood Players of “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow”
on October 19 at 8:00 p.m. at the Wade James Theater and Councilmember Marin encouraged the public
to call the theater to obtain free tickets. Two actresses were present who thanked the Council for
recognizing Live Theatre Week.
5. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REGARDING A
PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT KNOWN AS THE MCCORMICK MEDICAL BUILDING, 635
PARADISE LANE.
City Engineer Dave Gebert explained the owner of the property at 635 Paradise Lane was in the process
of constructing a private development project known as the McCormick Medical Building. He clarified
this was not a medical clinic but a business that was involved in medical equipment. He displayed a
vicinity map, identifying the property, Edmonds Way/SR 104 and Paradise Lane. He advised the map
included in the agenda memo incorrectly identified the locale of the dental clinic, and displayed a map of
the correct location.
Mr. Gebert stated the current configuration of the intersection posed unique traffic circulation and safety
issues. He identified the slip lane to Paradise Lane from SR 104, the two entrances/exits onto Edmonds
Way, the bus stop, the right turn pocket and the area where ferry traffic conflicted with movements at the
intersection. During permit review for the McCormick Medical Building, staff recognized the
opportunity to cooperate on a project with the developer to improve the configuration of the intersection.
Mr. Gebert displayed a drawing of the project concept, explaining it was intended to create a safer and
more attractive intersection. Since the public hearing was announced, several concerns were expressed by
citizens regarding the intersection, primarily regarding traffic movement, the bus stop and conflicts with
ferry traffic at the intersection, issues this project would address. The concept was to eliminate the slip
lane, build a small island park, create a more standard right-angle entrance/exit from SR 104, lengthen the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 4
right turn pocket and combine it with the bus stop and improve signage and control of the ferry traffic to
reduce conflicts at the intersection. He explained the details of the design still need to be worked out.
Mr. Gebert explained the RCW allowed the City to enter into development agreements with developers.
The improvements inside the right-of-way would be done by the City; improvements on private property
would be done by the developer. A portion of the cost of development would increase as a result of the
development agreement and others would be reduced. The developer has incurred additional costs to
redesign his parking lot as a result of the proposal, but his responsibilities for right-of-way restoration,
traffic control, sidewalks, etc. will be reduced. The developer has agreed via the development agreement
to contribute $2,400 toward the project. He advised there were sufficient funds in Fund 125 to cover the
remainder of the cost of the project. Staff recommends Council authorize the Mayor to sign the
development agreement.
For Councilmember Plunkett, Mr. Gebert explained in the proposed concept the slip lane would be
eliminated and the right-hand turn would be made via the right turn lane at the intersection.
Councilmember Plunkett asked how drivers would enter the right turn lane if it were blocked by ferry
traffic. Mr. Gebert explained signage would be installed to identify the right turn lane and prevent
blockage by ferry traffic. Traffic Engineer Don Sims displayed an updated conceptual plan based on
survey data, explaining there would be a dedicated right turn lane that would operate similarly to other
right turn lanes when there was no ferry queue. The transit stop would be moved back, away from the
intersection to improve sight lines for egress from Paradise Lane. He advised this intersection was
identified by WSDOT as a high accident location in 2004; accidents are in the 2-way left turn lane
involving vehicles attempting to access Paradise Lane.
Councilmember Plunkett envisioned the presence of a bus would hinder a driver’s sight lines when
attempting to exit from Paradise Lane to the left. Mr. Sims noted that issue existed today; the proposed
project would improve the sight distance by moving the bus stop back. Staff is working with the Police
Department and WSDOT to develop improved pavement markings and signage at the intersection.
Councilmember Plunkett envisioned ferry traffic would block the entrance to the right turn lane. Mr.
Sims acknowledged that was an issue currently for right turns and driveway entrances along the corridor
when ferry traffic was backed up. He envisioned when ferry traffic was backed up, a vehicle that wanted
to enter Paradise Lane would travel in the left lane and turn right in front of the queued-up vehicles the
same way they would enter a driveway in this corridor. He explained the right turn lane was not designed
for times when ferry traffic was backed up but intended as a deceleration pocket for vehicles leaving SR
104 and turning right onto Paradise Lane. In the current configuration, vehicles use the slip lane and enter
Paradise Lane at a higher rate of speed; the proposed configuration provides a traffic calming element for
the neighborhood as it requires vehicles to make the right turn at a slower speed. He acknowledged it was
not possible to totally eliminate conflicts with ferry traffic.
Councilmember Wambolt asked the cost of the project. Mr. Sims answered it was estimated at $20,000 -
$25,000; the developer would contribute $2,400. Funding would be provided via Parks Fund 125 as it
would provide a gateway treatment with landscaping.
Councilmember Moore asked how buses would reach the bus stop when ferry traffic was backed up. Mr.
Sims answered the same way it did today; he was uncertain whether buses currently traveled in the left
lane and moved into the right lane to reach the bus stop or if they waited in the ferry queue.
Councilmember Moore suggested staff talk to Community Transit to ensure the design was acceptable to
them. Mr. Sims pointed out similar conflicts existed with bus stops along the corridor. He agreed staff
would confer with Community Transit on the proposed design.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 5
Councilmember Moore pointed out the exit from Paradise Lane on the conceptual drawing was much
wider, providing greater flexibility for ingress/egress at Paradise Lane to SR 104. Mr. Sims agreed the
single entrance/exit would be wider to allow the design vehicle for a residential neighborhood, a single
axle truck such as a garbage truck, UPS truck, etc., to easily negotiate the turn.
Councilmember Moore inquired whether the ferry queuing would be eliminated by the Edmonds Crossing
project. Mr. Sims answered the significant additional holding lanes at Edmonds Crossing would
eliminate ferry queuing into this area for many years.
Councilmember Orvis commented it appeared to be easier for pedestrians to reach the bus stop. He asked
how many pedestrians used the crosswalk. Mr. Sims answered this transit stop was not heavily used; the
intent was to enhance the transit stop. He agreed the proposed intersection improved pedestrian safety as
crossing the existing slip lane was more dangerous.
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing, advising the Council
received a letter dated October 3, 2006 from Diane and Takashi Nasa, Edmonds, who explained the
main safety issue at the intersection was ferry traffic, not the two entrances onto Paradise Lane.
Ardell Morgan, Edmonds, opposed the elimination of the sidewalk, currently along the slip lane,
pointing out the proposed location of the sidewalk would require pedestrians to cross the street and walk
along the outside of the park area facing traffic on SR 104. She commented this configuration was less
safe for children. She suggested installing a walkway through the park area and that park area not contain
vegetation that blocked sight distances when exiting Paradise Lane. She suggested consideration be given
to an alternate access in case of emergency such as at the other end of Paradise Lane. She also suggested
signage identifying the entrance to Paradise Lane.
Melissa Weakland, Edmonds, pointed out most of the residences were located to the north of Paradise
Lane. She agreed with Ms. Morgan’s objection to the location of the sidewalk that would require
residents to cross the street to reach the sidewalk. She pointed out this would only add to safety concerns.
She supported renovating the sidewalks as the existing sidewalks were so overgrown that two people
could not walk side-by-side. She requested the configuration of the proposed sidewalk be reevaluated.
Joe Scordino, Edmonds, commented on his experience with traffic flows at this intersection with and
without ferry traffic. His primary concern was the bus stop in the right turn lane. He noted the difficulty
turning right if a bus were at the stop, possibly requiring drivers in the right turn lane to go around the bus
into traffic to make a right during peak hour traffic flows. He pointed out the proposed location of the
right turn lane was approximately where drivers realized they needed to be in the right lane to reach the
ferry. He preferred to retain the current configuration, summarizing the proposed configuration increased
rather than decreased safety hazards.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO
EXTEND DISCUSSION OF THIS MATTER FOR TEN MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Peter Evich, Edmonds, expressed concern that the proposed park area would affect visibility of drivers
exiting Paradise Lane. He stated that signage would not eliminate ferry traffic from blocking the
intersection. The only solution would be to have police patrols such as was done in Mukilteo. He
suggested speeds in the slip lane could be solved via speed bumps. If the City had not maintained the
sidewalk in the past, he questioned why it would be done for a private developer who would increase the
traffic to the neighborhood.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 6
Del Skinner, Edmonds, expressed concern that any hesitation by a driver to make a right-hand turn
would cause an accident. The existing configuration facilitated an even flow of traffic. He pointed out
the number of large trucks in their neighborhood and questioned their ability to make a right turn without
entering the oncoming lane.
John Heighway, Edmonds, questioned whether sidewalks had ADA access. He referred to the $20,000 -
$25,000 estimated cost of the project, expressing a preference to use those funds for the purchase of park
property. He commented a right turn lane similar to the right turn lane at Pine Street would be safer than
a combined right turn lane/bus stop. He agreed with the need to confer with Community Transit on bus
stop configuration. He suggested the City seek WSDOT’s input regarding the proposed configuration.
Rather than reconfiguring one exit, he recommended the City master plan the north side of SR 104 from
Westgate to downtown. He questioned the benefit to the City from the proposed configuration. He also
questioned who would maintain the proposed park and the cost of maintenance.
Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing.
Mr. Gebert responded to questions raised by the public, explaining all the comments would be considered
in the final design. He identified the location of the proposed sidewalk, explaining it would have ADA
facilities. He advised consideration could be given to providing a walkway or trail through the park area.
With regard to trees/vegetation blocking sight distances, he assured there were specific criteria for
vegetation within sight distances. With regard to signage identifying Paradise Lane, he assured signage
would be included in the design. With regard to safety for children, the sidewalks would meet the city’s
standards and include gutters and elevated curbs. With regard to the location of the bus stop, he explained
the bus stop would be moved back.
Mayor Haakenson asked staff to identify the location of the bus stop and the right turn lane and explain
how they would not conflict. Mr. Gebert identified the location of the turn lane and the current and
proposed bus stop location, explaining the bus stop would be moved back so that there would be room for
the turn lane in front of the bus stop.
With regard to the comment about why do this project for a private developer, Mr. Gebert explained this
concept was developed by staff when reviewing the private development and was not proposed by the
developer. City Attorney Scott Snyder explained the City could only require a developer to mitigate off-
site impacts they created. Staff’s proposal would reroute mitigation funds to a project they viewed as an
improvement.
In response to the comment about the turn accommodating large vehicles, Mr. Gebert explained the radius
was designed to accommodate large trucks such as garbage trucks, etc. With regard to the use of Fund
125 to purchase park property, he advised Fund 125 was designated for park improvements and was not
available for park acquisition; Fund 126 was used for park acquisition. The Parks & Recreation Director
participated in the development of this concept, would be involved in the design and approved the use of
Fund 125 for development of this island park. The Parks Department would maintain the vegetation.
Mr. Sims assured the primary reason for this project was to improve pedestrian and vehicular safety; the
secondary reason was the park area. He explained eliminating high speed slip lanes was a common
practice in the industry to improve vehicular and pedestrian safety. He acknowledged there was the
potential for conflict between a bus at the bus stop and a vehicle turning right that did not exist today,
however, the other benefits of the project outweigh that potential conflict. Their research indicated 35
right turns during the peak hour, thus the potential for conflict was minimal. Moving the bus stop back
would allow vehicles to make right turn in front of the bus similar to how right turns occurred on Hwy. 99
currently. He assured WSDOT had been contacted regarding the project and was supportive.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 7
Councilmember Orvis asked how the mitigation funds would be used if this project were not constructed.
Mr. Gebert answered there would be no mitigation funds provided; the developer would be required to
install frontage improvements.
Councilmember Marin agreed with the importance of a sidewalk wide enough to accommodate two
pedestrians walking side-by-side on a street with higher speeds. He recommended coordinating this
project with Community Transit in the event they would prefer to move the bus stop to the south away
from the right turn lane. Mr. Gebert agreed, reminding this was in the conceptual stage; Community
Transit would be involved in the final design concept.
For Councilmember Plunkett, Mr. Gebert clarified the Council was being asked to approve a development
agreement between the City and the developer that attaches the concept. Mr. Snyder read from the
development agreement, Paragraph 6.3 Obligations of the City, “The City agrees to develop and construct
the walkway and right-of-way improvements. The final design of the parkway improvements, sidewalk
and intersection shall be at the sole discretion of the City and the design shown may be altered in whole or
in part in accordance with a conditioned approval by the State, so long as the intersection redesign and
pocket park are developed which substantially comply with the purposes of this Agreement.”
Mr. Gebert then identified the current location of the bus stop. Councilmember Plunkett observed the
concept would create a conflict between a bus and a vehicle making a right turn where no conflict
currently existed. Mr. Sims explained the existing transit pull out would be lengthened and the bus stop
relocated further south to create a shared transit pullout and right turn lane. He commented 20,000
vehicles per day used SR 104, there were approximately 35 vehicles utilizing the right turn lane during
the peak hours, thus the conflict was only a potential for those 35 vehicles. Councilmember Plunkett
acknowledged it was a small number and may be a commonly occurring situation in other areas but it was
not common at this intersection. Mr. Sims agreed that situation did not exist at that intersection today.
Councilmember Plunkett observed if a bus was at the bus stop, a vehicle intending to enter the right turn
lane to access Paradise Lane would instead make their right turn from SR 104. Mr. Sims answered that
would be one solution. If the bus was signaling to leave, the driver could pull in behind the bus and
utilize the right turn lane. Councilmember Plunkett pointed out making a right turn from SR104 if the bus
was at the stop would require a driver to slow considerably. Mr. Sims responded the intent was to locate
the bus stop as close to the beginning of the turn lane as possible.
Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the developer had agreed to this concept. Mr. Sims answered
yes, the $2,400 he would provide would be in lieu of frontage improvements. Councilmember Plunkett
asked if the developer preferred this concept to the existing situation. Mr. Gebert answered the developer
was present and could be asked that question; he believed he viewed it as beneficial as it created an
attractive entrance. He reiterated the primary purpose of the proposal was to improve safety and create a
pocket park. The developer had been very cooperative in redesigning his parking lot.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, TO
EXTEND DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM FOR TEN MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Olson referred to the comment that this was a high accident area and asked what type of
accidents had occurred. Mr. Sims explained it was classified as a high accident location by WSDOT; the
accidents occurred in the 2-way left turn lane. This project would potentially improve sight lines by
moving the bus stop back and improving egress from Paradise Lane. He advised there were no accidents
associated with the slip lane. The high accident location was not the primary reason for the project.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 8
Councilmember Moore stated it appeared the City was trying to fix a WSDOT problem. Mr. Sims stated
this concept was developed before this was identified by WSDOT as a high accident location.
Councilmember Moore asked if any accidents had occurred at the Paradise Lane intersection. Mr. Sims
explained the accidents occurred on SR 104 but involved vehicles ingressing/egressing Paradise Lane,
and estimated there were 3-4 accidents in the past 5 years.
Councilmember Moore asked if there had been a study of what problem needed to be solved. Mr. Sims
reiterated this was not a high accident mitigation project, it was intended to address potential accidents
and conflicts with the slip lane. Slip lanes are an old highway design style with high speeds into a
residential neighborhood. Councilmember Moore noted testimony indicated the current situation worked
adequately and she questioned why the City would spend money to create a pocket park on a highway
that one developer found attractive. Mr. Gebert explained it was not intended to make it attractive for the
developer; it was intended to create an entrance/gateway to the City.
Councilmember Moore questioned if the Council’s vision was to create a gateway in this location. She
agreed with one of the speakers’ suggestions to master plan that side of the street. She questioned why
this project needed to proceed now. Mr. Gebert explained the developer redesigned his parking lot to
coordinate with this City project. If the City’s project did not proceed, the developer would redesign his
parking lot to coordinate with the slip lane, limiting opportunities to install the island park in the future.
Councilmember Moore asked whether this pocket park existed in the Parks Comprehensive Plan. Mr.
Gebert was not certain, commenting there was landscaping and a signage in this area currently.
Councilmember Moore commented the development of streetscapes as gateways was an issue the Council
needed to discuss holistically.
Councilmember Moore asked if there were grant funds available for intersection safety improvements.
Mr. Gebert answered he was not aware of any grants and staff had not applied for a grant for this project.
Councilmember Moore pointed out the drawing appeared to eliminate the existing curb cut at 639
Paradise Lane. Mr. Gebert answered the location of the access road was incorrectly depicted on the map.
Councilmember Moore referred to the development agreement, which indicated by agreeing to the
development agreement, the City agreed to develop and construct the walkway and right-of-way
improvements shown on Attachment A. Mr. Snyder reiterated the subsequent language stated the design
was at the City’s sole discretion. The purpose of the development agreement was to transfer funds that
the developer would otherwise spend on frontage improvements. He pointed out if the Council chose to
make this improvement in the future, they would not have the developer’s contribution and would likely
need to redo his frontage improvements as well as fund a new egress for him.
Councilmember Moore questioned how the shared right turn lane/bus stop was safer than the existing
situation. Mr. Sims acknowledged that conflict was the one negative of the proposed project; he felt the
other benefits such as eliminating the high speed slip lane entrance into Paradise Lane and providing a
safer pedestrian crossing outweighed potential conflicts between a bus and a vehicle making a right turn.
He noted if there were higher traffic volumes turning right, this would not be a recommended solution.
Councilmember Moore asked whether there were any accidents related to the slip lane into Paradise Lane.
Mr. Sims answered there had been no accidents. Staff viewed this as an opportunity to design this
intersection to current traffic design standards. If the intersection was designed today, it would not have
the high speed slip lane and would be designed as the concept proposed.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSEN, TO
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 9
Councilmember Wambolt advised he would oppose the motion, commenting the amount of improvement
was illusive. He also objected to spending $20,000 - $25,000 to develop this small park area, remarking
this was not his concept of a park.
Councilmember Orvis advised he would not support the motion. Although he would favor the proposal if
he lived on Paradise Lane, he would defer to the residents of that area who did not support the proposal.
Councilmember Plunkett recognized Mr. Sims’ and Mr. Gebert’s efforts to maximize an opportunity. He
disagreed the benefits outweighed the potential conflicts, preferring the straight entrance to Paradise Lane
from SR 104 to a 90-degree turn. He preferred the existing intersection that did not have a conflict with
the bus stop. He noted vehicles using the slip lane avoided what was identified as a high accident
location. For those reasons, he did not support the proposed concept, although he was willing to consider
other options with fewer conflicts.
Council President Dawson advised she would not support the proposed project until Community Transit
had been consulted.
Councilmember Marin advised he supported the proposal as it would address safety concerns. He was
persuaded by the fact that this intersection would not be designed this way today but would be designed
as staff proposed.
Councilmember Olson agreed with Councilmember Marin’s comment about how the intersection would
be designed today. Further, the project would slow vehicles on Paradise Lane. She noted without this
project, the sidewalks were not likely to be improved. She suggested staff return the proposal to the
Council after conferring with Community Transit.
Councilmember Moore commented sidewalks could be improved without this project. Her primary
concern was with the bus/auto conflict in a location where there was currently no conflict. She did not
review the proposal as an improvement to the intersection and it did not fit her concept for a park. She
preferred the Council establish a plan for gateways/entrances to the City rather than doing it piecemeal.
MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS MARIN AND OLSON IN FAVOR; COUNCIL
PRESIDENT DAWSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS ORVIS, PLUNKETT, MOORE, AND
WAMBOLT OPPOSED.
Mayor Haakenson asked staff to comment on the time considerations if the Council was willing to
consider an alternate design. Mr. Gebert advised the project was under construction; he would speak with
the developer but envisioned the likely outcome would be the developer would proceed with the frontage
improvements.
6. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO EDMONDS CITY CODE CHAPTER
8.64.030, SECTION 13, PROHIBITING PARKING AT ALL TIMES ON BOTH SIDES OF 220TH
STREET SW FROM 100TH AVENUE W TO 84TH AVENUE W, AND UPDATING REFERENCE
TO A CERTAIN STREET TO REFLECT CORRECTION IN NAME.
City Engineer Dave Gebert advised construction of the 220th Street project was substantially complete.
The project included construction of sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides as well as two 11-foot wide
vehicle travel lanes and left turn pockets at select intersections. He displayed a photograph illustrating a
vehicle parked adjacent to the travel lane in the bike lane.
He explained the planning of the 220th Street project included numerous public workshops and
consideration of several alternatives. It was recognized at that time that the bike lanes would eliminate
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 10
on-street parking where it previously existed. He explained bike lanes and sidewalks were an important
component of the City’s non-motorized transportation infrastructure. The 220th Street project received $4
million in State and federal grants and Public Works Trust Fund loans; installation of sidewalks and bike
lanes on both sides was a requirement of the grant funding. Widening 220th to accommodate parking in
addition to bike lanes and sidewalks would have made the project prohibitively expensive.
Mr. Gebert referred to concerns submitted by Dan Lida to the Council Public Safety Committee whose
primary concern was the loss of parking and requested the Council consider allowing parking in certain
situations such as on one side of the street, at certain times and/or by special permit and issuance of traffic
cones. Mr. Gebert reiterated, as the photograph illustrated, there was no space for a vehicle to safely park
on 220th at any time. The City’s parking code currently prohibited parking on 220th in certain locations
but not in the area of this project. He advised the proposed ordinance would amend the code to prohibit
parking on 220th between 84th Avenue West and 100th Avenue West. Staff recommends approval of the
proposed ordinance.
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Don Lamey, Edmonds, commented the elimination of on-street parking had reduced property values in
this area and turned 220th into a speedway. He suggested on-street parking would slow traffic speeds. He
commented the light at the corner of 84th and 100th for pedestrian crossing was four seconds long. He
doubted anyone rode a bicycle on this street; children riding their bikes rode on the sidewalks. He
recommended something be done to slow the traffic and allowing on-street parking was one method.
Don Kreiman, Edmonds, expressed support for the recommended action. An avid cyclist, prior to this
project he never rode on 220th as he found it too dangerous. It was now a very safe place to ride a bicycle.
Robert Bretz, Edmonds, expressed his support for the proposed ordinance, advising he often rode his
bicycle in the bike lane with his dog on a leash on the sidewalk. He opined property values on 220th had
likely increased due to the improvements.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON, FOR
APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 3605.
Councilmember Marin commented on the potential for a vehicle parked on the street to be hit by another
vehicle in the travel lane. He pointed out the grant funding for this project required the City install
sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides.
Councilmember Moore expressed support for the ordinance, commenting this was a great start to
providing bike lanes in the City. She commented if there were concerns with speed on 220th that was a
separate issue.
Council President Dawson expressed support for the ordinance, advising the Council had already
approved the project that included sidewalks and bike lanes on both sides and there was not enough space
for on-street parking.
Councilmember Wambolt also supported the ordinance, although he had empathy for residents along
220th who wanted to park in front of their home. He pointed out there were many areas of the City where
it may not be appropriate to park in front of one’s home such as on an arterial street.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 11
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The ordinance approved reads as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE
PROVISIONS OF ECC 8.64.030 SECTION 13; PROHIBITING PARKING AT ALL TIMES ON
BOTH SIDES OF 220TH STREET SW FROM 100TH AVENUE W TO 84TH AVENUE W;
UPDATING REFERENCE TO A CERTAIN STREET TO REFLECT CORRECTION IN NAME;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
At Mayor Haakenson’s request, Mr. Gebert explained the design as constructed did not include a left turn
lane for traffic traveling south on 9th and turning left onto 220th. Modifications will be necessary to
include a left turn lane which unfortunately will require widening the street and reconfiguring the
sidewalks. He acknowledged this was an unfortunate situation but the best approach was to fix it.
Councilmember Plunkett asked why a left turn lane was not included in the original design and what the
cost would be to construct it now. Mr. Gebert answered that was a topic of discussion with the designer.
Staff feels it is a design error and the designer should bear the cost; the cost sharing is being negotiated.
7. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTING THE PORT OF EDMONDS STRATEGIC PLAN AND
MASTER PLAN.
Chris Keuss, Executive Director, Port of Edmonds, advised the Strategic Plan was reviewed and
adopted by the Port Commission in April 2005 and the Master Plan was reviewed and approved by the
Port Commission in June 2005. The Planning Board reviewed both plans earlier this year. The Strategic
Plan includes the Port’s mission statement, strategic actions, budget and financial information, history and
current operations, and the Port’s current capital program. The Master Plan includes the Port’s vision,
guiding principles, features and programs, and elements of the Master Plan.
He displayed a vicinity map of the Port property, identifying the marina, the boundaries of the Port, the
Harbor Square complex, Admiral Way, Dayton Street, railroad right-of-way, former US West parcel the
Port purchased, and a parcel behind the Richards building jointly owned by the City and Port for fishing
pier parking. He identified facilities on Port property including the Landing building that houses Arnie’s
Restaurant, the Port Administration building, Anthony’s Restaurant, dry stack facility, docks and marina.
He advised the Port had approximately 730 boats in wet moorage and 300 boats in dry storage.
He reviewed the Port’s mission – to operate the Port on behalf of the residents of the Port District; be a
responsible financial steward; be a responsible environmental steward; provide and foster quality services
and facilities for tenants and the boating community; play a leadership role in ensuring that the waterfront
is a vibrant, active centerpiece for the Edmonds and Woodway communities; provide opportunities in
economic development; and communicate openly, frequently and consistently with Port District residents
and tenants.
Mr. Keuss reviewed the seven elements of the Port’s Master Plan:
• North boardwalk improvements –improvements made in the past several years including view
cutouts, benches, tables, planters. Consideration is being given to widening the boardwalk in the
future, installing a landscape buffer and relocating the refuse containers into enclosures.
• Mixed use area – currently used for parking and the Port Administration building. The Edmonds
Yacht Club has proposed a new building on this site; the Port is working on a lease agreement with
the Yacht Club. The timeline for construction would be 2009. Review and possible approval is
scheduled on the Port Commission’s October 9 agenda.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 12
• Mixed Use area – currently the northeast gravel parking lot/open storage area. If the Yacht Club
facility is constructed, this area would be developed for parking, as a community use facility or for
Port programs.
• Mixed Use area (south) – currently used for parking for Anthony’s and for dry storage. Possible
future uses include parking, marine retail/marine services, or Port programs.
• Dry Storage expansion – currently no immediate need for expansion but with a marketing program,
the Port Commission felt could be a need for expansion. Currently used for parking.
• Restroom complex – new facility to house restrooms, laundry facility, and storage lockers with
possible funding in 1-2 years via IAC grants.
• Public Plaza – permit process completed last year. Converts 12-13 parking spaces behind the
Edmonds Yacht Club and Anthony’s into a landscaped public use area. Project delayed last year due
to funding and a legal dispute. Discussion is scheduled on the Port Commission’s October 9 agenda.
One element of the project, the weather center, has been completed.
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, posed several questions: were there any plans to expand the Port’s
boundaries by acquiring additional property, the Port’s plans for the old ferry dock if the ferry moved, the
status of moving Admiral Way onto the Port property, and whether there were any plans for a small boat
ramp. He recommended the Master Plan designate an emergency access route and suggested an
emergency access route be a priority for the Fire Chief.
John Heighway, Edmonds, recommended in order to improve the view of the skyline from the ferry,
buildings not have flat roofs regardless of the height.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing.
In response to questions raised by the public Mr. Keuss advised the Port had no plans to expand their
current boundaries. With regard to the old ferry dock, he recalled in the Downtown Waterfront Plan
when the ferry terminal was moved, a portion of the existing dock was removed. He noted some
consideration has been given to day moorage in that location. With regard to relocating Admiral Way, he
advised research indicated the expense outweighed the benefit. In response to the question about a small
boat ramp, Mr. Keuss explained the Port partnered with the State in the 1980s to build the existing sling
launch. A ramp was not feasible at this time as it required a considerable amount of land as well as an
increase in parking to accommodate vehicles and trailers.
Mr. Keuss advised emergency access across the railroad tracks was an important issue to the Port
Commission and City staff and it was anticipated it would be addressed via the Edmonds Crossing which
may include a pedestrian crossing and a railroad crossing further south. With regard to the skyline, he
advised buildings would be constructed in accordance with the City’s codes. Mayor Haakenson advised
the new fire boat, moored at the Port, had the same equipment as an aid unit and the firefighters could
cross a stalled train to reach the Port to provide aid as well as fight fires. Mr. Keuss advised the Port had
an Interlocal Agreement with the City to provide personnel and a vehicle when the train was stopped to
assist with getting personnel and equipment across the tracks.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO
APPROVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS AND DIRECT STAFF TO INCLUDE THEM IN
THE ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE 2006 AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mayor Haakenson declared a brief recess.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 13
8. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ADOPTING AMENDED GOALS AND POLICIES FOR
NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICTS, INCORPORATING SPECIFIC PROPOSALS FOR
THE FIRDALE AND FIVE CORNERS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS
Council President Dawson advised the Council was emailed additional information but may not have had
time to review it in detail. She suggested staff make their presentation and the Council take public
comment but no action be taken until the Council had an opportunity to review all the materials.
Planning Manager Rob Chave explained this effort was initiated by the City’s Economic Development
Director Jennifer Gerend last year. She held several public workshops in January 2006 to assess uses in
the Firdale Village and Five Corners commercial centers and initiate discussion regarding future
development. She followed up with workshops in April 2006 that focused on draft Comprehensive Plan
policies that were reviewed at a Planning Board public hearing in June 2006. Her intent was a
neighborhood planning process to develop a vision for the commercial centers.
Mr. Chave explained what prompted this issue was many of the neighborhood centers in Edmonds and
throughout the region were established as strip malls; however, more recent developments reflect a
significant change in what neighborhood centers provide. Property owners have also expressed interest in
considering what could be developed in the neighborhood centers. He advised the Comprehensive Plan
amendments recommended by the Planning Board were intended to provide a way to include
neighborhood-based plans in the City’s Comprehensive Plan and provide a framework for follow-up
zoning and land use. The next phase would include more detailed discussions with the neighborhood
about design, uses, arrangement of buildings, setbacks, heights, etc. That process would begin next year
if the Comprehensive Plan amendments are approved.
Mr. Chave provided questions posed at the workshops:
Q2: Many new developments in the region provide a mix of uses…assuming that traffic and parking
improvements were made, do you believe that a mix of uses should be encouraged?
Q3: What should be the range of building stories above ground level retail/service uses?
Q4: Some cities offer a height incentive, such as an extra story, if a builder provides a special benefit
in the project such as a percentage set aside for public art, environmentally friendly design, public
gathering spaces, or affordable/middle income housing. Should this concept be incorporated?
Mr. Chave displayed and reviewed the survey results:
Five Corners
Q2: Mix of Uses? Q3: Max # Stories Q4: Height Incentive?
Responses 66 Responses 70 Responses 65
Yes 56 Median 3.0 Yes 44
No 10 Average 2.9 No 21
Firdale Village
Q2: Mix of Uses? Q3: Max # Stories Q4: Height Incentive?
Responses 33 Responses 38 Responses 30
Yes 21 Median 4.0 Yes 18
No 12 Average 3.5 No 12
Next Mr. Chave compared the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment to the survey results:
Plan vs. Survey Firdale Village Five Corners
Mix of Uses? Plan: Yes Plan: Yes
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 14
Survey: Yes Survey: Yes
Building Heights? Plan: 4
Survey 3.5-4
Plan: 4
Survey: 3
Incentive for added floor? Plan: Yes
Survey: Yes
Plan: Yes
Survey: Yes
Councilmember Orvis pointed out the question regarding building heights offered a range of building
stories above the ground floor: 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 and 7-8. Mr. Chave explained in tabulating the data, staff
used the highest number in the range, assuming the response meant up to the higher number.
Councilmember Moore asked what would happen if the Comprehensive Plan amendments were
approved, noting zoning would follow as well as design guidelines, ADB review of any proposals, etc.
Mr. Chave agreed, explaining the intent of the draft language was to provide a policy framework for the
next steps to prevent rehashing the same issues again. He acknowledged the difficult part would be the
zoning and design issues as there were a variety of opinions. Although it was clear that residents wanted
the neighborhood centers improved, the specifics would be more difficult.
Councilmember Moore referred to Planning Board Member Henderson’s comment that the Zoning Code
could identify height limitations and the Comprehensive Plan should describe the neighborhood centers as
a village-style development and should define village-style. Mr. Chave stated the Board felt the concept
of a village was workable but that the specifics could be addressed in the zoning and design standards.
For Council President Dawson, Mr. Chave displayed and reviewed the survey form. He offered to
provide Councilmembers the raw survey data.
For Councilmember Orvis, Mr. Chave explained the draft language for building heights for Five Corners
and Firdale Village was up to four stories with incentives for one additional story. Councilmember Orvis
noted both were zoned BN currently and asked whether the BN zone had setback and open space
requirements. Mr. Chave answered BN had only setback requirements. Councilmember Orvis asked
whether residential use was allowed in the BN zone. Mr. Chave responded the residential use allowed in
the BN zone was one unit above the commercial development per lot.
Councilmember Plunkett asked how much weight Ms. Gerend gave to the survey results in drafting the
language. Mr. Chave advised he was unable to answer that question. Councilmember Plunkett asked
how much weight the Planning Board gave to the survey results. Mr. Chave was uncertain whether the
Planning Board saw the detailed survey data; they reviewed the staff reports, etc. He emphasized this was
not a scientific survey, only a survey of those who attended the workshop.
Council President Dawson asked how much of the language was written prior to the neighborhood
meetings. Mr. Chave advised Ms. Gerend used the surveys provided at the first workshops to draft the
language. The language was then presented at the second set of workshops. He referred to the
comparison of the Comprehensive Plan language and the survey results, commenting they tracked fairly
well. He clarified that the first set of meetings was where surveys were completed; the language was then
drafted; the language was presented at the second set of meetings; and followed by Planning Board
review.
Councilmember Moore commented the Council was being asked to approve language for development of
zoning by the Planning Board working with property owners and neighborhoods. She agreed the
language was guidance for improving the neighborhood centers; the actual heights could be worked out
later although the language did establish an upper limit to heights. She referred to a statement in the
proposed amendment regarding Five Corners – development should be oriented to the street and respond
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 15
to the unique character of the intersection, including a planned intersection improvement, asking whether
“unique” referred to the intersection or the neighborhood. Mr. Chave answered it referred to the
intersection. Although there was agreement at the workshops that the intersection needed to be improved,
there was disagreement regarding exactly what should be done.
Council President Dawson asked why the term “stories” was used when the Council was told when
discussing the downtown zoning that language was unworkable. Mr. Chave agreed “stories” was difficult
in code language but was appropriate at the conceptual level in the Comprehensive Plan. Council
President Dawson questioned how it was presented to residents at the workshops, noting four stories
above a grocery was different that above some other uses. Mr. Chave recalled Ms. Gerend’s indication
that to encourage a grocery store to locate in a neighborhood center there may need to be some flexibility
in the building heights. Mr. Bowman advised he attended the workshops and recalled Ms. Gerend
displayed several photographs of mixed used development to provide a visual of the concept. He felt
residents understood the concept of stories.
Council President Dawson questioned if the residents’ vision translated to the draft language. Mr.
Bowman stated the draft language was not inconsistent with the residents’ vision, pointing out the draft
language was presented at the second workshop. The details would be resolved in the code language.
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. He advised the Council
received three letters, one from Tony Shapiro, Edmonds, in support of the amendments, a letter from
Ron Knowles in support of the amendments which would provide affordable multi family dwellings and
business space outside the bowl area, and a letter submitted by Joe Gnagey who saw no need for multi-
story commercial/residential space in the Five Corners or Firdale Village areas.
Tony Shapiro, Edmonds, commented the vote on this item was an indicator of whether Edmonds was an
open, welcoming community or self-centered and inward looking with people more concerned about the
past than the future. He pointed out change was a fact of life. He asserted the Council had closed the
bowl to new construction; there were areas outside the bowl such as Five Corners and Firdale Village that
needed to be redeveloped. Although most people think of Edmonds as downtown, the majority of people
who pass through Edmonds see areas outside the bowl where there were dilapidated houses, vacant or
rundown commercial areas, etc. He pointed out development occurring around the region such as Mill
Creek Town Center where there were multi-story buildings with multi family development abutting the
commercial zone. He disagreed taller buildings could not coexist adjacent to residential, pointing out
Whistler Village and New Orleans Square in Disneyland as examples. Another factor to consider is
residents’ children cannot afford to live in downtown Edmonds; enabling land outside the bowl to be
developed with 3-4 story buildings would reduce the proportionate cost of land to a more affordable level.
Warren Schweppe, Edmonds, advised he missed the last Planning Board meeting but understood
heights as high as 50 feet were discussed. He preferred buildings be no higher than 2-3 stories or that the
30-33 foot guideline in downtown be used. He did not want another building like the Gregory. He
remarked a good example of appropriate development was the Montclair condominiums which were
limited to 2-3 stories. He summarized he was in favor of progress but it needed to be done the right way.
Robert Bretz, Edmonds, was opposed to 45-50 foot heights in the Five Corners neighborhood, advising
the infrastructure was currently overburdened and the proposed zoning changes would increase the
burden and bring gridlock at rush hour. Parking was already an issue on 84th, Main, 212th and Bowdoin
and density in the Five Corners area had increased dramatically in the past five years with the
development of the Montclair condominiums, the Madrona Cove PRD, and the condominium on the
former fire station property. He noted there is currently no zoning that would provide transition between
the proposed high-rise commercial/residential and single family residential although City plans mandate
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 16
transitional zoning to alleviate conflicts. The Five Corners area is very flat with no natural barriers to
provide relief from the sight pollution a 45-foot building would impose on single family residences.
Diane Hill, Edmonds, found the survey on height confusing and was certain the average citizen also
found it confusing. She objected to the use of the term ground story and floors above and was not certain
the survey respondents understood the question. She objected to the use of a range in the survey and
staff’s decision to use the higher number when tabulating the results. She volunteered to hand-deliver a
new survey to every house in the Five Corner’s neighborhood. She commented the Five Corners
neighborhood was home to two schools and she was concerned with the street becoming a raceway. She
recommended if the City wanted to change height limits, it be done citywide, not in just a few
neighborhoods. She viewed Montclair as a tastefully done development and would support something
like that. She did not support heights above 33 feet including the first floor.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, pointed out a BN zone meant it was located within a residential
neighborhood; the intent was to protect the neighborhood. He suggested a property owner in a BN zone,
who was restricted by the current regulations to one residential unit above commercial would be satisfied
with mixed use without a height increase. He envisioned a property owner would be ecstatic if they could
have two stories of residential above commercial and according to downtown studies, the economics
would allow for redevelopment. He disagreed that 4-5 stories were necessary and objected to allowing an
additional story for an amenity, commenting the amenities were usually not enough. He disagreed with
requiring buildings in the BN zone to be located close to the street with parking behind, suggesting
instead to buffer the noise for residences, locating the parking in front and buildings in back. He
disagreed with providing an incentive for redevelopment, remarking most people who completed the
survey did not realize the building height was number of stories above the ground floor.
Don Kreiman, Edmonds, recalled several Councilmembers and Planning Board Members attended the
workshops in Firdale Village. Firdale Village was an underutilized facility where numerous businesses
have failed due to the poor design. He referred to a nearby ravine where trees were removed to make way
for 14 houses on small lots, questioning the amount of tax revenue the City received from that
development as well as from an underutilized neighborhood center. He summarized Firdale Village
needed to be redeveloped. The surveys revealed what the residents of these neighborhoods wanted.
Ted Kim, Edmonds, did not support any additional buildings or increased building height in the Five
Corner commercial area as the uncontrolled intersection could not handle any additional traffic. He
remarked on the cars that back up at the intersection during rush hour. He concluded additional
development would destroy the ambiance of the neighborhood. The reason they moved to Montclair was
the ability to walk to nearby stores and services; that ability would be eliminated by increased traffic.
John Heighway, Edmonds, advised he attended the Firdale Village meeting and felt Ms. Gerend did a
good job. He recalled the people who attended the meeting were local residents and were enthusiastic
about redevelopment of Firdale Village. He supported moving forward but with more accurate
information. He recalled one of the uses residents attending the Firdale Village meeting were most
interested in was a beer pub. He preferred to delay adoption of the amendments if necessary.
Kevin Grossman, Shoreline resident and Edmonds property owner, pointed out the difference between a
Comprehensive Plan amendment and zoning. The Council was being asked to embrace a big picture
concept, not develop the details. The subsequent process would include more specifics about design
issues, building appearance, heights, etc. If the Council liked rundown, one story retail centers, he
suggested the Council not adopt the proposed amendments. Conversely, he encouraged the Council to
support the amendments if they wanted developers to reinvest in these areas so that residents had better
retail, better designed structures, etc. He pointed out the proposed amendments would also provide a
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 17
variety of housing options, allowing residents’ children and the elderly to continue to live in this
community. He referred to the City’s obligation under GMA to accommodate increased density, pointing
out concentrating density where land use and transportation dovetailed provided synergy for retail and
minimized traffic impacts as well as decreased the density in neighborhoods.
Brad Butterfield, Edmonds, explained the proposed amendment was the culmination of over 12 months
of work by Ms. Gerend, planning staff and the Planning Board. He commented the current BN zoning
did not work for many of the large properties at Firdale Village, Westgate, Five Corners and Perrinville.
He recalled unanimity among the residents attending the Firdale Village neighborhood meetings that
something needed to be done with the buildings in Firdale Village that were constructed in the 1940s. He
pointed out the amendments laid the groundwork for sensitive zoning and more neighborhood and
Planning Board meetings to discuss how development should occur. He encouraged the Council to adopt
the draft amendments to allow the discussion to move forward.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE MOVED, SECONDED BY OLSEN, TO EXTEND THE MEETING
FOR 1½ HOURS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Eric Anderson, Edmonds, owner of the Five Corners Shopping Plaza, commented he was the only
property owner at the Five Corner’s meeting. The proposed amendments were the result of two
neighborhood meetings and a year of discussions. He viewed the amendments as a basic proposal that did
not obligate the City but would move the issue ahead. If the amendments were adopted, the Planning
Board would begin working with property owners and the neighborhood to develop zoning to implement
the plan. As a property owner, he assured the current configuration – a strip mall built in the 1960s – was
all there would be under the current zoning. The strip mall has had many cosmetic remodels but has
reached the end of its economic life. He pointed out every city in the greater Seattle area was developing
retail mixed use/urban villages that included housing. If the Council approved the draft amendments,
redevelopment could bring that same energy to Five Corners.
Cheryl Ahlen, Edmonds, commented she moved to Edmonds because it is quiet and she wanted it to
stay that way. If she wanted activity, she could drive to a place nearby where there was activity. She was
opposed to a lot of development in Five Corners.
Kelly Picasso, Edmonds, commented her neighborhood at 84th & 210th received notice of tonight’s
public hearing but neither she nor her neighbors were aware of the neighborhood meetings. Although she
understood progress was to be expected, she found 4-5 story buildings at Five Corners incompatible with
the neighborhood. She stated because this neighborhood was not in the bowl did not mean it was less
worthy of the same small town feel of Edmonds. She was aware mixed use could be done successfully
but prefer it respect the residential areas via heights that were sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood.
She also pointed out the need for transition, and looked forward to more discussion on this issue.
Douglas Alfi, Edmonds, asked how the City planned to accommodate increased heights in Five Corners,
commenting additional stories or buildings would increase traffic. He pointed out cars already backed up
to the high school on 212th in the late afternoon.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing.
Mr. Chave commented the survey was not scientific, it was only a questionnaire used by Ms. Gerend in
drafting the proposed language. He agreed many residents and property owners wanted to move forward
with something more positive than currently exists.
Councilmember Plunkett referred to comments such as “move forward, this was not locked in stone,
future planning could be done down the road, this is just a concept, forward it, more discussion.” If that
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 18
was an acceptable premise, he suggested replacing the statement that development should not be more
than four stories with mixed use multi floors. Mr. Chave stated leaving the specifics in the language
provided additional guidance. Without reference to a number of stories, that issue be rehashed in the
future. He noted although the Council heard negative comments tonight, the problem with this process
was that the people who were satisfied tended not to continue participating whereas the people with
concerns tended to continue with the process to ensure their concerns were addressed.
Mr. Chave observed there appeared to be a fair amount of comfort in the survey with the 3-4 story range
although there may have been some misunderstanding regarding whether that was on top of the ground
floor. He suggested leaving the language regarding a maximum of four stories and incentives for
additional height and allow the next step to determine how that should be arranged.
Councilmember Marin suggested establishing three stories as a starting point and a fourth story with
incentives.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE PLAN AMENDMENT LANGUAGE AND DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE AN
ORDINANCE FOR FORMAL ADOPTION AS PART OF THE 2006 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
UPDATE.
Councilmember Moore explained this concept was a launching pad; it was clear everyone wanted
something done in the neighborhoods. The preponderance of evidence in the packet points to the wording
the Planning Board forwarded. She acknowledged traffic was bad everywhere, particularly during rush
hour. The intent was to develop neighborhoods and villages so that people could walk to local sores and
services and not use their cars as much. She acknowledged traffic amelioration would be necessary at
Five Corners but that would be discussed as zoning changes were made. To the comments that this was
against the concept of Edmonds, she pointed out the concept of Edmonds was ever-changing. She agreed
more affordable housing was important, commenting the reason many bought at Montclair was because it
was affordable. The proposed neighborhood concept may facilitate more affordable housing that would
allow residents’ children to remain in the community. She pointed out the housing provided by Montclair
was similar to what projections indicate cities needed to provide – housing for the four Ss – singles, single
parents, seniors and starter homes.
Councilmember Olson advised she attended both the Five Corners meetings and recalled the people were
less concerned about heights and more concerned with traffic and were excited about having something
done. She agreed traffic as well as other issues would be addressed in the upcoming process. She
concluded if Edmonds did not begin making some progress, other cities would pass Edmonds by.
Council President Dawson commented the language in the draft amendment and in the survey was
confusing. She preferred to have an opportunity to review the survey data. She doubted anyone at the
Five Corners meeting was comfortable with a five story building and she was not comfortable with five
story buildings at Five Corners, particularly if the plan was to move the buildings toward the street. She
was comfortable with moving forward for further discussion if the specific language were removed.
Councilmember Orvis opposed the language as written or a range of 4-5 stories. He agreed with the need
for further review. He recognized even a three floor option would create a sizable economic driver. He
preferred to take the time necessary to develop specific enough language so that the process could move
forward without needing to rehash the number of stories in the future.
Councilmember Wambolt advised he attended all the neighborhood meetings and felt perhaps too much
weight was being given to the surveys. He recalled leaving the meetings feeling there was no consensus;
as many people were in favor of a concept as were against it. He did not believe further review of the
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 19
surveys would be productive. His impression was four total floors, not four floors above the ground level
and he did not support allowing a fifth floor with incentives.
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO
AMEND THE MOTON TO SPECIFY A FOUR FLOOR MAXIMUM AND REMOVE THE
INCENTIVE FOR ADDITONAL FLOORS. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3),
COUNCILMEMBERS WAMBOLT, MARIN, MOORE, AND OLSON IN FAVOR; AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS ORVIS AND PLUNKETT
OPPOSED.
UPON ROLL CALL, THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (4-3),
COUNCILMEMBERS MOORE, MARIN, WAMBOLT, AND OLSON IN FAVOR; AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON, AND COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT AND ORVIS
OPPOSED.
9. CONTINUED COUNCIL DELIBERATION AND ACTION ON THE PUBLIC HEARING HELD
ON SEPTEMBER 18, 2006 ON THE DRAFT "BD - DOWNTOWN BUSINESS ZONES"
INTENDED TO BE APPLIED TO THE DOWNTOWN AREA TO IMPLEMENT THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
Council President Dawson relayed Councilmember Marin’s suggestion that due to the late hour and
anticipated need for a lengthy discussion, this item be rescheduled. She suggested rescheduling it to the
October 24 work session.
Councilmember Wambolt agreed. Councilmember Orvis requested Councilmember Plunkett’s and his
amendments be included in the packet.
Councilmember Moore requested this item be scheduled at the beginning of the agenda. Council
President Dawson agreed, pointing out it was later on the agenda tonight due to the public hearing that
preceded it. She preferred to schedule it on the October 24 week session due to the public hearings on the
October 17 agenda.
The Council discussed the number of items on upcoming agendas and the possibility of scheduling a
special meeting. Mayor Haakenson requested the annual reports from the Public Defender and the
Prosecutor be scheduled before this item on October 24.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO
CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE OCTOBER 24, 2006 WORK SESSION. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Council President Dawson apologized to the audience, advising the Council did not expect the preceding
items to be this lengthy.
10. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, relayed the next chapter of the “Ferry Terminal Farce” ferry tale entitled
“Where Did the Pilings Go?” She recalled when the Council asked its consultant about the depth of the
water at the Edmonds Crossing project, they were warned that the water at Edmonds Crossing would be
the deepest of the 20 ferry terminals in the State and would push technology to construct landing
structures. The water depth was 150-160 feet deep, the wing walls would be in water 60-120 feet deep,
concrete steel buffers along the east side of the third slip would be in water 120-200 feet deep, and a total
of 306 steel pilings pounded into a steep slope of unknown stability. She summarized the problems with
the Edmonds Crossing – an exposed site, a distance between the terminal and the landing that exceeded
all pedestrian standards, water depth that pushes technology, and holding lanes on a hillside in a landslide
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 20
hazard zone. She advised the next chapter, “A Belt and Suspenders” would address fix-it schemes to
address the problems. She asked if the City had hired a consultant for the next phase. Mayor Haakenson
answered no. She asked if the City planned to hire a consultant and the Mayor responded possibly. She
asked when and the Mayor answered he did not know.
Don Kreiman, Edmonds, posed a series of questions to Councilmembers. To Councilmember Moore
whom he recalled had defended trees, woods, and an underground creek, he asked if she planned to do
anything about the trees being cut to develop PRDs. Councilmember Moore responded she would look
into it. To Councilmember Olson, he asked how she would feel if the trees in the ravine near her home
were cut to build a neighborhood with houses too small and lots too close together. To Councilmember
Marin, he asked if mixed use residential development on arterials was preferable to everyone driving. To
Councilmember Wambolt, he asked if the City received more taxes from mixed use development with
retail and condominiums or from individual residential houses. Councilmember Wambolt answered the
City received more taxes from mixed use development. To Councilmember Plunkett, who ran a recent
PUD campaign that stressed the environment, he asked whether mixed use development supported the
environment by not cutting trees as well as getting people out of their cars. Councilmember Plunkett
replied he supported the environment. To Councilmember Orvis, he asked if he was aware how many
more houses were being constructed in his neighborhood and whether cutting trees increased the value of
Edmonds to families. To Council President Dawson, he admired her stand on domestic violence and the
need to defend the defenseless. He commented people were spending 40-50% of their income on housing
which may contribute to stress that leads to domestic violence. More affordable housing was needed to
reduce this stress. To Mayor Haakenson, who attended eight neighborhood meetings, he invited him to
inform the Council if the cutting of trees was an issue in the City. Mayor Haakenson answered the
Council received a report of every neighborhood meeting he attended and the issues raised.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to the Paradise Lane proposal, and cautioned the Council to
carefully examine any proposal presented on a rush basis. He invited the Council to tour a downtown
development, beginning at 5th & Dayton. As he began describing the building and inviting the Council to
look at each section of the building, Mayor Haakenson cautioned the Council would be involved in a
closed record review of the building in two weeks; therefore, he should not be talking to the Council
about it. Mr. Snyder agreed.
11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Haakenson had no report.
12. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Marin commented that in preparation for tonight’s proclamation in honor of Change a
Light Day in Edmonds, he replaced 750 watts of bulbs in his home with 128 watts. His house currently
used 40% of the average home’s consumption of electricity which would be reduced to 38% with the
replacement of these bulbs. His house was now completely converted to florescent bulbs. He invited the
public to obtain coupons from the PUD, noting two of the places listed on the reverse where bulbs could
be purchased were on Hwy. 99. He reported at last week’s Snohomish County Tomorrow meeting there
was unanimous support of five principles of annexation. He explained the intent of the principles was to
encourage Snohomish County to use adjoining cities’ development guidelines so that an area that might
eventually be annexed to a city would be developed according to that city’s standards. He advised this
was an advisory vote that asked Snohomish County to consider the principles.
Councilmember Moore directed the public’s attention to the three proclamations the Council passed
tonight, regarding domestic violence, live theater and changing light bulbs. She planned to begin
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 3, 2006
Page 21
changing light bulbs in her home and suggested Councilmembers report at the next meeting on the
number of light bulbs they converted. Mayor Haakenson advised he changed five.
Councilmember Orvis advised he had several Energy Star light bulbs in his home, not only because they
were good for the environment but because he disliked changing light bulbs and they lasted a long time.
Councilmember Orvis reported the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee allocated funds for the Bird
Festival and the Snohomish County Visitors Bureau. The Committee requested information regarding
why the Visitors Bureau’s numbers were declining. The Committee declined a proposal for additional
ads for the Waterfront Festival for budget reasons and reduced funding to the Economic Development
Director to market the City. He reported Cindi Cruz was leading an effort to redo the rack cards and she
was directed to utilize a trifold card that had more pictures of Edmonds.
Councilmember Wambolt expressed concern with the number of items on agendas and suggested
scheduling additional meetings such as a special meeting on October 30. He pointed out the October 17
and October 24 agendas had items scheduled for at least three hours. Councilmember Moore agreed.
Mayor Haakenson suggested scheduling discussion items on some Committee nights.
Council President Dawson was uncomfortable with scheduling continued deliberation on the draft
Downtown Business Zones for a special meeting. Councilmembers Olson and Moore indicated they
would be out of town on October 10. Council President Dawson advised she would take scheduling a
special meeting under consideration.
13. EXECUTIVE SESSION
At 11:00 p.m., Mayor Haakenson recessed the Council to a 10-minute Executive Session regarding
potential litigation. He advised the Council would adjourn immediately following the Executive Session
without taking any action.
AM-642 2.C.
Claim Checks, Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Debbie Karber, Administrative Services
Submitted For:Dan Clements Time:Consent
Department:Administrative Services Type:Action
Review
Committee:
Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Agenda Memo
Subject
Approval of claim checks #91183 and #91189 through #91425 for October 5, 2006 in the amount of $761,443.14.
Approval of claim checks #91426 through #91578 for October 12, 2006 in the amount of $168,084.49. Approval of
payroll direct deposits and checks in the amount of $761,825.84 for the period of September 16 through September
30, 2006.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896
delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non-approval of
expenditures.
Recommendation
Approval of claim checks and payroll direct deposits and checks.
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year: 2006 Revenue: Expenditure: $1,691,353.47
Fiscal Impact:
Claim $929,527.63
Payroll $761,825.84
Attachments
Link: Claim Cks 10-05-06
Link: Claim Cks 10-12-06
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 Admin Services Kathleen Junglov 10/12/2006 04:35 PM APRV
2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 04:42 PM APRV
3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 06:02 PM APRV
4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2006 08:21 AM APRV
Form Started By: Debbie Karber Started On: 10/12/2006 02:47 PM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2006
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91183 10/2/2006 060371 STANDARD INSURANCE CO October 2006 OCTOBER 2006 STANDARD INSURANCE
10/06 Standard Insurance
811.000.000.231.550.000.00 18,476.41
Total :18,476.41
91189 10/5/2006 000135 ABSCO ALARMS INC E6LD.Pmt 1 E6LD.Sr Ctr Fire Alarm Renovation
E6LD.Sr Ctr Fire Alarm Renovation
116.000.651.594.190.650.00 13,712.51
Total :13,712.51
91190 10/5/2006 071177 ADVANTAGE BUILDING SERVICES 06-714 JANITORIAL SERVICE
JANITORIAL SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.410.23 334.00
Total :334.00
91191 10/5/2006 000710 ALASKAN COPPER & BRASS 346736-1 C-161 SCREENINGS SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
C-161 SCREENINGS SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 415.83
Sales Tax
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 36.59
Total :452.42
91192 10/5/2006 070254 ALLIED ELECTRONICS INC 209736-00 05-09452
ELECTRILCAL SUPPLIES
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 116.90
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 9.31
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 11.22
Total :137.43
91193 10/5/2006 069751 ARAMARK 512-3720027 18386001
1Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91193 10/5/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
UNIFORMS
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 86.83
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 7.73
18386001512-3724637
UNIFORMS
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 90.79
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 8.08
Total :193.43
91194 10/5/2006 069751 ARAMARK 512-3709827 STORM/STREET UNIFORMS
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.24
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.24
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.29
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.29
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS512-3718659
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.24
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.24
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.29
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.29
2Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91194 10/5/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
PW - MATS512-3723257
PW - MATS
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.38
PW - MATS
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 5.24
PW - MATS
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 5.24
PW - MATS
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 5.24
PW - MATS
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 5.24
PW - MATS
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 5.26
WATER UNIFORMS - HIGHLAND
411.000.654.534.800.240.00 11.75
Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.12
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.240.00 1.03
3Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91194 10/5/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS512-3723258
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.24
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.24
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.29
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.29
FLEET UNIFORMS512-3723259
FLEET UNIFORMS
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 17.40
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 1.55
Total :82.98
91195 10/5/2006 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 341542 75179
DIESEL FUEL
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 2,259.72
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 180.78
Total :2,440.50
91196 10/5/2006 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 342219 FLEET- DIESEL 97 GAL
FLEET- DIESEL 97 GAL
511.000.000.141.120.000.00 167.68
WA ST SVC FEE
511.000.000.141.120.000.00 60.00
ST EXCISE DIESEL TAX, WA OIL SPILL
511.000.000.141.120.000.00 34.46
Sales Tax
511.000.000.141.120.000.00 4.80
Total :266.94
91197 10/5/2006 069451 ASTRA INDUSTRIAL SERVICES 00086502 BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY
4Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91197 10/5/2006 (Continued)069451 ASTRA INDUSTRIAL SERVICES
BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 112.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.45
Total :117.45
91198 10/5/2006 069451 ASTRA INDUSTRIAL SERVICES 00086748 WATER/ WWTP - SPLIT - CV/RV RUBBER TEST
WATER/ WWTP - SPLIT - CV/RV RUBBER TEST
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 36.45
WATER/ WWTP - SPLIT - CV/RV RUBBER TEST
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 36.45
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 2.73
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 2.73
Total :78.36
91199 10/5/2006 064343 AT&T 425-771-1124 PARKS MAINT. BLDG
PARKS MAINT. BLDG
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 25.90
CEMETERY425-771-4741
CEMETERY
130.000.640.536.200.420.00 25.90
Total :51.80
91200 10/5/2006 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 37519 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS
5Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91200 10/5/2006 (Continued)070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER
UB Outsourcing area #600~
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 30.78
UB Outsourcing area #600~
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 30.78
UB Outsourcing area #600~
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 30.87
UB Outsourcing area #600~
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 89.76
UB Outsourcing area #600~
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 89.75
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 2.71
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 2.71
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 2.71
Total :280.07
91201 10/5/2006 071325 BAKKE, KIT BAKKE1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
LOST IN TIME: TIMING & CONSISTENCY IN
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91202 10/5/2006 071293 BALLINGER, ARIEL 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91203 10/5/2006 070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 9191851 COPIER RENTAL
COPIER RENTAL
001.000.230.512.501.450.00 153.55
Total :153.55
91204 10/5/2006 070512 BANNER BANK Retainage 13 E1BA.Marshbank Retainage 14
6Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91204 10/5/2006 (Continued)070512 BANNER BANK
E1BA.Marshbank Retainage 14
112.506.630.595.330.650.00 8,716.94
Total :8,716.94
91205 10/5/2006 002100 BARNARD, EARL 316 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
617.000.510.522.200.230.00 30.00
Total :30.00
91206 10/5/2006 070634 BAUGHER, JANEE BAUGHER1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
RE-ENVISION POEMS & STORIES~
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 145.00
FICTION JUDGE~
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :245.00
91207 10/5/2006 066891 BEACON PUBLISHING INC 3876 Parks Dept. BPW, #06-26 (Edmonds &
Parks Dept. BPW, #06-26 (Edmonds &
001.000.220.516.100.440.00 20.92
Total :20.92
91208 10/5/2006 066891 BEACON PUBLISHING INC 6879 NEWSPAPER AD
Downtown Zoning Ad
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 148.00
Total :148.00
91209 10/5/2006 002203 BEN KO MATIC 00043531 UNIT 55 - SIDE BROOM HYD
UNIT 55 - SIDE BROOM HYD
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 536.67
SIDE BROOM DISK
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 373.93
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 87.21
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 87.81
7Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91209 10/5/2006 (Continued)002203 BEN KO MATIC
UNIT 26 - HYDRAULIC MOTOR00126972
UNIT 26 - HYDRAULIC MOTOR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 735.30
MAIN B COUPLING
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 146.00
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 29.63
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 81.07
Total :2,077.62
91210 10/5/2006 071348 BERGER/ABAM ENGINEERS INC 7902 FISHING PIER SURVEY
CONDITION SURVEY FOR FISHING PIER
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 14,225.31
Total :14,225.31
91211 10/5/2006 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS 358 E5GA.L/S 2 & 13 Improvements
E5GA.L/S 2 & 13 Improvements
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 10,073.05
Total :10,073.05
91212 10/5/2006 003074 BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY 06091489 STORM SEWER PERMIT 10/05/06-10/04/11
STORM SEWER PERMIT 10/05/06-10/04/11
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 25.00
Total :25.00
91213 10/5/2006 069085 BOND, KATHRYN BOND1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
CHARACTER: THE ART OF BECOMING
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 145.00
Total :145.00
91214 10/5/2006 060141 BRANOM INSTRUMENT 323548 3083
8Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91214 10/5/2006 (Continued)060141 BRANOM INSTRUMENT
FLOAT/BRASS VALVE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 47.50
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 16.12
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.60
Total :69.22
91215 10/5/2006 067391 BRAT WEAR 307587 INV#307587 EDMONDS PD - MCCLURE
WINTER K-9 JUMPSUIT - MCCLURE
001.000.410.521.260.240.00 350.00
SCREEN PRINTING ON BACK PANEL
001.000.410.521.260.240.00 12.00
EMBROIDERED NAMETAG
001.000.410.521.260.240.00 8.00
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.260.240.00 32.56
Total :402.56
91216 10/5/2006 071331 BREIDENBACH, MARILYN BREIDENBACH1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
WRITING FREELANCE NF COLUMNS
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91217 10/5/2006 071326 BROOKS, LARRY BROOKS1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
PANEL: MARKETING YOUR WORK
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 50.00
PUTTING THE THRILL IN THRILLERS
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 245.00
6 CORE COMPETENCIES OF SUCCESSFUL
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :420.00
91218 10/5/2006 066578 BROWN AND CALDWELL 1439853 127918
9Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91218 10/5/2006 (Continued)066578 BROWN AND CALDWELL
C-161 SCREENINGS SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 9,397.09
Total :9,397.09
91219 10/5/2006 063459 BYRNE SPECIALTY GASES INC 270249 00674
CAL GAS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 260.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 17.50
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 24.42
Total :301.92
91220 10/5/2006 070903 CALENCE LLC 97988413 APC SMART-UPS SU2200RM2U PER QUOTE~
APC Smart-UPS SU2200RM2U per Quote~330-00313
001.000.310.518.880.350.00 3,595.56
Freight
001.000.310.518.880.350.00 224.79
Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.350.00 340.01
Total :4,160.36
91221 10/5/2006 067432 CAREY, JANET CAREY1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
STORY CPR - LONG SESSION
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 290.00
Total :290.00
91222 10/5/2006 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN08061044 2954000
ARGON/NITROGEN/OXYGEN
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 30.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 2.67
Total :32.67
91223 10/5/2006 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY98133 ALS SUPPLIES
10Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91223 10/5/2006 (Continued)003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 17.86
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 1.59
ALS SUPPLIESLY98134
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 35.72
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 3.18
ALS SUPPLIESLY98171
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 25.85
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 2.30
Total :86.50
91224 10/5/2006 070792 CH2O 137174 FAC - LIQUID SOLVENT FOR STRUCTURAL
FAC - LIQUID SOLVENT FOR STRUCTURAL
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 352.52
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 61.02
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 32.26
Total :445.80
91225 10/5/2006 071294 CHAPMAN, JEFFREY 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91226 10/5/2006 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT7224 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT
FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #7224
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 110.60
Total :110.60
11Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91227 10/5/2006 065774 CHAVOND-BARRY ENGINEERING CORP 1560-091406 C-248 INCINERATOR PROJECT
C-248 INCINERATOR PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 816.00
Total :816.00
91228 10/5/2006 064341 CINGULAR WIRELESS 4X10032006 ALS COMMUNICATIONS
IRIS
001.000.510.526.100.420.00 47.61
Total :47.61
91229 10/5/2006 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION 460456005 UNIFORMS
Volunteers
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 44.72
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 3.98
OPS UNIFORMS460456006
Stn. 16
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 102.19
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.09
UNIFORMS460457062
Stn 17-ALS
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 96.47
Stn 17-Operations
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 96.47
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 8.59
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 8.58
OPS UNIFORMS460457087
Stn. 20
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 110.24
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.81
Total :490.14
12Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91230 10/5/2006 066070 CIT TECHNOLOGY FINANCIAL 8198890 COPIER LEASE PW
copier lease for PW~
001.000.650.519.910.450.00 256.31
Total :256.31
91231 10/5/2006 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 100306 1-218359
2203 N 205TH
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 11.20
Total :11.20
91232 10/5/2006 067186 CLEAR IMAGE INC 59964 INV#59964 EDMONDS PD
4 x 6 prints 06-3726
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 12.71
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 1.14
Total :13.85
91233 10/5/2006 071236 COLUMBIA ANALYTICAL SERVICES 01-037328-0 273384
C-249 PROCESS CONTROL IMPROVEMENTS
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 465.00
Total :465.00
91234 10/5/2006 062891 COOK PAGING WA 6443618 ACC 1126518
13Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91234 10/5/2006 (Continued)062891 COOK PAGING WA
Pagers - Water
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 17.21
group pager-water
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 1.00
pagers-sewer
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 3.95
group pagers-sewer
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 1.00
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 1.20
pagers-streets
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 19.75
pagers-storm
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 23.70
pagers-facilities
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 23.70
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 2.11
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 1.37
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 2.27
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 2.05
Total :99.31
91235 10/5/2006 071328 COOMER, PAULA COOMER1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
PERSONAL ESSAY
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 245.00
MIMETIC FICTION
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :370.00
91236 10/5/2006 005810 CRAIN, DOUGLAS 315 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
14Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91236 10/5/2006 (Continued)005810 CRAIN, DOUGLAS
LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
001.000.390.517.220.230.00 961.00
Total :961.00
91237 10/5/2006 071281 CROASDILL, WALTER 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91238 10/5/2006 063519 CUZ CONCRETE PRODUCTS INC 273051 STORM DEPT - CONCRETE CATCH BASIN BASE
STORM DEPT - CONCRETE CATCH BASIN BASE
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 176.00
6" RED SLAB
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 50.13
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 19.22
Total :245.35
91239 10/5/2006 029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS September 2006 DRS SEPTEMBER 2006 DRS
September 2006 DRS
811.000.000.231.540.000.00 149,293.54
Total :149,293.54
91240 10/5/2006 029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS 569873 Employer contributions for Roberts
Employer contributions for Roberts
001.000.620.532.200.230.00 748.69
Total :748.69
91241 10/5/2006 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 06-2669 Jun-Aug 06 So Sno Co Cities Mtg Minutes
Jun-Aug 06 So Sno Co Cities Mtg Minutes
001.000.000.237.910.000.00 226.80
Total :226.80
91242 10/5/2006 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 06-2671 MINUTE TAKING
Council Minutes 9/26/06
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 403.20
15Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :403.209124210/5/2006 064531 064531 DINES, JEANNIE
91243 10/5/2006 064867 DLI ENGINEERING CORP 2467 TRAINING/MOORS
TRAINING/MOORS
411.000.656.538.800.490.71 1,095.00
Total :1,095.00
91244 10/5/2006 068591 DOUBLEDAY, MICHAEL September 2006 GENERAL GOVERNMENT SERVICES
9/06 Lobbyist General Government
001.000.390.519.900.410.00 1,630.00
9/06 Lobbyist Edmonds Crossing
001.000.610.519.700.410.00 870.00
Total :2,500.00
91245 10/5/2006 068871 DOUG'S LYNNWOOD MAZDA HYCS114323 INV#HYCS114323 CUST#87356 EDMONDS PD
OIL CHANGE AND DISPOSAL
001.000.410.521.300.480.00 32.29
LICENSE PLATE BULB
001.000.410.521.300.480.00 2.98
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.300.480.00 3.14
Total :38.41
91246 10/5/2006 071313 DOWNEY, MARY DOWNEY0920 REFUND
REFUND - CLIENT CANCELLED WORKSHOP
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 45.00
Total :45.00
91247 10/5/2006 071317 DUARTE, BRENDA DUARTE0929 REFUND
REFUND OF CREDIT ON ACCOUNT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 10.00
Total :10.00
91248 10/5/2006 071295 DUFFY, COLIN 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
16Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :14.459124810/5/2006 071295 071295 DUFFY, COLIN
91249 10/5/2006 060933 DYNAMIC LANGUAGE CENTER 196615 INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 58.10
Total :58.10
91250 10/5/2006 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 71263 SUPPLIES
OIL SEAL
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.48
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.67
SUPPLIES71372
CLEAR SILICONE
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 11.99
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.07
SUPPLIES71501
SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 8.56
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.76
Total :30.53
91251 10/5/2006 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 71049 BRAKE CLEANER
BRAKE CLEANER
411.000.656.538.800.310.59 65.28
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.59 5.81
Total :71.09
91252 10/5/2006 007775 EDMONDS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CHAMBER0929 REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT FOR TASTE OF
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 1,500.00
Total :1,500.00
91253 10/5/2006 070683 EDMONDS MAIL & PARCEL 7994 METER MAIL
17Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91253 10/5/2006 (Continued)070683 EDMONDS MAIL & PARCEL
METER MAIL
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 1.35
UPS/BROWN & CALDWELL8003
UPS/BROWN & CALDWELL
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 8.34
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 0.74
Total :10.43
91254 10/5/2006 069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP PORTWOOD YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP
YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP: SARAH
122.000.640.574.100.490.00 75.00
Total :75.00
91255 10/5/2006 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 3-38565 WATER
18410 92ND AVE W
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.27
Total :30.27
91256 10/5/2006 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 3-01808 LIFT STATION #11
LIFT STATION #11
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 19.99
MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE3-03575
MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 181.55
LIFT STATION #123-07525
LIFT STATION #12
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 54.40
LIFT STATION #153-07709
LIFT STATION #15
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 19.99
LIFT STATION #43-09350
LIFT STATION #4
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 50.97
18Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91256 10/5/2006 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION
LIFT STATION #103-09800
LIFT STATION #10
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 23.41
LIFT STATION #93-29875
LIFT STATION #9
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 25.13
Total :375.44
91257 10/5/2006 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 6-01127 WWTP WATER
WWTP WATER
411.000.656.538.800.473.64 118.14
WWTP WATER6-01130
WWTP WATER
411.000.656.538.800.473.64 11.42
WWTP WATER6-01140
WWTP WATER
411.000.656.538.800.473.64 767.78
Total :897.34
91258 10/5/2006 069924 EIMCO WATER TECHNOLOGIES 8444949 17156
BALL CHECK/CHECK VALVE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1,204.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 70.81
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 107.16
Total :1,381.97
91259 10/5/2006 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 020076 ADMIN MAINT
Admin copier maint
001.000.510.522.100.480.00 76.51
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.100.480.00 6.81
Total :83.32
19Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91260 10/5/2006 065427 FCS GROUP 1134-2609036 WATER SEWER STORM RATE UPDATE
Sept 06 Water, Sewer & Stormwater 2006
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 882.00
Sept 06 Water, Sewer & Stormwater 2006
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 1,151.50
Sept 06 Water, Sewer & Stormwater 2006
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 416.50
Total :2,450.00
91261 10/5/2006 066590 FELIX LLC, ROBERT W FELIX7120 STOP SMOKING WITH HYPNOSIS
STOP SMOKING WITH HYPNOSIS~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 245.00
Total :245.00
91262 10/5/2006 071296 FENNING, JACQUELINE 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91263 10/5/2006 069090 FITZGERALD, WAVERLY FITZGERALD1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
BEFRIENDING REJECTION: THE FOUR R'S
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91264 10/5/2006 071314 FLEENOR, MARGARET FLEENOR0925 REFUND
REFUND FOR CLASS
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 126.00
Total :126.00
91265 10/5/2006 070855 FLEX PLAN SERVICES INC 85467 September 2006 - Section 125 fee
September 2006 - Section 125 fee
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 50.00
Total :50.00
91266 10/5/2006 071311 FORMS AND FILING INC 93076A INV#93076A CUST#8151 EDMONDS PD
20Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91266 10/5/2006 (Continued)071311 FORMS AND FILING INC
COLOR TAB FILE LABELS
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 84.50
Freight
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 4.80
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 7.94
Total :97.24
91267 10/5/2006 010665 FOSTER PEPPER PLLC D. ANDERSON MANAGING BEHAVIORS IN WORKPLACE/ANDERSON
D.ANDERSON/TRAINING~
001.000.410.521.400.490.00 25.00
Total :25.00
91268 10/5/2006 071297 GENKINGER, CATHERINE 080609 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91269 10/5/2006 071329 GEORGE, ELIZABETH GEORGE1007 KEYNOTE SPEECH
KEYNOTE SPEECH~
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 1,000.00
Total :1,000.00
91270 10/5/2006 067232 GERRISH BEARING COMPANY 2067712-01 BALL BEARING
BALL BEARING
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 38.84
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.75
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 3.92
Total :48.51
91271 10/5/2006 012199 GRAINGER 9191817593 837944131
21Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91271 10/5/2006 (Continued)012199 GRAINGER
SOLENOID VALVE
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 121.50
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 10.69
Total :132.19
91272 10/5/2006 069864 GRAPHIC ENTERPRISES INC AR104365 Contract base/overage K&E 8036 DSD
Contract base/overage K&E 8036 DSD
001.000.620.524.100.480.00 31.19
Total :31.19
91273 10/5/2006 071282 HADDOW, CARLA 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91274 10/5/2006 071283 HARPER, BRENDA 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91275 10/5/2006 012900 HARRIS FORD INC 65094 UNIT 133 - CALIPER PAD KIT, OIL SEAL
UNIT 133 - CALIPER PAD KIT, OIL SEAL
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 105.58
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.40
FLEET INVENTORY - BRAKE SHOE KIT, ROTOR65562
FLEET INVENTORY - BRAKE SHOE KIT, ROTOR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 316.04
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 28.13
22Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91275 10/5/2006 (Continued)012900 HARRIS FORD INC
FLEET INVENTORY - BRAKE SHOE KIT65562-1
FLEET INVENTORY - BRAKE SHOE KIT
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 88.72
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.90
Total :555.77
91276 10/5/2006 071284 HARRIS, BRIAN 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91277 10/5/2006 071330 HARTER, KAREN HARTER1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
ONE WRITER'S JOURNEY TO PUBLICATION
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91278 10/5/2006 070638 HARWICK, MELINDA HARDWICK1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
PLODDING OR PLOTTING
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91279 10/5/2006 071315 HELLER, BEVERLY HELLER0926 REFUND
CLASS REFUND
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 124.00
Total :124.00
91280 10/5/2006 071318 HJELM, PAMELA HJELM0929 REFUND
REFUND OF CREDIT ON ACCOUNT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 25.00
Total :25.00
91281 10/5/2006 065541 HOGGATT, TINA HOGGATT1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
ARTIST SLIDE SHOW/READING
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
23Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :100.009128110/5/2006 065541 065541 HOGGATT, TINA
91282 10/5/2006 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1071276 6035322502670205
NOZZLES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 14.51
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.28
60353225026702053044666
BIT
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 14.97
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.32
60353225026702055562784
SPRAYERS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 27.94
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.46
60353225026702056065507
WOOD FILLER
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 21.36
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.88
60353225026702056087173
SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 9.98
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.88
603353225026702056089450
SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 6.48
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.57
24Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91282 10/5/2006 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
60353225026702057034776
PAINT
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 25.67
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.26
60353225026702057042456
SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.98
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.53
60353225026702057042469
TSP
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 12.97
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.14
60353225026702057070744
PAINT, METAL NOZZLES, SOLVENT, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 74.14
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 6.52
603532250267020587953
TRIMMER
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 99.97
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 8.80
Total :341.61
91283 10/5/2006 071319 HUDSON, SUSAN HUDSON0929 REFUND
REFUND OF CREDIT ON ACCOUNT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 65.00
Total :65.00
91284 10/5/2006 062899 HUFF, ARIELE HUFF1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
MANUSCRIPT CRITQUES
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 150.00
25Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :150.009128410/5/2006 062899 062899 HUFF, ARIELE
91285 10/5/2006 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 70633197 COPIER LEASE
PARK MAINTENANCE COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 52.43
Total :52.43
91286 10/5/2006 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 70633196 FINANCE COPIER RENTAL
Copier Rental 9/22-10/21/06
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 454.07
Additional B/W & Color Images 8/3-9/3/06
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 190.81
Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 57.40
Total :702.28
91287 10/5/2006 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 70633190 Lease/copies DSD Recept Copier
Lease/copies DSD Recept Copier
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 118.24
Lease/copies DSD Large Copier70633191
Lease/copies DSD Large Copier
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 1,071.35
Lease-Copies Eng Color Copier70633195
Lease-Copies Eng Color Copier
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 689.84
Total :1,879.43
91288 10/5/2006 066256 IMSA IMSA ID 51740 IMSA DUES FOR G EVANS
IMSA DUES FOR G EVANS
001.000.651.519.920.490.00 60.00
Total :60.00
91289 10/5/2006 071350 INOCENCIO, ARTURO LEON INOCENCIO1003 REFUND
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT FOR MEADOWDALE
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 150.00
Total :150.00
26Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91290 10/5/2006 069098 ISRAEL, UNDERSTANDING ISRAEL0930 WATERSHED FUN FAIR STORYTELLING
WATERSHED FUN FAIR STORYTELLING AND USE
001.000.640.574.350.410.00 300.00
Total :300.00
91291 10/5/2006 069264 J & K ASSOCIATES 92006 STREET DEPT - 3" SEALANT SHOE WITH
STREET DEPT - 3" SEALANT SHOE WITH
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 156.00
Freight
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 44.00
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 13.26
Total :213.26
91292 10/5/2006 071320 JOHN L SCOTT REAL ESTATE JLSCOTT0929 REFUND
REFUND FROM SHELTER CANCELLATION
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 48.00
Total :48.00
91293 10/5/2006 068737 JOHNSON ROBERTS & ASSOC 105250 INV#105250 EDMONDS PD - SCOTT
PRE-OFFER PHQ
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 15.00
Freight
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 1.26
Total :16.26
91294 10/5/2006 065056 JOHNSON, TROY TJOHNSON0930 PLAZA ROOM MONITOR
PLAZA ROOM MONITOR~
001.000.640.574.100.410.00 120.00
Total :120.00
91295 10/5/2006 015270 JONES CHEMICALS INC 320706 54278825
HYPOCHLORITE
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 3,037.86
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 267.33
27Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :3,305.199129510/5/2006 015270 015270 JONES CHEMICALS INC
91296 10/5/2006 066913 KDL HARDWARE SUPPLY INC 298833 FAC MAINT - LOCKSMITH SUPPLIES
FAC MAINT - LOCKSMITH SUPPLIES
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 128.00
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.46
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 11.65
FAC MAINT STRUCT SUPPLIES - KNOB302914
FAC MAINT STRUCT SUPPLIES - KNOB
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 230.40
RIM CYL
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 295.20
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.59
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 46.66
Total :720.96
91297 10/5/2006 015535 KELLER SUPPLY COMPANY 1860651 FAC - EVERFLUX, PRESSURE GAUGE
FAC - EVERFLUX, PRESSURE GAUGE
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.46
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.55
CITY PARK BLDG - HOT WATER THERM1867736
CITY PARK BLDG - HOT WATER THERM
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 9.50
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.85
Total :29.36
91298 10/5/2006 070641 KIRCHNER, BHARTI KIRCHNER1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
WRITING THE FIRST PAGE
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
28Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :125.009129810/5/2006 070641 070641 KIRCHNER, BHARTI
91299 10/5/2006 016600 KROESENS INC 67396 OPS UNIFORMS
Beardsley Class A
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 501.35
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 44.12
OPS UNIFORM70591
Schmitt polos
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 89.80
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 7.90
Total :643.17
91300 10/5/2006 016850 KUKER RANKEN INC 308165-001 STREET DEPT - 11.5" MEASURING WHEEL
STREET DEPT - 11.5" MEASURING WHEEL
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 119.99
4' MEASURING WHEEL
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 139.99
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 23.14
Total :283.12
91301 10/5/2006 060132 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY 1008469036 STREET DEPT - PUSH IN EARPLUGS
STREET DEPT - PUSH IN EARPLUGS
111.000.653.542.900.310.00 291.60
Freight
111.000.653.542.900.310.00 13.11
Total :304.71
91302 10/5/2006 068711 LAWN EQUIPMENT SUPPLY 9006-218 FAC MAINT - ATLAS LARGE NITRILE TOUGH
29Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91302 10/5/2006 (Continued)068711 LAWN EQUIPMENT SUPPLY
FAC MAINT - ATLAS LARGE NITRILE TOUGH
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 94.80
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.11
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 8.62
Total :105.53
91303 10/5/2006 071285 LEE, MARK 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91304 10/5/2006 018140 LEIN, JONATHAN 0283 TRAVEL/LEIN
TRAVEL/LEIN
411.000.656.538.800.430.00 314.53
Total :314.53
91305 10/5/2006 067725 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER 115368 UNIT 11 - 2 RADIAL TRACTION TUBELESS
UNIT 11 - 2 RADIAL TRACTION TUBELESS
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 673.40
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 61.93
UNIT 124 - WHITE SPOKE RWD344327
UNIT 124 - WHITE SPOKE RWD
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 35.26
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.14
UNIT 110 - INDUSTRIAL TUBES344733
UNIT 110 - INDUSTRIAL TUBES
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 24.96
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.22
Total :800.91
30Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91306 10/5/2006 070643 LETKO, KEN LETKO1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
THE VALUE OF PUBLISHING
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 225.00
Total :225.00
91307 10/5/2006 071286 LINDSTROM, AARON 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91308 10/5/2006 071345 LUNDE, KRISTIN LUNDE1002 REFUND
REFUND OF PLAZA ROOM DAMAGE DEPOSIT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 500.00
Total :500.00
91309 10/5/2006 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 091427 INV#091427 EDMONDS PD
DESK CALENDARS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 126.90
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 11.29
Total :138.19
91310 10/5/2006 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 538388 TOOLS
EDGER BLADES, BLADES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 40.98
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.65
Total :44.63
91311 10/5/2006 061900 MARC 0309900-IN 00-0902224
DEFOAMER
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 70.50
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 20.72
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 8.12
31Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :99.349131110/5/2006 061900 061900 MARC
91312 10/5/2006 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 2690 INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 45.00
INTERPRETER FEE2692
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 180.00
INTERPRETER FEE2693
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 135.00
INTERPRETER FEE2694
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 45.00
INTERPRETER FEE2705
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 60.00
INTERPRETER FEE2707
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 60.00
INTERPRETER FEE2715
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 105.00
INTERPRETER FEE2716
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 45.00
INTERPRETER FEE2719
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.490.01 45.00
Total :720.00
91313 10/5/2006 068670 MARSHBANK CONSTRUCTION INC E1BA.Pmt 14 Thru 08/31-Street OVWSD portion
32Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91313 10/5/2006 (Continued)068670 MARSHBANK CONSTRUCTION INC
Thru 08/31-Street OVWSD portion
112.506.630.595.330.650.00 166,229.37
Thru 08/31-Water Portion
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 586.10
Thru 08/31-Storm Portion
412.200.630.594.320.650.00 3,274.95
Thru 08/31-Sewer Portion
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 179.11
Total :170,269.53
91314 10/5/2006 071298 MCCARTY, SHANNON 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91315 10/5/2006 071321 MCKENZIE, SHANNON MCKENZIE0929 REFUND
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT FOR MEADOWDALE
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 200.00
Total :200.00
91316 10/5/2006 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 50044201 123106800
C-161 SCREENINGS SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 300.72
Freight
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 9.49
12310680050434375
C-161 SCREENINGS SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 146.80
Freight
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 24.29
12310680050455144
PVC BALL VALVE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 50.79
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 4.83
33Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91316 10/5/2006 (Continued)020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO
12310680050632060
C-161 SCREENINGS SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 330.72
Freight
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 9.89
12310680050898812
CAP SCREW
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 4.95
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 4.14
12310680050899774
HOSE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 131.16
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 11.81
12310680051055105
C-161 SCREENINGS SYSTEM IMPROVEMNETS
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 14.88
Freight
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 4.14
12310680051069345
STEEL/FLANGE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 163.52
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 51.82
12310680051120202
NOZZLE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 14.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 4.51
Total :1,282.46
91317 10/5/2006 071287 MEARNS, ALAN 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
34Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
35
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :14.459131710/5/2006 071287 071287 MEARNS, ALAN
91318 10/5/2006 069285 MERCER MD, JAMES 1009-06 ALS PRO SERVICES
Sept med prgm dir
001.000.510.526.100.410.00 1,644.75
Total :1,644.75
91319 10/5/2006 020450 MICRO DATA 40225-37 INV#40225-37 CUST#6011 EDMONDS PD
5500 CRIMINAL CITATIONS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 990.00
Freight
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 38.35
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 86.38
Total :1,114.73
91320 10/5/2006 071288 MILLS, NANCY 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91321 10/5/2006 071299 MURPHY, DENIS 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91322 10/5/2006 066076 NATIONAL FLOOD SERVICES 87021764372005 POLICY # 87021764372005
Flood Ins Prem Sr Ctr 11/06-11/07
001.000.390.519.900.460.00 1,628.00
Total :1,628.00
91323 10/5/2006 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0182049-IN Miscellaneous safety supplies
35Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
36
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91323 10/5/2006 (Continued)064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC
Miscellaneous safety supplies
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 205.75
Freight
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 11.89
Sales Tax
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 19.16
Miscellaneous safety supplies0182651-IN
Miscellaneous safety supplies
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 30.50
Freight
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 9.93
King County Sales Tax
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 3.56
Miscellaneous safety supplies0182700-IN
Miscellaneous safety supplies
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 98.85
Freignt
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 9.39
Sales Tax
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 9.53
Miscellaneous safety supplies0182902-IN
Miscellaneous safety supplies
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 36.95
Freight
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 9.79
King County Sales Tax
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 4.13
Miscellaneous safety supplies0182903-IN
Miscellaneous safety supplies
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 1.30
King County Sales Tax
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 0.12
Total :450.85
91324 10/5/2006 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0182656-IN Bldg Div Safety Harness Laynards
36Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
37
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91324 10/5/2006 (Continued)064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC
Bldg Div Safety Harness Laynards
001.000.620.524.100.350.00 179.54
Total :179.54
91325 10/5/2006 070109 NAUTILUS ENVIRONMENTAL LLC 1454 DMRQA STUDY
DMRQA STUDY
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 100.00
Total :100.00
91326 10/5/2006 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0295518-IN FLEET SHOP INVENTORY - FILTERS
FLEET SHOP INVENTORY - FILTERS
511.000.000.141.170.000.00 44.28
Sales Tax
511.000.000.141.170.000.00 3.81
Total :48.09
91327 10/5/2006 070788 NETRIVER INC 32057-01 BIRD FEST BILLING
JULY, AUG & SEPT 2006 BILLING~
001.000.240.513.110.410.00 39.00
Total :39.00
91328 10/5/2006 065779 NEWMAN TRAFFIC SIGNS INC TI-0165084 STREET DEPT - BLANK VERTICAL RECT
STREET DEPT - BLANK VERTICAL RECT
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 277.50
Freight
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 44.40
Total :321.90
91329 10/5/2006 067098 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 411191318-058 Cell Service -GRAF
Cell Service -GRAF
001.000.620.524.100.420.00 110.94
Total :110.94
91330 10/5/2006 067098 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 976032312-058 COMMUNICATIONS
37Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
38
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91330 10/5/2006 (Continued)067098 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS
Admin
001.000.510.522.100.420.00 27.11
Operations
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 339.84
Prevention
001.000.510.522.300.420.00 79.82
ALS
001.000.510.526.100.420.00 71.02
Total :517.79
91331 10/5/2006 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 0072416 SODIUM BISULFITE
SODIUM BISULFITE
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 1,269.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 112.94
Total :1,381.94
91332 10/5/2006 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 0326597 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 95.36
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0326598
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 95.36
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0326599
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 95.36
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0328904
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 108.90
Total :394.98
91333 10/5/2006 068570 O'CONNELL, NICK O'CONNELL1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
CREATIVE NONFICTION
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
38Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
39
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :125.009133310/5/2006 068570 068570 O'CONNELL, NICK
91334 10/5/2006 071332 OAKLEY, JANET OAKLEY1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
FINDING HISTORY
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91335 10/5/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 173239 OFFICE SUPPLIES
BINDERS
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 39.94
King County Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 3.43
OFFICE SUPPLIES219337
HANGING FILE AND FRAMES
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 32.44
King County Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 2.77
OFFICE SUPPLIES249492
HANGING FRAME
117.100.640.573.100.310.00 15.90
King County Sales Tax
117.100.640.573.100.310.00 1.31
Total :95.79
91336 10/5/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 282561 Wireless Mouse
Wireless Mouse
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 57.50
King County Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 5.06
Total :62.56
91337 10/5/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 510147 OFFICE SUPPLIES
Office supplies
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 60.34
King County Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 5.31
39Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
40
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91337 10/5/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC
OFFICE SUPPLIES588444
Office supplies
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 86.19
King County Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 7.58
OFFICE SUPPLIES611458
Office Supplies
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 67.23
King County Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 5.92
Total :232.57
91338 10/5/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 616331 WATER/SEWER DEPT - WASTEBASKET, RECYCLE
WATER/SEWER DEPT - WASTEBASKET, RECYCLE
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 4.26
WATER/SEWER DEPT - WASTEBASKET, RECYCLE
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.26
PW ADMIN - 3PART LOCATE PAPER, PENS,
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 155.54
King County Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 0.38
King County Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 0.38
King County Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 13.68
Total :178.50
91339 10/5/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 529221 Office Supplies Dev. Serv. Dept
Office Supplies Dev. Serv. Dept
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 258.41
Total :258.41
91340 10/5/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 522814 INV#522814 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD
40Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
41
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91340 10/5/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC
INK CARTRIDGES FOR DETECTIVES
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 808.48
INK CARTRIDGES - MANDEVILLE
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 41.04
HIGHLIGHTERS, BINDERS, CLIPBOARD
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 22.78
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 74.76
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 2.00
INV#593358 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD593358
CALCULATOR RIBBON
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 3.84
CALENDAR
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 13.48
FILE FOLDERS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 20.20
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 3.30
41Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
42
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91340 10/5/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC
INV#596304 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD596304
SOLO BISTRO CUPS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 80.87
PEN REFILLS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 17.28
2007 CALENDARS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 61.14
INK-TRAFFIC COLOR/PHOTO PRINTER
001.000.410.521.710.310.00 123.19
BINDERS FOR FTO MANUALS
001.000.410.521.400.310.00 26.64
CALENDARS FOR CRIME PREVENTION
001.000.410.521.400.310.00 23.01
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 14.02
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.710.310.00 10.84
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.400.310.00 4.37
Total :1,351.24
91341 10/5/2006 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 06-012 STROM DEPT - WATER USED @ FRIAR TUCK &
STROM DEPT - WATER USED @ FRIAR TUCK &
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 31.72
Total :31.72
91342 10/5/2006 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 38733 STORM DEPT - BRUSH DUMP & ENV COMP FEE
STORM DEPT - BRUSH DUMP & ENV COMP FEE
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 88.00
FUEL SCHG
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 3.43
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 0.27
42Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
43
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91342 10/5/2006 (Continued)027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS
STORM DEPT -BRUSH DUMP38751
STORM DEPT -BRUSH DUMP
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 84.00
ENV COMPLIANCE FEE
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 4.00
FUEL SCHG
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 3.43
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 0.27
Total :183.40
91343 10/5/2006 066817 PANASONIC DIGITAL DOCUMENT COM 9191848 ADMIN LEASE
Copier lease
001.000.510.522.100.450.00 137.06
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.100.450.00 12.20
Total :149.26
91344 10/5/2006 071333 PENZ, ERIC PENZ1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
STORY AS SECOND LANGUAGE
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91345 10/5/2006 071334 PERKINS-VALDEZ, DOLEN PERKINS-VALDEZ1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
RESEARCHING HISTORICAL FICTION
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 145.00
Total :145.00
91346 10/5/2006 063951 PERTEET ENGINEERING INC 22036.0000040 E1BA.Thru 08/27 Street/OVWSD
43Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
44
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91346 10/5/2006 (Continued)063951 PERTEET ENGINEERING INC
E1BA.Thru 08/27 Street/OVWSD
112.506.630.595.330.650.00 10,897.86
E1BA.Thru 08/27-Water
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 226.20
E1BA.Thru 08/27-Storm
412.200.630.594.320.650.00 1,263.93
E1BA.Thru 08/27-Sewer
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 69.13
Total :12,457.12
91347 10/5/2006 067159 PIERCE COUNTY BUDGET &C85261 TRAINING MISC
RC,DS,Rescue Sytms I
001.000.510.522.400.490.00 1,200.00
Total :1,200.00
91348 10/5/2006 029012 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 145885 INV#145885 ACCT#2772 EDMONDS PD
RETURN ITEM TO K-9 STORM
001.000.410.521.100.420.00 20.43
Total :20.43
91349 10/5/2006 071184 PROCOM 2006-1065 FIBER PROJECT
Sept 06 Services Fiber Project
001.000.310.514.100.410.00 1,781.25
Total :1,781.25
91350 10/5/2006 067263 PUGET SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPANY 0010462-IN EDMCITW
PVC POLY SUIT
411.000.656.538.800.310.12 27.96
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.12 2.35
Total :30.31
91351 10/5/2006 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 7918807004 YOST POOL
YOST POOL
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 2,929.59
44Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
45
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :2,929.599135110/5/2006 046900 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY
91352 10/5/2006 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 0101874006 LIBRARY
LIBRARY
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 128.76
PARK & BUILDING MAINTENANCE SHOP0230757007
PARK & BUILDING MAINTENANCE SHOP
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 69.98
LIFT STATION #71916766007
LIFT STATION #7
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 53.08
PUBLIC SAFETY-POLICE,CRT & COUNCIL2753166004
PUBLIC SAFETY-POLICE,CRT & COUNCEL
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 332.06
PUBLIC WORKS2776365005
PUBLIC WORKS
001.000.650.519.910.470.00 8.08
PUBLIC WORKS
111.000.653.542.900.470.00 40.39
PUBLIC WORKS
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 33.12
PUBLIC WORKS
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 33.12
PUBLIC WORKS
511.000.657.548.680.470.00 46.84
LIFT STATION #132986629000
LIFT STATION #13
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 84.31
VACANT PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING3689976003
VACANT PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 19.45
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE5254926008
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 94.74
45Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
46
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91352 10/5/2006 (Continued)046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY
SEWER LIFT STATION #95672895009
SEWER LIFT STATION #9
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 21.80
PUBLIC SAFETY-FIRE STATION6439566008
PUBLIC SAFETY-FIRE STATION
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 176.96
ANDERSON CENTER6490327001
ANDERSON CENTER
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,320.34
LIFT STATION #88851908007
LIFT STATION #8
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 54.64
FIRE STATION #209919661109
FIRE STATION #20
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 72.62
Total :2,590.29
91353 10/5/2006 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 084-904-700-6 3325
WWTP PUGET SOUND ENERGY
411.000.656.538.800.472.63 566.66
Total :566.66
91354 10/5/2006 030695 PUMPTECH INC 25836 SEWER DEPT - LIFT ST 11 - HYDROMATIC
SEWER DEPT - LIFT ST 11 - HYDROMATIC
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 220.00
Freight
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 6.14
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 19.90
Total :246.04
91355 10/5/2006 063452 RADIO SHACK CORPORATION 323597 00004605060005
46Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
47
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91355 10/5/2006 (Continued)063452 RADIO SHACK CORPORATION
12 VOLT REGULATOR
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 3.18
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 0.28
Total :3.46
91356 10/5/2006 066948 RAY ALLEN MFG CO INC 214443 INV#214443 EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS/PD
SEDAN CRUISE EZE/CROWN VIC
001.000.410.521.260.350.00 1,345.00
Freight
001.000.410.521.260.350.00 175.00
INV#214606 EDMONDS PD214606
RAM TECH LA LEAD 6' X 3/4"
001.000.410.521.260.310.00 20.95
Freight
001.000.410.521.260.310.00 5.00
CM7741 EDMONDS PD FOR PO 2140897741CM
RETURN WRONG LEAD
001.000.410.521.260.310.00 -34.95
Total :1,511.00
91357 10/5/2006 031500 REID MIDDLETON & ASSOC INC 0608084 Shoreline Master Program Update-Plng
Shoreline Master Program Update-Plng
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 3,065.92
Total :3,065.92
91358 10/5/2006 071322 REMAX CHAMPIONS REMAX0929 REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT FOR PLAZA ROOM
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 250.00
Total :250.00
91359 10/5/2006 068483 RH2 ENGINEERING INC 43501 E3JC.Water Supply System Improvements
E3JC.Water Supply System Improvements
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 9,718.26
Total :9,718.26
47Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
48
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91360 10/5/2006 071335 RHAMEY, RAY RHAMEY1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
FLASH EDITING
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 225.00
Total :225.00
91361 10/5/2006 068484 RINKER MATERIALS 9410959276 STORM DEPT - ASPHALT & SAND
STORM DEPT - ASPHALT & SAND
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 322.78
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 18.41
WATER/SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT9410971320
WATER/SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 122.50
WATER/SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 122.50
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 10.79
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 10.78
STROM DEPT - ASPHALT & SAND9410971321
STROM DEPT - ASPHALT & SAND
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 222.21
Freight
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 1.56
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 7.94
WATER/SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT9410983680
WATER/SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 134.75
WATER/SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 134.75
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 11.86
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 11.86
48Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
49
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91361 10/5/2006 (Continued)068484 RINKER MATERIALS
WATER/SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT9410996980
WATER/SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 147.22
WATER/SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 147.22
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 12.96
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 12.96
Total :1,453.05
91362 10/5/2006 071336 RUSHFORD, PATRICIA RUSHFORD1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
WRITING MYSTERIES
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 225.00
Total :225.00
91363 10/5/2006 071337 SELAK, JOY SELAK1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
LOST IN TIME: TIMING & CONSISTENCY IN
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :100.00
91364 10/5/2006 071289 SELFE, PHILLIP 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91365 10/5/2006 071338 SELLMAN, TAMARA SELLMAN1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
THE WRITER'S WEB
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
JUDGE OF NONFICTION ENTRIES FOR WRITE
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :225.00
91366 10/5/2006 070115 SHANNON & WILSON INC 74782 SR CENTER - Geo-Tech/Engineering Study
SR CENTER - Geo-Tech/Engineering Study
116.000.651.519.920.410.00 5,723.48
49Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
50
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :5,723.489136610/5/2006 070115 070115 SHANNON & WILSON INC
91367 10/5/2006 071339 SHAPIRO, NEAL SHAPIRO1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
ART OF ELECTRONIC SCHMOOZING
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91368 10/5/2006 071340 SHEFFIELD, DEREK SHEFFIELD1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
SCIENCE AS MUSE
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91369 10/5/2006 071316 SHERWOOD, MARYBETH SHERWOOD0926 REFUND
REFUND
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 124.00
Total :124.00
91370 10/5/2006 071341 SHORTRIDGE, JENNIE SHORTRIDGE1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
PANEL: MARKETING YOUR WORK
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 50.00
THE 10 PAGE PROMISE
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 145.00
Total :195.00
91371 10/5/2006 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0051848-IN UNIT 486 - REPLACEMENT ROTATOR
UNIT 486 - REPLACEMENT ROTATOR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 204.40
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 10.50
Total :214.90
91372 10/5/2006 065803 SKYHAWKS SPORTS ACADEMY 238626824 SPORTS ACADEMIES
SOCCER CAMP
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 2,092.00
Total :2,092.00
91373 10/5/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 3850013073 IRRIGATION CONTROL
50Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
51
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91373 10/5/2006 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
IRRIGATION CONTROL
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.74
UTILITY BILLING4120014156
750 15TH ST SW
130.000.640.536.500.470.00 15.64
SPRINKLER SYSTEM4160017333
SPRINKLER SYSTEM
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 61.42
Total :106.80
91374 10/5/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2260043795 SIGNAL LIGHT
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 44.76
ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER2670022181
ANDERSON CULTURAL CENTER
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 3,031.45
SIGNAL LIGHT3710011507
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 49.66
SIGNAL LIGHT3800017489
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 70.73
STREET LIGHT4320012174
STREET LIGHT
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 360.70
LOG CABIN5500019350
LOG CABIN
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 88.04
Total :3,645.34
91375 10/5/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 904002772 463-001-867-1
9805 EDMONDS WAY
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 27.60
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 1.66
51Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
52
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :29.269137510/5/2006 037375 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
91376 10/5/2006 038100 SNO-KING STAMP 32122 Stamp for Bldg Div
Stamp for Bldg Div
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 40.16
Total :40.16
91377 10/5/2006 038100 SNO-KING STAMP 32125 INV#32125 EDMONDS PD
DATE STAMP FOR BROMAN
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 43.75
Freight
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 2.50
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 4.12
Total :50.37
91378 10/5/2006 065910 SNOCOM 911 COMMUNICATIONS 305 Q4 2006 COMMUNICATIONS
Q4 2006 Communications
001.000.410.528.600.510.00 123,493.83
Q4 2006 Communications
001.000.510.528.600.510.00 44,104.94
Q4 2006 Communications
411.000.654.534.800.510.00 8,820.98
Total :176,419.75
91379 10/5/2006 064351 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER 2006323 INV#2006323 EDMONDS PD - AUGUST 2006
AUGUST PRISONER R/B
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 39,158.82
Total :39,158.82
91380 10/5/2006 038500 SO COUNTY SENIOR CENTER INC MONTHLY FEE Sept 06 Recreation Services Contract
Sept 06 Recreation Services Contract
001.000.390.519.900.490.00 4,583.33
Total :4,583.33
91381 10/5/2006 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03583 garbage & recycle for PS
52Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
53
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91381 10/5/2006 (Continued)038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO
garbage & recycle for PS
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 487.49
garbage & recycle for FAC03585
garbage & recycle for FAC
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 556.90
garbage & recycle for Library03586
garbage & recycle for Library
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 491.20
garbage & recycle-City Hall03588
garbage & recycle-City Hall
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 379.46
Total :1,915.05
91382 10/5/2006 038413 SOUND TRACTOR IN58530 PARTS
KUBOTA PARTS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 6.67
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.98
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.92
Total :11.57
91383 10/5/2006 070677 SPRINT Eng Sept 2006 Engineering Nextel thru 09/24/06
Engineering Nextel thru 09/24/06
001.000.620.532.200.420.00 538.69
Total :538.69
91384 10/5/2006 069997 SRI TECHNOLOGIES INC 59619 Glasby thru 08/19-Street/OVWSD
53Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
54
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91384 10/5/2006 (Continued)069997 SRI TECHNOLOGIES INC
Glasby thru 08/19-Street/OVWSD
112.506.630.595.330.650.00 1,869.95
Glasby thru 08/19-Water
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 38.81
Glasby thru 08/19-Storm
412.200.630.594.320.650.00 216.88
Glasby thru 08/19-Sewer
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 11.86
Glasby thru 09/16-Street/OVWSD60417
Glasby thru 09/16-Street/OVWSD
112.506.630.595.330.650.00 1,692.79
Glasby thru 09/16-Water
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 35.14
Glasby thru 09/16-Storm
412.200.630.594.320.650.00 196.33
Glasby thru 09/16-Sewer
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 10.74
Glasby thru 09/23-Street/OVWSD60535
Glasby thru 09/23-Street/OVWSD
112.506.630.595.330.650.00 1,259.75
Glasby thru 09/23-Water
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 26.15
Glasby thru 09/23-Storm
412.200.630.594.320.650.00 146.11
Glasby thru 09/23/06
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 7.99
Total :5,512.50
91385 10/5/2006 069093 STAINTON, BILL STAINTON1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
HUMOR WRITING FOR THE HUMOR CHALLENGED
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91386 10/5/2006 071290 STANLEY, HOLLY 090806 JURY FEE
54Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
55
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91386 10/5/2006 (Continued)071290 STANLEY, HOLLY
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91387 10/5/2006 070684 STANTEC CONSULTING INC 101116 53769
C-161 SCREENING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 369.60
Total :369.60
91388 10/5/2006 031060 STEARNS FINANCIAL SERVICES 6109035-IN RADIX MONTHLY MAINT NOV 06
RADIX MONTHLY MAINT NOV 06
411.000.654.534.800.480.00 155.40
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.480.00 13.83
Total :169.23
91389 10/5/2006 071093 STEVENS, DAVID 510-2206 TRAINING TRAVEL
Training mileage
001.000.510.522.400.430.00 85.44
Total :85.44
91390 10/5/2006 069095 STEVES, RICK STEVES1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
THE BUSINESS OF TRAVEL WRITING
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 145.00
Total :145.00
91391 10/5/2006 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 727484 BOYS CLUB - ELEC MAINT - KNIFE, ELEC
BOYS CLUB - ELEC MAINT - KNIFE, ELEC
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 36.97
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.29
FAC MAINT STRUCT SUPPLIES - ELECTRIC731612
FAC MAINT STRUCT SUPPLIES - ELECTRIC
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 433.95
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 38.62
55Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
56
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :512.839139110/5/2006 040430 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY
91392 10/5/2006 071300 STRONG, JO DEE 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91393 10/5/2006 065578 SYSTEMS INTERFACE INC 7449 TELEMETRY SYSTEM PROF SVCS - SYSTEMS
TELEMETRY SYSTEM PROF SVCS - SYSTEMS
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 9,846.50
Total :9,846.50
91394 10/5/2006 063575 TEE'S PLUS SCREEN PRINTING FAC 223092 INV#223092 CUST#5145 EDMONDS PD
SCREEN CHARGE FOR T SHIRTS
001.000.410.521.310.310.00 10.00
DARE CAMO T SHIRTS S-XL
001.000.410.521.310.310.00 2,250.00
Freight
001.000.410.521.310.310.00 50.00
Total :2,310.00
91395 10/5/2006 070578 TEL WEST COMMUNICATIONS 695113 C/A 20044
PRi 1 City Phone Service 9/21-10/21/06
001.000.390.528.800.420.00 848.96
Total :848.96
91396 10/5/2006 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1440387 NEWSPAPER ADS
Ordinance 3604
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 22.08
Total :22.08
91397 10/5/2006 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1434333 Legal Notice S-06-78 Viking
Legal Notice S-06-78 Viking
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 17.94
Legal Notice V-0692 WASH DOT1435330
Legal Notice V-0692 WASH DOT
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 56.58
56Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
57
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91397 10/5/2006 (Continued)009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY
Legal Notice CDC 05-961436806
Legal Notice CDC 05-96
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 35.88
Total :110.40
91398 10/5/2006 027269 THE PART WORKS INC 190668 SUPPLIES
RUBBER KITS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 67.58
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.95
Total :73.53
91399 10/5/2006 069357 THIES, MIKE Thies ThiesTravel WACE Conf Leavenworth
ThiesTravel WACE Conf Leavenworth
001.000.620.558.800.430.00 307.50
Thies Registration WACE Conf Leavenworth
001.000.620.558.800.490.00 225.00
Total :532.50
91400 10/5/2006 071346 THORKILDSEN, CHRISTINE THORKILDSEN1002 REFUND
REFUND FOR CANCELLED CLASS
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 75.00
Total :75.00
91401 10/5/2006 071291 THORSRUD, MARK 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91402 10/5/2006 064423 USA BLUE BOOK 238043 PSI SWITCH
PSI SWITCH
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 460.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 15.06
57Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
58
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91402 10/5/2006 (Continued)064423 USA BLUE BOOK
391128242814
PSI SWITCH
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 230.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 11.30
Total :716.36
91403 10/5/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-AB8-1176 CITY PARK T1 LINE
City Park T1 Line 9/16-10/16/06
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 406.61
DEDICATED LINE FS #17 TO SNOCOM425-DHO-0667
Dedicated Line FS #17 to Snocom
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 355.50
9/20-10/19/06 Frame Replay for SnoCom &425-NW2-0887
9/20-10/19/06 Frame Replay for SnoCom &
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 285.00
Total :1,047.11
91404 10/5/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-206-1108 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 145.03
TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 269.35
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR425-206-1137
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.50
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-1141
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 18.43
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 34.22
58Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
59
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91404 10/5/2006 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-4810
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 42.17
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 78.32
PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE425-712-8347
PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 57.18
FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM425-776-3896
FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 115.02
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST425-778-3297
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 17.81
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 33.06
Total :837.09
91405 10/5/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-673-5978 LIFT STATION #1
Lift Station #1
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 47.44
FS # 16425-771-0158
FS #16
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 228.74
Total :276.18
91406 10/5/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-778-2153 FS #20 PHONE SERVICE
FS #20 PHONE SERVICE
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 47.19
FS #16 FRAME RELAY425-FLO-0017
FS #16 FRAME RELAY
001.000.510.528.600.420.00 343.73
FRAME RELAY FOR FS #20 & SNOCOM425-NW4-3726
FRAME RELAY FOR FS #20 & SNOCOM
001.000.510.528.600.420.00 247.00
59Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
60
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :637.929140610/5/2006 011900 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
91407 10/5/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 364280677-00001 360-929-3167
cell phone- Jim Kammerer
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 1.13
cell phone- Jim Kammerer
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 1.13
425-238-8846470091643-00001
cell phone-Tod Moles
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 30.34
425-238-5456470103273-00001
cell phone-Mike Johnson
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 29.68
425-327-5379670091643-00001
cell phone-unit #77
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 24.80
425-238-8252770096328-00001
cell phone-Dave Sittauer
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 3.76
Total :90.84
91408 10/5/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 206-595-3117 965420720-00001
PRETREATMENT CELL
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 36.28
Total :36.28
91409 10/5/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 2075026811 Bldg - air card laptap
Bldg - air card laptap
001.000.620.524.100.420.00 76.81
Total :76.81
91410 10/5/2006 070597 VISICORE LLC 263 Add't Labor to accomodate new Postage
Add't Labor to accomodate new Postage
001.000.250.514.300.420.00 311.45
Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.420.00 27.72
60Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
61
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :339.179141010/5/2006 070597 070597 VISICORE LLC
91411 10/5/2006 071323 WAILER, JAY WAILER0929 REFUND
REFUND OF CREDIT ON ACCOUNT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 106.00
Total :106.00
91412 10/5/2006 071342 WALKER, JAN WALKER1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
WRITE FROM LIFE
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
91413 10/5/2006 065035 WASHINGTON STATE PATROL F0600590 TRAINING MISC
TF,JM,DS,ET
001.000.510.522.400.490.00 390.00
Total :390.00
91414 10/5/2006 045912 WASPC 80138 ELECTRONIC HOME MONITORING
ELECTRONIC HOME MONITORING
001.000.230.523.200.510.00 1,178.75
Total :1,178.75
91415 10/5/2006 071301 WAY, BONNIE 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91416 10/5/2006 068106 WELCOME COMMUNICATIONS 5151 INV#5151 EDMONDS PD - CELL PHONE BATTERY
MOTOROLA CELL PHONE BATTERIES
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 164.28
Freight
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 5.77
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 15.13
Total :185.18
91417 10/5/2006 069691 WESTERN SYSTEMS I0001362 STREET DEPT - SIGNAL PARTS FOR 9TH &
61Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
62
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91417 10/5/2006 (Continued)069691 WESTERN SYSTEMS
STREET DEPT - SIGNAL PARTS FOR 9TH &
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 890.95
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 76.62
Total :967.57
91418 10/5/2006 064234 WILDWATER RIVER TOURS INC AMUNDSON7252 WHITEWATER RAFTING
TIETON WHITEWATER RAFTING~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 217.44
Total :217.44
91419 10/5/2006 071343 WINGATE, SUSAN WINGATE1008 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
ON EXPOSITION
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 145.00
Total :145.00
91420 10/5/2006 068203 WJA PLLC 06.03.01 Pt Edwards Temporary Shoring
Pt Edwards Temporary Shoring
001.000.620.524.100.410.00 575.00
Lovell Retaining Wall Review06.04.01
Lovell Retaining Wall Review
001.000.620.524.100.410.00 575.00
Total :1,150.00
91421 10/5/2006 071292 WRIGHT, CLINTON 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91422 10/5/2006 071303 YIRKA, SARAH 090806 JURY FEE
JURY FEE
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 14.45
Total :14.45
91423 10/5/2006 070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC 198 SEPTEMBER 06 RETAINER
62Page:
10/05/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
63
12:40:20PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91423 10/5/2006 (Continued)070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC
Sept 06 Retainer Prosecuting Attorney
001.000.360.515.230.410.00 6,000.00
Total :6,000.00
91424 10/5/2006 071344 ZALE, SARAH ZALE1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND PRESENTER
POETRY OF WONDER
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 125.00
POETRY JUDGE FOR WRITE ON THE SOUND
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :225.00
91425 10/5/2006 071349 ZUNIGA, LAURA ZUNIGA1003 REFUNDS
REFUND FOR DAMAGE DEPOSIT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 250.00
Total :250.00
Bank total :761,443.14238 Vouchers for bank code :front
761,443.14Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report238
63Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91426 10/11/2006 071354 ALEXANDER, RACHAEL L E1CC.ROW 1 Purchase of ROW for 100th Ave West
Purchase of ROW for 100th Ave West
112.200.630.595.330.650.00 2,000.00
Total :2,000.00
91427 10/11/2006 071355 FUCHS, NICHOLAS J E1CC.ROW 2 E1CC.ROW purchase for 100th Ave West
E1CC.ROW purchase for 100th Ave West
112.200.630.595.330.650.00 12,750.00
Total :12,750.00
91428 10/12/2006 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 1-16888 RODENT CONTROL
RODENT CONTROL
001.000.640.576.800.480.00 73.51
Total :73.51
91429 10/12/2006 069634 ACCURINT - ACCT 1201641 1201641-20060930 INV#1201641-20060930 EDMONDS PD
SEARCHES/REPORTS 09/06
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 42.85
Total :42.85
91430 10/12/2006 064615 AIR COMPRESSOR SERVICE 28272 FILTER ELEMENT
FILTER ELEMENT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 109.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 9.71
Total :118.71
91431 10/12/2006 071347 AMERICAN CHEMICAL INC A-2197 ENVIRO TERRA/CLEANER
ENVIRO TERRA/CLEANER
411.000.656.538.800.310.59 249.50
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.59 31.28
Total :280.78
91432 10/12/2006 001634 AQUA QUIP 503158 08239
1Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91432 10/12/2006 (Continued)001634 AQUA QUIP
TABGUARD TABS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 103.49
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 9.21
Total :112.70
91433 10/12/2006 069751 ARAMARK 512-3724635 UNIFORM SERVICES
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.410.00 36.30
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.410.00 3.23
UNIFORM SERVICES512-3729275
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.410.00 36.30
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.410.00 3.23
Total :79.06
91434 10/12/2006 069751 ARAMARK 512-3729277 18386001
UNIFORMS
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 86.56
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 7.70
Total :94.26
91435 10/12/2006 069751 ARAMARK 512-3727970 FLEET UNIFORMS
FLEET UNIFORMS
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 17.40
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 1.55
2Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91435 10/12/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
PW MATS512-3727972
PW MATS
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.38
PW MATS
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 5.24
PW MATS
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 5.24
PW MATS
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 5.24
PW MATS
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 5.24
PW MATS
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 5.26
WATER UNIFORMS - HIGHLAND
411.000.654.534.800.240.00 11.75
Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.12
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.47
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.240.00 1.03
3Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91435 10/12/2006 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS512-3727973
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.24
STORM/STREET UNIFORMS
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.24
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.29
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.29
Total :68.86
91436 10/12/2006 070434 AURORA PLASTICS & PACKAGING 13864 INV#13864 EDMONDS PD
CASE OF 1000 9x12 ZIPLOCK BAGS
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 101.48
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 9.03
Total :110.51
91437 10/12/2006 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 37623 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS
UB Outsourcing area #300
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 148.95
UB Outsourcing area #300
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 148.95
UB Outsourcing area #300
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 149.40
UB Outsourcing area #300
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 416.56
UB Outsourcing area #300
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 416.55
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 13.11
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 13.11
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 13.14
4Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :1,319.779143710/12/2006 070305 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER
91438 10/12/2006 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 06-1024 BURIAL SUPPLIES
BURIAL SUPPLIES:~
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 353.00
Total :353.00
91439 10/12/2006 069076 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS INC COE0906 Criminal Background checks
Criminal Background checks
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 65.00
Total :65.00
91440 10/12/2006 070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 9191852 Canon 5870 copier lease 11/06
Canon 5870 copier lease 11/06
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 101.35
Canon 5870 copier lease 11/06
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 101.32
Canon 5870 copier lease 11/06
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 101.33
Supply Charge - 11/06
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 25.01
Supply Charge - 11/06
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 25.00
Supply Charge - 11/06
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 24.99
Sales Tax
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 11.25
Sales Tax
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 11.25
Sales Tax
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 11.25
Total :412.75
91441 10/12/2006 071364 BELTONE HEARING CENTER 317 LEOFF 1 Expense (E. Hasner hearing aid
LEOFF 1 Expense (E. Hasner hearing aid
001.000.390.517.220.230.00 3,591.00
5Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :3,591.009144110/12/2006 071364 071364 BELTONE HEARING CENTER
91442 10/12/2006 067519 BLACK BOX CORPORATION 675339 Uncut cable wraps, cable ties
Uncut cable wraps, cable ties
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 119.85
Total :119.85
91443 10/12/2006 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM CO INC 533025-81 INV#533025-81 EDMONDS PD - NIK KITS
BACKORDERED NIK MARIJUANA KIT
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 24.95
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 2.20
INV#533037-01 EDMONDS PD - FALK533037-01
ATAC LOW 6" BOOT FOR FALK
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 79.99
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 7.04
INV#536653 EDMONDS PD - YAMANE536653
SHORT SLEEVE UNIFORM SHIRT
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 59.95
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 5.28
Total :179.41
91444 10/12/2006 071357 BUSCH, M JEAN BUSCH1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND CONTEST WINNER
2ND PLACE PRIZE: POETRY
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 75.00
Total :75.00
91445 10/12/2006 065458 CAMPBELL/NELSON 98312 INV#98312 EDMONDS PD
OIL CHANGE FOR CRIME PREV. CAR
001.000.410.521.300.480.00 33.30
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.300.480.00 2.97
Total :36.27
91446 10/12/2006 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN09061040 GYM ASTICS SUPPLIES
6Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91446 10/12/2006 (Continued)003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
HELIUM FOR GYMNASTICS BIRTHDAY PARTIES
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 7.50
Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 0.67
Total :8.17
91447 10/12/2006 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN09061042 2954000
ARGON/NITROGEN/OXYGEN
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 30.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 2.67
Total :32.67
91448 10/12/2006 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN09061041 SEWER DEPT - CYLINDER RENTAL
SEWER DEPT - CYLINDER RENTAL
411.000.655.535.800.450.00 7.50
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.450.00 0.67
WATER DEPT - 2 CYLINDER RENTALSRN09061043
WATER DEPT - 2 CYLINDER RENTALS
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 30.00
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 2.67
Total :40.84
91449 10/12/2006 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY98567 ALS SUPPLIES
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 44.65
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 3.97
ALS SUPPLIESLY98568
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 17.86
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 1.59
7Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91449 10/12/2006 (Continued)003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
ALS SUPPLIESLY98605
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 25.18
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 2.24
ALS SUPPLIESRN09061039
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 15.00
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 1.34
Total :111.83
91450 10/12/2006 071358 CERTIFIED LABORATORIES 185606 SUPPLIES
PREMALUBE
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 139.00
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 14.69
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 13.68
Total :167.37
91451 10/12/2006 071358 CERTIFIED LABORATORIES 183559 V0267472
ELECTRA AEROSOL/LOK CEASE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 258.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 17.25
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 24.50
Total :299.75
91452 10/12/2006 066580 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CO 5715089 E1CC.Recording fee Statutory Warranty
E1CC.Recording fee Statutory Warranty
112.200.630.595.330.650.00 72.00
8Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91452 10/12/2006 (Continued)066580 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE CO
E1CC.Recording Fee Statutory Warranty5715090
E1CC.Recording Fee Statutory Warranty
112.200.630.595.330.650.00 36.00
Total :108.00
91453 10/12/2006 064341 CINGULAR WIRELESS 150421551X10042006 C/A 150421551
425.418.8755 Wireless Service
001.000.310.514.100.420.00 119.94
Total :119.94
91454 10/12/2006 064341 CINGULAR WIRELESS 206-409-2502 047-50052570
PLANT CELL PHONES
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 17.89
Total :17.89
91455 10/12/2006 064341 CINGULAR WIRELESS 43598473 OPS COMMUNICATIONS
Vehicles' wireless
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 55.53
Total :55.53
91456 10/12/2006 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION 460461217 VOLUNTEER UNIFORMS
Volunteers
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 44.72
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 3.98
OPS UNIFORMS460461218
Stn. 16
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 103.69
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.23
9Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91456 10/12/2006 (Continued)066382 CINTAS CORPORATION
UNIFORMS460462267
Stn 17 ALS
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 96.47
Stn 17 Ops
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 96.47
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 8.59
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 8.58
OPS UNIFORMS460462293
Stn. 20
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 110.24
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.81
Total :491.78
91457 10/12/2006 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 2-533584-460571 WATER USEAGE FOR SEPT 06
WATER USEAGE FOR SEPT 06
411.000.654.534.800.340.00 420.00
Total :420.00
91458 10/12/2006 067186 CLEAR IMAGE INC 59967 INV#59967 EDMONDS PD
4 X 6 PRINTS
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 12.71
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 1.14
Total :13.85
91459 10/12/2006 070231 CNR INC 10420 10/06 MAINT PHONE SYSTEM
Monthly Phone Maintenance
001.000.390.528.800.480.00 736.67
Sales Tax
001.000.390.528.800.480.00 65.56
Total :802.23
10Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91460 10/12/2006 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES E1701318 CLEANING SUPPLIES
PAPER TOWELS, CLEANER, BRUSHES, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 990.34
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 87.15
Total :1,077.49
91461 10/12/2006 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES E1698346 FAC MAINT SUPPLIES - TT, KIT TOWELS,
FAC MAINT SUPPLIES - TT, KIT TOWELS,
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 865.94
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.50
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 76.42
FAC MAINT - LINERSE1698346-1
FAC MAINT - LINERS
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 138.87
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 12.22
FAC MAINT - TOWELSE1698648
FAC MAINT - TOWELS
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 379.80
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.50
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 33.64
FAC MAINT - TRIGGER SPAYER HEADSE1699283
FAC MAINT - TRIGGER SPAYER HEADS
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 29.76
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.50
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.84
Total :1,546.99
91462 10/12/2006 071040 CON-WAY FREIGHT 712-656523 SHIPPING/GEAR BOXES
11Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91462 10/12/2006 (Continued)071040 CON-WAY FREIGHT
SHIPPING/GEAR BOXES
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 217.32
Total :217.32
91463 10/12/2006 065364 CONTRACT HARDWARE INC 0029687-IN CITY PARK BLDG - LOCKSET
CITY PARK BLDG - LOCKSET
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 191.23
FAC - SPINDLE
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 11.81
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.87
Total :220.91
91464 10/12/2006 068815 CORRECT EQUIPMENT 7490 SEWER DEPT - GRINDER PUMPS
SEWER DEPT - GRINDER PUMPS
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 2,920.00
255-3 PANELS
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 255.44
REMOTE SENTRY FOR NON-IDU
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 298.50
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 305.71
Total :3,779.65
91465 10/12/2006 066368 CRYSTAL AND SIERRA SPRINGS 0906 2989771 5374044 INV#0906 2989771 5374044 EDMONDS PD
SIX 5 GALLON WATER BOTTLES
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 41.94
HOT/COLD COOLER RENTAL
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 10.00
ENERGY SURCHARGE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 1.95
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 0.89
Total :54.78
12Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91466 10/12/2006 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3184669 E5MD.Bid Invite Skateboard Park
E5MD.Bid Invite Skateboard Park
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 227.50
Total :227.50
91467 10/12/2006 047450 DEPT OF INFORMATION SERVICES 2006090142 CUSTOMER ID D200-0
Scan Services for September, 2006
001.000.390.528.800.420.00 296.12
BILL NO I133307 9/30/062006090142
Acrobat Professional 7.0 WIN AOO330-00315
001.000.410.521.310.350.00 155.93
Acrobat Professional 7.0 WIN AOO330-00316
001.000.310.518.880.490.00 155.93
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.310.350.00 12.47
Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.490.00 12.47
BILL NO I132935 9/30/062006090142
AutoCAD 2007 Network License Upgrade~330-00309
411.000.652.542.900.350.00 4,190.86
AutoCAD 2007 Network License Upgrade~330-00309
411.000.654.534.800.350.00 4,190.86
AutoCAD 2007 Network License Upgrade~330-00309
411.000.655.535.800.350.00 4,192.12
Freight
411.000.652.542.900.350.00 1.33
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.350.00 1.33
Freight
411.000.655.535.800.350.00 1.32
Total :13,210.74
91468 10/12/2006 029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS 575149 Employer Contribution for Roberts
Employer Contribution for Roberts
001.000.620.532.200.230.00 167.46
13Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :167.469146810/12/2006 029900 029900 DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS
91469 10/12/2006 047610 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RE41JA5729L004 E5GA.State Services August
E5GA.State Services August
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 289.31
Total :289.31
91470 10/12/2006 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 06-2675 MINUTE TAKING
10/3 Council Minutes
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 386.40
Total :386.40
91471 10/12/2006 065846 DOWD-TIMMONEN, PATRICIA TIMONEN1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND CONTEST WINNER
1ST PLACE WINNER: FICTION
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :100.00
91472 10/12/2006 068803 EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS 2849309 SEWER DEPT INVENTORY - S-MHCI-25.25-020
SEWER DEPT INVENTORY - S-MHCI-25.25-020
411.000.000.141.150.310.00 168.00
Sales Tax
411.000.000.141.150.310.00 14.28
Total :182.28
91473 10/12/2006 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 71539 SUPPLIES
PAINT, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 8.29
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.74
Total :9.03
91474 10/12/2006 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 71543 Lift Station #6 - Gas Filter
14Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91474 10/12/2006 (Continued)007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS
Lift Station #6 - Gas Filter
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.74
Unit #B17 - Cushions
511.200.657.594.480.640.00 18.00
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.33
Sales Tax
511.200.657.594.480.640.00 1.60
Total :23.67
91475 10/12/2006 007905 EDMONDS FAMILY MEDICINE CLINIC E162539-1 Pre-employment screening services
Pre-employment screening services
001.000.220.516.210.410.00 184.00
Pre-employment screening servicesE162539-2
Pre-employment screening services
001.000.220.516.210.410.00 6.00
Pre-employment servicesE165181-1
Pre-employment services
001.000.220.516.210.410.00 16.00
Pre-employment screeningE169622
Pre-employment screening
001.000.220.516.210.410.00 12.00
Fit for dutyE201850-1
Fit for duty
001.000.220.516.210.410.00 238.00
Total :456.00
91476 10/12/2006 008688 EDMONDS VETERINARY HOSPITAL 146185 INV#146185 CLIENT#308 EDMONDS PD - ROCKY
15Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91476 10/12/2006 (Continued)008688 EDMONDS VETERINARY HOSPITAL
EXAM TO RECHECK EAR
001.000.410.521.260.410.00 29.60
CANINE DEWORMER
001.000.410.521.260.410.00 35.25
EPI OTIC
001.000.410.521.260.410.00 22.75
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.260.410.00 5.16
Total :92.76
91477 10/12/2006 069878 EDMONDS-WESTGATE VET HOSPITAL 91004 INV#91004 CLIENT#5118 EDMONDS AC
CASTRATE DOG >60 LB #6576
001.000.410.521.700.490.01 108.00
Total :108.00
91478 10/12/2006 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0060738 WATER DEPT INVENTORY -
WATER DEPT INVENTORY -
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 1,368.38
W-MTRLIDDI-0.75-010
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 904.85
Sales Tax
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 202.32
WATER INVENTORY - W-VALVCHB-08-0100064654
WATER INVENTORY - W-VALVCHB-08-010
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 57.60
W-VALVCHB-24-010
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 103.36
W-VALVCHBL-00-010
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 80.24
W-VALVCHB-18-010
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 122.40
Sales Tax
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 32.00
16Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91478 10/12/2006 (Continued)009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC
WATER INVENTORY - W-VALVCHB-18-0100064867
WATER INVENTORY - W-VALVCHB-18-010
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 122.40
Sales Tax
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 10.77
Total :3,004.32
91479 10/12/2006 069940 FIRST ADVANTAGE BACKGROUND SVC 900JJM0609 INV#900JJM0609 EDMONDS PD
CREDIT CHECK - EXPERIAN
001.000.410.521.400.410.00 13.06
Total :13.06
91480 10/12/2006 071361 FLUID ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES 00007340 REBUILD KIT/PAPER FILTERS
REBUILD KIT/PAPER FILTERS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 847.60
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 13.91
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 75.81
Total :937.32
91481 10/12/2006 010600 FOG TITE INC 233071 WATER INVENTORY - M-METERTUR-01.5-020
WATER INVENTORY - M-METERTUR-01.5-020
411.000.000.141.170.310.00 1,534.86
W-MTRLID-0.75-010
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 67.50
Sales Tax
411.000.000.141.170.310.00 135.07
Sales Tax
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 5.94
WATER INVENTORY - W-MTRLID-0.75-010233724
WATER INVENTORY - W-MTRLID-0.75-010
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 337.50
Sales Tax
411.000.000.141.140.310.00 29.70
17Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :2,110.579148110/12/2006 010600 010600 FOG TITE INC
91482 10/12/2006 012355 GRCC/WW M/S WW 1458 TRAINING/KOHO
TRAINING/KOHO
411.000.656.538.800.490.71 115.00
Total :115.00
91483 10/12/2006 062383 HEPBURN INDUSTRIES IN068878 BURIAL SUPPLIES
VASES, RINGS
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 610.80
Freight
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 17.67
Total :628.47
91484 10/12/2006 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1074160 6035322501434934
stations' supplies
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 39.10
60353225014349347080093
Stations supplies
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 11.40
Total :50.50
91485 10/12/2006 067468 HORAN, JULIANNA HORAN1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND CONTEST WINNER
2ND PLACE: NONFICTION
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 75.00
Total :75.00
91486 10/12/2006 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 70708010 CANON IMAGE RUNNER 9070 LEASE
Canon Image Runner 9070 Lease~250-00118
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 926.19
Total :926.19
91487 10/12/2006 066256 IMSA ID 22675 DUES - M JOHNSON
IMSA DUES FOR M JOHNSON
111.000.653.542.900.490.00 60.00
Total :60.00
18Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91488 10/12/2006 014900 INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 2513 MEMBERSHIP
IIMC Membership fee City Clerk & Deputy
001.000.250.514.300.490.00 166.00
Total :166.00
91489 10/12/2006 065947 INTL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULTURE TIMBROOK2007 MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL
DAVID TIMBROOK:~
001.000.640.576.800.490.00 155.00
Total :155.00
91490 10/12/2006 068737 JOHNSON ROBERTS & ASSOC 105337 INV#105337 EDMONDS PD
PRE-OFFER PHQ - 10/3/06
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 15.00
Freight
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 1.26
Total :16.26
91491 10/12/2006 063923 KELLY-MOORE PAINT CO INC 403-29437 WATER DEPT SUPPLIES FOR 5 CORNERS
WATER DEPT SUPPLIES FOR 5 CORNERS
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 43.06
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 3.83
Total :46.89
91492 10/12/2006 071352 KEVIN & SANDIE GRUNEWALD AND, DAVID BROGGEL4-34400 RE: 7-0608-087 UTILITY REFUND
UB Refund P/A 20829 80th Ave W, Edm
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 152.28
Total :152.28
91493 10/12/2006 017135 LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC 0019816 810 WALNUT ST - ENVIRONMENTAL
810 WALNUT ST - ENVIRONMENTAL
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 1,298.50
Total :1,298.50
91494 10/12/2006 070289 LANG, KERRI LANG1007 GYM MONITOR
ANDERSON CENTER GYM MONITOR FOR DANCE
001.000.640.574.100.410.00 48.00
19Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :48.009149410/12/2006 070289 070289 LANG, KERRI
91495 10/12/2006 068711 LAWN EQUIPMENT SUPPLY 10006-108 MOWER SUPPLIES
WALKER SEAT & DECK COVER KNOB
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 112.50
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 17.38
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 11.56
MOWER SUPPLIES10006-109
SPRING, BOLTS, BUSHINGS, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 47.30
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.21
MOWER SUPPLIES10006-110
MOWER SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 55.92
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.98
SUPPLIES9006-289
EZ REACHERS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 69.00
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.98
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 6.50
Total :333.33
91496 10/12/2006 067725 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER 114333 UNIT 476 - FLAT REPAIR
UNIT 476 - FLAT REPAIR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 23.75
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.11
20Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91496 10/12/2006 (Continued)067725 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER
UNIT 124 - 2 TIRES114595
UNIT 124 - 2 TIRES
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 125.28
TIRE TAX
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.00
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.15
Total :164.29
91497 10/12/2006 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 091546 PW ADMIN SUPPLIES - PENCIL CLIPS
PW ADMIN SUPPLIES - PENCIL CLIPS
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 30.88
Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 2.75
Total :33.63
91498 10/12/2006 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 091520 INV#091520 EDMONDS PD
3,000 BLOCK WATCH FLIERS
001.000.410.521.300.310.00 148.00
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.300.310.00 13.17
Total :161.17
91499 10/12/2006 018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC 502267 Unit #115 - Lamp
Unit #115 - Lamp
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 24.38
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.17
Unit #129 - MC Lamp502309
Unit #129 - MC Lamp
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.72
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.87
21Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91499 10/12/2006 (Continued)018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC
Unit #33 - Lube Filter502320
Unit #33 - Lube Filter
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.52
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.85
Unit #114 - Brake Fluid502356
Unit #114 - Brake Fluid
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 29.99
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.67
Lube Filter - Fleet Shop502446
Lube Filter - Fleet Shop
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.52
Oil Filter - Fleet Shop
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 28.18
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.36
Unit #124 - Lube Filter502447
Unit #124 - Lube Filter
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.52
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.85
Fire Station #20 - Oil Filter for~502483
Fire Station #20 - Oil Filter for~
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 16.98
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.51
Unit #24 - Air Filter502527
Unit #24 - Air Filter
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 74.77
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.65
22Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91499 10/12/2006 (Continued)018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC
Unit #24 - Air Filter502581
Unit #24 - Air Filter
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 50.87
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.53
Unit #137 - Oil Filter502585
Unit #137 - Oil Filter
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.61
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.41
Unit #12 - Whl Seal502960
Unit #12 - Whl Seal
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.24
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.00
Unit #25 - PTEX CLR503356
Unit #25 - PTEX CLR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.59
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.32
Lift Station #13 - Nipple503547
Lift Station #13 - Nipple
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 8.97
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.80
Fire Station #16 - Oil Filter~503617
Fire Station #16 - Oil Filter~
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.66
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.41
23Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91499 10/12/2006 (Continued)018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC
Fire Station #16 - Oil Filter~503625
Fire Station #16 - Oil Filter~
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.66
Fire Station #16 - Delo 400
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 32.07
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.27
Lift Station #13 - Thermo SL503634
Lift Station #13 - Thermo SL
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 22.49
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.00
Unit #16 - Hal Bulb503686
Unit #16 - Hal Bulb
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 8.05
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.72
Unit #238 - Headlamp503773
Unit #238 - Headlamp
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.94
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.06
Unit #B-17 - NAPA HD30504069
Unit #B-17 - NAPA HD30
511.200.657.594.480.640.00 5.67
Unit #B-17 - NAPA 10W3
511.200.657.594.480.640.00 5.67
Sales Tax
511.200.657.594.480.640.00 1.01
Unit #100 - Napa Acet504123
Unit #100 - Napa Acet
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 20.08
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.79
24Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91499 10/12/2006 (Continued)018950 LYNNWOOD AUTO PARTS INC
Unit #130 - Fitting504131
Unit #130 - Fitting
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.18
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.11
Total :444.69
91500 10/12/2006 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 540157 SUPPLIES
JOINT ASSEMBLY, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 144.76
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 12.88
Total :157.64
91501 10/12/2006 071351 MAJACK, GORDON AND CLAUDIA 4-39600 RE: 7-0608-060 UTILITY REFUND
UB Refund PA 21712 84th Ave W, Edmonds
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 56.41
Total :56.41
91502 10/12/2006 019582 MANOR HARDWARE 10060011 FAC MAINT TRUCK SUPPLIES - 30' LIFELINE
FAC MAINT TRUCK SUPPLIES - 30' LIFELINE
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 139.95
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 12.46
Total :152.41
91503 10/12/2006 019650 MASTER POOLS OF WASHINGTON INC 41808 YOST POOL SUPPLIES
SILICA SAND
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 150.72
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 13.41
Total :164.13
91504 10/12/2006 064047 MCCONNELL & ASSOCIATES 834 Hearing Ex Retainer Sept. 2006
Hearing Ex Retainer Sept. 2006
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 3,321.09
25Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :3,321.099150410/12/2006 064047 064047 MCCONNELL & ASSOCIATES
91505 10/12/2006 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 51347013 123106800
ANGLE EDGE TRIM
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 74.80
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 12.20
12310680051462916
ADHESIVE/SEALANT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 56.16
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 8.55
Total :151.71
91506 10/12/2006 063773 MICROFLEX 00016571 Q 2-06 Tax Audit Program
Q 2-06 Tax Audit Program
001.000.310.514.230.410.00 98.21
Total :98.21
91507 10/12/2006 070430 MICROTEK SOLUTIONS 54482 ADMIN SUPPLIES
printer toner
001.000.510.522.100.310.00 297.00
Freight
001.000.510.522.100.310.00 30.00
Total :327.00
91508 10/12/2006 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 34415 SEWER DEPT --NEW HEAD FOR WEED EATER
SEWER DEPT --NEW HEAD FOR WEED EATER
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 31.95
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 2.84
Total :34.79
91509 10/12/2006 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0183116-IN MS RED LED FLASH/CONST LIGHT
26Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91509 10/12/2006 (Continued)064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC
MS RED LED FLASH/CONST LIGHT
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 16.95
MI LED HEADS UP LITE W/CL & ES
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 60.60
Freight
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 9.79
Sales Tax
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 7.70
Total :95.04
91510 10/12/2006 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0183363-IN WATER DEPT - BIB PANT
WATER DEPT - BIB PANT
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 17.40
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 9.82
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 2.41
Total :29.63
91511 10/12/2006 067098 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 323912314-058 C/A 323912314
IT Cell Phone Service 8/25-9/24/06
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 175.26
Total :175.26
91512 10/12/2006 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 0328710 HONEY BUCKET CREDIT
CREDIT FOR HONEY BUCKET @ MADRONA
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 -83.39
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0331752
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 166.81
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0332692
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 119.70
Total :203.12
27Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91513 10/12/2006 070865 NORTHWIND MARINE INC 1862 UNIT B17 - FINAL PAYMENT
UNIT B17 - FINAL PAYMENT
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 53,482.20
Sales Tax
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 4,706.43
Total :58,188.63
91514 10/12/2006 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 428 His Prv Minutes 9-14-06
His Prv Minutes 9-14-06
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 180.00
PB Minutetaker 9-27-06000 00 431
PB Minutetaker 9-27-06
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 555.00
Total :735.00
91515 10/12/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 265580 OFFICE SUPPLIES
STAPLER
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 12.96
King County Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.06
OFFICE SUPPLIES297543
PLANNER REFILL
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 12.71
King County Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.03
OFFICE SUPPLIES304810
FAX TONER
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 24.04
King County Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 2.03
OFFICE SUPPLIES323468
ASSORTED COPY PAPER
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 195.81
King County Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 17.23
28Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91515 10/12/2006 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC
OFFICE SUPPLIES325273
SALMON PAPER
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 16.84
King County Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.39
Total :285.10
91516 10/12/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 685787 Green Dots for IT
Green Dots for IT
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 3.35
Freight
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 1.00
King County Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 0.29
Total :4.64
91517 10/12/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 652958 Office Supplies
Office Supplies
001.000.110.511.100.310.00 68.65
Total :68.65
91518 10/12/2006 063511 OFFICE MAX CONTRACT INC 615016 INV#615016 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD
RED CLASSIFICATION FOLDERS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 33.39
King County Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 2.93
Total :36.32
91519 10/12/2006 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 06-013 METER DROP
3/4" METER DROP AT 220TH ST SW & 84TH
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 200.00
Total :200.00
91520 10/12/2006 066817 PANASONIC DIGITAL DOCUMENT COM 9191849 COPIER CONTRACT
29Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91520 10/12/2006 (Continued)066817 PANASONIC DIGITAL DOCUMENT COM
COPIER CONTRACT
411.000.656.538.800.450.41 145.22
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.41 12.60
Total :157.82
91521 10/12/2006 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC.462861 MUSEUM - BASE PAINT
MUSEUM - BASE PAINT
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 13.31
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.18
Total :14.49
91522 10/12/2006 067543 POLY BAG LLC 15779 City of Edmonds Plastic Bags-Bldg
City of Edmonds Plastic Bags-Bldg
001.000.620.524.100.490.00 2,956.93
Total :2,956.93
91523 10/12/2006 029012 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 146380 INV#146380 ACCT#2772 EDMONDS PD
RETURN TASER FOR REPAIR
001.000.410.521.100.420.00 8.08
Total :8.08
91524 10/12/2006 069378 PRATTO SALES INC 11389 SHOP SUPPLIES - 8 1/2" PACKING KIT, ~
SHOP SUPPLIES - 8 1/2" PACKING KIT, ~
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 188.92
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 15.67
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 17.39
Total :221.98
91525 10/12/2006 064088 PROTECTION ONE 2010551 MCC
24 hour alarm monitoring MCC~
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 96.00
30Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91525 10/12/2006 (Continued)064088 PROTECTION ONE
24 hour alarm monitoring Senior Center2445047
24 hour alarm monitoring Senior Center
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 90.00
Total :186.00
91526 10/12/2006 030410 PUGET SOUND BUSINESS JOURNAL PS038914878 52 issues
52 issues
001.000.210.513.100.490.00 67.95
Total :67.95
91527 10/12/2006 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 5322323139 Fire Station # 16
Fire Station # 16
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 155.19
Total :155.19
91528 10/12/2006 065579 QUIKSIGN 54719 Sign Install V-06-81 Trunkhill
Sign Install V-06-81 Trunkhill
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 148.40
Total :148.40
91529 10/12/2006 066948 RAY ALLEN MFG CO INC 214444 INV#214444 EDMONDS PD
CR 4 PREMIER SYSTEM/NO PAGER
001.000.410.521.260.350.00 712.00
Freight
001.000.410.521.260.350.00 30.00
Total :742.00
91530 10/12/2006 071353 RAY, BRIAN 8-19750 RE: 060374 UTILITY REFUND
UB Refund P/A 23024 99th Ave W
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 4.52
Total :4.52
91531 10/12/2006 062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL 3003520-I STORM DEPT - STREET SWEEPING DUMP
31Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91531 10/12/2006 (Continued)062657 REGIONAL DISPOSAL
STORM DEPT - STREET SWEEPING DUMP
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 358.44
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 12.90
Total :371.34
91532 10/12/2006 068484 RINKER MATERIALS 9410945469 ASPHALT
SEAVIEW PARK IMPROVEMENTS~
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 539.00
Sales Tax
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 47.45
Total :586.45
91533 10/12/2006 068484 RINKER MATERIALS 9411008877 STORM DEPT - DUMPED ASPHALT
STORM DEPT - DUMPED ASPHALT
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 46.03
STREET DEPT - ASPHALT9411023610
STREET DEPT - ASPHALT
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 196.00
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 17.24
SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT9411037526
SEWER DEPT - ASPHALT
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 107.06
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 9.42
STORM DEPT - DUMPED ASPHALT9411061728
STORM DEPT - DUMPED ASPHALT
411.000.652.542.320.490.00 52.68
Total :428.43
91534 10/12/2006 069103 ROGERS, MAUREEN MROGERS1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND CONTEST WINNER
2ND PLACE PRIZE WINNER: FICTINO
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 75.00
32Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :75.009153410/12/2006 069103 069103 ROGERS, MAUREEN
91535 10/12/2006 065784 RUDD COMPANY INC INV-036805 STREET DEPT - SEAT CAP, ADAPTER
STREET DEPT - SEAT CAP, ADAPTER
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 96.00
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 8.45
Total :104.45
91536 10/12/2006 069879 SALTER JOYCE ZIKER PLLC 10561 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEES - ~ 810
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FEES - ~ 810
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 380.00
Total :380.00
91537 10/12/2006 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 207982 RETURNED OIL SEALS FOR CR
RETURNED OIL SEALS FOR CR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -19.76
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -1.76
UNIT 114 - RADIATOR827366
UNIT 114 - RADIATOR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 401.98
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 35.78
UNIT 65 - S ARM829693
UNIT 65 - S ARM
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 58.31
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 5.19
UNIT 238 - SPARK PLUGS830666
UNIT 238 - SPARK PLUGS
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 23.60
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.10
Total :505.44
33Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91538 10/12/2006 071248 SLEEP INN - SEATAC 15451 INV#15451 ACCT#276 - ROSS SUTTON 9/24-28
ROOM DURING ACADEMY - 9/24-28
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 249.95
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 31.00
Total :280.95
91539 10/12/2006 068959 SMITH, DAMIAN J.10/4/06 Sick leave buyback reimbursement -
Sick leave buyback reimbursement -
001.000.410.521.220.110.00 117.98
Total :117.98
91540 10/12/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2110016462 IRRIGATION CONTROL
IRRIGATION CONTROL
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.23
UTILITY BILLING3890014081
750 15TH ST SW
130.000.640.536.500.470.00 77.44
UTILITY BILLING5040011628
750 15TH ST SW
130.000.640.536.500.470.00 291.78
IRRIGATION SYSTEM5070014260
IRRIGATION SYSTEM
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.23
Total :429.68
91541 10/12/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 3050047152 SIGNAL LIGHT
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 272.05
TRAFFIC SIGNAL4510017488
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.23
STREET LIGHTING6000013000
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 8,407.81
34Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
35
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91541 10/12/2006 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
STREET LIGHTING6100013009
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 9,003.22
STREET LIGHTING6100013306
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 170.07
STREET LIGHTING6200013008
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 1,814.76
Total :19,698.14
91542 10/12/2006 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 857004326 620-001-500-3
VARIOUS LOCATIONS
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 7.32
Total :7.32
91543 10/12/2006 071196 SNOHOMISH COUNTY AIRPORT 2006-0906 CPR TRAINING/SLENKER/ZUVELA
CPR TRAINING/SLENKER/ZUVELA
411.000.656.538.800.490.71 60.00
Total :60.00
91544 10/12/2006 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 035870914 DISPOSAL SERVICES
PARK MAINTENANCE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 576.16
Total :576.16
91545 10/12/2006 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03584 RECYCLING
RECYCLING
411.000.656.538.800.475.66 23.38
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.475.66 1.40
Total :24.78
91546 10/12/2006 071356 SPRING, JAMES L JSPRING1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND CONTEST WINNER
1ST PLACE PRIZE WINNER: NONFICTION
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
35Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
36
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :100.009154610/12/2006 071356 071356 SPRING, JAMES L
91547 10/12/2006 069997 SRI TECHNOLOGIES INC 60784 Glasby thru 09/30-Street/OVWSD
Glasby thru 09/30-Street/OVWSD
112.506.630.595.330.650.00 1,338.49
Glasby thru 09/30-Water
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 27.78
Glasby thru 09/30-Storm
412.200.630.594.320.650.00 155.24
Glasby thru 09/30-Sewer
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 8.49
Total :1,530.00
91548 10/12/2006 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 739615 WATER DEPT SUPPLIES - 100' FISHTAPE
WATER DEPT SUPPLIES - 100' FISHTAPE
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 119.86
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 10.67
FAC MAINT - LOCKSWITCH KEYS, LENS,746279
FAC MAINT - LOCKSWITCH KEYS, LENS,
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 39.82
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.54
Total :173.89
91549 10/12/2006 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 10444980 DRILL SET
DRILL SET
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 85.40
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.04
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.96
Total :97.40
91550 10/12/2006 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 10443118 SHOP SUPPLIES - NUTS, AND BOLTS, ETC
36Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
37
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91550 10/12/2006 (Continued)040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC
SHOP SUPPLIES - NUTS, AND BOLTS, ETC
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 347.76
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 30.95
UNIT T19 - POL- FLAT WASHERS, NUTS,18775423
UNIT T19 - POL- FLAT WASHERS, NUTS,
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 11.83
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.05
RETURNED LARGE BLUE DRAWER18779451
RETURNED LARGE BLUE DRAWER
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -33.49
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -2.98
Total :355.12
91551 10/12/2006 040916 TC SPAN AMERICA 36552 FAC MAINT - UNIFORM T SHIRTS
FAC MAINT - UNIFORM T SHIRTS
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 310.00
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 27.59
Total :337.59
91552 10/12/2006 040916 TC SPAN AMERICA 36712 OPS UNIFORMS
Uniform shorts
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 180.00
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 16.02
Total :196.02
91553 10/12/2006 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1440390 E5MD.Bid Invite Skateboard Park
E5MD.Bid Invite Skateboard Park
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 96.60
Total :96.60
37Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
38
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91554 10/12/2006 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 9/30/06 WWTP - La Raza, #06-25
WWTP - La Raza, #06-25
411.000.656.538.800.440.00 7.20
Volunteer FF - La Raza, #06-24
001.000.220.516.100.440.00 3.60
Parks Dept., BPW, #06-26
001.000.220.516.100.440.00 41.72
Total :52.52
91555 10/12/2006 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1433982 NEWSPAPER AD
Agenda Display Ads
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 1,022.69
NEWSPAPER AD1442519
Public Hearing-MPOR Zone
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 33.12
NEWSPAPER AD1442521
Public Hearing-Mantooth
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 37.26
Total :1,093.07
91556 10/12/2006 068599 THOMPSON, LINDA LTHOMPSON1007 WRITE ON THE SOUND CONTEST WINNER
FIRST PLACE WINNER: POETRY
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :100.00
91557 10/12/2006 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR 483685 MUSEUM
monthly elevator maint-museum
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 150.44
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 13.38
CITY HALL ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE~483686
CITY HALL ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE~
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 735.32
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 65.45
38Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
39
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91557 10/12/2006 (Continued)038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR
MONITORING-PS483687
monitoring-PS
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 33.25
Total :997.84
91558 10/12/2006 068322 TRANE 61224168 HVAC preventative maint-PS~ FOR
HVAC preventative maint-PS~ FOR
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 247.50
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 22.03
Total :269.53
91559 10/12/2006 068249 TRAUTMANN MAHER & ASSOCIATES 9/30/06 INV FOR ACCT #161 THRU 9/30/06
MEBT II services - thru 9/06
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 132.78
Total :132.78
91560 10/12/2006 063939 TYLER TECHNOLOGIES INC INV0097696 CLIENT CODE EDMONDS
Expenses WWTP Reconcilliation 9/13/06
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 53.70
Support WWTP Reconcilliation 9/13/06INV0098238
Support WWTP Reconcilliation 9/13/06
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 675.00
Total :728.70
91561 10/12/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST E1BA.to 9/16/06 Job Shack thru 09/16/06
Job Shack thru 09/16/06
112.506.630.595.330.650.00 4.99
Total :4.99
91562 10/12/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-712-0647 IRRIGATION SYSTEM
IRRIGATION SYSTEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 42.98
EDMONDS MEMORIAL CEMETERY425-771-4741
EDMONDS MEMORIAL CEMETERY
130.000.640.536.200.420.00 48.82
39Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
40
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :91.809156210/12/2006 011900 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
91563 10/12/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-640-8169 PT EDWARDS SEWER PUMP STATION MONITOR
Phone line for Sewer Lift Station at Pt
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 33.89
CITY HALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEM425-776-6829
CITY HALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 115.02
Total :148.91
91564 10/12/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425 NW1-0060 03 0210 1079569413 10
BALLINGER PUMP STATION
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 41.02
23303 CIRCUIT425 NW1-0155
23303 CIRCUIT
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 215.74
03 0210 1014522641 07425-771-5553
AUTO DIALER
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 62.29
Total :319.05
91565 10/12/2006 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-771-0152 FS #16-FAX LINE
FS #16-FAX LINE
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 50.75
Total :50.75
91566 10/12/2006 068265 VERIZON ONLINE 44570589 ACCT #8372119
City of Edmonds Internet Access
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 667.00
Total :667.00
91567 10/12/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 2077481628 CENTRALIZED IRRIGATION
CENTRALIZED IRRIGATION
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 3.00
Total :3.00
91568 10/12/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 269992985-1 425-308-9867
40Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
41
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91568 10/12/2006 (Continued)067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
cell phone-water watch
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 36.03
Total :36.03
91569 10/12/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 2077701120 OPS COMMUNICATIONS
Air card
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 6.24
Total :6.24
91570 10/12/2006 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 2076892031 INV#2076892031 ACCT#470497482-00001
CELL PHONES 9/24-10/23/06
104.000.410.521.210.420.00 119.99
Total :119.99
91571 10/12/2006 006284 W S DARLEY AND CO 0000726137 STREET DEPT - TURTLE TILES
STREET DEPT - TURTLE TILES
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 205.62
Freight
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 49.35
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 18.59
Total :273.56
91572 10/12/2006 046200 WA ST DEPT OF REVENUE October 2006 2006 UNCLAIMED PROPERTY
2006 Unclaimed Property
001.000.000.111.100.000.00 884.06
2006 Unclaimed Property
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 74.94
2006 Unclaimed Property
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 76.37
2006 Unclaimed Property
001.000.000.257.310.000.00 117.50
Total :1,152.87
91573 10/12/2006 046200 WA ST DEPT OF REVENUE Q3-06 UBI# 600 200 230
41Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
42
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
91573 10/12/2006 (Continued)046200 WA ST DEPT OF REVENUE
Q3-06 Leasehold Tax
001.000.000.237.220.000.00 3,328.36
Total :3,328.36
91574 10/12/2006 071359 WASSER CORPORATION 10700 564
PAINT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 184.60
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 16.24
Total :200.84
91575 10/12/2006 061395 WASTE MANAGEMENT NW 0707562-2677-8 202-0001256-2677-0
ASH DISPOSAL
411.000.656.538.800.474.65 2,712.88
Total :2,712.88
91576 10/12/2006 070123 WOODARD, MARCIA WOODARD1006 PRE-CONFERENCE WORKSHOP
TEACHING WRITE ON THE SOUND
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 329.00
Total :329.00
91577 10/12/2006 071363 WOODEN BOATS CENTER7467 LONGBOAT SEAMANSHIP CLASS
TRADITIONAL LONGBOAT SEAMANSHIP #7467
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 126.00
Total :126.00
91578 10/12/2006 064213 WSSUA TREASURER 169 UMPIRING
UMPIRING FOR LEAGUE GAMES
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 1,794.00
Total :1,794.00
Bank total :168,084.49153 Vouchers for bank code :front
168,084.49Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report153
42Page:
10/12/2006
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
43
2:37:30PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
43Page:
AM-633 2.D.
Claim for Damages
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Linda Hynd, City Clerk's Office
Submitted For:Sandy Chase Time:Consent
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action
Review
Committee:
Action:
Agenda Memo
Subject
Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages from William J. and Linda A. Chase ($295.00).
Previous Council Action
Not applicable.
Narrative
A Claim for Damages has been received from the following:
William J. and Linda A. Chase
7817 193rd Place S.W.
Edmonds, WA 98026
Amount: $295.00
Recommendation
Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages.
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Chase Claim for Damages
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 11:54 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 06:02 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2006 08:20 AM APRV
Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 10/11/2006 02:46 PM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2006
AM-631 2.E.
Change Order #3 with Harbor Pacific Contractors
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Steve Koho, Wastewater Treatment Plant Time:Consent
Department:Wastewater Treatment Plant Type:Action
Review
Committee:
Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Agenda Memo
Subject
Authorization for the Mayor to sign Change Order #3 with Harbor Pacific Contractors in the amount of $45,081 for
the Screenings Improvement Project at the Treatment Plant.
Previous Council Action
On February 28, 2006, Council authorized award of the Screenings Improvement Project to Harbor Pacific
Contractors in the amount of $1,073,950, not including Washington State Sales Tax.
Narrative
This capital project involves replacing the existing equipment that collects, transports, and dewaters screenings. The
existing equipment has reached the end of its useful life, is maintenance intensive, and allows significant quantities
of screenings to pass through and interfere with proper operation of plant equipment. The project implements the
recommendations from a technical study completed by a consultant, in which various improvement options were
considered.
In addition to the core work of screenings system replacement, three additive bid items were requested in the City's
bid documents for other work in the construction areas. One of these items was the rehabilitation of failed painting
on the interior walls in the screenings building. The painting work consists of the removal of paint flaking off
concrete walls, preparation of concrete surfaces for reapplication, application of concrete sealer to portions of the
concrete walls, and the installation of sound board to other portions of the walls.
Upon closer inspection, it is apparent that additional painting than originally identified needs to be performed. Paint
chips and flakes are falling off pipes and equipment not included in the original scope of work. Because this
proposed change order is an extension of work already being done, the scope of the original agreement is not
changed to a point where new bids are required. There will also be cost savings by having the work done at this
time by a contractor already on-site, rather than paying for another contractor to mobilize at a later time.
This proposed change order (CO) is the third of the project to date. The first CO was in the amount of $7,742 to
cover needed field modifications that were unknown at the time of contract award. The second CO was a deduction
in the contract amount of $38,794, as a credit for spare parts that are not needed. The proposed change order #3
changes the contract amount to $1,087,979, a $14,029 increase of the original contract amount.
Recommendation
Authorization for Mayor to sign Change Order #3 in the amount of $45,081 for Harbor Pacific Contractors.
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Change Order #3
Form Routing/Status
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/09/2006 09:28 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/09/2006 09:57 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/09/2006 05:13 PM APRV
Form Started By: Steve Koho Started On: 10/06/2006 11:09 AM
Final Approval Date: 10/09/2006
CHANGE ORDER NO. 3
October 5, 2006
PROJECT NAME: Screenings System Improvement CIP #: C161
Owner: Contractor:
City of Edmonds Harbor Pacific Contractors
121 Fifth Avenue North 19628 144th Ave NE, Suite A
Edmonds, WA 98020 Woodinville, WA 98072
Under contract for the Screenings System Improvement Project, your contract is hereby revised as follows:
Original Contract Amount: (Not including WSST) $ 1,073,950
Current Contract Amount (adjusted by previous change orders): $ 1,042,898
Net Change This Change Order: (Not including WSST) $ 45,081
Revised Contract Amount: (Not including WSST) $ 1,087,979
CHANGE ORDER DESCRIPTION:
Provide all labor, material and equipment to:
1. Paint all existing Non-potable Water (NPW) piping and piping appurtenances as appropriate in
the Raw Sewage Pump Room of Building 100. This consists of approximately 160 feet of ½ to 1-
inch diameter piping, 115 feet of 1-1/2-inch diameter piping, 70 feet of 2-inch diameter piping,
and 20 feet of 3-inch diameter piping. Painting shall be done in conformance with Section 09900
(Paint System E-1) and Paragraph 13200-3.06. This work will be performed for a lump sum
amount of $9,647 (not including Washington state sales tax).
2. Paint all existing Non-potable Water (NPW) piping and piping appurtenances as appropriate in
the Influent Screens Room of Building 100. This consists of approximately 31 feet of ¾-inch
diameter piping, 35 feet of 1-inch diameter piping, 43 feet of 1-1/2-inch diameter piping, and
200 feet of 2-inch diameter piping. Painting shall be done in conformance with Section 09900
(Paint system EP-1) and Paragraph 13200-3.06. This work will be performed for a lump sum
amount of $8,423 (not including Washington state sales tax).
3.1 Clean and paint all four existing raw sewage influent pumps P 101, P 102, P103, and P 104
shown on Drawing 100-M-011 (Raw Sewage Pump Room of Building 100), their bases, their
motors, and their motor bases. Painting shall be done in conformance with Section 09900 (Paint
System E-1) and Paragraph 13200-3.06. This work will be charged at a Time and Material
basis at a rate of $60.69/hour, not to exceed $6,615 (not including Washington state sales tax).
The contractor shall track the time and materials costs as this work progresses. The City of
Edmonds will be notified in the event that costs may exceed the above amount and the work is
not yet complete. At such time, the contractor will discontinue the added work and seek
direction from the City on how to proceed.
3.2 Clean and paint the suction piping for all four influent pumps up to the wall penetration, and
all discharge piping, including pipe appurtenances (e.g. check valves, isolation valves) to the
flange where the bright white paints meets the older, grayer paint (approximately 20 feet of 20-
inch diameter piping). Painting shall be done in conformance with Section 09900 (Paint System
E-1) and Paragraph 13200-3.06. This work will be performed for a lump sum amount of
$20,396 (not including Washington state sales tax).
CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIME:
The performance of the work on this change order does not require a change in contract time.
In accordance with WSDOT Standard Specifications 1-04.5, by his/her signature below, the contractor accepts all
requirements of this change order and agrees that this change order constitutes full payment and final settlement of all claims
for contract time and for all costs of any kind, including costs of delays, related to any work either covered or affected by the
change.
Accepted by Contractor:
Harbor Pacific Contractors Date Printed Name, Title
Approval Recommended Approved
Stephen Koho, Plant Manager Date Gary Haakenson, Mayor Date
City of Edmonds City of Edmonds
AM-634 2.F.
Make a Difference Day
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Linda Carl, Mayor's Office
Submitted For:Gary Haakenson Time:Consent
Department:Mayor's Office Type:Information
Review
Committee:
Action:
Agenda Memo
Subject
Proclamation in honor of Make a Difference Day, Saturday, October 28, 2006.
Previous Council Action
None.
Narrative
All Americans are asked to spend the fourth Saturday of October “making a difference” in their communities.
Americans of all ages and walks of life take action to help others that day. As a result, communities improve the
lives of millions of Americans, and thousands of charities receive donations to continue their work. It’s the nation’s
largest day of volunteering, sponsored by USA WEEKEND magazine in partnership with The Points of Light
Foundation.
Recommendation
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Proclamation
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/11/2006 04:25 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 07:11 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 08:01 AM APRV
Form Started By: Linda Carl Started On: 10/11/2006 03:58 PM
Final Approval Date: 10/12/2006
AM-640 2.G.
Surplus Vehicles
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Linda Klein, Public Works
Submitted For:Noel Miller Time:Consent
Department:Public Works Type:Action
Review
Committee:
Action:
Agenda Memo
Subject
Authorization to contract with James Murphy Auctioneers to surplus seized and forfeiture city vehicles.
Previous Council Action
Narrative
The following vehicles have become surplus as a result of seized and forfeiture property obtained by the City of
Edmonds.
1992 Ford Explorer VIN 1FXBT1419WS802166
1998 ZODIAC 13’ Pleasure Boat VIN XDC8385JL798
Calkins Trailer VIN 1CXBT1419WS802166
Mercury Outboard Engine SER #ODO47682
For the past 11 years, the city has utilized the services of James Murphy Auctioneers to sell the City’s vehicles which
has proven to be a cost effective method. Proceeds of the sale will be deposited in the Police/Fire rescue boat
operation budget and the General Fund.
Recommendation
Authorize Public Works to contract with James Murphy Auctioneers to surplus seized and forfeiture City vehicles.
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 10:18 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 06:02 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2006 08:21 AM APRV
Form Started By: Linda Klein Started On: 10/12/2006 10:08 AM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2006
AM-641 3.
Hearing Examiner Annual Report
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Sandy Chase, City Clerk's
Office Time:10 Minutes
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Information
Review
Committee:
Action:
Agenda Memo
Subject
Annual Report of the Hearing Examiner
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Ronald McConnell, Hearing Examiner, will present his annual report to the City Council.
Recommendation
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 01:35 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 06:02 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2006 08:21 AM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 10/12/2006 01:35 PM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2006
AM-643 4.
Transmittal of 2007-08 Budget
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Dan Clements, Administrative Services Time:15 Minutes
Department:Administrative Services Type:Information
Review
Committee:
Action:
Agenda Memo
Subject
Transmittal of 2007-08 Budget: Mayor's Budget Address
Previous Council Action
None
Narrative
Mayor Haakenson will present his budget message and formally transmit the 2007-08 Budget to the City Council for
their consideration. There are not attachments, as the budget will be available after the Mayor's budget address.
There are a number of public hearings and workshops that are part of the budget adoption process. Key dates this
year are:
1.) October 24: Council Budget Work Session
2.) November 6: Public Hearings on Budget & Revenues
3.) November 21: Second Budget Hearing and Possible Budget Adoption
Recommendation
Receive Mayor's recommended budget.
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 03:10 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 06:02 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2006 08:21 AM APRV
Form Started By: Dan Clements Started On: 10/12/2006 03:01 PM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2006
AM-638 5.
Mantooth Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Steve Bullock, Planning Time:45 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review
Committee:
Action:Recommend Review by Full Council
Agenda Memo
Subject
Public hearing on the Planning Board's recommendation of denial on a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone
for Jennifer Mantooth, located a approximately 97th Avenue West and 231st Place Southwest. (File No. CDC-05-3
and R-06-67)
Previous Council Action
None
Narrative
On June 14, 2006, the Planning Board held a public hearing to consider both a Comprehensive Plan Map
Amendment and a related rezone. The comprehensive plan map amendment requests that a group of properties
just south of Edmonds Way, east of 97th Ave. W. and north of 231st Place SW have their designations changed
from the current “Single Family – Urban 1” to “Multi-Family – Medium Density.” If the comprehensive plan
amendment is approved, the applicant also requests that the property be rezoned from its current single family
classification, RS-8, to multi-family, RM-2.4. Without approval of the plan map amendment, the requested rezone
cannot be approved because it would not be consistent with the comprehensive plan.
After listening to the presentation of the applicant and the testimony of interested parties, and deliberating on the
issues, the Planning Board moved to recommend that the City Council deny the proposed comprehensive plan
amendment as they did not believe the applicant had demonstrated the request complied with the criteria for
approval. Following that action, the Planning Board also moved to recommend that the City Council deny the
proposed rezone request.
Recommendation
Deny the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
Deny the proposed Rezone Requests.
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1 - PB minutes
Link: Exhibit 2 - PB Exhibits
Link: Exhibit 3 - Nowak letter
Link: Exhibit 4 - Smyth letter
Link: Exhibit 5 - Deaton letter
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 Development Services Duane Bowman 10/12/2006 11:48 AM APRV
2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 11:54 AM APRV
3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 06:02 PM APRV
4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2006 08:21 AM APRV
Form Started By: Steve Bullock Started On: 10/12/2006 08:27 AM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2006
CITY OF EDMONDS
VERBATIM TRANSCRIPTS OF PLANNING BOARD HEARING
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006
Chair Freeman: We go to Item Number 6a, which is a public hearing on the application by Jennifer Mantooth to change the
Comprehensive Plan designation for a group of properties lying north of 231st Place South and south of Edmonds Way from
Single Urban 1 to Multi-Family Medium Density. And then there’s a concurrent rezone to RM-2.4, is also requested. And
it’s File Number CDC-05-03/R-06-67. Steve.
Mr. Bullock: Thank you madam chair, members of the Planning Board. To start with, my name is Steve Bullock. I am the
Senior Planner that’s working on this project. I would like to start by entering the staff report into the record as Exhibit 1,
and then we passed out a number of letters to you that I would like to enter into the record as exhibits, as well. First, we have
a letter from Mary McCloskey stating her opposition to the project, and also a letter from Leo and Peggy Smyth stating their
opposition. That would be Exhibits 2 and 3. The letter from Aaron Lindstrom, Exhibit 4, stating his opposition to it. Exhibit
5 will be the letter from Norbert and Carole Nowak, and that would be Exhibit 5. A letter from Wilma Rougny would be
Exhibit 6 and the letter from Irving and Barbara Deeton is Exhibit 7, again stating their opposition to it.
Mr. Bullock: There are a number of Board Members that were probably on the Board a couple of years ago when a similar
application was before the Board. If I can call your attention to, probably the best one to see it at is going to Attachment 5 of
the Staff Report. It’s a colored map that shows the seven properties that are the subject of the proposed Comprehensive Plan
amendment and the concurrent rezone. The properties are all right now currently zoned single-family, RS-6, and they are
identified on the Comprehensive Plan as Single-Family Urban and the proposal is to change them to Multi-Family Medium
Density, and then follow that up with a zoning change to RM-2.4 from the current RS-8 zoning.
Mr. Bullock: Because the applicant is the one making the proposal, and I know you have had an opportunity to read the
staff report and a similar one was before you, I think I am just going to close my part of the presentation right now. I would
be happy to answer any questions you have, but turn it over to the applicant to make their presentation.
Chair Freeman: Does anybody have any questions for Steve at this point? No, okay.
Board Member Young: When are we going to recess to read all this stuff we just got?
Chair Freeman: Well, it was suggested that we have the public testimony first. Is that okay?
Board Member Young: Okay, fair enough.
Chair Freeman: Okay, we’ll turn it over to the applicant.
Mr. Bissell: What’s being passed out to you is identical to what I have got on the screen. Some people like to read things in
front of them, and some people like to see the thing, and some people like to listen. So, whichever you like to do it. My
name is John Bissell, with Higa Burkholder Associates. I am a planning consultant. The address is 1721 Hewitt Avenue,
Suite 401, Everett, WA 98201.
Mr. Bullock: Real quickly. Before you start. We’ll enter this into the record as Exhibit 8.
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 2
Mr. Bissell: The staff has recommended denial of this application, as you probably read in the Staff Report. I am going to
explain to you why I think that it should be approved. The first issue is to look at what you want to use multi-family zoning
for; where you want to place it in your city. One of the primary places you want to place it is as a buffer between major
arterials and single-family residential. Typically, you don’t want single-family residential zoning to be fronting on or
adjacent to the major arterials. You would also like the single-family residential uses not to be subjected to being directly
adjacent to a business type use. In the case of the specific application, both of those are true. It does have some frontage on
the major arterial and so on.
Mr. Bissell: I wanted to go to. . . If I can remember how to use a PowerPoint. Okay. I wanted to bring your attention to
how the City has addressed Highway 99 as opposed to how the City has addressed SR-104. If you look at the corridor
comprehensive planning along Highway 99 and the corridor comprehensive planning along SR-104, you will see the corridor
along SR-104 is substantially narrower. The assumption is that there is substantially less traffic, less impact from that
highway. But, in reality, there is somewhat less, but according to Washington State Department of Transportation and
statistics both in 2004 and 2005, there’s 34,000 trips on Highway 99 between SR-104 and 196th Street, so basically the whole
length as it passes through Edmonds and most of Lynnwood. At 95th Place on SR-104, which is essentially across the street
from the proposed development, there’s 21,000 ADT. To give you a perspective, a local access street is typically 250 ADT,
residential streets typically 250 to 1,000, collector 1,000 to 3,000 and arterial more than 3,000. So this is way more than
3,000. Both of these are major regional highways, yet we’re treating Highway 99 a lot different from how we are treating
SR-104.
Mr. Bissell: When we go to the next page, we look at the existing Comprehensive Plan and the existing zoning. What we
see, the subject property is the area that I am showing with my pointer on the overhead. If we look directly to the opposite
side of the large curve that SR-104 makes, we see that the City has brought the Comprehensive Plan designation down to
cover the area that is the same size as the area the applicant is proposing in this case. Now that area that the City has set aside
in the Comprehensive Plan for multi-family and corridor type development actually suffers less impact from the highway and
from commercial than the subject site. The subject site has commercial across the street, and it is exposed directly to SR-104
at the intersection of the street that the property has frontage on, 97th. So it seems simply from that measure, that it makes
sense, looking at the ADT of the highway, the impact of the highway on the local residential community, and the consistency
of how the City has treated the adjacent properties and how the City has viewed development along Highway 99, which is the
other major regional highway going through the City.
Mr. Bissell: Now, staff has stated that the application should be denied largely based on traffic impact issues. If the
proposed zoning is approved, the density of the area could double or even more than double, and that could cause substantial
impact is the premise that staff is putting forward. However, there’s been no study or presentation on what doubling means.
Obviously, a double of one trip to two trips is no big deal. A double of 1,000 trips would be something we would want to
take very seriously. So we need to know what are the numbers and what is the real impact of these numbers. So first we
have to look at what the trip generations are according to the ITE Manual, which is the manual that this City and almost every
other city uses to determine how many vehicle trips are generated from particular kinds of uses. Single-family trips are 9.57,
single-family and duplex. Apartments are rated at 6.72 trips per unit, and condominiums are rated at 5.86 trips per unit. So
doubling the density wouldn’t necessarily result in a doubling of the trips.
Mr. Bissell: Then we have to look at what impacts we would find on those sites. A local access street, as we looked at a
little while ago, would have about 250 trips. A residential street would be 250 to 1,000 trips, a collector would be 1,000 to
3,000 and arterials are more than 3,000. So what do we have surrounding the subject site? This area is not an area of great
traffic. Because of the limited ability for trips that are in here to get out, you don’t have a lot of cut through from Edmonds
Way going down to 100th. Most people who want to go to 100th on Edmonds will continue on Edmonds Way and head south
because this does not have a lot of capacity for people to get through. In fact, this street here that shows it goes through,
actually doesn’t go through. But what we do have within this area that’s very important is we have a lot of streets that
connect within the area. What that means is, in no one place do you have more than about 25 dwelling units or more than 100
dwelling units so you don’t ever get past the residential street classification for any of these streets. So staff has indicated
that the street is somewhat substandard. The street is, in fact a residential street with fewer than 1,000 ADT. 1,000 sounds
like a big number, but when you are looking at all the cars that go by during the day, 1,000 trips is not that much. That’s the
kind of street network that we are working off of.
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 3
Mr. Bissell: So then, what is the real impact with this site? We can see in the air photo that the site is primarily developed.
Right now there are duplexes on five of the sites, five out of seven of the sites. There is a business location on this site, and
so then with that, what could be the possible impact if it were to be developed? Right now, there’s 13 dwelling units, either
residential single-family, so you would rate the total trips coming off of that site at 124.5 or 125 trips. If the site were
completely developed, we would see the possibility of a total of perhaps 28 units on the site. So if it was developed as
condos, we would see 164 trips, apartments 188 trips, single-family 267 trips. The difference in that is a possible increase in
trips of between 63 and 143 total trips per day. Now, most traffic engineers and traffic planners would also want to look at
what’s our AM or PM peak trip impact. Typically, you are going to figure 1 AM or PM rush hour trip per unit, so we would
see an additional perhaps 15 trips. And those are the ones you really see. We talk about these numbers, 1,000, 250, and that
was for the daily trips, but you don’t really see those because they are interspersed over the 24-hour period. The trips when
you feel an impact to an area are your AM and PM trips. We are talking about 15 new trips if this zoning were to be
changed. So staff is recommending denial primarily based on an impact to the street system. The street system is a local
residential street system, and the impact of adding an additional perhaps 150 total trips, 15 PM trips would create a negligible
impact.
Mr. Bissell: The other point to consider beyond the fact that planning practices would show you would want to change this
Comprehensive Plan for this location as has been done on Highway 99, has been done on other sites on SR-104. The impacts
appear to be fairly negligible and the benefits high. You also want to look at what’s been going on on that site. Right now, it
is zoned single-family. Yet, five out of the seven sites have duplexes and one has a business office type use that could be
allowed in a commercial zone with a conditional use permit. The area is being used currently as if it was multi-family.
That’s the use that’s happened over time when it was in the County, when those kinds of uses would be legal. The uses on
the site are all legal, non-conforming. Nobody has anything on there that’s illegal. They’re legal and they are non-
conforming because they were legal once. But it appears that not only good planning practice indicates it should be
approved, but the economy is driving it in this direction. Economic has already set this up in this fashion.
Mr. Bissell: So I believe that this application should be approved in compliance with all the things I just said. The traffic
impacts are negligible, the planning principles say it should be approved, and the market forces have already driven these
properties in the direction that the applicant is currently requesting. That’s all I have. If you have any questions, I would be
happy to answer them.
Chair Freeman: Thank you. Does anybody have any questions of Mr. Bissell. Not yet, okay. Okay, we are going to open
it at this point for anybody else who would like to address this question. Anybody in the audience who would like to address
us on this question. I don’t know if there’s a sign up sheet. There was, okay. We haven’t seen it yet. Okay. Anybody can
speak whether they are signed up or not. But we’ll take the people who signed up first. The first person is John Bissell, and
he’s spoken. Aaron Lindstrom.
Mr. Lindstrom: Members of the Council, thank you very much for sitting and hearing these arguments tonight. A couple
of points I would like to make as a resident on 231st. I am in the process of buying my property from the bank, but I do reside
full time on 231st, unlike the applicant for this petition. To address a couple of points. First, as a matter of record for the
packet we were given, Attachment 3 is a reference of signatures supporting Ms. Mantooth’s recommendation. I would like to
note that there is only one full time resident of 231st Place on that sheet. The other three signatures come from rentals of Ms.
Mantooth’s property that she is trying to rezone.
Mr. Lindstrom: To address her project engineer’s earlier statements regarding the rezone and traffic impact, for those of
you who that maybe haven’t been out to that neighborhood recently, there is no controlled access to 97th, which is the City
street that our engineer is stating is in great shape, from westbound Highway 104. There is no controlled access turning off
of 97th either east or west bound. Likewise, that street has an extremely steep grade. Anytime there’s any snow or ice on the
roads, it’s almost unnavigatible, so you are suggesting to rezone to a higher density a property that’s very hard to get out of in
the winter. The pictures and the diagrams that have been presented don’t do justice to the topography of that area. My
property and most of the properties along 231st Place Southwest in the block that we are looking at have a significantly steep
drop in grade immediately behind their properties. Ms. Mantooth’s property is actually the only one in this rezone that sits
on 231st Place Southwest. 231st Place is your natural boundary for the single-family residences. Below the hill, I don’t think
anybody in this room takes issue necessarily with rezoning those properties except some of the individual land owners, I
don’t know. But I can tell you that the majority of residents on 231st Place feel that that street’s character would be destroyed
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 4
by this rezone. You are opening up to turn our quiet cul-de-sac where my child and my child to be, my 2-year old is actually
right now running around with a babysitter in the front yard, can run around under the watchful eye of myself, my wife, our
family when they are visiting, our neighbors who we know and trust. We didn’t want to move our family into an apartment
complex.
Mr. Lindstrom: I was here three years ago, shortly after I found out my wife was due with our first child, to fight this same
petition. This is a residential neighborhood. We have built connections between our neighbors. Putting an apartment
complex in the middle of our street doesn’t do anything to support the character of this City. If we wanted that, we would all
be living in North Seattle. There’s plenty of condos, there’s plenty of duplexes all over that place. We moved out of there.
We wanted a home on a quiet street, and we paid a premium for it. Three years later to have that premium destroyed so
somebody can use an addition to their property to make some money where she doesn’t live is outrageous. It shouldn’t be
happening, and I would really urge this Council to follow staff’s recommendation and deny the rezone of this property.
Thank you.
Chair Freeman: Hold the applause please. Thank you very much. Next person signed up is Norbert Nowak.
Mr. Nowak: Hi, my name is Norbert Nowak and I probably have lived there about 1/3 longest of anyone, and we’ve been
going through this now for the last, oh, 10 plus years. The past history has been an, oh gee, I would like to build a little
garage with a little shop on top of it. Pretty soon, people were moving in. And the County shut her down, the City shut her
down, and it’s a matter of record and you can look at the case if you would like. A couple of years ago, she sent a bunch of
letters to the people in that square that she wants to rezone saying, look, you know, my property is located, you might be
aware that this property is somewhat unique because of a duplex and guest house/arts studio is located. Well, that was
illegally done. So I would like to know what happened between gee, I would like to have a little studio on top of the garage
in an open area there to renting it. She’s rented it, she’s put full facilities to live there, and people have shut her down many
times.
Mr. Nowak: Now, this piece of property is in the middle of the cul-de-sac, as Aaron so eloquently said. It’s in the middle of
our cul-de-sac. And you know, it’s up here and Edmonds Way is down here maybe 100 and some feet down there. We have
no objection about Edmonds Way, that area like where Fowler’s Studio is and so forth, no problem. But for her to piggy back
her property onto that particular rezoning area, I think it’s unconscionable. So anyway, what’s really done here, is she piggy
backs it onto the property that she wants to and has legally put into the position to go along with the rest of the property. She
is actually putting neighbor against neighbor. People are going up there, well, those people up there don’t want it when we
know it should be done. Well, we have no objection about it, but that piece of property on the middle of our cul-de-sac to be
rezoned to screw up the cul-de-sac, I don’t think is right, and I hope you look at it that way too. If you look at the topography
of the area, you can obviously see. It’s not even close to the topography that is down below there. Thank you.
Chair Freeman: Thank you. Please, no applause. The next person is Jacqueline Barnes, please.
Ms. Barnes: Good evening. I am Jacqueline Barnes, and my address is 9520 – 231st Place Southwest. I like the other
people who are here and have spoken have lived in the neighborhood for about 15 years. I don’t know if any of the new
people sitting here or from the last time were here have drive down our cul-de-sac of nice, lovely homes with gardens and
children playing, but that’s the type of cul-de-sac it is. In support of what has already been said, we have one property, Ms.
Mantooth’s property, that is in the center of our cul-de-sac that she’s trying to adjoin with the multi-family properties down
below. I understand buffering, and there’s a need for buffering, but the buffering is down below. The buffering is on 97th,
it’s on the cul-de-sac below. If you look through your packet of attachments, each person that has commented here, they
don’t live on 231st, with the exception of one, Ben Ferarr. Ben has his reasons for being in support of Jennifer, and those are
his own reasons. But the other 12 or 13 families that live on this street are not in support of it and don’t want to have any
more traffic down the cul-de-sac by adding another unit to an already duplex that really shouldn’t be there in the first place.
When you look at the cul-de-sac, you will notice that there’s one property that’s out of place, that it’s Ms. Mantooth’s
property that’s out of place. To allow her the freedom to add another unit to the cul-de-sac doesn’t make any sense,
whatsoever. If you haven’t driven down it, I really, really encourage you to drive up the hill, turn left onto 231st Place
Southwest and take a look at what you are considering rezoning. I would ask that you deny the proposal. Thank you.
Chair Freeman: The next person to sign here is Lynn Hillman.
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 5
Ms. Hillman: I just signed up to be notified of further action.
Chair Freeman: Okay. You don’t wish to speak then?
Ms. Hillman: No.
Chair Freeman: Would anybody else wish to speak to this topic. No. Alright then. Are you sure? I will close the public
hearing then.
Board Member Young: The applicant representative needs to come back . . .
Chair Freeman: Oh, okay. The applicant is apparently entitled to come back. I am sorry. I will not close it until you have
spoken.
Mr. Bissell: I understand the neighbor’s concerns. You know, the first issue that is important is that nobody wants to be on
the edge of the buffer. That’s always going to be the case. The properties that are fronting on SR-104 don’t want to be there
and buffer those ones and the guys next to that don’t want to be the ones on the edge of the buffer, and so on. And that’s
always the case, so I understand their concern.
Mr. Bissell: I was trying to pick up the names of the people who were speaking, and I might have gotten it wrong. I think it
was Mr. Lindstrom who was the first speaker, talked about that 231st Street is the natural boundary. This is 231st right there
is the cul-de-sac that they are talking about. The area that is proposed for the change in the Comprehensive Plan and the
rezone is this area here. The statement that this is in the middle of their cul-de-sac is somewhat misleading. It’s true that the
building on this property has access to 231st and that the access is relatively small but it is apparent. It doesn’t look like the
other properties there. It’s a corner of another property that’s facing it. So I would agree that 231st is a natural boundary, and
you would end up with a corner of this property facing 231st if you accept that as the natural boundary.
Mr. Bissell: There was some discussion as to essentially the second speaker, Mr. Nowak, essentially was speaking to the
applicant’s character, as to whether or not violations have been committed on site and holding up evidence that the County
and the City have both shut this applicant down. That is unfortunate, but it is not really pertinent to the case as to whether or
not it is appropriate to change the zone or the Comprehensive Plan. It doesn’t alter any of the information that I have given
to you already about the trip generation and the need for buffering and so on.
Mr. Bissell: So I believe that the case still exists. The neighbors, as I said, will never want to be on the edge of a buffer.
That will always be the case in any zoning change that is proposed, and the facts or merits of the case are not changed or
challenged by any of the testimony the neighbors have provided. Thank you.
Chair Freeman: Thank you. I don’t believe anybody can come back. Is that. . .
Mr. Lindstrom: I had a clarification of something the speaker just said to clear up a matter of record.
Board Member Young: I think we can do that.
Chair Freeman: Is that alright?
Mr. Bullock: It is up to you.
Chair Freeman: Yes, you can.
Board Member Young: I move that we reopen the public hearing for clarifications on. . .
Chair Freeman: We haven’t closed it. I didn’t close it.
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 6
Board Member Young: Okay. I withdraw that.
Mr. Lindstrom: My one question and statement lead to the same point. We don’t object to the rezoning of the majority of
these properties. My question to the applicant or the applicant’s representative is, is there an existing easement or access for
the property at 9601 – 231st Place Southwest to anything but 231st Place Southwest. Is there any other way on or off that
property?
Mr. Bissell: No.
Mr. Lindstrom: So there is nothing to say that any rezoning would allow access to that property from anything other than
231st Place Southwest? That’s the objection. If I could borrow your pointer. That property.
Mr. Bissell: That is correct for that property.
Mr. Lindstrom: That property is the property we’re referring to that sits in the middle of our cul-de-sac because the only
access on or off that property is our cul-de-sac. That’s the issue that I would urge the Council to take under consideration
above and beyond anything else presented today.
Chair Freeman: Thank you. Can I close the public now? I will close the public hearing. Before we deliberate, I think
some of us would like some time to look at these letters. Is that correct?
Board Member Young: I would move we take a 10-minute recess to review the material that came in 40 minutes ago.
Board Member Crim: Second.
Chair Freeman: Okay. It has been moved and seconded that we take a 10-minute recess to review the material that was
handed to us this evening, 40 minutes ago, according to Jim. All in favor. (The vote was unanimous).
Chair Freeman: Steve, could you just give us those exhibit numbers again please. You read through them rather quickly,
and mine were out of order. I wasn’t sure which was which.
Ms. Noyes: I can do that. Exhibit 1 was the Staff Report, Exhibit 2 was a letter from Mary McCloskey, Exhibit 3 was from
Leo and Peggy Smyth, Number 1 was from Aaron Lindstrom, Number 5 was from Robert and Carole Nowak, and Number 6
was from Wilma Rougny and Number 7 was from Irving and Barbara Deeton.
Chair Freeman: Okay, who was the last one.
Ms. Noyes: Irving and Barbara Deeton.
Chair Freeman: Oh, that was Number 7.
Board Member Cassutt: And then Number 8 was the big packet that he handed to us.
Board Member Young: You’re right, the PowerPoint thing.
Chair Freeman: Okay, we will take a 10-minute break to read through these.
Chair Freeman: Yeah, it has been 10 minutes, so we will reconvene. I know that Mr. Bullock wants to speak, but before
that, I just want to ask anybody here if they have had any ex-parte communications with people concerned with this and think
they can’t give a fair decision on this. (None of the Board Member indicated a concern).
Chair Freeman: And I’ll ask people here. Does anybody have any objection to any of us here?
Board Member Young: Do you find any of us objectionable?
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 7
Chair Freeman: (No one in the audience voiced a concern.) Thank you. Alright then, Steve, over to you.
Mr. Bullock: Thank you, madam chair. A couple of things I wanted to address from the applicant’s presentation. First of
all, he was trying to draw some comparisons between the SR-104 Corridor and the Highway 99 Corridor. Although they
both have very high volumes of traffic, they are in our opinion, very different kinds of corridors. The Highway 99 Corridor
is absolutely supposed to be a commercial artery of the City, so to speak. It’s bounded by a bunch of commercially zoned
property and is supposed to have a lot more intense uses than what is projected to happen along the SR-104 Corridor. The
other thing about the 104 Corridor that is fairly substantially different than the Highway 99 Corridor is the topography. It’s
much narrower and in many cases, Edmond Way is tucked right at the bottom of that little ravine that winds around this area.
Therefore, the area that’s located along that corridor is fairly narrow and close to single-family properties that are
significantly elevated from Edmonds Way, and this is a great example, what we are looking at here. So there’s a reason for it
being narrower and not having quite as wide a band. They are not looking to have big commercial tracts associated with the
transportation corridor, as well as the fact that the topography gets up quick enough that we can have single-family areas
fairly close to the corridor without impacting those single-family areas.
Mr. Bullock: The other things that was not very clearly addressed in their presentation, too, is the fact that most of the
properties that you see, if you are to look at both the zoning and the Comp Plan for this area and along the SR-104 Corridor,
the properties that are included in the Corridor designation have direct access to Edmonds Way, almost without exception.
What’s being proposed today is different from that in that none of these properties have direct access to Edmonds Way. They
would all gain sort of a secondary access to Edmonds Way off of 97th for most of them, although in the one property off of
231st then 97th, then Edmonds Way. So if I can call your attention to the Comprehensive Plan Policies that are on Page 5 of
the staff report, Item G.3 talks about the fact that site access should not be provided from residential streets unless there’s no
other available alternative. The whole point was to really make sure that the properties that have higher designation are
gaining their access off of Edmond Way and making sure to limit their impact on adjacent single-family properties.
Mr. Bullock: So, I guess the last thing I would like to say, too, is that, and it’s kind of related to what the neighbors have
said. They have stated that they are not opposed to the properties that gain their direct access out to 97th, they probably
wouldn’t have a problem with the Comprehensive Plan being changed on those and ultimately the zoning being changed on
those. They are most concerned about the property that is in the southeast corner of the site that gains its access directly out
onto their private street, 231st. They would not like to see that included in any rezone or change in the Comprehensive Plan
designation.
Mr. Bullock: The Planning Staff, if that’s where the Planning Board wants to go, we’re willing to entertain that, but we still
have some concerns based on access and the curve, the steepness of 97th, and potentially having more development happen
on that street. As one of the testifiers even said, when wintertime hits, when it’s raining, when it’s snowy, when it’s icy,
that’s a very, very difficult street. If there’s more homes or units developed on that hill that gain access off of that hill,
there’s going to be more difficulties and problems there. So we still have some concerns even for the whole area. I think
with that, I will close my response.
Chair Freeman: Okay. This is for our deliberation now. Who wants to lead off? Don.
Board Member Henderson: I appreciate what you were recapping, Steve, because I was thinking the same thing. I was
going to disagree with Mr. Lindstrom because I think 231st Place Southwest is not the natural boundary for the buffer. It’s
really the ravine top. I would be in favor of the northern three most lots up for rezoning, and possibly even the northern most
five lots. But the seven lots goes too far in my opinion.
Chair Freeman: Okay, thank you. Anybody else. Jim.
Board Member Crim: I think the point’s been well taken that access onto 231st is what’s critical for this rezone, and I think
those two lots there at the south end of the proposed package simply don’t fit it. I can’t bring myself to agree that they should
be included. I am kind of like Don. I would be open on some of the other lots, but I don’t know if we have that option. Do
we have to accept the whole package, Steve, as is, or can we pick and choose.
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 8
Board Member Young: We better not get in the business of picking and choosing. The application is what it is.
Board Member Crim: Yeah, I assumed that was what it was and we either accepted it in entirety or deny it. I would be in
favor of denying it.
Board Member Young: Well, I’ve got the same issue I had three years ago. I mean, I agree with the applicant. I don’t
think the traffic that would be generated by these lots is going to be that much different than it is now. We didn’t get any
comments from any of the departments that this whole area just couldn’t handle that kind of an increase in traffic. But we
have A, B, C and D to consider of Chapter 20 of the Community Development Code that says. . . Edmonds Community
Development Code 20.00.050 states the criteria to be considered in reviewing a proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment,
and that’s all we are talking about because until that changes, we can’t even talk about the zone change request. There was
an attempt to address some of these in the original.
Board Member Young: Item A says the proposed amendment is consistent with the provisions of the Edmonds Comp Plan
and is in the public interest. My intuitive reaction is, and it’s strictly intuitive so I can’t implement it, is that it’s probably a
good idea, kind of in general, to have more affordable housing within the City limits of Edmonds. But you could say that
about any parcel in Edmonds. If that’s your only criteria, you know, that’s not persuasive to me, and I am not sure that
somebody has met the test of whether we are really short on multi-family housing in Edmonds. Okay. And it’s not my job to
go research that.
Board Member Young: The proposed amendment wouldn’t be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety or welfare.
Okay, the applicant addressed traffic, and I am sorry, I think really, designed right, it probably wouldn’t be detrimental. It
would probably end up exiting out onto 97th, if they could work things out with the Engineering Department. But again, I am
not going to second guess what the site plan is going to be or how the site is going to function. I will agree that, in total, it’s
probably not going to create that much of a traffic problem, just generically speaking, but I don’t know that it’s not going to
be detrimental based on any information I have other than sort of a global level.
Board Member Young: C is kind of a repeat of A. The proposed amendment would maintain the appropriate balance of
land uses within the City. Mr. Bissell, the applicant’s representative, noted there is a, well there’s any number of books in the
planning profession, back when I used to do what Mr. Bissell did, I used the Handbook of Architectural Standards and that
will show you how long ago I was working on that stuff. But planning literature, in all that time, kind of recommends that in
a City of a population of whatever, a certain percent should be of such and such a density and another percentage should be
another such a density. I don’t see that other than sort of anecdotally. It would be good to have more affordable housing in
Edmonds. Again, that’s something you can’t disagree with, but it doesn’t mean anything, particularly to this property.
Board Member Young: D, the subject parcels are physically suitable for the requested land use designation. I don’t know.
I mean, I guess a case could be made that they are, but I’m not hearing it and I’m not seeing it. Is it flat, does it have the right
kind of access, does it have all of the infrastructure in place? Again, I’m not going to go out and research it because it’s now
my application. So I have an issue, again, that we have not met the first test that we have to make in granting a
Comprehensive Plan amendment. It’s not that I don’t think that it could be made to work, but I don’t have enough evidence
in the application that it can work. That’s all I am going to say.
Board Member Crim: That’s enough.
Board Member Cassutt: You went over your five minutes. Well, Mr. Bullock took the words right out of my mouth
because I don’t consider that area the same as Highway 99 at all. I live in that area, and there’s absolutely no way. They are
both very, very different. The other thing is 97th at the bottom of the hill is a very sometimes dangerous corner. You take
your life in your own hands when you turn from SR-104 to go up 97th. Then I definitely don’t feel that anything that has a
231st address should be a rezone. That’s definitely single-family dwelling and that’s the way it should stay. I don’t feel that
has anything to do with buffering. They kept talking about it’s going to buffer between this, that and the other thing. I
probably would not have a problem with the property down the hillside, the three or four lots down the hillside on 97th, but
absolutely nothing on 231st can I vote for. So I will not vote for this.
Chair Freeman: Cary.
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 9
Board Member Guenther: Well, I concur with what Mr. Young had said. I feel like we were given a lot of generalities and
not a lot of specifics to judge this with, other than the traffic counts. I find it hard to really make a decision in favor of this
without more specifics.
Chair Freeman: Well, I certainly agree with the point that Virginia has made that the lot on 231st definitely is part of the
single-family neighborhood, and I couldn’t vote for it because of that, too. I do think that somewhere further down the hill
there could be some . . . You could use the slope of the hill to make a buffer, to justify having a buffer between the single-
family homes at the top of the hill, but that hasn’t been put forward. Because of that, I can’t vote for it either. Would people
like to go through all the points again and so we could answer to these for our findings of fact before we vote, or would you
like to take a vote on it first.
Board Member Young: I think somebody has to make a motion first.
Chair Freeman: Right, someone has to make a motion. Should we entertain a motion first, then. Okay, I will entertain a
motion.
Board Member Young: Does anybody else have any more comments to make. Okay. I would move that we deny
whatever the number is.
Board Member Cassutt: CDC-2005-03 and R-2006-67.
Board Member Young: Actually, we are just doing one at a time.
Board Member Cassutt: CDC-2005-03
Board Member Young: On the basis that the application does not meet Criteria 1 A, B, C, or D of Edmonds Community
Development Code Chapter 20.00.050, specifically criteria to be considered in reviewing a proposed Comp Plan amendment.
Board Member Crim: Second.
Chair Freeman: It’s been moved by Jim Young and seconded by Jim Crim to deny the application of CDC-2005-03.
That’s all wasn’t it? All in favor of denying, please say aye.
Board Member Crim: Aye.
Board Member Cassutt: Aye.
Board Member Guenther: Aye.
Board Member Henderson: Aye.
Board Member Young: Aye.
Chair Freeman: Aye.
Chair Freeman: Opposed. Motion carries unanimously.
Board Member Young: Thank you.
Chair Freeman: Now, you want us to look at the rezone, or we don’t need to.
Board Member Young: We can’t take up the rezone because the. . .
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 10
Mr. Chave: The trouble is you don’t know what Council is likely to do with this. So in case they decide otherwise, passing
on your recommendation on the rezone would be appropriate, also.
Board Member Cassutt: So we should do R-2006-07, also?
Mr. Chave: I would recommend it because, otherwise, if they change their mind on what to do about the Comprehensive
Plan, they won’t have a recommendation from you.
Chair Freeman: Okay, does staff have anything to say about the rezone before we start to deliberate, or do we have another
hearing again.
Board Member Crim: The rezone is ECDC Section 20.40, and there’s again. . . I’m on Page 4 of 6 of the Staff Report.
Section 2, and there are the criteria that need to be dealt with. In this case, is the proposal consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan. No it is not. Is the proposal consistent with the purposes of the zoning ordinance and the proposed zone district. I
don’t think so.
Board Member Cassutt: No.
Board Member Crim: The relationship of the proposed rezone to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or
nearby properties. Well, when you look at it, what they are requesting, they are not contiguous to any zone of that type. So I
don’t think that’s consistent.
Board Member Crim: Has there been sufficient change in the character, and no, I don’t think there has been. Whether the
property is economically or physically suitable for the uses allowed under the existing zoning and under the proposed zoning.
Well, right now, it’s a non-conforming legal use, and I don’t see that there probably is a great push to change that. The
relative gain to the public health, safety and welfare compared to the potential increase or decrease. I think we can see that
there are, certainly, a number of people who feel that this is not in the public’s best interest, as evidence by their being here
tonight. So I would say there is a question there.
Board Member Crim: The applicant has submitted declarations describing how they feel, and so on. I think that, in
general, it does not meet the rezone factors, as well. I would move, then, that we send this on to Council with a
recommendation to deny the rezone.
Board Member Cassutt: Second.
Chair Freeman: Alright, it has been moved by Jim Crim and seconded by Virginia Cassutt to recommend to Council that
they deny the rezone request. That is for R-2006-67, have I got the right number there? Okay. All I favor.
Board Member Crim: Aye.
Board Member Cassutt: Aye.
Board Member Guenther: Aye.
Board Member Henderson: Aye.
Board Member Young: Aye.
Chair Freeman: Aye.
Chair Freeman: Opposed. Okay, that too carries unanimously.
Chair Freeman: Okay, thank you. That closes that section. Thank you.
Verbatim Planning Board Transcripts
File Numbers CDC-05-03 and R-06-67
June 12, 2006 Page 11
I TESTIFY THAT THESE VERBATIM TRANSCRIPTS ARE COMPLETE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY
ABILITY TO TRANSCRIBE THE PROCEEDINGS.
__________________________________________________________ ____________________________________
Karin Noyes, Transcriber Date
AM-632 6.
Public Hearing on Amendments to the MPOR Zone
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Rob Chave, Planning
Submitted For:Rob Chave Time:30 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review
Committee:
Action:
Agenda Memo
Subject
Public hearing on the Planning Board's recommendation regarding amendments to the Edmonds Community
Development Code Chapter 16.77, MPOR Zone.
Previous Council Action
Council adopted Ordinance #3581 on January 3, 2006, establishing a moratorium on applications to rezone or
develop under the current version of the MPOR zone.
Narrative
The Planning Board has recommended that the City Council approve the MPOR code amendment proposal contained
The Planning Board has recommended that the City Council approve the MPOR code amendment proposal contained
in Exhibit 1. Approval of the draft language will enable the city to lift the current moratorium and potentially allow
development of the properties consistent with the comprehensive plan. Minutes from the Planning Board are
included in Exhibit 3.
Currently there is a moratorium on applications to rezone or develop properties under the adopted MPOR zone
contained in Chapter 16.77 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC). Council direction to the
Planning Board was contained in Ordinance 3581. A copy of the ordinance establishing the moratorium and minutes
from the City Council are attached for your reference (Exhibit 4).
The Planning Board has been considering changes to the MPOR zone to address City Council concerns. While the
Planning Board discussions were proceeding, some of the property owners and neighbors volunteered to meet to
discuss how the MPOR zone could be configured to address the properties west of Sunset Avenue and south of Bell
Street – the area identified in the Comprehensive Plan for this type of zone. As a result of these meetings, the
parties have agreed to a revised MPOR zone. If this new version of the MPOR zone is adopted, it would implement
the comprehensive plan while also addressing the needs of the property owners and the concerns of the neighbors.
The proposed “compromise” MPOR zone language is contained in Exhibits 1 and 2. Exhibit 1 is a “clean” version of
what the new MPOR zone would look like, while Exhibit 2 shows changes (in underline/strikeout format) from the
MPOR zone language that is currently adopted in the city’s development code.
Although the Planning Board originally desired to craft an MPOR zone that could have broader application in the city
than just the Sunset Avenue properties, it has proven very difficult to make such a zone generally applicable while
also providing the specificity necessary to guide decision-making. The Sunset properties, in particular, are uniquely
situated and present unusual circumstances that don’t easily translate to other locations in the city.
The only area currently identified in the city’s comprehensive plan for such a zone is the area west of Sunset and
south of Bell Street. Since the property owners and neighbors appear to have come up with a zoning solution that
will implement the comprehensive plan and deal with the various issues pertaining to these properties, the Planning
Board has agreed that it is desirable to reconfigure the MPOR zone to directly implement the plan in that location,
and abandon the idea of making it applicable to other parts of the city.
Two additional notes on the draft language. First, the last sentence in footnote 1 to Table 16.77.020.A has been
modified by the City Attorney to provide additional clarity. Second, the City Attorney has pointed out that the
wording under section 16.77.020.E pertaining to decks, porches, etc, could be improved by adding the following:
"The height of a deck, porch or steps shall be measured at the top of the deck, porch or step surface and shall be
determined exclusive of any safety railing." Staff agrees that this would improve the language, but the draft
language in 16.77.020.E is exactly the same as the code language contained in other residential zones. Since staff
has been doing by interpretation (since 1994) what the City Attorney’s proposed clarification would accomplish, we
are proposing to “hold” his language and include it in all the appropriate code sections during the code rewrite
process.
Recommendation
1. Approve the amended MPOR code language (Exhibit 1), and direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance for
Council adoption.
2. Direct the City Attorney to prepare appropriate Council action to lift the MPOR zoning moratorium to coincide with
adoption of the MPOR code amendment.
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1: MPOR amendment language
Link: Exhibit 2: MPOR amendment language - edits
Link: Exhibit 3: PB minutes
Link: Exhibit 4: Moratorium ordinance & CC minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/10/2006 03:04 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/11/2006 07:58 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/11/2006 08:22 AM APRV
Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 10/10/2006 01:22 PM
Final Approval Date: 10/11/2006
Planning Board Recommendation / 2006.09.27 Page 1
Chapter 16.77
MPOR – MASTER PLANNED OFFICE-RESIDENTIAL
Sections:
16.77.000 Purposes.
16.77.010 Uses.
16.77.020 Site development standards.
16.77.030 Operating restrictions.
16.77.000 Purposes.
A. The master planned office-residential (MPOR) zone is intended to be
applied to areas designated in the comprehensive plan for “Planned Residential-
Office” development on the west side of Sunset Avenue south of Bell Street.
B. This area is appropriate for development which provides for a mix of small-
scale office and residential uses which provide a transition between the more
intensive commercial uses along Main Street and the residential uses along
Sunset Avenue. Because the area of this designation is located adjacent to
commercial development to the south, the railroad to the west, and is near both
multiple family and single-family residential development, this area should act as
a transition between theses uses.
C. To restrict commercial and multiple residential uses in scale and intensity so
as to reduce noise, parking and traffic impacts on the adjacent residential
neighborhood.
D. The height and setback limits established for this zone have been adopted
after full consideration of the topographical constraints of sites within the zone.
Variances are not available under current city code provisions in order to make
more profitable use of a property. In adopting these provisions, the city council
has specifically provided for, and made allowances for, the site constraints and
topographical features inherent in development of the designated MPOR sites.
Therefore, no other height variance would typically be available absent a special
showing of constraints unanticipated on the date of adoption of the ordinance
codified in this chapter.
16.77.010 Uses.
A. Permitted Primary Uses. Any combination of the following uses is permitted:
1. Single-family dwellings.
2. Office uses.
3. Multiple dwelling unit(s).
4. Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks with
an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070.
B. Permitted Secondary Uses.
1. Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted or conditional
use.
2. All permitted secondary uses allowed in the RS – Single Family
Residential zone, as listed in 16.20.010.B.
C. Primary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit.
1. Local public facilities subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050;
Planning Board Recommendation / 2006.09.27 Page 2
16.77.020 Site development standards.
A. Table.
Sub
District
Minimum
Lot
Area
Minimum
Street
Setback 1
Minimum
Side
Setback
Minimum
Rear
Setback
Maximum
Height
Maximum
Coverage
(%)
MPOR None 15' 5' None 25' No maximum
1 The minimum street setback of 15 feet applies to a building which is no wider than 110 feet.
For any part of a building that exceeds 110 feet in width, an additional setback of 15 feet shall
apply so that no more than 110 feet of building width is closer than 30 feet to the street lot line.
For the purposes of this section, “building width” shall be the total horizontal dimension of that
portion of the building facing the street measured parallel to the street.
B. Parking requirements. See Chapter 17.50 ECDC for specific parking
requirements for allowed uses. No parking spaces may be located within the
street or side setbacks.
C. Signs, Landscaping and Design Review. See Chapters 20.10, 20.12 and
20.60 ECDC for regulations on design review and signage. Signage shall be
regulated as in an RM zone. Signage for office uses shall be regulated as in a
BN zone, except that no free standing signs shall be permitted.
D. Satellite Television Antennas. Satellite television antennas shall be
regulated as set forth in ECDC 16.20.050.
E. Setback Encroachments. Eaves and chimneys may project into a required
setback not more than 30 inches. Uncovered and unenclosed porches, steps,
patios, and decks may project into a required setback not more than one-third of
the required setback, or four feet, whichever is less; provided that they are no
more than 30 inches above the ground level at any point.
Planning Board Recommendation / 2006.09.27 Page 1
Chapter 16.77
MPOR – MASTER PLANNED OFFICE-RESIDENTIAL
Sections:
16.77.000 Purposes.
16.77.010 Uses.
16.77.020 Site development standards.
16.77.030 Operating restrictions.
16.77.000 Purposes.
A. The master planned office-residential (MPOR) zone is intended to be
applied to areas designated in the comprehensive plan for master planned or
transitional development, or areas requiring special design considerations due to
unique site constraints or their location between potentially incompatible uses,
consistent with the following purposes: to provide for a transitional area between
different use areas, such as between single-family and commercial or multiple-
family uses, consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan “Planned Residential-
Office” development on the west side of Sunset Avenue south of Bell Street.
B. This area is appropriate for development which provides for a mix of small-
scale office and residential uses which provide a transition between the more
intensive commercial uses along Main Street and the residential uses along
Sunset Avenue. Because the area of this designation is located adjacent to
commercial development to the south, the railroad to the west, and is near both
multiple family and single-family residential development, this area should act as
a transition between theses uses.To allow for development that is sensitive to the
residential uses in the neighboring area.
C. To restrict commercial and multiple residential uses in scale and intensity so
as to reduce noise, parking and traffic impacts on the adjacent residential
neighborhood.
D. To allow flexible site design to provide for economical and functional
development on sites that include difficult topographical or other circumstances
requiring unusual design solutions.
E. To permit construction in accordance with a master plan concept and site
design that is visually pleasing.
FD. The height and setback limits and calculation procedures established for
this zone have been adopted after full consideration of the topographical
constraints of sites within the zone. Variances are not available under current city
code provisions in order to make more profitable use of a property. In adopting
these provisions, the city council has specifically provided for, and made
allowances for, the site constraints and topographical features inherent in
development of the designated MPOR sites. Therefore, no other height variance
would typically be available absent a special showing of constraints unanticipated
on the date of adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter. [Ord. 3569 § 1,
2005].
16.77.010 Uses.
A. Permitted Primary Uses. Any combination of the following uses is permitted:
Planning Board Recommendation / 2006.09.27 Page 2
1. Single-family dwellings.; and/or
2. Offices and service uses.; and/or
3. Multiple dwelling unit(s).; and/or
4. Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks with
an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070.
B. Permitted Secondary Uses.
1. Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted or conditional
use.
2. All permitted secondary uses allowed in the RS – Single Family
Residential zone, as listed in 16.20.010.B.
C. Primary Uses Requiring a Conditional Use Permit.
1. Local public facilities subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.050;
2. Wholesale uses;
3. Laboratories where use impact is equivalent to office uses;
4. Counseling centers where use impact is equivalent to office uses. [Ord.
3569 § 1, 2005].
16.77.020 Site development standards.
A. Table.
Sub
District
Minimum
Lot
Area
Minimum
Street
Setback 1
Minimum
Side
Setback
Minimum
Rear
Setback
Maximum
Height
Maximum
Coverage
(%)
MPOR None 15' 5' None 25' No maximum
1 The minimum street setback of 15 feet applies to a building which is no wider than 110 feet.
For any part of a building that exceeds 110 feet in width, an additional setback of 15 feet shall
apply so that no more than 110 feet of building width is closer than 30 feet to the street lot line.
For the purposes of this section, “building width” shall be the total horizontal dimension of that
portion of the building facing the street measured parallel to the street.
A. Any development located in an MPOR zone shall be subject to design
review in accordance with Chapter 20.10 ECDC.
B. Density. Single-family dwelling units shall have a maximum density of not
more than 7.3 dwelling units per acre. Multiple-family dwelling units shall have a
maximum density of not more than 29.2 dwelling units per acre. “Density” is the
maximum number dwelling units permitted per acre and shall be rounded down
to the nearest whole number.
C. Height. The maximum height for structures in the MPOR zone shall result in
buildings that are not more than 25 feet in height as determined in accordance
with ECDC 21.40.030(C)(1). During the master plan review of any project, an
application must specifically address the height and mass of the project.
D. Transition. Uses and buildings on the property shall be arranged to provide
a transition from more intensively zoned areas (e.g., commercial or multifamily
zones) to areas that are designated for less intensive uses (e.g., single-family
zones). Techniques used to provide a transition shall include at least three of the
following:
1. Setbacks;
Planning Board Recommendation / 2006.09.27 Page 3
2. Building height and/or massing;
3. Lot coverage;
4. Landscape features visible to the public, such as courtyards, open
space and/or decorative landscaping.
When designing a transition from an MPOR-zoned site to adjoining properties,
the techniques employed shall result in a logical transition from the site to the
bulk standards of the zone applied to the adjoining property. When the MPOR
zone is not adjacent to another property – due to an intervening right-of-way, for
example – then the combination of the selected techniques and their application
to the property shall result in a transition appropriate to the site’s location and its
relation to the adjoining street front.
B. Parking requirements. See Chapter 17.50 ECDC for specific parking
requirements for allowed uses. No parking spaces may be located within the
street or side setbacks.
EC. Signs, Parking, Landscaping and Design Review. See Chapters 17.50,
20.10, 20.12 and 20.60 ECDC for regulations on design review and signage.
Signage shall be regulated as in an RS RM zone unless otherwise specified as
part of an approved master plan. Signage for office uses shall be regulated as in
a BN zone, except that no free standing signs shall be permitted.
FD. Satellite Television Antennas. Satellite television antennas shall be
regulated as set forth in ECDC 16.20.050.
E. Setback Encroachments. Eaves and chimneys may project into a required
setback not more than 30 inches. Uncovered and unenclosed porches, steps,
patios, and decks may project into a required setback not more than one-third of
the required setback, or four feet, whichever is less; provided that they are no
more than 30 inches above the ground level at any point.
G. Master Plan Required.
1. No development shall be permitted in an MPOR zone unless a master
plan has been prepared and approved by the city council, identifying
potential land uses and densities as set forth in subsection (G)(2) of this
section.
2. A master plan shall describe the land use parameters and relationships
to guide future site development. The plan shall, in a general manner, define
the site layout by showing development areas by type of use, circulation
patterns, site access, residential densities (if applicable), maximum square
footage of nonresidential uses (if applicable), and any open space areas and
buffers. The plan shall also illustrate the relationship between the site and
adjoining properties.
3. All property identified in the master plan shall be developed in a manner
consistent with the provisions of the master plan.
4. It is intended that site layouts, the range and intensity of uses, access,
and circulation shall be depicted in both graphic and narrative form in a
general manner. Subsequent to the adoption of a master plan, more detailed
site and design information shall be submitted for review in accordance with
Planning Board Recommendation / 2006.09.27 Page 4
Chapter 20.10 ECDC. The applicant also has the option of submitting a
master plan concurrently with a specific site design. Other necessary
applications, such as subdivision, binding site plan (BSP), or planned
residential development (PRD), may also be submitted concurrently. If
submitted concurrently, the city shall review the applications concurrently.
However, no site design or other approval shall be granted until such time as
the master plan is approved.
5. A master plan may be approved as a comprehensive plan amendment
or as a contract rezone. The planning advisory board and city council shall
review and act upon a proposed master plan in accordance with the
provisions of ECDC 20.100.020 and 20.100.030, except in the case of a
PRD, which shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter
20.35 ECDC. [Ord. 3569 § 1, 2005].
16.77.030 Operating restrictions.
A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely
enclosed building, except:
1. Outdoor residential and office decks;
2. Public utilities and parks;
3. Off-street parking and loading areas, and commercial parking lots.
B. Drive-in businesses are expressly prohibited.
C. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Performance
Standards. [Ord. 3569 § 1, 2005].
AM-637 7.
Appeal of ADB Decision - Old Milltown Refurbishment
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Steve Bullock, Planning Time:45 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review
Committee:
Action:Recommend Review by Full Council
Agenda Memo
Subject
Closed Record Review of an appeal by Elisabeth Larman on the Architectural Design Board approval of the
refurbishment of Old Milltown, located at 201 5th Avenue South. (File No. APL-20060003 and PLN-20060094)
Previous Council Action
None
Narrative
On September 6th, 2006, the City's Architectural Design Board (ADB) held a public hearing on the refurbishment of
the north portion of Old Milltown. The ADB approved the proposed project with conditions. On September 20th,
2006, Ms. Larman filed an appeal of the ADB’s decision. An appeal of an ADB decision is performed as a closed
record review by the City Council who affirm, overturn or remand the original decision.
As a closed record review, the Council will review the record established with the ADB and issue their decision. If
the Council chooses, they may allow any party of record to restate their position, but no new information may be
introduced into the record. For this review, only Mr. Gregg, his architect, Ms. Larman and Roger Hertrich are parties
of record.
One of the concerns of Ms. Larman was the notice provided for this project. ECDC 20.10 specifically outlines the
hearing and notice process for projects being reviewed by the ADB. The ADB must hold a public hearing on all
projects except consolidated proposals. However, only those projects that are subject to SEPA review, major
projects which in this case create more than 4,000 sq. ft. of new commercial area, are required to provide notice by
mailing, display ads and site signs. All other projects, minor projects, are notified through the posting of the ADB’s
monthly agenda. City staff has checked and rechecked the area calculations and determined that the project does
not create more than 4,000 sq. ft. of new commercial floor area and therefore, notice was provided in accordance
with the code.
The second major concern of Ms.Larman deals with the design proposed by Mr. Gregg and his architect. In her
opinion it is not attractive or in keeping with the direction of the code for design review. Please review her letter for
specifics. Ms. Larman read a similar letter to this into the record before the ADB.
After considering all the testimony at the hearing and the codes sections that apply, the ADB chose to approve the
proposed refurbishment with conditions. They document in their motion, that with their conditions, they believed
the project complied with the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies and Development Codes.
Recommendation
Deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the ADB.
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1 - Larman appeal letter
Link: Exhibit 2 - ADB minutes
Link: Exhibit 3 - ADB Exhibits
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 Development Services Duane Bowman 10/12/2006 11:50 AM APRV
2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 11:54 AM APRV
3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 06:02 PM APRV
4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2006 08:20 AM APRV
Form Started By: Steve Bullock Started On: 10/12/2006 08:19 AM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2006
Architectural Design Board Meeting Page 6 September 6, 2006 Draft Minutes
1. INDIVIDUAL ELEMENTS OF THIS PROJECT ARE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL APPLICABLE
CITY CODES, SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE HEIGHT AND SETBACKS OF THE
BASEBALL BACKSTOP AND BLEACHERS;
2. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO APPLY FOR AND OBTAIN ALL
NECESSARY PERMITS;
THE BOARD FINDS THAT WITH THESE CONDITIONS, THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER ADOPTED CITY POLICIES, AND THE PROPOSAL
SATISFIES THE CRITERIA AND PURPOSES OF ECDC CHAPTER 20.10 – ADB CRITERIA AND
ECDC CHAPTER 20.12 – LANDSCAPING, AND STAFF HAS FOUND THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
c. FILE NO. ADB-06-94: An application to refurbish Old Milltown. The site is located at 201 5th Avenue
South and is zoned Community Business (BC).
Ralph Allen, architect, 7310 15th Avenue Northwest, Seattle, and Bob Gregg, developer in Edmonds, were present.
Senior Planner Steve Bullock presented the application about refurbishing of Old Milltown. He explained that from
Dayton to Maple there is a portion of the building that fronts right on to the courtyard area, with parking above it, and
that no portion of the application is dealing with that southern portion of the building that has the pizza shop, the barber
shop, Quizno’s, and a couple of other businesses fronting directly on to the courtyard, as well as the parking above. The
project deals entirely with the building that is north of that section.
Steve Bullock described the building as kind of a maze inside and recalled that it used to be a car dealership, a bus
station and was constructed using concrete post and beam. The proposal is to gut the building entirely and refurbish it,
playing on its original architectural style and history. A portion of the building on 5th Avenue South steps back on the
second floor and the second floor is not built right out to the street front in the middle of the building. The application
proposes to fill up that hole on the second story. A good portion of the project will be to remove a chunk of the roof that
is presently over the building. Most of the roof is configured with a 4/12 pitch hip roof around the majority of the
building and that will be taken off and a new flat roof will be put on in behind the cornice line, so the building will be
shorter than it is now. Part of the building which might be called kind of characteristic of the existing building is at the
intersection at Dayton and 5th Avenue, where there are bay window projections on the second floor, one facing Dayton
and one facing 5th, and both of those are proposed to be removed with the project. A lot of the folksy art that is painted
around the perimeter of the building that is part of the Old Milltown original theme or style will also be replaced and the
building is going to be more detailed with traditional architectural elements, more in keeping with the original style of
the building.
In reviewing the guidelines for the project, Mr. Bullock explained that because the applicant is not adding anything to
the footprint, but is refurbishing the existing building and not doing much to the site, landscaping is not a strongly
required element. The proposal includes window planter boxes along 5th and on Dayton some, but there are presently
no details as to what those will be. He felt that if the board has any concerns they could direct the applicant to work with
staff or bring a final plan back to the board for review.
Mr. Bullock reported that the city’s urban design guidelines considers this part of the city downtown to be a pedestrian-
oriented commercial area, which encourages details and features to be used to enhance the pedestrian experience. The
proposal has awnings that go along the length of the building as it fronts on 5th Avenue South and around the corner
starting to go up Dayton Street, but those awnings appear to be an architectural detail and do not project out very far
over the sidewalk. In looking at the elevations, he thought it seemed like the awnings barely got past the flower boxes.
Architectural Design Board Meeting Page 7 September 6, 2006 Draft Minutes
He wanted to see the design board and the applicant talk more about that and see if there was an opportunity to extend
those awnings and provide more of a pedestrian amenity by creating and incorporating more weather protection.
Ralph Allen, architect, discussed that the character of the building is such that there are existing two-story elements that
are framing the building both at the corner of 5th and Dayton and at the beginning of the courtyard. Stretching between
them is a saddle where the second floor is held back. The proposal is to bring the second floor out to not quite the street
face. They propose to hold it back and use a different fenestration pattern, doing a 5/3 pattern to make it feel subordinate
and held in, so that the original massing of the building is maintained and strengthened. Running between those primary
components are the stretch of planters and awnings that are lighter in scale and have been kept back. He stated that they
could look at expanding those to provide coverage from the weather. He wanted to keep them balanced with the major
awnings for a feel of the space along 5th and to highlight the recognition of entry for the retail tenants.
Mr. Allen next presented views of the building with the two major awning entries, one at the corner of 5th and Dayton
and the other one framing the development that they have put together, which provides a visual break and relief from the
building so that it is not filling in at a flush plane. He thought that helped maintain the balance of the primary corner
massing. At Dayton at 5th, they are redefining the entrance, which is an entry into the garage for the additional parking
required for the area being added, one storefront entry, and a Dayton level street lobby entrance that goes up to the
commercial space on the second floor. Currently the concrete ramp that runs up to the second floor is proposed to be
removed and a service area provided that will support the retail areas and the whole complex and will be a good delivery
and material-handling spot for the property. At 5th and Dayton, there are bay windows and the kind of popped up
edifice that is proposed to be traded for a much broader treatment of the building. A cornice cap detail has been
developed with some ornamental straps that tie the building back and recalls the industrial nature of the building but will
be a classy redressing of the building that is respectful to its historic roots, and will stretch across the entire building as
opposed to emphasizing one corner. He thought it was an overall gain to the building.
Mr. Allen explained that the planters are proposed to be worked in on the pedestrian street side and they would be happy
to work with staff on that. They are opening up in between at the concrete columns and show a pre-cast plenth or base.
Orchestrated into that will be a cast bronze plaque with a series of historical comments on it. The idea is to bring a
human scale treatment along 5th between the major entries to the new commercial space that will have something to
look at from a historical standpoint and bring the historical character of the building to the pedestrian view and keep that
piece alive for people. He looked forward to writing the text and doing sketches for the bronze plaque.
Bob Gregg pointed out that going down Main Street and looking at most of the older buildings there is not only the main
glass but there are transom windows that are above that, and most of the rest of the buildings in town that are of that
same era have been painted over or boxed over. They would like to open these up and concentrate on adding the
transom windows back in to what the building was like in the early 1900’s. In response to Mr. Bullock’s comment
about making the awnings bigger, they are not opposed to that. He referred the board to a particular sentence in the
city’s guidelines that says the city should create incentives for the addition of awnings over public sidewalks. He was
not sure how far the Architectural Design Board’s authority went, but suggested as a recommendation that he would be
happy to make the awnings bigger. If the city wants to get awnings that are six feet out, he would be “incentivised” to
do that if the city would drop its parking disruption fee or reduce it or mitigate it. Steve Bullock stated that he would
work on that.
Pro Tem Chairman Utt complimented the applicant on the efforts that they had achieved and thought it would be an
enhancement to the downtown area. He noticed some of the awnings that are being talked about extending out are using
a cowl wall. He wondered what material would be used with the larger awnings marking the entrances.
Mr. Allen explained that those would be opaque and they are looking at a metal roof, possibly a flat lock sink panel,
which will be an a-frame shape and have some kind of a soffit material underneath. The cowl wall panels are
translucent, which will allow light in for plant growth and also help the storefront and the sidewalk.
Architectural Design Board Meeting Page 8 September 6, 2006 Draft Minutes
Pro Tem Chairman Utt inquired whether the applicant perceived any problem with keeping the plants alive with a cowl
wall and whether they would be irrigated. Mr. Allen stated that they intend to irrigate and drain the planters. He did not
think that light was a major issue. As they get out further, they would want to look at their light transmittance specs and
there is a range within the cowl wall product to let more or less light through.
In answer to Mr. Utt’s question, Mr. Allen stated that the awnings presently extend out to about 40 inches. Pro Tem
Chairman Utt suggested adding another two feet, totaling close to six feet.
Mr. Allen stated that if they could have a little latitude to work that so that they can get the cover for inclement weather
and scale it appropriately for the sidewalk and the experience and the supports that are being structured he thought they
could reach an amicable resolution and make sure there is enough light coming in to keep the plants growing.
Pro Tem Chairman Utt commented that the materials delineate where the main entrances are well, and the cowl wall
along the edge reminisces the old historical clear-story storefronts of that period.
Elisabeth Larman, 801 Walnut Street, Edmonds, asked to read her statement and comments regarding the application
to refurbish old Milltown.
“I love Edmonds and I am very interested in this building because it reflects a part of the history of the town. I have sat
through the years on many historical commission boards and served as president of the Historical District Preservation
Society in Columbus, Georgia. I am also an interior designer, refurbished and remodeled many homes in the past, and
one commercial building. I also concur with the mayor as he stated in the last issue of the Enterprise that more retail
business is vital to downtown. The building that is proposed to replace Old Milltown is a sure way to lose more retail
business.”
“I have looked over the plans and first I am astounded that this should be considered a minor project. I think that any
project that affects directly the look of our downtown is far from minor. Apparently, the rule is that if the addition made
to a building is less than 4,000 square feet, it is considered a minor project. Actually, in this case, it is the remodeling of
approximately 15,600 square feet and it seems to me that it should be handled appropriately in front of the whole city
and the city council.” One thing I do not understand as well on the staff report is that the issues that the guidelines is the
subject property falls under the direction of the Downtown Activity Center, Multi-Family Residential, so maybe
someone can explain that to me later.
Ms. Larman continued, “I am in total agreement that this and many of the buildings downtown are in need of
refurbishing and need to be made attractive so to encourage retail. But in this case, the proposed building will have the
opposite effect. Many reasons why. It does not follow in any way the city’s own guideline for the downtown activity
center. I have described on page 23 in items one and two, the proposed building as shown in the computer rendering
and blueprint is not in any way sensitive to the presence of historic buildings or landmarks, and is not in any compatible
with its surroundings. It will have the opposite effect and actually visually shrink the down retail core by eliminating all
the architectural details of this building, by altering the irregular footprint by giving it a stucco boxy look, this building
will look not totally out of place with its surrounding neighbors towards the fountain, but will instead tie in with the two
other stucco boxes to the right of it going towards Walnut Street, which are not occupied by businesses and not retail
stores.”
“On page 25 of the guidelines it stipulates in item C that buildings should avoid long, unbroken roofs and wall lines, that
the corners should be accented. The proposed design goes exactly against this guideline. It obliterates all the details
which make the facade on Dayton really charming and also eliminates the corner to the right of the building on 5th
Avenue. Instead of enhancing the social side of this last area and taking advantage of the landscape outdoor draw, the
developer shuts it off to the public, as he also shuts off access to the restrooms located in this area. That is not the way to
Architectural Design Board Meeting Page 9 September 6, 2006 Draft Minutes
attract people and it is not conducive to attracting shoppers. I also would question that the only restaurant facilities for
four people in this entire building seems to me woefully inadequate.”
“On page 25, item D is not respected by the developer either. By eliminating the details on the façade of the building,
the developer fails to show the character and flavor of the existing building. He eliminates the base at the corner of
Dayton and 5th. He eliminates the central door on to 5th Avenue. He eliminates many windows, almost all openings on
the south side, and the new purpose windows do not have any respect actually for the old terrace-story style that is in its
place. Another way he destroys the character and history of the building is by adding an addition that will fill in the
space above the Yost sign on 5th Avenue. The addition does not respect the style of the building, its so arched up
windows versus rectangular ones everywhere else, it will stick out like a sore thumb and look added and out of place. It
certainly would have been more respectful of the building to set it back and I would also argue that the space being left
open would have actually capitalized on being an attraction for a savvy restaurant, for example, an outdoor terrace. In
restaurants it is very popular and would have added an attraction for the area.”
“I will totally agree with the city staff who found that the awnings on the buildings are senseless as they would not
provide any shelter for the pedestrians during inclement weather. Furthermore, style-wise, they are very unattractive and
out of place in Edmonds.”
“In closing, I would like to propose that the city has a unique opportunity to combine its history, which is fast
disappearing with modernizing of buildings and attracting more people to shop, in doing this, the developer needs to
show respect for the character and flavor of downtown. Edmonds is a mill town which has come a long way and we
should all be proud of its heritage. Instead of hiding it by changing old buildings with non-descript, pseudo-modern and
irrelevant architecture, it would be much more profitable to capitalize on its charm, its quirkiness and its beauty. I have a
few ideas I would like to propose. Keep the outside of the building as it is. Reinforce its slope by adding architectural
details, such as a cornice along the roof line and more details on the windows. Keep the broken lines of the facade on
Dayton but use imagination. There are lots that you can think about. Maybe take out the ramp and glass this whole area
and make it a conservatory, flower shop, restaurant, art gallery. There are so many things you could do. Keep the brick
and concrete facades look and certainly and absolutely keep the Yost brick side on the facade of 5th Avenue. It is part
of Edmonds’ patrimony. Do not use stucco so it does not tie in with the boxes to the right, the buildings going towards
Walnut. Do not use tiles, which would be totally out of place with the styles in Edmonds. Do not fill in the area above
the Yost sign with an unsightly addition which does not tie in with the building; instead, use the space as a terrace for
people to enjoy the outdoors, which is what the Northwest is all about. It certainly would be novel in the town and
would attract people. Tie in with the neighboring buildings around the fountain and become part of the heart of
downtown by adding the same kind of awnings that are existing there. Continue the look of the block of Starbucks,
Rapid Fill, and Acadia. You will also find the same type of awnings across the street with the Wilcox and Arista
buildings, and all around the fountain. All of these ideas will, when implemented, will give the downtown an additional
beautiful building, true to its history, and more cohesive and respectful of Edmonds’ style and character. At the same
time, it will enhance the quaintness of Edmonds, which is a major drawing factor to our city by the surrounding
populace. There are architects in this country who specialize and are very sensitive to redesigning and refurbishing
historic and old buildings. This proposal, I can see clearly, was not done by one of them. All of the ideas that I have
proposed would not be a significant cost to the developer and would be so much better for our town. Thank you for
your attention and your consideration.”
Pro Tem Chairman Utt inquired about the time limit for public comments on specific projects. Mr. Bullock stated that it
is up to the board.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, asked the board to turn to page A11 in their packet, the pictures of Old Milltown, and
compare those to the next page of the new design. He wondered how the board felt when they looked at the
photographs on the first page. Because Milltown is part of the city’s character, he thought the emphasis at this point in
time is that the city wants to look at what it wants its center of town to look like and he felt that they wanted it to look a
Architectural Design Board Meeting Page 10 September 6, 2006 Draft Minutes
bit like it already is. He pointed out that there are a lot of different styles in Edmonds and a lot of different buildings that
were built at different times, and there is no consistent character of building. At the same time, each one represents an
era when it was built. He felt that if the whole Milltown building is torn down and a new building is built, they will get a
Bob Gregg remodel, and there is no touch with the past. He thought that the new design would be boring. The plaque
he heard mentioned is their tie with history. The building will not provide gathering places any more. He thought what
made the pedestrian-orientated town work is for people to be able to hang around and talk or be protected from the rain
as they walk by the building.
Mr. Hertrich pointed out the difference shown between the old building with the gaps shown in between and the next
page not showing those gaps and there being a flat wall. He recalled the speaker before him saying something about
setting back enough of the building in the area to leave the impression that there is still a gap and make it an area for
outdoor seating and for some other facility upstairs, which would be an amenity to the building. He suggested that this
building did not follow the code when it talks about relating to the historic nature of this city. He suggested that the
board has an important duty in what it does tonight and has a chance to maintain and protect Edmonds.
Chairman Utt acknowledged Mr.Gregg’s request for right of rebuttal. Steve Bullock explained that the applicant always
bears the burden of proof to show their compliance with the criteria in the guidelines and has the final opportunity to
address anything that came up.
Bob Gregg realized it is difficult for citizens to get a packet like this and go through it and fully understand it. He
thought there was a misunderstanding in that it is not the whole block between Dayton and Maple. It is the north half of
the block, and the courtyard is not being eliminated. He agreed with some of the comments. He did not personally like
stucco. He knew it could be used nicely, but he did not use it himself, and there is no stucco on the building. With
regard to its historical cues, he explained that when they first interviewed Mr. Allen for the project, their comments to
him were to look not at the remodel that was done in 1978, but to look at the building as it was in the early 1900’s and
rather than covering up the rough, old, formed concrete walls where the rough-sawn wood imprints in the concrete are
still visible and the bulging of the forms and the concrete is uneven, rather than covering that all up or grinding it down
and sack it all over and make it smooth, his first comment was that they were going to expose all of that. He mentioned
that it gets to a point where there is enough ugliness and eccentricity to a building that it becomes beautiful. This
building was built as a concrete, poured-in-place, blockhouse, one-story, and some decades later another concrete block
house was built halfway down the block, and some decades later a second story was added in, all in the free-form poured
concrete style. In defense of Ralph’s team, he thought they had worked very hard to preserve the historical elements of
the building and it was a situation where as the remodel becomes more familiar and it starts to come to fruition, you
begin to appreciate the major effort to save a building that in almost any other circumstance would have been bulldozed.
He remarked that this building is an old girl with a lot of charm that needs remodeling every hundred years or so and it
will benefit from being brought up to code and HVAC and plumbing. The fire marshal recently thanked him for
reviewing the plans for the sprinkler system that will be added. It meets all of the current and proposed codes in terms of
having all of its storefronts on the exterior access. In terms of attracting retail, he was not sure what the
misunderstanding was but he did not think that they could have taken any more directly from the cues that Mark
Hinshaw made in his presentation in terms of transom windows and the street scape and the continuous shopping
experience. They are still uncertain as to what is going to go on the ground floor of the building, but it is being tuned
and fine-tuned to attract retail. He thought the issue was to focus on the architectural detail rather than the politics of the
whole situation, and complimented the bridge architecture that was done under Ralph Allen’s direction.
Pro Tem Chairman Utt inquired about the seismic condition of the building. Mr. Gregg responded that at last count they
were talking about 15,000 pounds of I-beams. Mr. Gregg explained that the first thing they did when they started their
due diligence was to talk with the structural engineers, and the building is so far out of seismic compliance that it will
not stand much longer: It does not meet health safety codes, plumbing codes, electrical codes, or fire code. The whole
back wall is bulged and leaning. The east wall is leaning. All of that is being rebuttressed. He pointed out that Mr.
Architectural Design Board Meeting Page 11 September 6, 2006 Draft Minutes
Allen is adamant that they can save the building and make it work. When they are done, the concrete walls will be
attached to a steel I-beam frame inside holding up the 30-year old walls.
Boardmember Michel inquired about obtaining the change to the code on one or two of the applicant’s other projects to
have living space project into the city right-of-way. He wondered if the applicant would use the bay windows from Old
Milltown as an argument to get that approved by City Council. Mr. Gregg responded that he did not doubt that he did,
and then he had heard Darryl Marmion stand up and tell them how horrible bay windows are. He noted that the bay
windows were not part of the project in the 1900’s, they were added later, and they are absolutely San Francisco-style
bay windows and are totally inconsistent with the style and are not historical.
Pro Tem Chairman Utt closed public comments to move into board deliberations.
Boardmember Schaefer noted that the guidelines talk about downtown commercial developments being pedestrian-
oriented and the city shall encourage the placement of awnings over public right-of-way where possible and appropriate.
He thought it was certainly possible and appropriate. The purpose of the awnings is to provide a shelter for pedestrians,
he noted, and he fully supported an extension of the awnings to something more functional for pedestrian protection. As
far as light for plantings, presently there are solid fabric awnings that extend out a ways and shade the planters that are
there and they bloom fine now. He was not concerned about light for the plants necessarily.
Pro Tem Chairman Utt wondered if they would like wiggle room as far as the extension or to negotiate with the city and
come up with something or let the applicant decide what that is.
Boardmember Smith inquired about width of an awning. Pro Tem Chairman Utt was not aware of a requirement that
says how many people can be underneath an awning but thought that it would be good to provide one person shelter.
Pro Tem Chairman Utt was concerned that although a cowl wall is a lighter material, there will still need to be some
steel or aluminum frame to support it, and the more the awnings project out, it is starting to create structural issues for
support on the building. Assuming that the building concrete is pretty sturdy, it probably is not a significant increase,
but if it was going to a heavy gauge c-channel with a metal deck or something in it, they would probably have to come
back in and restructure the building to support its awnings. He thought they had to bear in mind that awnings may often
times look fairly wide, but they still have to be held up. He thought using the cowl wall system, if they could keep a
pristine frame to it, extending a minimum of 18 inches to a maximum of 24 inches may be sufficient to get enough
coverage to meet the city’s requirements and still keep the plants happy and not get too far out, and allow the city and
the architect to work on it to see how it goes. Mr. Utt clarified that in addition to what they are now, if they are 40
inches, if they go another 24 inches they are getting close to six feet. He would not go over six feet for an awning.
Somewhere between five and six feet would probably be sufficient.
BOARDMEMBER KENDALL MOVED, SECONDED BY BOARDMEMBER SMITH, TO APPROVE
MINOR PROJECT ADB-2006-94, WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
• INDIVIDUAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROJECT ARE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL APPLICABLE
CITY CODES. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO APPLY FOR ALL
NECESSARY PERMITS AND DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH ALL THOSE CODES AND
APPROVALS (I.E. PARKING AND ADB APPROVAL);
• THE APPLICANT IS TO PROVIDE A FINAL PLANTING PLAN WITH THEIR BUILDING
PERMIT WHICH WILL BE APPROVED BY STAFF;
• THE AWNINGS ALONG FIFTH AVENUE SOUTH SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE
SUFFICIENT PROTECTION FOR PEDESTRIANS AND EXTEND FIVE TO SIX FEET OVER THE
SIDEWALK AT THE ARCHITECT’S DISCRETION;
BECAUSE WITH THESE CONDITIONS THE BOARD FINDS THAT THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT
WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND OTHER ADOPTED CITY POLICIES, THE STAFF HAS
Architectural Design Board Meeting Page 12 September 6, 2006 Draft Minutes
FOUND THE PROPOSAL MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE
PROPOSAL SATISFIES THE CRITERIA AND PURPOSES OF ECDC SECTION 20.10, ADB CRITERIA.
MOTION CARRIED (4-1; BOARDMEMBER MICHEL OPPOSED).
d. FILE NO. ADB-06-97: An application to modify the design of building 10 of the Point Edwards project.
Instead of a building that has a stepped roof design for the upper two floors it would have an upper floor
that covers the entire building. The site is located at 50 Pine Street and is zoned Master Plan Hillside
Mixed Use
Ross Woods, 85 Pine Street, Edmonds, was present
Senior Planner Steve Bullock presented the Point Edwards project, explaining that it had received its initial approval
from the board a few years ago and the project has moved along and different phases of it have been completed. This is
a proposed change for Building 10, which is the southern-most building located inside the loop of Pine Street. It is one
of the larger buildings and is located on a portion of the site that is sloped fairly well. When the City Council approved
the code language for the zone district that ultimately was applied to this property, language was created to address that
there were going to be larger buildings located on the site that had some fairly significant slopes to them and recognized
that when there is a large building on a slope that is fairly steep, it becomes very difficult to do one height calculation
box on the building. What was allowed in the original drafting of the Master Plan Hillside Residential zone was for an
applicant to put together a proposal for a building that would be one building, meaning it had one big parking garage and
even a couple of floors that were all the same, but then might have different elements projecting out from that point and
there was a portion of the building that was distinct from another portion of the building and the height calculations
could be done for that portion of the building separate from the other portion of the building. At the conceptual design
for Building 10, when it came through for conditional approval, it was planned for the building to take use of that
provision in the code. The western portion of the building, which faces almost due north, was going to have one height
calculation done for it and the portion of the building that faces off to the northeast would have a separate height
calculation done for it, and it was anticipated that the portion of the building to the west would be a story higher than the
portion to the east. As the applicant is putting together their proposal now for their construction plans, they are nailing
down their grades and the heights of their buildings and have found that the height calculation can be done for the entire
building as one height calculation, and it works okay for them, and it results in a building that is the same height all the
way across. They could still do that and it would allow the western portion to project probably even higher than what
their proposal is at this time. It would be proposed as all one building with one height calculation and the upper floor
would be one floor with some step to it, as opposed to a whole floor step to it. It will maintain the exact same site plan
approval that the board has approved in the past and will maintain the exact same character, colors and materials that
have already been approved and used on the remainder of the site.
Ross Woods described that the building is at the top of the hill on Pine Street, abuts Woodway, and primarily faces Pine
Street to the north. Since the sun is coming from the south side, the shadow would be on Pine Street rather than back on
any of the neighboring properties. He brought up that view blockage has already been set by this building’s original
design and prior approval. Woodway is a residential area and there is one home directly behind the building that is a
two-story home. Building 10 would block that view but the additional height on the eastern portion of the building does
not block it any further.
Boardmember Michel inquired which page shows the elevations of the new structure as it will be built. Mr. Bullock
commented that he has only seen a couple of massing studies that show it as blocks and there are photographs of other
similar elevations.
Boardmember Michel noted that it does not show how many stories or floor levels there are. Mr. Woods explained that
the eastern side of the building is four residential levels, with the lower level portion being a parking garage.
AM-639 9.
Report on City Council Committee Meetings
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/17/2006
Submitted By:Sandy Chase, City Clerk's
Office Time:15 Minutes
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Information
Review
Committee:
Action:
Agenda Memo
Subject
Report on City Council Committee Meetings.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
The following Committee Meeting Minutes are attached:
1. Finance Committee (10/10/06)
2. Public Safety Committee (10/10/06)
Recommendation
Revenue & Expenditures
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Finance Minutes
Link: Public Safety Minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/12/2006 02:23 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/12/2006 06:02 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2006 08:21 AM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 10/12/2006 09:57 AM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2006
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
October 10, 2006
6:00 PM
V:\WORDATA\FINANCE COMM MINUTES\FINANCE - 061010.DOC
Present: Councilmember Ron Wambolt
Deanna Dawson, Council President
Staff: Kathleen Junglov, Assistant Administrative Services Director
Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director
The Finance Committee meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM.
Item A: Preliminary Property Tax Ordinance
Staff reviewed the preliminary 2007 Property Tax Ordinance with Committee members.
After reviewing the ordinance it was the Committee’s consensus to forward the item to the
full Council without a recommendation at this time. It was felt it would be more
appropriate to submit a recommendation after reviewing the full budget and revenues.
The Committee also requested that staff prepare three ordinances for consideration during
the budget adoption process: 1.) An ordinance with no property tax increase; 2.) An
ordinance with a 1% property tax increase; and 3.) An ordinance with a 1% property tax
increase and use of remaining banked capacity.
2007-08 Budget Discussion
After concluding discussion of the property tax ordinance, the Committee moved on to a
more general review of possible revenues, expenditures, and programs, and how these
impact property tax levels.
As a follow-up item, the Committee requested information regarding possible
implementation dates for sales tax sourcing, and more specifically if the City would see any
dollars in 2007 if the State passes implementing legislation.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 PM.
Minutes
Public Safety Committee Meeting
October 10, 2006
Committee Members Present: Council member Richard Marin, Chair
Council member David Orvis
Staff Present: Chief of Police David Stern
Assistant Chief of Police Gerry Gannon
Community Services Director Stephen Clifton
Guests: Four Members of the Public
The meeting was called to order at 1800 hours.
A. Discussion of enforcement options related to barking dogs, stray cats, and
possible changes to procedures.
1. Discussion regarding Enforcement Options for Barking Dogs
Chief Stern advised that he had reviewed several ordinances included in the
packet and did not find them to be any clearer than the existing language. Chief
Stern stated that the common language in most ordinances described barking as
disturbing a person or neighborhood to an unreasonable degree. The
unreasonable degree standard is subjective and is probably one reason why the
existing statute seeks three signatures from neighbors. The opinion of several
neighbors would hold more weight in a prosecution than that of one person.
Chief Stern was asked to consult with the departments personnel, who work the
City of Mountlake Terrace, to determine if that City’s ordinance is more effective.
Chief Stern was than asked to report back at the November 14, 2006 Committee
Meeting.
2. Discussion regarding Stray Cats
Council member Chairman Marin preceded the discussion by stating that the
topic would be confined to code language and not specific cases. Chief Stern
gave a brief background of the existing code noting that it probably evolved from
the necessity of circumstances. Specifically he noted that almost all cases
involving bites and other aggressive behavior involved dogs as opposed to cats
and that is most likely why the code is more heavily weighted toward dogs.
Chief Stern then reviewed the memorandum from the City Attorney’s Office
discussing their research into the rights and responsibilities of pet and property
owners. A synopsis of the memorandum follows with the entire memorandum
attached for reference. Chief Stern noted the main topics as follows;
• Cats, although not specifically prohibited from roaming at large,
are not thereby granted any special rights or privileges.
• Cats permitted to roam by their owners are liable for trespassing
even if no damage is caused.
• Reasonable force may be used to prevent or detain a trespasser.
• Non-lethal traps or cages are considered reasonable force by
many municipalities.
• A trapped animal must be promptly removed from the property by;
setting it free off the property; returning to the owner if known; or
turned over to Animal Control Officers.
• The trapped animal cannot be mishandled or neglected.
Several options from other codes were noted which required release of stray
animals to Animal Control authorities promptly and which authorized seizure and
impound by property owners. It was observed that the code must be balanced to
protect the rights of both property and animal owners and to provide for
protection of seized animals.
A citizen stated that the code must require owners of cats to prevent them from
trespassing. Council member Chairman Marin indicated that the issue would be
covered. No other citizen comments were noted.
Chief Stern was directed to consult with the City Attorney and bring back
suggested code language at the November 14, 2006 Committee Meeting.
Action: On October 10, 2006 the Public Safety Committee met. The discussion of
“enforcement options relating to barking dogs, stray cats, and possible changes to procedures”
was held. Chief Stern was asked to; consult with personnel who work Mountlake Terrace to
determine if that City’s ordinance is more effective and to consult with the City Attorney and
bring back suggested code language at the November 14, 2006 Committee Meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 1830 hours.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 10, 2006
TO: Mayor Gary Haakenson; Councilmember Richard Marin; Police Chief David
Stern; Asst. Chief Gerald Gannon
City of Edmonds Public Safety Committee
FROM: Bio F. Park, Office of the City Attorney
RE: Legal Analysis of Trapping Cats Trespassing onto Private Property
The Edmonds City Code on Animal Control, Chapter 5.05 ECC, does not prohibit domesticated cats from roaming
at large.1 At large is defined as being unleashed and off the premises of its owner.2 Although such activity is not
illegal under our code, no special right or privilege is created to cats or their owners. They must continue to obey
applicable laws including those relating to animal waste and rights of private property owners.3 Cat owners allow
their cats to roam the city unsupervised at their own risk. As noted in ECC 5.05.001, the responsibility and
obligation to comply with requirements and regulations of animals falls upon their owners.
Property owners, whether of real estate or an animal, have rights and responsibilities under Washington law. A cat
owner who permits his or her cat to enter and or remain on private property without permission or invitation is liable
for trespass even if no damage is caused.4 The right to exclude others is a fundamental attribute of real property
ownership.5 State statute and the common law recognize a property owner’s privilege to use reasonable force
relative to perceived threat to prevent trespass.6 In addition, the same force may be used to reasonably detain a
trespasser.7
Use of non-lethal cage or box traps is considered reasonable and appropriate by a number of municipalities given the
degree of threat generally posed by cats. In fact, Animal Control in Lakewood will remove cats in non-lethal traps
upon request by the property owner, and Animal Control in Everett will go one step further and lend-out such traps.
After the trespassing cat is trapped, the property owner must take prompt steps to remove the cat from his property.
The owner of the cat, if known, can be contacted to take the cat, or the cat can be freed outside property limits.
While trapped, a cat is under that property owner’s control and care, and animal cruelty laws do apply if the cat is
mishandled or neglected.8 A prior city ordinance required property owners to turn over trapped animals to Animal
Control within 24 hours. This approach offered protection to the animal and could prevent confrontations between
affected owners.
Again, the mere fact that the City does not prohibit cats from roaming at large does not equate to a creation of any
special privilege. Roaming at large is a risky endeavor for any animal, including cats. Their owners should be
aware such risks include being not only killed by traffic or wild animals, but also trapped by owners onto whose
property they trespass. As long as done reasonably, property owners have the privilege under Washington law to
prevent trespass. When cats trespass, their owners are civilly liable.
BFP:
1 See ECC 5.05.050; “It shall be unlawful for owners […] of any animal, with the exception of cats, to allow such
animal to run at large […] .” (Emphasis added.)
2 See ECC 5.05.010.
3 Unlike ECC 5.05.050, ECC 5.05.070 on animal waste makes no exception for cats.
4 See 16 Wash. Prac., Tort Law and Practice § 13.31 (2d ed.).
5 Guimont v. Clarke, 121 Wn.2d 586, 602, 854 P.2d 1 (1993).
6 RCW 9A.16.020; Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 77, 78, 260 (1965).
7 Id.
8 See Chapter 16.52 RCW; RCW 9.08.070; and ECC 5.05.128.