2008.10.21 CC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
Edmonds City Council
Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex
250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds
______________________________________________________________
October 21, 2008
6:30 p.m. - Executive session regarding negotiation of purchase of real estate.
7:00 p.m. - Call to Order and Flag Salute
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Approval of Consent Agenda Items
A. Roll Call
B. AM-1845 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2008.
C. AM-1856 Approval of claim checks #107347 through #107532 for October 9, 2008 in the amount of
$312,528.33, and #107533 through #107675 for October 16, 2008 in the amount of
$410,660.86.
D. AM-1832 Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages from Eric Thuesen ($750.00).
E. AM-1823 Police Support Collective Bargaining Agreement.
F. AM-1817 Authorize award of the contract for the South County Senior Center kitchen upgrades
construction project to the lowest responsible bidder (Construction Specialties LLC) as
determined October 6, 2008. This consent agenda item was not reviewed by a Council Committee.
G. AM-1838 Authorization to contract with James G. Murphy to sell a surplus city vehicle, Unit #15, a
1995 Chevrolet van. This consent agenda item was not reviewed by a Council Committee.
H. AM-1847 2007-2008 Fire Department Work Plan Update #3. Reviewed by the Public Safety Committee on
10-14-08.
I. AM-1846 Authorization for Mayor to sign Interlocal Agreement for Automatic First Response and
Mutual Assistance. Reviewed by the Public Safety Committee on 10-14-08.
J. AM-1850 Authorization to purchase light poles and electrical components for the SR99 International
District enhancement project through US Communities Interlocal Cooperative Purchasing
Agreement. This consent agenda item was not reviewed by a Council Committee.
K. AM-1852 Council approval of contract with SRI Technologies, Inc. for a part time Capital Project
Manager. This consent agenda item was not reviewed by a Council Committee.
3. AM-1849
(10 Minutes)
Public Service Announcement - Friends of the Library
Packet Page 1 of 374
4. (60 Minutes)2009-2010 Budget Public Hearing:
A. AM-1857 Potential budget cuts in lieu of forming a Regional Fire Authority.
B.City Council Comments
C. AM-1853 Public Hearing on 2009-2010 budget and revenue sources.
5. AM-1833
(60 Minutes)
Public Hearing on the Planning Board recommendation regarding Code changes related
to the BD1 zones.
6.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)*
Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings.
7. AM-1854
(30 Minutes)
Report on Senior Center proposal (Bob Gregg).
8. AM-1844
(10 Minutes)
Proposed ordinance amending ECDC 19.00.005 modifying the time limitations on
permit applications
9. AM-1855
(10 Minutes)
Contract for Professional Services - Prosecutor.
10. AM-1851
(15 Minutes)
Report on City Council Committee Meetings of October 14, 2008.
11. (5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments
12. (15 Minutes)Council Comments
Adjourn
Packet Page 2 of 374
AM-1845 2.B.
Approval of 10-07-08 Draft City Council Minutes
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Sandy Chase Time:Consent
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of October 7, 2008.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
It is recommended that the City Council review and approve the draft minutes.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Attached is a copy of the draft minutes.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: 10-07-08 Draft City Council Minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/14/2008 08:40 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/14/2008 08:41 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/14/2008 08:43 AM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy
Chase
Started On: 10/14/2008 08:38
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/14/2008
Packet Page 3 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
October 7, 2008
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
Michael Plunkett, Council President
Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember
Steve Bernheim, Councilmember
D. J. Wilson, Councilmember (arrived 7:02 p.m.)
Deanna Dawson, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Ron Wambolt, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Leif Warren, Student Representative
STAFF PRESENT
Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief
Mark Correira, Assistant Fire Chief
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Gerry Gannon, Assistant Police Chief
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director
Brian McIntosh, Parks & Recreation Director
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
Kathleen Junglov, Finance Director
Debi Humann, Human Resources Director
Douglas Fair, Municipal Court Judge
Joan Ferebee, Court Administrator
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Carl Nelson, Chief Information Officer
Ann Bullis, Building Official
Mike Thies, Code Enforcement Officer
Rob English, City Engineer
Debra Sharp, Accountant
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Megan Cruz, Video Recorder
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED. (The vote was 6-0;
Councilmember Wilson was not present for the vote.)
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. (The vote was 6-0; Councilmember
Wilson was not present for the vote.) The agenda items approved are as follows:
A. ROLL CALL
B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 30, 2008.
Packet Page 4 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 2
C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #107059, 107060 AND 107172 THROUGH #107346
FOR OCTOBER 2, 2008 IN THE AMOUNT OF $727,950.88. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL
DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #47312 THROUGH #47359 FOR THE PERIOD OF
SEPTEMBER 16, 2008 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30, 2008 IN THE AMOUNT OF
$863,442.69.
D. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM SYDNEY ALLRUD
($750,000.00).
E. APPROVAL OF LIST OF BUSINESSES APPLYING FOR RENEWAL OF THEIR
LIQUOR LICENSES WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD,
SEPTEMBER 2008.
F. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 TO THE
BUILDING USE AGREEMENT WITH THE GREATER EDMONDS CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE.
G. AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) TO
UPDATE THE WATER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
H. AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS TO
PREPARE AN INFILTRATION AND INFLOW STUDY ON THE SEWER SYSTEM.
I. APPROVAL OF PAYMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $11,923.03 TO LANDAU
ASSOCIATES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF THE OLD MILLTOWN
COURTYARD SITE FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND.
J. PROPOSED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT - CONSORTIUM FOR NEGOTIATION OF
COMCAST CABLE TELEVISION FRANCHISING, AND AGREEMENT WITH RIVER
OAKS COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION.
3. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH, OCTOBER
2008.
Councilmember Dawson read a proclamation declaring October as Domestic Violence Awareness month
and encouraging all residents to take a stand against domestic violence in their personal relationships and
in the community. The proclamation urged all residents to work toward eliminating domestic violence in
the community. She recognized the City's Domestic Violence Advocate Kari Hvorka, Police Chief Al
Compaan, and Mountlake Terrace’s Domestic Violence Advocate Danielle Simpson. She also recognized
Assistant Chief Gerry Gannon for his advocacy on issues of domestic violence in the community.
Ms. Hvorka expressed her appreciation for the City’s efforts to ensure domestic violence victims and their
children were safe and recognized the excellent job done by the Police Department to keep victims safe
and to ensure children were raised in homes free of violence. Mayor Haakenson expressed his
appreciation for the work done by Ms. Hvorka.
4. PUBLIC HEARING ON EDMONDS CITY CODE CHAPTER 6, NUISANCE REGULATIONS
AMENDMENTS.
Development Services Director Duane Bowman explained this matter was originally discussed by the
Council at a work session in February and two public hearings were held on June 3 and July 15. The
Council then referred the matter to the Community Services/Development Services (CS/DS) Committee
who considered it at their August 12 and September 9 meetings.
He reviewed the rationale for the proposed revisions:
• Consolidate nuisance regulations into one location, the Edmonds Municipal Code (EMC).
Packet Page 5 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 3
• Clean up antiquated code language in the EMC.
• Nuisance regulations are part of the City’s broad police powers and should be in the EMC and not
within the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC).
• The proposed regulations cover the types of complaints frequently received by the City’s Code
Enforcement Officer.
He clarified the proposed amendments did not regulate RVs, boats, cars or trailers except if they were
junk. The CS/DS Committee’s recommendation was to concur with the City Attorney revisions in the
memo dated August 1, 2008 with the following exceptions:
• Retain the three year old vehicle criteria for junk cars - this has not been an issue for staff and an
amendment could be proposed to Council if it became a problem in the future.
• Eliminate the addition of mediation - the CS/DS Committee recognized the value of mediation
but did not want to include it as a requirement in the nuisance regulations.
• Add a requirement to send notice before fines are issued for frivolous complaints.
• Add a reference to side yards in Chapter 6.20.41.G.2.
Staff recommends the Council direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance for adoption on
the City Council consent agenda.
Council President Plunkett relayed a resident’s question whether or not the proposed amendment would
impact a property owner storing a boat next to their house. Mr. Bowman responded this ordinance did
not regulate boats or RVs. Council President Plunkett asked if the ordinance addressed awnings over
boats or RVs. Mr. Bowman answered it did not; the Planning Board will be discussing that topic at their
October 8 meeting.
Council President Plunkett observed the ordinance eliminated a property owner’s ability to cover junk in
their backyard. Mr. Bowman agreed the ordinance did address covered junk or debris in a person’s
backyard. Council President Plunkett noted the ordinance did not allow a property owner to cover a
nuisance because a nuisance may be more than sight. City Attorney Scott Snyder advised the ordinance
distinguishes between two categories of nuisance: if a visual/aesthetic nuisance was in the backyard and
screened by a fence, it did not need to be covered. However, chemical nuisances, rodent harbors, an
attractive nuisance for children, etc. were not eliminated by covering it.
Council President Plunkett asked if a motorcycle stored in a side yard was addressed by the ordinance.
Mr. Bowman answered it was not.
Council President Plunkett observed the decision regarding a nuisance was made by the Hearing
Examiner and asked if that decision was appealable to the City Council. Mr. Bowman answered it was
not; the Hearing Examiner would make a factual finding whether the property owner was in compliance
or not. In an enforcement action, the burden of proof was on the City to prove the violation exists.
Council President Plunkett asked whether the Hearing Examiner’s decision was appealable to court. Mr.
Snyder answered it was.
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to the definition of vehicle on page 3 of the ordinance: recreational
vehicle, truck, trailers, van, motorcycle, watercraft, farm equipment, construction equipment and antique
vehicles (i.e., cars, trucks, vans, motorcycles, carriages, or motorized buggies), noting there is also
reference to “vehicle” in the definition of junk vehicle. He disagreed with Mr. Bowman that recreational
vehicles, boats, etc. were not regulated by this ordinance. He recommended the definition of vehicle be
moved to the beginning of the definitions so that persons reading the ordinance knew what items were
regulated. Next, he referred to Section 6.20.040, aesthetic nuisances, noting A, B, C and D were in one
Packet Page 6 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 4
category and E was in a separate category because the exceptions in paragraph G omitted E which
prohibited screening of the items listed in E. He suggested items used for painting such as ladders,
wheelbarrows, etc. could be easily screened in a backyard. He referred to page 4, attractive nuisances,
noting the proposed ordinance expanded the State law regarding refrigerators and freezers. He asserted
Section 6.20.045, protective covers, was a new section and intended to eliminate the use of blue tarps. He
summarized his concerns were the inability to appeal the Hearing Examiner’s decision and the protection
of property rights.
Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing.
Mr. Snyder assured the section regarding protective coverings had been in every draft of the ordinance.
With regard to paragraph E in Section 6.20.040, he noted those items could be stored as long as the
property owner had a building permit plus 10 days before the permit. That provision was only applicable
if a property owner was storing building and/or landscaping materials that were not being used. It was up
to the Council if they wanted to move the definition of junk vehicle to the beginning of the definitions
rather than having them in alphabetical order.
Councilmember Bernheim asked whether the finding regarding a nuisance was subject to appeal to the
City Council. Mr. Snyder advised it was subject to appeal to Superior Court; the City’s final decision was
made at the Hearing Examiner. He noted this was the civil equivalent of a traffic ticket.
Council President Plunkett pointed out motorcycles were in the definition of vehicle. Mr. Snyder advised
the only time the vehicle provision was applicable was in the junk vehicle section and the definition was
as used in the State statute that established junk vehicle provisions.
Councilmember Wambolt disagreed with retaining the three year age as a criteria for determining a
vehicle was junk, commenting the other four criteria, extensively damaged, inoperable, without valid
registration plates and market value equal only to the approximate value of the scrap were sufficient to
determine whether a vehicle was junk. He feared citizens would use the age of a vehicle to declare a
neighbor’s vehicle junk.
COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY ORDINANCE FOR
ADOPTION ON THE CITY COUNCIL CONSENT AGENDA.
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PLUNKETT, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REMOVE THE 3 YEAR AGE CRITERIA FOR
DECLARING A VEHICLE JUNK.
Councilmember Dawson agreed with Councilmember Wambolt’s motion to remove the age criteria,
finding it irrelevant.
Councilmember Wilson stated at the CS/DS Committee meeting, staff explained the current criteria
worked and there had not been any problems with the language.
UPON ROLL CALL VOTE, THE AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3); COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PLUNKETT AND COUNCILMEMBERS DAWSON, ORVIS, AND WAMBOLT IN FAVOR; AND
COUNCILMEMBERS OLSON, WILSON AND BERNHEIM OPPOSED.
Mayor Haakenson commented if there were issues with declaring a vehicle junk without that criteria, staff
could make a request to Council to reinstate it. Mr. Snyder explained declaring a vehicle junk required
that the vehicle meet any two of the criteria. He asked whether the Council wanted to require that a
vehicle meet only one of the remaining criteria. He noted without the criteria regarding three years of age
or older, declaring a vehicle junk may be difficult to prove.
Packet Page 7 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 5
Councilmember Dawson preferred the vehicle meet two of the criteria in order to be declared a junk
vehicle. She noted the fact that a vehicle met two of the other criteria was significant enough without the
criteria regarding the vehicle’s age. If staff could not prove any two of the remaining criteria, the vehicle
was likely not a junk vehicle. Code Enforcement Officer Mike Thies explained criteria 3 (Is apparently
inoperable) and 4 (Is without valid current registration plates) were the criteria most often used to declare
a vehicle junk. Without the criteria regarding the age of the vehicle, a property owner could keep a junk
vehicle in their yard for the cost of registration plates.
With regard to mediation, Councilmember Dawson pointed out staff could still encourage mediation but it
was not necessary to include that in the code. She found mediation an appropriate solution to many
neighborhood disputes.
Councilmember Bernheim expressed his general opposition to the extension of government regulation to
what people were doing on their private property, commenting as belt-tightening was required, what
people did on their property may need to be expanded rather than further restricted. He commented
property owners were entitled to the benefit of the doubt with regard to what they were doing on their
property versus a neighbor being offended by the view of their property. To the extent a use caused a
diminution of property values, a neighbor would have a private right of action in court. He commented
on the neighborhood blight occurring in Atlanta due to the high foreclosure rate. Unless the problem
reached the point of impacting public safety, he was opposed to regulations related to aesthetics. He
expressed concern with the effort that had been expended on this issue including a great deal of staff time.
He preferred consolidating the existing nuisance regulations in the code and eliminating antiquated
language rather than rewriting the code to expand the restrictions. He summarized he would oppose the
motion, finding it unnecessary and that Section 20.110.030 adequately defined nuisances.
THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (6-1); COUNCILMEMBER
BERNHEIM OPPOSED.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Don Hall, Edmonds, recalled last week Mayor Haakenson outlined the budget dilemma. With regard to
raising the business license fee, he relayed that his wife, the owner of a small retail store, did not object to
the increase as it had been at least 13 years since the business license fee had been increased. He relayed
his wife’s request that all people doing business in Edmonds be required to obtain a business license
including those participating in fairs and markets as well as ensure they were paying sales tax to the City.
With regard to raising cable TV taxes, he noted increasing taxes on cable TV, water, sewer, etc.
disproportionately affected lower and medium income residents. He agreed with the proposal to institute
EMS transport fees, questioning why that had not been done previously particularly since insurance pays
for this service. He agreed with the concept of a Fire Authority as long as all citizens were aware it would
increases taxes. He wanted to ensure a Fire Authority saved money and provided better service and the
same response times. For the Councilmembers opposed to gambling, he urged them to identify a creative
way to raise $500,000 without raising his taxes.
6. DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION REGARDING THE SOUTH COUNTY SENIOR
CENTER LEASE AND RECREATION SERVICES AGREEMENT.
Council President Plunkett referred to Exhibits 3 (South County Senior Center Activity Report
Overview), 4 (2009 Lease) and 5 (2009 Recreational Services Agreement). He reported he invited Ms.
Cantwell to tonight’s meeting to respond to Council questions, noting the Senior Center Board plans to
discuss this at their October 15 meeting. He suggested the Council take action tonight to allow the Senior
Center Board to review the lease and for the lease to be renewed by November 1.
Packet Page 8 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 6
City Attorney Scott Snyder referred to Council President Plunkett’s reference to November 1 to provide
notice to the Senior Center, explaining the date by which the lease needed to be renewed was January 1,
2009. A key issue for the Council to resolve was whether to describe the service provided by the Senior
Center in a general way or a specific way. The report provided as Exhibit 3 did not contain a list of
specific activities although it referenced United Way documents that likely provided further detail. The
existing lease and the draft have a generalized list modeled after the City’s grant obligations. He recalled
that during past discussions Councilmember Dawson suggested identifying specific programs to ensure
the City was getting its money’s worth under the funding agreement and that those services were being
provided via the lease agreement.
Councilmember Dawson explained a question arose during the past year regarding how to ensure the
Senior Center was providing high quality services. She was confident assurance could be provided but
did not want it to be an onerous process for the Senior Center. She preferred reporting that would assure
the Council that the Senior Center organization was providing the services expected in exchange for the
funding the City provided and if they were not, to have a method whereby the lease could be terminated.
Councilmember Wilson recognized the political reality that a Councilmember could not impact the Senior
Center and be reelected in this City as well as the reality that the City was in significant financial straits.
He recalled in a previous Council meeting he estimated the City lost approximately $100,000 in rent on
this facility; the materials provided by the Senior Center valued the free rent at $250,000. He noted the
City provided $60,000 for programs at the Senior Center, an amount well spent. He acknowledged there
was not a political will on the Council to change the amount charged the Senior Center for rent but
$250,000 plus the $60,000 was a large subsidy that required the new leadership at the Senior Center to
continue and broaden programs at the Senior Center. He supported broadening programs to the point it
was not just a Senior Center but also a community center where families felt welcome.
Councilmember Bernheim expressed support for attaching a list of senior center projects and programs to
the Recreational Services Agreement as referenced in the lease. He envisioned a list could be created that
was general enough to accomplish the desired outcome. He noted in all the criticism of the Senior Center,
the problem was not that the lease and/or Recreational Service Agreement did not contain sufficient
controls; the problem was the controls were not enforced. He inquired with the State Auditor why the
City’s audit did not reveal that the rent had not been paid or reports provided and was assured it would be
reviewed during the next audit.
Council President Plunkett expressed support for Exhibits 3, 4 and 5 as presented.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO
MOVE FORWARD WITH EXHIBITS 3, 4 AND 5, SOUTH COUNTY SENIOR CENTER
ACTIVITY REPORT OVERVIEW, 2009 LEASE AGREEMENT AND 2009 RECREATIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT.
Councilmember Bernheim recognized the Senior Center may have some revisions and suggested
revisions be returned to the Council for review.
Mr. Snyder referred to the reference in the second paragraph in Exhibit 3 to the Logic Model for the
South County Senior Center attachment, assuming that contained more detail than was contained in
Exhibit 3. He suggested that be included in Exhibit 3. Senior Center Executive Director Hallie Olson
agreed to provide the Council a copy of the Logic Model.
Councilmember Dawson commented she had seen that document and felt it provided the appropriate level
of detail and required the same reporting. She agreed the Senior Center should be allowed to suggest
revisions before final adoption by the Council at a later date.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Packet Page 9 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 7
7. WORKSHOP ON THE 2009-2010 PRELIMINARY BUDGET
Council President Plunkett referred to page 195 of the budget as an example of a comparison of revenues
and expenditures and questioned why on page 33 only expenditures were identified for that cost center.
Finance Director Kathleen Junglov commented the bulk of the budget was General Fund and was
presented by cost center in order to provide that level of detail by department. Council President Plunkett
asked why each cost center did not have revenue and expenditures on the same page. Ms. Junglov
explained General Fund revenues were not dedicated to a specific cost center.
Council President Plunkett recalled Mayor Haakenson stated in his budget message that retirements in
2009 would present additional opportunities for not filling positions. He asked Ms. Junglov what
positions may not be filled. Mayor Haakenson offered to provide a list of employees who were retiring in
2009.
Council President Plunkett recalled Mayor Haakenson’s budget message indicated the Regional Fire
Authority (RFA) would free up several million dollars. Since the Fire Department costs $8 million, he
asked whether establishing an RFA would free up $8 million. Ms. Junglov explained the formation of a
RFA would preclude the City from assessing the EMS levy and collection of funds for contracts with
Woodway and Esperance, therefore, the net savings would be approximately $4 million.
Council President Plunkett referred to page 8, noting the ending cash balance fluctuated from $1 million
in 2009, down to $637,000 in 2010 and increased again in 2011 and 2012. He asked if staff was
comfortable with this much flexibility in the ending cash balance. Ms. Junglov answered she was not; the
Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommends one month ending cash which was
approximately 8-10% of General Fund expenditures. She found $637,000 very low but that was the
amount of the ending cash balance with the available revenue sources. Council President Plunkett
commented it could be inferred there was a fair amount of flexibility if the ending cash balance could get
that low.
Council President Plunkett referred to page 17, recalling the Council reduced Council benefits, yet the
reduction was not reflected in 2009. Ms. Junglov answered the reduction in benefits applied to
Councilmembers taking office after 2010.
Council President Plunkett expressed his thanks for staff establishing a separate cost center in the budget
for fiber optics. He noted fiber optics was a mixture of government use, expansion to business and
possibly expansion to residents in the future. He noted through 2008 a fair amount ($242,000) had been
expended and asked whether the projected expenditure of $200,000 in 2009 was for government entities
or expansion to the business community. He also asked whether that expenditure implemented the recent
proposal the CTAC made to the Council. Rick Jenness, Community Technology Advisory Committee
(CTAC), answered the major expenditures were one time equipment purchases for routing and switching.
The communications cost was the gross cost of purchasing internet bandwidth out of the Westin Hotel
and that amount will decrease over time.
Council President Plunkett asked whether these expenditures covered the most basic work, outreach to
government entities or did they cover outreach to businesses and the more expansive program the CTAC
presented to the Council. Mr. Jenness answered the expenditures were the continuation of outreach to
government. Council President Plunkett asked if any of the proposed expenditures were for the expansion
to businesses. Mr. Jenness answered the only expenditures in this budget related to that proposal were
anticipated legal fees.
Packet Page 10 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 8
Council President Plunkett asked when revenue would be generated. Chief Information Officer Carl
Nelson advised the revenues were shown in miscellaneous revenues. Council President Plunkett
requested staff provide details regarding the revenue stream.
Council President Plunkett commented it was his understanding records management was becoming an
increasing expense in the Police Department, yet page 78 indicates there were no significant budget
changes. Police Chief Al Compaan responded the 2008 year end estimate for salaries versus 2009
includes one position that was unfilled for the majority of 2008 that has been filled recently. The 2008
salary under run is due to a vacant Police Services Assistant position. He noted the Public Records Act
requests have significantly impacted their budget.
For Councilmember Orvis, Ms. Junglov identified revenue from increases in Cable TV taxes,
Development Services fees and Business License fees in 2009 and 2010. Mayor Haakenson pointed out
the increase in Development Services fees which are included with building permits reflected the
downturn in the housing industry. Ms. Junglov identified EMS transport fees and the Transportation
Benefit District in the Charges for Services line. She noted most new revenue would begin January 1;
revenue from the TBD would begin July 1.
Council President Plunkett referred to page 101, Police Reserves, pointing out the amount budgeted and
the year end estimate varied widely. Assistant Police Chief Gerry Gannon answered the difference was
due to one vacant Reserve Officer position.
Council President Plunkett referred to page 104 and the transfer of charges from Southwest Snohomish
County Communications Agency and Snohomish Emergency Radio to the non-departmental budget. Ms.
Junglov explained the non-departmental budget was in Finance and included expenditures that could not
be allocated to just one cost center. These were detailed on page 59 and included election costs, voter
registration, insurance, SnoCom, audit fees, etc. Fire Chief Tom Tomberg advised the Emergency
Services Coordinating Agency (ESCA) that coordinates before/during/after disaster response serves all
City departments and because it was difficult to break that out by department, it was included in non-
departmental. SnoCom, the 911 dispatch agency, serves a similar role; Police, Fire and Public Works are
the primary consumers of that service and it seemed appropriate to include it in non-departmental.
Council President Plunkett referred to page 188, Public Works, that indicated there were no budget
changes and page 190 that indicated there were no significant budget changes, yet those costs centers had
the largest change of any cost center, 6% and 6.1%. Public Works Director Noel Miller answered there
were no changes, he would need to discuss the reason for the increase with Ms. Junglov. Ms. Junglov
advised the largest contributing factor was there were only 2.5-3 FTE in this cost center and the
employees were now eligible for step increases and the benefit costs depend on whether the person was
single or married with children.
Council President Plunkett referred to page 195, pointing out the ending cash varied dramatically, from
$178,000 to $5,000 and asked what amount would be normal. Mr. Miller answered the Street Fund
varied from year to year based on the weather, the amount of good weather to do road projects and the
amount of snow removal.
Council President Plunkett pointed out the 148% difference in interfund transfer on page 203. Ms.
Junglov answered she would need to verify this but believed it was a transfer to Fund 412.
Council President Plunkett referred to the 119% increase in the travel budget on page 205. Mr. Miller
stated this represented a national conference that Treatment Plant Manager Steve Koho was interested in
attending. He noted there were no General Funds associated with the Wastewater Treatment Plant fund.
Packet Page 11 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 9
Council President Plunkett noted the capital budget did not include the street lights on 5th and Main east
of Main up to the library. Mr. Miller stated the capital budget was only for two years and several projects
were extended out due to the lack of transportation funds. Council President Plunkett asked whether
funds from the TBD could be used for those street lights. Mr. Miller answered the decline in REET has
significantly reduced the amount available to be transferred to Fund 112 Transportation. Council
President Plunkett asked whether REET was used to fund infrastructure such as street lights. Mr. Miller
answered these were an extension of the decorative lights in the downtown area that were funded in the
late 1980s and early 1990s. Mayor Haakenson recalled they were funded via a Downtown Business
Improvement District. Council President Plunkett asked whether the funding source when the lights were
discussed two years ago was REET. Mr. Miller answered yes.
Councilmember Wambolt commented he had asked staff a number of questions via email over the past
several weeks.
Councilmember Wilson expressed his thanks to staff for their thorough responses to his emails regarding
the budget. He anticipated funding for the downtown streetlights could be provided if the license fee in
the TBD was more than $20. He inquired about funding for a joint City/Chamber of Commerce
marketing effort. Community Services Director/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton
answered the City had been working with the Chamber and has purchased joint advertisements in the
Puget Sound Business Journal and Alaska Airlines magazine recruiting specialty businesses and related to
tourism. He explained the intent was to leverage the City’s funds against other entities such as the
Chamber. He requested an additional $7,300 in the budget to do more joint advertising and to leverage
funds provided by the Chamber.
Councilmember Wilson commented he was typically an advocate of advertising the City, noting it was
easy to spend money without a plan for measuring success. He relayed his discussion with Chamber
members regarding establishing a Business Development District in the downtown core that would force
anyone who benefited from advertising dollars to support the expenditure on advertising. He asked
whether there had been any discussion by staff regarding a local improvement district or economic
development zone downtown, suggesting advertising funds may be better spent developing that. Mr.
Clifton answered he has met with Chamber representatives and attends the Downtown Edmonds
Merchants Association (DEMA) meetings; their primary focus has been marketing the downtown from a
retail aspect and have not pursued the formation of a local improvement district. Executive Director Jan
Vance and he have discussed a variety of ways of improving the business climate downtown including
providing educational opportunities for businesses.
Councilmember Dawson requested staff forward their responses to any Council questions to all
Councilmembers.
Councilmember Wambolt referred to Mr. Hall’s observation that there may be businesses that were not
paying sales tax and asked how the City knew everyone with a business license was paying the
appropriate sales taxes. Ms. Junglov answered the City contracts with Microflex who conduct business
license/sales tax checks to ensure businesses were paying sales tax. Mayor Haakenson commented Mr.
Hall’s question was related to vendors at the Summer Market and requested staff also address the summer
arts festival, etc. With regard to a business license, City Clerk Sandy Chase explained the vendors were
under the umbrella of the Summer Market who pays the City a set amount each week for each vendor.
She advised vendors at the arts festival were not required to obtain a business license; they were under the
umbrella of that event. She advised Microflex also sends business applications to businesses collecting
sales tax in Edmonds but do not have a business license. Councilmember Wambolt asked whether a
Packet Page 12 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 10
business could be established without obtaining a business license and not pay sales tax. Ms. Chase
advised it is possible the City may only be aware if someone complained.
Councilmember Bernheim commented a recent newspaper headline in Chicago stated they may force
non-union workers making $75,000 or more to take up to three unpaid days per year due to budget
shortfalls as a result of lower real estate values, decreased construction permit activity, and lower REET
collections. Non-union workers making less than $75,000 would take two unpaid days per year. He
noted this was an example of the range of options available.
In response to Mr. Hertrich’s comment that increases in utility taxes impacted low income families,
Councilmember Wambolt explained he analyzed how best to generate increased revenue, via increased
utility and cable TV tax or property taxes. The proposed budget indicated the average person would pay
an additional $60 per year on their cable. He clarified this was for residents with a cable packet costing
$100/month; for the average person whose bill was $56/month, the additional cost was $33.70 per year.
The increase in utility and cable TV tax was $26.40/year or approximately $60 more per year to generate
$865,000. To generate that amount in property tax would require a $0.115 increase in the property tax.
When applied to the price of an average home in Edmonds, $461,500, the cost would be $52.60. He
concluded there was little difference in the cost to residents of increasing utility and cable TV tax or
property taxes.
Mayor Haakenson advised staff would email a response to the questions raised tonight to all
Councilmembers. He encouraged Councilmembers to email staff with any additional questions prior to
the October 21 meeting and asked whether the Council wanted any other information provided at the
October 21 meeting.
Councilmember Dawson stated one of the unknowns was the Regional Fire Authority concept. Given
that it was not a certainty that the Council would approve forming such an agency and if they did, that the
citizens would approve it, the Council needed more detail on the impacts on departments of not forming a
RFA. She questioned whether the Council should proceed as if formation of the RFA would not occur
and take early steps so that deeper cuts were not required in the future if a RFA were not formed. She
suggested staff relay recommendations for the 2009 budget were the Council not to pursue the formation
of a RFA. Mayor Haakenson answered if the RFA is not approved by either the Council or the voters, a
$4 million cut would be required. Staff did not know where to make that cut and were looking to the
Council for direction regarding their priorities and where $4 million could be cut from the budget.
Councilmember Dawson pointed out the difficulty for the Council was they did not have staff to do the
analysis or identify the impact of a $4 million cut and needed the assistance of the directors to identify the
impacts on departments and services and where General Fund cuts could be made. She appreciated that it
would result in reductions in service levels but needed input from staff to make that analysis.
Councilmember Wambolt pointed out formation of a RFA would not take effect until 2011. Mayor
Haakenson agreed, noting Councilmember Dawson’s point was if the RFA was not approved, cuts needed
to be made in the 2009 budget. He emphasized $4 million in budget cuts would not be just an employee
here or an employee there; it would be an entire department such as the Parks Department. He stressed
staff had no idea what the Council valued most beyond police and fire services. Councilmember Dawson
commented it would be helpful for each department to identify what would be cut and the impacts on
service delivery of a 10% across-the-board reduction. She noted it was necessary for staff to identify
possible General Fund cuts because in some departments eliminating the entire department would not
save any General Fund dollars because they were funded via other sources. She summarized the Council
needed to hear from the directors regarding the impacts that cuts would have on their departments.
Packet Page 13 of 374
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
October 7, 2008
Page 11
Councilmember Wilson agreed with Councilmember Dawson’s suggestion. He pointed out the
importance of highlighting for the public the impact of $4 million in cuts. He also supported
consideration of other revenue options including a significant levy or property tax increase. He did not
feel comfortable urging citizens to raise their taxes, to allow gambling or to continue the $250,000
subsidy to the Senior Center without that additional information. He agreed with Councilmember
Dawson’s suggestion that cuts be considered in 2009 rather than waiting until 2010.
Councilmember Orvis commented on the City’s day-to-day liquidity and ability to do an interfund loan.
Councilmember Wilson inquired about the City’s $1.7 - $1.9 million emergency fund. He asked about
the appropriate amount for an emergency fund and why those funds were not used to cover revenue
shortfalls. Mayor Haakenson answered the purpose of the Rainy Day Fund was to ensure funds were
available in the event of a catastrophic event such as an earthquake, terrorist attack, etc., and he did not
see this budget crisis as a use for this fund. He would only support using the funds in a manner whereby
it could be paid back immediately.
Councilmember Wilson asked whether the City could do an interfund loan in the event of a cataclysmic
event. Mayor Haakenson agreed that would be possible but the question then was how to pay it back. He
summarized this was a policy decision; the Council was charged with spending the taxpayers money as
they best saw fit. If the Council wanted to spend money in the Rainy Day Fund on a budget crisis, the
Council was free to do so.
8. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Haakenson announced a presentation would be made at the October 21 meeting regarding the
possibility of a new senior center.
9. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Plunkett advised the October 21 meeting would also include a public hearing on the
budget.
Councilmember Orvis reported as a result of attrition, belt tightening and increased fees, the Snohomish
Health District’s deficit had been reduced to $2.3 million. He noted cities have the ability to do interfund
loans while awaiting the receipt of revenue; the Health District did not have that ability. Therefore, they
are seeking an agency to be their “bank” and in that way could maintain services for a year and minimize
cuts.
10. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
Packet Page 14 of 374
AM-1856 2.C.
Approval of Claim Checks
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Debbie Karber
Submitted For:Kathleen Junglov Time:Consent
Department:Administrative Services Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Approval of claim checks #107347 through #107532 for October 9, 2008 in the amount of
$312,528.33, and #107533 through #107675 for October 16, 2008 in the amount of $410,660.86.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approval of claim checks.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council.
Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends
either approval or non-approval of expenditures.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2008
Revenue:
Expenditure:$723,189.19
Fiscal Impact:
Claims: $723,189.19
Attachments
Link: Claim cks 10-9-08
Link: Claim Cks 10-16-08
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 Admin Services Kathleen Junglov 10/16/2008 01:47 PM APRV
2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 02:27 PM APRV
3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 03:00 PM APRV
4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 03:44 PM APRV
Form Started By: Debbie Started On: 10/16/2008 01:07
Packet Page 15 of 374
Form Started By: Debbie
Karber
Started On: 10/16/2008 01:07
PM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 16 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107347 10/8/2008 069848 CRAM, KATHERINE CRAM10159 IRISH DANCE CLASSES
IRISH DANCE 13+ #10159
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 140.00
IRISH DANCE 13+ #10162
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 224.00
IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 190.40
IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #10179
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 98.00
Total :652.40
107348 10/9/2008 070941 AAF INTERNATIONAL 132462 FAC MAINT - PERFECT PLEAT FILTERS
FAC MAINT - PERFECT PLEAT FILTERS
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 404.76
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 36.02
Total :440.78
107349 10/9/2008 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 260077 1-13992
PEST CONTROL
411.000.656.538.800.410.23 63.25
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.410.23 5.63
Total :68.88
107350 10/9/2008 066054 ADIX'S BED & BATH FOR DOGS AND October 2008 KENNELING SERVICES/10/2008 - EDMONDS
OCTOBER 2008/KENNELING SVCS.
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 1,921.23
Total :1,921.23
107351 10/9/2008 062423 ADPRO LITHO INC 71981 October 2008 City newsletter
October 2008 City newsletter
001.000.240.513.110.490.00 3,260.00
Sales Tax
001.000.240.513.110.490.00 290.14
1Page:
Packet Page 17 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :3,550.1410735110/9/2008 062423 062423 ADPRO LITHO INC
107352 10/9/2008 071177 ADVANTAGE BUILDING SERVICES 08-474 JANITORIAL SERVICE
JANITORIAL SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.410.23 334.00
Total :334.00
107353 10/9/2008 066417 AIRGAS NOR PAC INC 101343460 M5Z34
CALL GAS
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 25.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 2.23
Total :27.23
107354 10/9/2008 065568 ALLWATER INC 091808011 COEWASTE
DRINKING WATER
411.000.656.538.800.310.11 13.95
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.11 0.62
Total :14.57
107355 10/9/2008 069667 AMERICAN MARKETING 8983 BRONZE PLAQUES
WEBBER AND CIMINI PLAQUES
127.000.640.575.500.310.00 255.80
Freight
127.000.640.575.500.310.00 4.90
Sales Tax
127.000.640.575.500.310.00 23.20
Total :283.90
107356 10/9/2008 066025 ANDERSON, ANGIE ANDERSON1004 PLAZA ROOM MONITOR
ANDERSON CENTER GYM MONITOR FOR DANCE
001.000.640.574.100.410.00 48.00
Total :48.00
107357 10/9/2008 069751 ARAMARK 655-3881516 UNIFORM SERVICES
2Page:
Packet Page 18 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107357 10/9/2008 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 34.04
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 3.03
Total :37.07
107358 10/9/2008 069751 ARAMARK 655-3863494 18386001
UNIFORMS
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 97.11
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 8.64
18386001655-3872295
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 8.65
UNIFORMS
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 97.21
Total :211.61
107359 10/9/2008 069751 ARAMARK 655-3856624 STREET STORM UNIFORM SVC
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.29
STREET STORM UNIFORM SVC
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.24
STREET STORM UNIFORM SVC
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.24
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.29
3Page:
Packet Page 19 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107359 10/9/2008 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
STREET STORM UNIFORM SVC655-3874343
STREET STORM UNIFORM SVC
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.51
STREET STORM UNIFORM SVC
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.51
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.31
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.31
FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC655-3881517
FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 40.44
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.60
4Page:
Packet Page 20 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107359 10/9/2008 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
PW MATS655-3883556
PW MATS
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.75
PW MATS
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 6.65
PW MATS
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 6.65
PW MATS
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 6.65
PW MATS
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 6.65
PW MATS
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 6.65
Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.16
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.59
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.59
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.59
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.59
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.410.00 0.60
Total :96.86
107360 10/9/2008 068379 ARCHITECREATION INC UA-08-0243 SUNSET AVE REPLACEMENT BENCH
SUNSET AVE BENCH REPLACEMENT
127.000.640.575.500.310.00 1,430.00
Freight
127.000.640.575.500.310.00 250.00
Sales Tax
127.000.640.575.500.310.00 149.52
5Page:
Packet Page 21 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :1,829.5210736010/9/2008 068379 068379 ARCHITECREATION INC
107361 10/9/2008 071120 ASHLAND SPECIALTY CHEMICALS 2500071048 113009/0702
POLYMER
411.000.656.538.800.310.51 3,875.00
Total :3,875.00
107362 10/9/2008 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 578995 75179
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 190.01
DIESEL FUEL
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 2,134.98
Total :2,324.99
107363 10/9/2008 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 579361 PS - 69 GAL DIESEL
PS - 69 GAL DIESEL
001.000.651.519.920.320.00 200.05
WA OIL SPILL RECOVERY TAX, WA HAZARDOUS
001.000.651.519.920.320.00 1.60
WA STATE SERVICE FEES
001.000.651.519.920.320.00 60.00
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.320.00 23.29
Total :284.94
107364 10/9/2008 001777 AURORA PLUMBING & ELECTRIC 157432 FAC MAINT - SCOAW REPAIR KIT
FAC MAINT - SCOAW REPAIR KIT
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 157.27
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 14.15
Total :171.42
107365 10/9/2008 001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC 70475 BRASS PLATE/ENGRAVING
6Page:
Packet Page 22 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107365 10/9/2008 (Continued)001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC
Freight
117.200.640.575.500.490.00 3.85
Sales Tax
117.200.640.575.500.490.00 8.11
BRASS PLATES/LETTERS ENGRAVED
117.200.640.575.500.490.00 87.31
Total :99.27
107366 10/9/2008 072497 BALINA, ANDREA BALINA1001 REFUND
REFUND DUE TO CLASS CANCELLATION
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 150.00
Total :150.00
107367 10/9/2008 066891 BEACON PUBLISHING INC 6525 CEMETERY CLASSIFIED AD
CLASSIFIED AD FOR CEMETERY~
130.000.640.536.200.440.00 52.00
Total :52.00
107368 10/9/2008 002210 BECKWITH & KUFFEL 866317 CED2
VACUUM PUMP
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 2,348.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 133.50
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 220.85
Total :2,702.35
107369 10/9/2008 028050 BILL PIERRE FORD INC 390304 FLEET - KIT FOR SHOP
FLEET - KIT FOR SHOP
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 80.98
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 7.29
7Page:
Packet Page 23 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107369 10/9/2008 (Continued)028050 BILL PIERRE FORD INC
FLEET - KIT FOR SHOP390326
FLEET - KIT FOR SHOP
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 80.98
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 7.29
Total :176.54
107370 10/9/2008 070803 BITCO SOFTWARE LLC 266 PERMIT TRAX IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES.
PERMIT TRAX IMPLEMENTATION SERVICES.
001.000.620.558.800.410.00 290.00
ANNUAL MAINTENANCE.268
ANNUAL MAINTENANCE.
001.000.620.558.800.410.00 7,949.70
Total :8,239.70
107371 10/9/2008 072501 BOWEN, RACHEL BOWEN1004 WADE JAMES HOUSE MANAGER
HOUSE MANAGER/WADE JAMES THEATRE - WOTS
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 50.00
Total :50.00
107372 10/9/2008 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY BROCKMANN9932 YOGA & PILATES CLASSES
YOGA #9932
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 820.40
YOGA #9929
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 285.60
YOGA #9938
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 821.10
PILATES STRETCH & SCULPT #9926
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 401.80
Total :2,328.90
107373 10/9/2008 071434 BRUNETTE, SISSEL BRUNETTE10091 PRENATAL FITNESS
PRENATAL FITNESS #10091
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 84.00
Total :84.00
8Page:
Packet Page 24 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107374 10/9/2008 002987 BUILDERS HARDWARE & SUPPLY CO S2867549.001 CITY HALL - DEADLATCH, FACEPLATE
CITY HALL - DEADLATCH, FACEPLATE
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 47.45
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 4.27
Total :51.72
107375 10/9/2008 072075 CAMPBELL, RICHARD 2008-10-2 ALS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Sept Med Progrm Dir
001.000.510.526.100.410.00 1,725.00
Total :1,725.00
107376 10/9/2008 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY 136771 WELDING SUPPLIES
REGULATOR
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 85.00
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.57
HELIUM FOR GYMNASTICSRN09081134
HELIUM FOR GYMNASTICS BIRTHDAY PARTIES
001.000.640.575.550.450.00 8.15
Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.550.450.00 0.73
Total :101.45
107377 10/9/2008 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN09081135 2954000
ARGON/NITROGEN/OXYGEN
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 32.60
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 2.90
Total :35.50
107378 10/9/2008 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY 136463 FLEET - MEDIUM ACETYLENE
FLEET - MEDIUM ACETYLENE
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 90.05
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 8.02
9Page:
Packet Page 25 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :98.0710737810/9/2008 003510 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
107379 10/9/2008 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY136595 ALS SUPPLIES
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 56.07
Freight
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 17.50
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 6.55
ALS SUPPLIESLY136596
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 122.15
Freight
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 17.50
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.310.00 12.44
ALS SUPPLIESRN09081133
medical oxygen
001.000.510.526.100.450.00 32.60
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.450.00 2.90
Total :267.71
107380 10/9/2008 064690 CHAMPION BOLT & SUPPLY INC 491493 EDM00001
NUTS & BOLTS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 157.15
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 13.51
EDM00001491911
NUTS & BOLTS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 170.14
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 14.63
Total :355.43
107381 10/9/2008 003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS 7898305185 ACCT#7898305185 - EDMONDS
10Page:
Packet Page 26 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107381 10/9/2008 (Continued)003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS
FUEL CHARGES/NARC UNIT
104.000.410.521.210.320.00 274.21
Total :274.21
107382 10/9/2008 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION 460256913 UNIFORMS
Volunteers
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 20.00
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 1.78
OPS UNIFORMS460256914
Stn. 16
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 107.08
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.53
UNIFORMS460258089
Stn 17 - ALS
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 111.29
Stn 17 - OPS
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 111.30
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 9.91
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.90
OPS UNIFORMS460258109
Stn. 20
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 134.69
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 11.98
Total :527.46
107383 10/9/2008 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 1-218359-279832 2203 N 205TH ST
2203 N 205TH ST
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 13.57
Total :13.57
11Page:
Packet Page 27 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107384 10/9/2008 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 2-533584-460571 WATER USEAGE FOR THE MONTH OF SEPT 08
WATER USEAGE FOR THE MONTH OF SEPT 08
411.000.654.534.800.330.00 510.00
Total :510.00
107385 10/9/2008 070231 CNR INC 54062 Add new DID Line
Add new DID Line
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 55.00
Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 4.90
Total :59.90
107386 10/9/2008 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES W1978666 FAC MAINT - OVER&UNDER, COMPLETE FINISH
FAC MAINT - OVER&UNDER, COMPLETE FINISH
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 260.16
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 23.15
Total :283.31
107387 10/9/2008 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES W1980571 OPS SUPPLIES
Stations' supplies
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 155.46
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 13.84
Total :169.30
107388 10/9/2008 070300 CODE 4 INC 5911 INV#5911/REG-A.FRAUSTO/EPD
REGISTRATION/A.FRAUSTO~
001.000.410.521.400.490.00 94.00
Total :94.00
107389 10/9/2008 069892 COLUMBIA FORD INC 3-82999 UNIT EQ40WR- NEW 2008 FORD F-450XL
12Page:
Packet Page 28 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107389 10/9/2008 (Continued)069892 COLUMBIA FORD INC
UNIT EQ40WR- NEW 2008 FORD F-450XL
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 24,962.00
Sales Tax
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 1,996.96
Prompt Paymment Discount if pd by 10/223-82999
Prompt Paymment Discount if pd by 10/22
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 -200.00
UNIT EQ41WQ - NEW 2008 FORD F-450XL3-83004
UNIT EQ41WQ - NEW 2008 FORD F-450XL
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 23,424.00
Sales Tax
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 1,873.92
Prompt Payment Discount if pd by 10/233-83004
Prompt Payment Discount if pd by 10/23
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 -200.00
Total :51,856.88
107390 10/9/2008 069983 COMMERCIAL CARD SOLUTIONS 7403 COMPACT REFRIGERATOR
COMPACT REFRIGERATOR
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 205.81
TRAINING/ZUVELA
411.000.656.538.800.490.71 263.75
Total :469.56
107391 10/9/2008 062891 COOK PAGING WA 7275672 pagers-water
pagers-water
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 7.90
pagers-facilities
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 23.70
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 0.54
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 1.60
Total :33.74
13Page:
Packet Page 29 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107392 10/9/2008 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3208873 3007
ADVERTISING/ODOR CONTROL PROJECT
411.000.656.538.800.440.00 136.50
Total :136.50
107393 10/9/2008 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 141227 INV#141227 - CUST#267 - EDMONDS PD
CALIBRATION/1831-16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 81.00
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.21
INV#141229 - CUST#267 - EDMONDS PD141229
CALIBRATION GVP1834
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 81.00
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.21
INV#141230 - CUST#267 - EDMONDS PD141230
CALIBRATION/E14920 - 16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 81.00
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.21
INV#141231 - CUST#267 - EDMONDS PD141231
CALIBRATION/E14921-16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 81.00
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.21
INV#141232 - CUST#267 - EDMONDS PD141232
CALIBRATION - E14922-16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 81.00
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.21
Total :441.05
107394 10/9/2008 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 140538 FLEET - GAI-TRONICS DESKSET TONE
14Page:
Packet Page 30 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107394 10/9/2008 (Continued)061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16
FLEET - GAI-TRONICS DESKSET TONE
511.100.657.548.680.350.00 2,628.00
Sales Tax
511.100.657.548.680.350.00 233.89
Total :2,861.89
107395 10/9/2008 068734 DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES 312000093/004,316-08 3RD QTR L & I PARKS AND RECREATION
3rd qtr Parks & Recreation L & I
811.000.000.231.530.000.00 37,568.97
Total :37,568.97
107396 10/9/2008 068734 DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES 312000093/004,316-06 3RD QTR L & I DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
3rd qtr L & I for Development Services
811.000.000.231.530.000.00 2,652.47
Total :2,652.47
107397 10/9/2008 006635 DEPT OF LICENSING MIKE THIES RECORDS FOR MIKE THIES RE CODE
RECORDS FOR MIKE THIES RE CODE
001.000.620.558.800.490.00 6.12
Total :6.12
107398 10/9/2008 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 08-2920 MINUTE TAKING
7/23 & 9/17 ADB Minutes
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 189.00
Total :189.00
107399 10/9/2008 072145 DISTINCTIVE WINDOWS INC 15301 LIBRARY - UV WINDOW TREATMENT PROJECT
LIBRARY - UV WINDOW TREATMENT PROJECT
116.000.651.519.920.480.00 13,670.00
Sales Tax
116.000.651.519.920.480.00 1,216.63
Total :14,886.63
107400 10/9/2008 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 1238 SUPPLIES
15Page:
Packet Page 31 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107400 10/9/2008 (Continued)007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS
MIRROR
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 10.99
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.98
Total :11.97
107401 10/9/2008 008688 EDMONDS VETERINARY HOSPITAL 168237 INV#168237/CLIENT ID 3713-EMONDS PD
FELINE/SERVICES
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 80.28
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 1.59
INV#168238, CLIENT ID#3713168238
IMPOUND #7565
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 20.80
INV #168654,CLIENT ID 3713, EPD168654
IMPOUND#7554/FELINE
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 26.00
INV#168857/CLIENT ID#3713-EDMONDS PD168857
IMPOUND # 7582
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 103.60
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 2.49
Total :234.76
107402 10/9/2008 069878 EDMONDS-WESTGATE VET HOSPITAL 116842 #116842/CLIENT ID#5118-EDMONDS POLICE
IMPOUND #7467/FELINE
001.000.410.521.700.490.00 86.00
Total :86.00
107403 10/9/2008 071967 ENG, STEPHEN ENG10078 TAEKWON DO CLASSES
BEGINNING TAEKWON-DO~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 264.60
Total :264.60
107404 10/9/2008 072486 EUREKA GROUP 943 WA State Retail Survey Publication
16Page:
Packet Page 32 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107404 10/9/2008 (Continued)072486 EUREKA GROUP
WA State Retail Survey Publication
001.000.620.558.600.490.00 160.00
Freight
001.000.620.558.600.490.00 6.00
Total :166.00
107405 10/9/2008 067599 EWING ELECTRIC INC ETM802 1295
C-251 ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTS
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 52,385.24
Total :52,385.24
107406 10/9/2008 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU14321 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 155.43
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 13.83
SUPPLIESWAMOU14479
SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 130.69
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.27
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 12.28
MOWER PARTSWAMOU14503
LANDPRIDE MOWER PARTS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 24.96
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.21
SUPPLIESWAMOU14524
GLOVES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 184.06
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.00
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 16.73
17Page:
Packet Page 33 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :551.4610740610/9/2008 066378 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY
107407 10/9/2008 069380 FBINAA WASHINGTON CHAPTER ANDERSON REGISTRATION/D.ANDERSON/EDMONDS PD
REGISTRATION/D.ANDERSON~
001.000.410.521.400.490.00 55.00
Total :55.00
107408 10/9/2008 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0183113 5TH & DAYTON IRRIGATION IMPROVEMENTS
SUPPLIES FOR 5TH & DAYTON IRRIGATION &
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 1,563.89
Sales Tax
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 139.17
Total :1,703.06
107409 10/9/2008 071995 FIRE SERVICE REPAIR LLC 2141 UNIT 474 - NFPA 1911 PUMP TEST
UNIT 474 - NFPA 1911 PUMP TEST
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 318.91
UNIT 475 - NFPA 1911 PUMP TEST
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 318.91
UNIT 476 - NFPA 1911 PUMP TEST
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 318.91
UNIT 477 - NFPA 1911 PUMP TEST
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 318.90
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 113.53
Total :1,389.16
107410 10/9/2008 070855 FLEX PLAN SERVICES INC 127163 September 2008 - Section 125 plan fees
September 2008 - Section 125 plan fees
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 50.90
September 2008 - Section 132 plan fees
811.000.000.231.590.000.00 37.70
Total :88.60
107411 10/9/2008 072498 FORD, THERESA FORD1001 REFUND
CLASS REFUND
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 69.00
18Page:
Packet Page 34 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :69.0010741110/9/2008 072498 072498 FORD, THERESA
107412 10/9/2008 070671 GALLOWAY, KEN E GALLOWAY1008 CONTEST WINNER
WOTS CONTEST WINNER~
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :100.00
107413 10/9/2008 012199 GRAINGER 9739906213 FAC MAINT - SMOKE DETECTOR TESTER
FAC MAINT - SMOKE DETECTOR TESTER
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 65.94
SCRUB TOWELS, TIME DELAY RELAY
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 40.16
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 5.87
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 3.57
Total :115.54
107414 10/9/2008 072467 HAPPY DAYS ADULT FAMILY HOME BLD20080104 PERMIT NOT REQUIRED DUE TO NEW
PERMIT NOT REQUIRED DUE TO NEW
001.000.000.257.620.000.00 565.00
Total :565.00
107415 10/9/2008 070515 HARLEY DAVIDSON OF SEATTLE 233056 UNIT 582 - SIDECOVER GROMMETS
UNIT 582 - SIDECOVER GROMMETS
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.18
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.28
Total :3.46
107416 10/9/2008 012900 HARRIS FORD INC 89918 UNIT 485 - SEALS AND PAD
UNIT 485 - SEALS AND PAD
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 69.56
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.19
19Page:
Packet Page 35 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107416 10/9/2008 (Continued)012900 HARRIS FORD INC
UNIT K43 - WINDOW SWITCH89965
UNIT K43 - WINDOW SWITCH
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 45.78
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.07
UNIT 128 - ALTERNATOR90016
UNIT 128 - ALTERNATOR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 305.86
CORE FEES
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 250.00
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 49.47
FLEET - SHOP BRAKE PAD INVENTORY90530
FLEET - SHOP BRAKE PAD INVENTORY
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 59.14
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 5.26
UNIT 48 - FLOOR COVER KIT90754
UNIT 48 - FLOOR COVER KIT
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 69.13
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.15
UNIT 128 - CORE FEE RETURNEDCM90016
UNIT 128 - CORE FEE RETURNED
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -250.00
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -22.25
Total :598.36
107417 10/9/2008 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC I2419764 WATER INVENTORY - ~
20Page:
Packet Page 36 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107417 10/9/2008 (Continued)010900 HD FOWLER CO INC
WATER INVENTORY - ~
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 1,973.28
W-MTRLIDDI-0.75-010
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 1,977.60
W-MTRBOXPL-02-030
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 578.58
W-MTRBOXPL-02-010
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 571.32
W-MTRLIDDI-02-010
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 1,243.92
1" COPPER REROUNDER REED
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 74.02
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 39.54
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 0.46
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 568.20
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 6.63
Total :7,033.55
107418 10/9/2008 069332 HEALTHFORCE OCCMED 2126-106 OPS PROF SERVICES
PH fit-for-duty
001.000.510.522.200.410.00 663.00
Total :663.00
107419 10/9/2008 072500 HEETBRINK, CHARLES HEETBRINK1004 WOTS TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE @ WADE JAMES
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :100.00
107420 10/9/2008 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 2037313 0205
21Page:
Packet Page 37 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107420 10/9/2008 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
LAFARGE PORTS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 52.86
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.76
02052046928
PEAT, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 80.90
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.28
02052067985
TOOL KIT, ETC.
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 82.42
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.42
0205319519
PEAT, MULTI-FLEX
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 26.16
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 2.35
02057045953
WEED KILLER
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 15.88
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.43
02059084750
GLOVES, SAW, GARDENING SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 133.25
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 11.99
LATE FEEFCH-002907210
LATE FEE
001.000.640.576.800.490.00 20.00
Total :446.70
107421 10/9/2008 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 5089828 6035322501434934
22Page:
Packet Page 38 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107421 10/9/2008 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
stations' supplies
001.000.510.522.200.310.00 196.16
Total :196.16
107422 10/9/2008 072503 HOWELL, M KAY HOWELL1008 CONTEST WINNER
WOTS CONTEST WINNER~
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 75.00
Total :75.00
107423 10/9/2008 069952 HUGHES, HOLLY HUGHES0912 WOTS PRE-CONFERENCE WORKSHOP
TEACHING WRITE ON THE SOUND
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 306.00
Total :306.00
107424 10/9/2008 070742 HURLEY, DAN HURLEY0912 WRITE ON THE SOUND WORKSHOP
TEACHING WOTS WRITE ON THE SOUND
117.200.640.573.100.410.00 459.00
Total :459.00
107425 10/9/2008 069102 HUTCHINSON, JANIS HUTCHINSON1008 CONTEST WINNER
WOTS CONTEST WINNER~
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :100.00
107426 10/9/2008 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 77473152 COPIER LEASE
COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.574.100.450.00 326.70
COPIER LEASE77505293
PARK MAINTENANCE COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 25.39
Total :352.09
107427 10/9/2008 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 77505292 C/A 467070-1003748A4
23Page:
Packet Page 39 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107427 10/9/2008 (Continued)070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES
Finance Copier Rental 9/22-10/21/08
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 454.07
Meter Charge 7/24-8/26/08
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 378.58
Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 74.11
Total :906.76
107428 10/9/2008 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 77505283 RENT AND ADD'L. IMAGES ON RECEPTION
RENT AND ADD'L. IMAGES ON RECEPTION
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 98.76
RENT & ADDL IMAGES ON LARGE COPIER-D.S.77505287
RENT & ADDL IMAGES ON LARGE COPIER-D.S.
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 934.43
RENT & ADDITIONAL IMAGES FOR ENG. COLOR77505290
RENT & ADDITIONAL IMAGES FOR ENG. COLOR
001.000.620.558.800.450.00 832.06
Total :1,865.25
107429 10/9/2008 006841 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS 1014155224 INV#1014155224 - EDMONDS PD
Freight
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 30.00
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 2.67
Total :32.67
107430 10/9/2008 014940 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER 734433 FLEET - HEATSHRINK, QUICK CONN, 3M
FLEET - HEATSHRINK, QUICK CONN, 3M
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 95.46
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 8.50
24Page:
Packet Page 40 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107430 10/9/2008 (Continued)014940 INTERSTATE ALL BATTERY CENTER
FLEET - HEATSHRINK, CABLE TIES734452
FLEET - HEATSHRINK, CABLE TIES
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 33.60
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 2.99
Total :140.55
107431 10/9/2008 015270 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 406796 54278825
HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 3,569.17
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 314.09
Total :3,883.26
107432 10/9/2008 066913 KDL HARDWARE SUPPLY INC 379849 YOST POOL DOOR REPAIR
SUPPLIES FOR YOST POOL DOOR REPAIR
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 35.60
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 3.17
Total :38.77
107433 10/9/2008 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 091108-03 CITY CAR WASHES
CITY CAR WASHES
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 10.03
Total :10.03
107434 10/9/2008 069634 LEXISNEXIS RISK & INF ANLY GRP 1201641-20080831 INV#1201641-20080831 - EDMONDS PD
BACKGROUNDS/SEARCHES AUG 08
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 63.95
INV#1201641-20080930 - EDMONDS PD1201641-20080930
BACKGROUNDS/SEARCHES -SEPT 08
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 66.65
Total :130.60
107435 10/9/2008 067631 LODESTAR COMPANY INC 20180 2795
25Page:
Packet Page 41 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107435 10/9/2008 (Continued)067631 LODESTAR COMPANY INC
HVAC REPAIR
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 288.37
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 25.66
Total :314.03
107436 10/9/2008 072504 LONG, CLARE LONG0827 SISTER CITY REIMBURSEMENT
SUPPLIES FOR WELCOME PARTY
623.200.210.557.210.310.00 332.64
Total :332.64
107437 10/9/2008 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 099194 ENVELOPES
ENVELOPES
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 132.00
Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 11.75
Total :143.75
107438 10/9/2008 072046 LYNNWOOD CONVENTION CENTER 1621 So Co Cities Alliance Meeting 9/25/08
So Co Cities Alliance Meeting 9/25/08
001.000.000.237.910.000.00 3,334.00
Sales Tax
001.000.000.237.910.000.00 296.73
Total :3,630.73
107439 10/9/2008 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 623959 UNIT 16 - COLLING MOTOR
UNIT 16 - COLLING MOTOR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 208.91
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 25.00
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 20.82
26Page:
Packet Page 42 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107439 10/9/2008 (Continued)018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA
UNIT M-16 - OXYGEN SENSOR623987
UNIT M-16 - OXYGEN SENSOR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 178.39
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 15.88
Total :449.00
107440 10/9/2008 061900 MARC 0370581-IN 00-0902224
DE-LIMER
411.000.656.538.800.310.11 397.50
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.11 35.38
Total :432.88
107441 10/9/2008 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 10138676 123106800
FITTING/CONNECTOR/SOCKET
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 543.53
Freight
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 15.02
12310680010319105
KNEE PADS/BATTERIES/FLASHLIGHTS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 125.76
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 7.64
12310680099339628
BUSHING/FITTINGS/HOSE COUPLING/FLANGE
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 179.67
Freight
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 10.80
12310680099930953
HOSE/CONNECTORS/PIPE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 214.53
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 8.69
27Page:
Packet Page 43 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :1,105.6410744110/9/2008 020039 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO
107442 10/9/2008 072100 MEHL, ANDY REFUND REFUND NEUTERING FEES/2 CATS 5.05.127.1
FELINE/MAX NEUTERING REFUND
001.000.000.343.930.000.00 50.00
FELINE SIMON NEUTERING REFUND
001.000.000.343.930.000.00 50.00
Total :100.00
107443 10/9/2008 068309 MERCURY FITNESS REPAIR INC 8091999 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE - ANDERSON CENTER
001.000.640.575.540.480.00 290.00
Freight
001.000.640.575.540.480.00 15.00
Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.540.480.00 25.81
Total :330.81
107444 10/9/2008 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 77630 MUFFLER, ETC.
MUFFLER, EXHAUST GASKET
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 51.85
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.61
Total :56.46
107445 10/9/2008 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 76200 17967
PIPE DIE & RATCHET RENTAL
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 18.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 1.60
Total :19.60
107446 10/9/2008 069105 MONROE, DOROTHY MONROE1008 CONTEST WINNER
WOTS CONTEST WINNER~
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 75.00
Total :75.00
28Page:
Packet Page 44 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107447 10/9/2008 071441 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC WA09-030768 101690-01
FLEX ELEMENT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 229.39
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 14.36
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 21.69
Total :265.44
107448 10/9/2008 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0384448-IN UNIT 46 - OIL, FILTER
UNIT 46 - OIL, FILTER
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 212.87
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 18.95
Total :231.82
107449 10/9/2008 023800 NFPA 4370695X PREV MISC
Codes renew thru 12/09
001.000.510.522.300.490.00 787.50
Total :787.50
107450 10/9/2008 023800 NFPA 4370694X PREVENTION MISC
Westfall renewal thru 12/09
001.000.510.522.300.490.00 150.00
Total :150.00
107451 10/9/2008 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY s2430554.001 2091
TAPE LEADER
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 66.54
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 5.92
Total :72.46
107452 10/9/2008 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 0095089 SODIUM BISULFITE
29Page:
Packet Page 45 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107452 10/9/2008 (Continued)066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC
SODIUM BISULFITE
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 2,231.75
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 198.63
Total :2,430.38
107453 10/9/2008 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 0820171 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 229.39
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0826716
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 180.29
Total :409.68
107454 10/9/2008 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 580 HISTORICAL PRES. MINUTES ON 9/11/08 AND
HISTORICAL PRES. MINUTES ON 9/11/08 AND
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 560.00
Total :560.00
107455 10/9/2008 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 524313 OFFICE SUPPLIES
CD CASES, BINDER, PHOTO PAPER
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 35.39
Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 3.15
OFFICE SUPPLIES535713
MASKING TAPE, BATTERIES
117.100.640.573.100.310.00 22.47
Sales Tax
117.100.640.573.100.310.00 2.00
OFFICE SUPPLIES553565
CALENDAR
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 19.19
Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.71
30Page:
Packet Page 46 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107455 10/9/2008 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC
OFFICE SUPPLIES661455
KLEENEX, STENO PADS
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 27.52
Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 2.45
Total :113.88
107456 10/9/2008 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 751366 Binders for Budget Books
Binders for Budget Books
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 110.70
Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 9.85
Archive Boxes, Tabs, Paper & Toner784786
Archive Boxes, Tabs, Paper & Toner
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 485.47
Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 43.21
Total :649.23
107457 10/9/2008 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 716244 WATER - FILE INDEX CARDS
WATER - FILE INDEX CARDS
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 19.80
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1.77
Total :21.57
107458 10/9/2008 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 705936 ACCT#520437,INV#705936, EDMONDS PD
CDR/PROP ROOM
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 413.90
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.910.310.00 36.84
Total :450.74
107459 10/9/2008 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT 0054671 WATER
31Page:
Packet Page 47 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107459 10/9/2008 (Continued)026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT
23700 104TH AVE W
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 197.88
Total :197.88
107460 10/9/2008 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00050615 UNIT 55 - PILOT BEARING
UNIT 55 - PILOT BEARING
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.41
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.76
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.53
UNIT 55 - IDLER BUSHING, TRNG RING,00050633
UNIT 55 - IDLER BUSHING, TRNG RING,
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 37.01
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.72
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.16
UNIT 55 - PILOT BEARINGS00050636
UNIT 55 - PILOT BEARINGS
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 37.05
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.76
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.16
Total :120.56
107461 10/9/2008 071402 PACIFIC NW FLOAT TRIPS 10155 WINE TASTING FLOAT TRIP
WINE TASTING FLOAT TRIP~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 102.85
Total :102.85
107462 10/9/2008 066339 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION 632466 B/W copy overage fee SEPT 08
32Page:
Packet Page 48 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107462 10/9/2008 (Continued)066339 PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION
B/W copy overage fee SEPT 08
411.000.654.534.800.480.00 10.00
B/W copy overage fee SEPT 08
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 10.00
B/W copy overage fee SEPT 08
411.000.652.542.900.480.00 10.00
B/W copy overage fee SEPT 08
111.000.653.542.900.480.00 10.00
Color copy overage fee
411.000.654.534.800.480.00 13.81
Color copy overage fee
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 13.81
Color copy overage fee
411.000.652.542.900.480.00 13.81
Color copy overage fee
111.000.653.542.900.480.00 13.79
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.480.00 2.12
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 2.12
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.480.00 2.12
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.480.00 2.11
Total :103.69
107463 10/9/2008 066817 PANASONIC DIGITAL DOCUMENT COM 010592082 COPIER SERVICE
COPIER SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.450.41 145.22
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.41 12.60
Total :157.82
107464 10/9/2008 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC.755167 FAC MAINT - PROJECT - PAINT SUPPLIES
33Page:
Packet Page 49 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107464 10/9/2008 (Continued)027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC.
FAC MAINT - PROJECT - PAINT SUPPLIES
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 198.31
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 17.65
FAC MAINT SHOP SUPPLIES755716
FAC MAINT SHOP SUPPLIES
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 30.94
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 2.75
Total :249.65
107465 10/9/2008 070091 PARROTT, CHERYL PARROTT10082 STAINED GLASS SNOWFLAKE CLASS
STAINED GLASS SNOWFLAKES~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 70.00
Total :70.00
107466 10/9/2008 027279 PATRICK & CO 775140 INV#775140,ACCT#26925, EDMONDS PD
DOG & CAT LICENSE TABS
001.000.410.521.700.310.00 452.00
Freight
001.000.410.521.700.310.00 18.54
Total :470.54
107467 10/9/2008 072507 PEACE OF MIND OFFICE SUPPORT SCCA 9/25/08 Minute taking, Transcibing, Formatting
Minute taking, Transcibing, Formatting
001.000.000.237.910.000.00 255.60
Total :255.60
107468 10/9/2008 071362 PEACHTREE BUSINESS PRODUCTS P17327740015 PRINTING OF EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT
Employee Parking Permits
121.000.340.517.900.310.00 770.00
Total :770.00
107469 10/9/2008 069690 PERFORMANCE RADIATOR 2025106 UNIT 91 - OIL COOLER REPAIR FEES
34Page:
Packet Page 50 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
35
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107469 10/9/2008 (Continued)069690 PERFORMANCE RADIATOR
UNIT 91 - OIL COOLER REPAIR FEES
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 67.00
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 5.79
Total :72.79
107470 10/9/2008 008350 PETTY CASH - PARKS & REC PCASH1007 PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
FRAMES FOR HOMESTAY PICTURES
623.200.210.557.210.490.00 48.84
BEACH RANGER CAMP SUPPLIES
001.000.640.574.350.310.00 4.64
GYMNASTICS BIRTHDAY PARTY SUPPLIES
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 15.21
SUPPLIES FOR 4TH AVE CORRIDOR PLANNING
132.000.640.594.760.310.00 12.98
SUPPLIES FOR BIRD FEST
001.000.240.513.110.310.00 55.60
WRITE ON THE SOUND SUPPLIES
117.100.640.573.100.310.00 25.17
PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES
001.000.640.575.560.490.00 1.89
PHOTOS FOR PRESCHOOL
001.000.640.575.560.490.00 14.69
PRESCHOOL SUPPLIES
001.000.640.575.560.310.00 21.06
PRESCHOOL PHOTOS
001.000.640.575.560.490.00 17.50
GYMNASTICS BALLOONS
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 4.57
WRITE ON THE SOUND SUPPLIES
117.100.640.573.100.310.00 21.28
Total :243.43
107471 10/9/2008 071983 PICKELBALL STUFF LLC 08264 PICKLEBALLS
35Page:
Packet Page 51 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
36
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107471 10/9/2008 (Continued)071983 PICKELBALL STUFF LLC
PICKLEBALLS
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 34.20
Freight
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 6.20
Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 3.60
Total :44.00
107472 10/9/2008 069447 POINTS SHARP STEEL INC 08-2882 WATER/SEWER - BREAKER REPAIR
WATER/SEWER - BREAKER REPAIR
411.000.654.534.800.480.00 345.05
WATER/SEWER - BREAKER REPAIR
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 345.05
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.480.00 30.71
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 30.71
Total :751.52
107473 10/9/2008 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 170657 STREET - CADLINK - EMERGENCY RETURN
STREET - CADLINK - EMERGENCY RETURN
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 92.63
STREET - PEEK CORP RETURN POSTAGE170731
STREET - PEEK CORP RETURN POSTAGE
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 39.79
WATER - PR DIAMOND PROD RETURN POSTAGE170738
WATER - PR DIAMOND PROD RETURN POSTAGE
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 12.15
STREET - DIALIGHT CORP - PED LIGHT SENT170809
STREET - DIALIGHT CORP - PED LIGHT SENT
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 15.54
STREET - ALISSA RA RETURN CAMERAS170826
STREET - ALISSA RA RETURN CAMERAS
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 28.30
36Page:
Packet Page 52 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
37
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107473 10/9/2008 (Continued)071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR
WATER - RADIX - RETURN POSTAGE - WATER170855
WATER - RADIX - RETURN POSTAGE - WATER
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 13.37
WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - DEPT OF L&I170903
WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - DEPT OF L&I
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 2.27
WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - DEPT OF L&I
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 2.27
WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - DEPT OF L&I
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 2.27
WATER/SEWER/STREET/STORM - DEPT OF L&I
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 2.25
Total :210.84
107474 10/9/2008 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 04371 UNIT F1 B1 FUEL
Fire Boat - Fuel
511.000.657.548.680.320.00 513.57
Total :513.57
107475 10/9/2008 069029 PR DIAMOND PRODUCTS INC 63883 WATER - SUPREME ASPHALT BLADE
WATER - SUPREME ASPHALT BLADE
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 239.00
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 9.00
Total :248.00
107476 10/9/2008 071184 PROCOM 2008-1269 SEPT 08 PROF SERV FIBER OPTIC PROJ
Prof Serv Fiber Optic Proj for Sept 08
001.000.390.528.200.410.00 1,750.00
Total :1,750.00
107477 10/9/2008 064088 PROTECTION ONE 31146525 24 HOUR ALARM MONITORING -CITY HALL
24 hour alarm monitoring-CH~
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 35.00
Total :35.00
37Page:
Packet Page 53 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
38
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107478 10/9/2008 067263 PUGET SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPANY 0028003-IN ANTACID/ASPIRIN/EAR MUFFS
ANTACID/ASPIRIN/EAR MUFFS
411.000.656.538.800.310.12 110.35
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.12 9.82
Total :120.17
107479 10/9/2008 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 084-904-700-6 WWTP PUGET SOUND ENERGY
WWTP PUGET SOUND ENERGY
411.000.656.538.800.472.63 26.32
Total :26.32
107480 10/9/2008 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 5254926008 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 129.76
Fire Station # 165322323139
Fire Station # 16
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 193.97
SEWER LIFT STATION #95672895009
SEWER LIFT STATION #9
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 25.61
Total :349.34
107481 10/9/2008 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 093114 INSCRIPTION
INSCRIPTION: BARRAN
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 104.00
INSCRIPTION93115
INSCRIPTION: MILLER
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 75.00
INSCRIPTION93657
INSCRIPTION: JOINER
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 75.00
Total :254.00
107482 10/9/2008 031500 REID MIDDLETON & ASSOC INC 0809121-122 FAC SEISMIC STRUCTRUAL RETROFIT PROJECT
38Page:
Packet Page 54 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
39
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107482 10/9/2008 (Continued)031500 REID MIDDLETON & ASSOC INC
FAC SEISMIC STRUCTRUAL RETROFIT PROJECT
116.000.651.519.920.410.00 16,983.06
Total :16,983.06
107483 10/9/2008 031500 REID MIDDLETON & ASSOC INC 0809065/66 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM PROFESSIONAL
SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM PROFESSIONAL
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 447.50
Total :447.50
107484 10/9/2008 072506 RIVERSIDE SAND & GRAVEL 71114 WILLOW CREEK STREAM PROJECT
STREAM BED MATERIAL:~
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 1,192.50
Sales Tax
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 106.13
Total :1,298.63
107485 10/9/2008 071467 S MORRIS COMPANY 70014 ACCT#70014/EDMONDS POLICE DEPT.
NPC/847062,845411,645027,892143
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 131.17
Total :131.17
107486 10/9/2008 068691 SAM'S GUN SHOP LLC 455 INV #455-EDMONDS PD
QUALIFICATIONS/09-23-08
001.000.410.521.400.410.00 500.00
Total :500.00
107487 10/9/2008 066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC 03-043338 UNIT 123 - RETURN OIL PAN
UNIT 123 - RETURN OIL PAN
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -6.88
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -0.61
UNIT 2 - BRAKE SHOE KIT, PAD03-943793
UNIT 2 - BRAKE SHOE KIT, PAD
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 82.76
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.37
39Page:
Packet Page 55 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
40
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107487 10/9/2008 (Continued)066964 SEATTLE AUTOMOTIVE DIST INC
UNIT 716 - PAD03-946607
UNIT 716 - PAD
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 47.98
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.27
UNIT 720 - PAD03-949184
UNIT 720 - PAD
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 40.88
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.64
UNIT 791 - PAD KIT, BRAKE ROTOR03-949744
UNIT 791 - PAD KIT, BRAKE ROTOR
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 151.43
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 13.48
UNIT 484 - STARTER, SWITCH ASSEMBLIES03-949966
UNIT 484 - STARTER, SWITCH ASSEMBLIES
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 262.74
CORE FEE
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 23.00
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 25.43
UNIT 123 - FILTERS, OIL PAN03-950130
UNIT 123 - FILTERS, OIL PAN
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 54.13
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 4.82
Total :714.44
107488 10/9/2008 061135 SEAVIEW CHEVROLET 247592 UNIT 127 - BELT KIT
UNIT 127 - BELT KIT
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 185.79
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 16.54
40Page:
Packet Page 56 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
41
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :202.3310748810/9/2008 061135 061135 SEAVIEW CHEVROLET
107489 10/9/2008 071595 SEECOAST MFG COMPANY INC 5886 REPLACEMENT VIEWING SCOPE
REPLACEMENT VIEWING SCOPE FOR
127.000.640.575.500.310.00 1,845.00
Freight
127.000.640.575.500.310.00 63.29
Total :1,908.29
107490 10/9/2008 068816 SIMPLEX GRINNELL LP 63892236 SPRINKLER INSPECTION
SPRINKLER INSPECTION
411.000.656.538.800.410.21 514.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.410.21 45.75
Total :559.75
107491 10/9/2008 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2110016462 IRRIGATION CONTROL
IRRIGATION CONTROL
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 28.77
PARK & MAINTENANCE SHOP2470011830
PARK & MAINTENANCE SHOP
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 79.64
750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY3890014081
750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY
130.000.640.536.500.470.00 64.14
750 15TH ST SW/CEMETERY4120014156
750 15TH ST SW
130.000.640.536.500.470.00 16.17
IRRIGATION SYSTEM5070014260
IRRIGATION SYSTEM
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 28.77
Total :217.49
107492 10/9/2008 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 568005163 620-001-500-3
VARIOUS LOCATIONS
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 6.88
41Page:
Packet Page 57 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
42
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107492 10/9/2008 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
463-001-867-1926019803
9805 EDMONDS WAY/WESTGATE
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 28.52
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 1.71
Total :37.11
107493 10/9/2008 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 3050047152 SIGNAL LIGHT
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 50.76
TRAFFIC SIGNAL4510017488
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 28.77
STREET LIGHTING6000013000
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 8,469.06
STREET LIGHTING6100013009
STREET LIGHTING
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 7,937.44
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 :18,470.86
107494 10/9/2008 072499 SOKOLOSKI, MICHELLE SOKOLOSKI0925 REFUND
CLASS REFUND REQUESTED
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 56.00
Total :56.00
107495 10/9/2008 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03584 RECYCLING
42Page:
Packet Page 58 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
43
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107495 10/9/2008 (Continued)038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO
RECYCLING
411.000.656.538.800.475.66 28.64
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.475.66 1.73
Total :30.37
107496 10/9/2008 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03583 garbage & recycle for PS
garbage & recycle for PS
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 523.22
garbage & recycle for FAC03585
garbage & recycle for FAC
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 594.39
garbage & recycle for Library03586
garbage & recycle for Library
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 637.48
garbage & recycle-City Hall03588
garbage & recycle-City Hall
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 429.33
Total :2,184.42
107497 10/9/2008 069005 ST. CLAIR, KERRY REIMBURSEMENT SISTER CITY REIMBURSEMENT
REIMBURSEMENT FOR HEKINAN MAYOR'S GIFT
001.000.210.513.100.490.00 122.63
Total :122.63
107498 10/9/2008 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 1631774 PS - ELECT SUPPLIES
PS - ELECT SUPPLIES
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 82.83
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.37
PS - ELECT SUPPLIES1639961
PS - ELECT SUPPLIES
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 416.83
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 37.10
43Page:
Packet Page 59 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
44
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :544.1310749810/9/2008 040430 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY
107499 10/9/2008 072505 STRYKER SALES CORP 471263M ALS SMALL EQUIPMENT
Stair Chair & assoc. items
001.000.510.526.100.350.00 5,060.80
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.350.00 450.41
Total :5,511.21
107500 10/9/2008 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 10733695 FLEET - NUTS, CABLE TIES, GRAY
FLEET - NUTS, CABLE TIES, GRAY
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 243.33
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 21.66
Total :264.99
107501 10/9/2008 070548 TANKS BY DALLAS BLD20080792 OUTSIDE JURISDICTION.
OUTSIDE JURISDICTION.
001.000.000.257.620.000.00 55.00
Total :55.00
107502 10/9/2008 071577 TAYLOR, KATHLEEN 1039 CONSULTANT SERVICES FROM 9/23-10/2/2008.
CONSULTANT SERVICES FROM 9/23-10/2/2008.
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 1,592.50
Total :1,592.50
107503 10/9/2008 072468 TECHLINE COMMUNICATIONS INC 00003911 QUOTE AAAQ4760 DATED 9/23/08
Techline-AVST CallXpress Annual Support310-00106
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 1,050.00
Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 93.45
Total :1,143.45
107504 10/9/2008 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1612728 Computer Support Technician ad, #08-45
Computer Support Technician ad, #08-45
001.000.220.516.100.440.00 50.24
44Page:
Packet Page 60 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
45
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :50.2410750410/9/2008 009350 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY
107505 10/9/2008 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1612493 101416
ADVERTISING/ODOR CONTROL PROJECT
411.000.656.538.800.440.00 98.28
Total :98.28
107506 10/9/2008 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1609714 NEWSPAPER ADS
Council & Plan Brd Agendas
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 1,572.63
NEWSPAPER ADS1613794
Ordinance 3698
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 25.16
NEWSPAPER ADS1614004
Ordinance 3697
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 37.44
NEWSPAPER AD1614300
10/7 Public Hearing
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 31.08
Total :1,666.31
107507 10/9/2008 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 187298 SR CENTER KITCHEN UPGRADES PROJECT -
SR CENTER KITCHEN UPGRADES PROJECT -
116.000.651.519.920.410.00 238.68
Total :238.68
107508 10/9/2008 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1612824 STEICHEN/S-08-41 LEGAL NOTICES
STEICHEN/S-08-41 LEGAL NOTICES
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 16.28
HOVDE/STF-2007024 LEGAL NOTICES.1613149
HOVDE/STF-2007024 LEGAL NOTICES.
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 41.44
COOK/ADU-08-56 LEGAL NOTICES.1614362
COOK/ADU-08-56 LEGAL NOTICES.
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 17.02
Total :74.74
45Page:
Packet Page 61 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
46
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107509 10/9/2008 027269 THE PART WORKS INC 242546 FAC - MVP METERING VALVE LOWER UNITS,
FAC - MVP METERING VALVE LOWER UNITS,
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 289.00
Freight
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 7.72
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 26.41
Total :323.13
107510 10/9/2008 066056 THE SEATTLE TIMES 042483000 Computer Support Technician Ad, #08-45
Computer Support Technician Ad, #08-45
001.000.220.516.100.440.00 470.86
Total :470.86
107511 10/9/2008 069357 THIES, MIKE MIKE THIES EXPENSES FOR WASH. ASSOC. OF CODE
EXPENSES FOR WASH. ASSOC. OF CODE
001.000.620.558.800.430.00 432.34
Total :432.34
107512 10/9/2008 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR 729580 MUSEUM
monthly elevator maint-museum~
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 171.45
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 15.26
CITY HALL ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE~729581
CITY HALL ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE~
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 844.04
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 75.12
MONITORING-PS729582
monitoring-PS~
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 37.36
46Page:
Packet Page 62 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
47
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107512 10/9/2008 (Continued)038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR
SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE~740602
SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE~
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 138.19
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 12.29
SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MONITORING740603
SENIOR CENTER ELEVATOR MONITORING
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 11.24
Total :1,304.95
107513 10/9/2008 068249 TRAUTMANN MAHER & ASSOCIATES 9/30/08 September, 2008 MEBT 2 plan fees
September, 2008 MEBT 2 plan fees
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 108.70
Total :108.70
107514 10/9/2008 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 15060 CITY HALL - KEYS, BLANKS, ID TAGS
CITY HALL - KEYS, BLANKS, ID TAGS
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 18.25
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.62
Total :19.87
107515 10/9/2008 071590 TRT LCC Sept2008-Edmonds HEARING EXAMINER SERVICES FOR SEPTEMBER
HEARING EXAMINER SERVICES FOR SEPTEMBER
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 3,500.00
EXPENSES FOR HEARING EX. SVCS.Sept2008-EdmondsEXP
EXPENSES FOR HEARING EX. SVCS.
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 10.88
Total :3,510.88
107516 10/9/2008 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 7983459 WATER - 3" OMNI METER FOR REPAIRS AT
WATER - 3" OMNI METER FOR REPAIRS AT
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,139.31
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 101.40
47Page:
Packet Page 63 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
48
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107516 10/9/2008 (Continued)061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY
WATER - SPOOL FOR REPAIRS AT 770 ALOHA7995754
WATER - SPOOL FOR REPAIRS AT 770 ALOHA
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 130.00
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 11.86
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 12.62
WATER INVENTORY - ~8030062
WATER INVENTORY - ~
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 1,601.16
W-MTRLIDDI-0.75-010
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 1,608.64
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.341.00 285.68
Total :4,890.67
107517 10/9/2008 069592 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS R02988971 INV#R02988971/ACCT#0298897-0 - EDNMONDS
PAGERS/DEPARTMENT
001.000.410.521.100.420.00 84.03
Total :84.03
107518 10/9/2008 072496 VALLEY CONSTRUCTION SUPPLY INC Ref Overpmt Refund overpmt of Business Lic
Refund overpmt of Business Lic
001.000.000.257.310.000.00 40.00
Total :40.00
107519 10/9/2008 072502 VAN HOLLEBEKE, MONDA VAN HOLLEBEKE1008 CONTEST WINNER
CONTEST WINNER/1ST PLACE
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 100.00
Total :100.00
107520 10/9/2008 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-712-0647 IRRIGATION SYSTEM
IRRIGATION SYSTEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 44.30
48Page:
Packet Page 64 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
49
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107520 10/9/2008 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
EDMONDS MEMORIAL CEMETERY425-771-4741
EDMONDS MEMORIAL CEMETERY
130.000.640.536.200.420.00 50.27
Total :94.57
107521 10/9/2008 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-NW2-0887 Frame Relay for Snocom & Internet
Frame Relay for Snocom & Internet
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 285.00
Total :285.00
107522 10/9/2008 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-712-0423 425 712-0423
AFTER HOURS PHONE
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 55.92
Total :55.92
107523 10/9/2008 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
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
49Page:
Packet Page 65 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
50
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107523 10/9/2008 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
MEADOWDALE COMMUNITY CLUB-SCAN ALARM425-206-8379
MEADOWDALE COMMUNITY CLUB-SCAN ALARM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 14.93
LIFT STATION #1425-673-5978
Lift Station #1
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 49.53
TELEMETRY STATIONS425-712-0417
TELEMETRY STATIONS
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 28.28
TELEMETRY STATIONS
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 28.28
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES425-712-8251
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 14.34
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 71.68
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 58.78
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 58.78
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 83.14
PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE425-712-8347
PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 57.93
FS # 16425-771-0158
FS #16
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 231.73
PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM425-775-2455
PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 49.53
FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM425-776-3896
FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 116.52
50Page:
Packet Page 66 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
51
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107523 10/9/2008 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST425-778-3297
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 18.58
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 34.49
Total :1,530.54
107524 10/9/2008 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-771-0152 FS #16-FAX LINE
FS #16-FAX LINE
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 52.66
Total :52.66
107525 10/9/2008 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 0694137968 IN#0694137968/ACCT#470497482-00001-EPD
NARC CELL PHONES
104.000.410.521.210.420.00 130.50
Total :130.50
107526 10/9/2008 006284 W S DARLEY AND CO 0000803406 UNIT 474 - VALVE SERVICE KIT
UNIT 474 - VALVE SERVICE KIT
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 63.95
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 7.99
Total :71.94
107527 10/9/2008 065035 WASHINGTON STATE PATROL F0900096 TRAINING MISC
JD,CK,BN,DO
001.000.510.522.400.490.00 400.00
Total :400.00
107528 10/9/2008 045912 WASPC DUES002553 INV#DUES002553 - EDMONDS POLICE/LAWLESS
SEPT ASSOCIATE DUES/J.LAWLESS
001.000.410.521.100.490.00 75.00
Total :75.00
107529 10/9/2008 071359 WASSER CORPORATION 111682 564
51Page:
Packet Page 67 of 374
10/09/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
52
4:28:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107529 10/9/2008 (Continued)071359 WASSER CORPORATION
PAINT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 154.35
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 13.58
Total :167.93
107530 10/9/2008 070796 WEED GRAAFSTRA & BENSON INC PS 7 CONTRACT REVIEW: WOODWAY ILA~
CONTRACT REVIEW: WOODWAY ILA~
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 92.50
Total :92.50
107531 10/9/2008 068106 WELCOME COMMUNICATIONS 6291 INV#6291 - EDMONDS PD
REPLACEMENT BATTERY PACK~
001.000.410.521.400.310.00 159.00
Freight
001.000.410.521.400.310.00 16.03
Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.400.310.00 15.58
Total :190.61
107532 10/9/2008 064213 WSSUA TREASURER 353 UMPIRING
UMPIRING OF MEN'S AND CO-ED GAMES
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 1,890.00
Total :1,890.00
Bank total :312,528.33186 Vouchers for bank code :front
312,528.33Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report186
52Page:
Packet Page 68 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107533 10/16/2008 071604 ADVENTNET INC 145931 Annual Subscription Fee for Service
Annual Subscription Fee for Service
001.000.310.518.880.490.00 535.00
Total :535.00
107534 10/16/2008 066417 AIRGAS NOR PAC INC 101355576 M5Z34
CYLINDER RENTAL
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 52.48
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 4.67
Total :57.15
107535 10/16/2008 000850 ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT 8621 MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER CHARGES FOR
MONTHLY WHOLESALE WATER CHARGES FOR
411.000.654.534.800.330.00 123,144.84
Total :123,144.84
107536 10/16/2008 072509 ALLBERY, LUCY ALLBERY1002 REFUND
REFUND - RETURNING CREDIT ON ACCOUNT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 55.00
Total :55.00
107537 10/16/2008 061540 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES 0197-001016053 PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY
Public Works Facility
001.000.650.519.910.470.00 21.69
Public Works Facility
111.000.653.542.900.470.00 82.41
Public Works Facility
411.000.652.542.900.470.00 82.41
Public Works Facility
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 82.41
Public Works Facility
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 82.41
Public Works Facility
511.000.657.548.680.470.00 82.41
1Page:
Packet Page 69 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107537 10/16/2008 (Continued)061540 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES
garbage for F/S #160197-001016123
garbage for F/S #16
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 108.47
garbage for MCC0197-001016839
garbage for MCC
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 53.16
FIRE STATION #20197-0800478
FIRE STATION #20
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 105.28
Total :700.65
107538 10/16/2008 069751 ARAMARK 655-3890172 UNIFORM SERVICES
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 34.04
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 3.03
Total :37.07
107539 10/16/2008 069751 ARAMARK 655-3881519 18386001
UNIFORMS
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 96.21
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 8.56
18386001655-3890175
UNIFORMS
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 95.85
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 8.53
Total :209.15
107540 10/16/2008 069751 ARAMARK 655-3883558 STREET/STORM UNIFORM SVC
2Page:
Packet Page 70 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107540 10/16/2008 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
STREET/STORM UNIFORM SVC
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 3.51
STREET/STORM UNIFORM SVC
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 3.51
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.240.00 0.31
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.240.00 0.31
FLEET UNIFORM SVC655-3883559
FLEET UNIFORM SVC
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 19.50
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.240.00 1.74
FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC655-3890173
FAC MAINT UNIFORM SVC
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 40.44
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.240.00 3.60
3Page:
Packet Page 71 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107540 10/16/2008 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK
PW MATS655-3891977
PW MATS
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 1.75
PW MATS
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 6.65
PW MATS
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 6.65
PW MATS
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 6.65
PW MATS
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 6.65
PW MATS
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 6.65
Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.410.00 0.16
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 0.59
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.900.410.00 0.59
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 0.59
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 0.59
Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 0.60
Total :111.04
107541 10/16/2008 069451 ASTRA INDUSTRIAL SERVICES 00100517 FIRE LINE BY PASS KIT
FIRE LINE BY PASS KIT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 62.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.14
4Page:
Packet Page 72 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107541 10/16/2008 (Continued)069451 ASTRA INDUSTRIAL SERVICES
CV/RV RUBBER KIT00100532
CV/RV RUBBER KIT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 100.61
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.14
Total :172.89
107542 10/16/2008 064343 AT&T 425-776-5316 PARKS FAX MODEM
PARKS FAX MODEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 39.85
Total :39.85
107543 10/16/2008 064343 AT&T 425-774-0944 STATION #20 FAX
STATION #20 FAX
001.000.510.522.200.420.00 41.84
Total :41.84
107544 10/16/2008 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 6409 BURIAL SUPPLIES
BURIAL SUPPLIES: SCHOONOVER
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 376.00
BURIAL SUPPLIES6480
BURIAL SUPPLIES: JENSEN
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 376.00
Total :752.00
107545 10/16/2008 069076 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS INC COE0908 Background check services
Background check services
001.000.220.516.100.410.00 30.00
Total :30.00
107546 10/16/2008 070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 010547538 COPIER RENTAL
COPIER RENTAL
001.000.230.512.501.450.00 153.55
COPIER RENTAL010592085
COPIER RENTAL
001.000.230.512.501.450.00 153.55
5Page:
Packet Page 73 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :307.1010754610/16/2008 070992 070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING
107547 10/16/2008 070992 BANC OF AMERICA LEASING 010592086 Canon 5870 lease charge 11/1 - 11/30/08
Canon 5870 lease charge 11/1 - 11/30/08
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 101.35
Canon 5870 lease charge 11/1 - 11/30/08
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 101.32
Canon 5870 lease charge 11/1 - 11/30/08
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 101.33
Supply charge
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 25.01
Supply charge
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 25.00
Supply charge
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
107548 10/16/2008 002210 BECKWITH & KUFFEL 866589 CED2
DIAPHRAGM/PISTON
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 112.20
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 9.11
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 10.80
Total :132.11
107549 10/16/2008 071403 BENTLEY SYSTEMS INC 47194027 E8JB.Bentley Water Cad Maint Agreement
6Page:
Packet Page 74 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107549 10/16/2008 (Continued)071403 BENTLEY SYSTEMS INC
E8JB.Bentley Water Cad Maint Agreement
412.100.630.532.200.410.00 721.25
Sales Tax
412.100.630.532.200.410.00 64.19
Total :785.44
107550 10/16/2008 069218 BISHOP, PAUL 78 WEB SITE MAINTENANCE
Sept 15-Oct 15-08 Web Site Maintenance
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 290.01
Total :290.01
107551 10/16/2008 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY BROCKMANN9941 YOGA CLASSES
YOGA #9941
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 821.10
YOGA #9935
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 785.40
Total :1,606.50
107552 10/16/2008 066578 BROWN AND CALDWELL 1488914 Recurring Storm Services thru September
Recurring Storm Services thru September
001.000.620.532.200.410.00 3,483.00
Total :3,483.00
107553 10/16/2008 069295 BROWN, CANDY BROWN10133 BACKYARD BIRDS
BACKYARD BIRDS #10133
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 84.00
Total :84.00
107554 10/16/2008 003001 BUILDERS SAND & GRAVEL 286310 STREET/WATER/SEWER - CRUSHED ROCK
7Page:
Packet Page 75 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107554 10/16/2008 (Continued)003001 BUILDERS SAND & GRAVEL
STREET/WATER/SEWER - CRUSHED ROCK
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 843.97
STREET/WATER/SEWER - CRUSHED ROCK
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 421.99
STREET/WATER/SEWER - CRUSHED ROCK
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 421.98
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 75.12
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 37.56
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 37.55
Total :1,838.17
107555 10/16/2008 072508 CAMPBELL, DARIN & LINDSEY 1-26175 RE: #G08-00319-MS UTILITY REFUND
#G08-00319-MS Utility Refund
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 93.96
Total :93.96
107556 10/16/2008 068484 CEMEX / RINKER MATERIALS 9415996800 STREET - DUMPED CONCRETE
STREET - DUMPED CONCRETE
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 133.70
STREET - ASPHALT9416005133
STREET - ASPHALT
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 261.98
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.310.310.00 23.58
STORM - DUMPED CONCRETE9416046595
STORM - DUMPED CONCRETE
411.000.652.542.320.310.00 159.56
Total :578.82
107557 10/16/2008 064690 CHAMPION BOLT & SUPPLY INC 492633 EDM00001
8Page:
Packet Page 76 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107557 10/16/2008 (Continued)064690 CHAMPION BOLT & SUPPLY INC
NUTS & BOLTS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 269.98
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 23.22
Total :293.20
107558 10/16/2008 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT9947 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT
FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #9947
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 161.70
Total :161.70
107559 10/16/2008 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION 460262193 UNIFORMS
Volunteers
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 20.00
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.410.240.00 1.78
OPS UNIFORMS460262194
Stn. 16
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 107.08
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.53
UNIFORMS460263385
Stn. 17 - ALS
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 111.29
Stn. 17 - OPS
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 111.30
Sales Tax
001.000.510.526.100.240.00 9.91
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 9.90
OPS UNIFORMS460263410
Stn. 20
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 134.69
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 11.98
9Page:
Packet Page 77 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :527.4610755910/16/2008 066382 066382 CINTAS CORPORATION
107560 10/16/2008 066070 CIT TECHNOLOGY FIN SERV INC 12623065 COPIER LEASE PW
copier lease for PW~
001.000.650.519.910.450.00 570.16
Total :570.16
107561 10/16/2008 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 6462 MAINT/OPERATION COSTS OCT 08
MAINT/OPERATION COSTS OCT 08
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 13,800.83
Total :13,800.83
107562 10/16/2008 063389 CLAY, JON 1347 TRAVEL/CLAY
TRAVEL/CLAY
411.000.656.538.800.430.00 232.76
Total :232.76
107563 10/16/2008 070231 CNR INC 11484 SEPTEMBER 08 MAINT PHONE SYSTEM
Sept-08 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
107564 10/16/2008 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES W1983375 005302
PAPER TOWELS/HAND SOAP/LINERS
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 287.52
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 25.59
Total :313.11
107565 10/16/2008 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES W1982799 FAC MAINT - 20" FLOOR PADS, BIGFOLD
FAC MAINT - 20" FLOOR PADS, BIGFOLD
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 331.50
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 29.50
10Page:
Packet Page 78 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :361.0010756510/16/2008 004095 004095 COASTWIDE LABORATORIES
107566 10/16/2008 069892 COLUMBIA FORD INC 3-83000 UNIT EQ42WR - NEW 2008 FORD F-450 XL
UNIT EQ42WR - NEW 2008 FORD F-450 XL
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 24,999.00
Sales Tax
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 1,999.92
Prompt payment discount 08 Ford3-83000
Prompt payment discount 08 Ford
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 -200.00
Total :26,798.92
107567 10/16/2008 061529 COMPTON, DOUGLAS 10/13/08 Sick leave buy back reimbursement
Sick leave buy back reimbursement
001.000.410.521.220.110.00 38.50
Total :38.50
107568 10/16/2008 072513 CONATY, LEANNE CONATY10019 ART WITH LEANNE CONATY
ART WITH LEANNE CONATY #10019
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 286.00
Total :286.00
107569 10/16/2008 065683 CORRY'S FINE DRY CLEANING 510-0991 OPS UNIFORMS
Batt Chiefs
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 91.22
PREVENTN UNIFORMS510-1524
Fire Marshal
001.000.510.522.300.240.00 29.43
ADMIN UNIFORMS510-1884
Fire Chief
001.000.510.522.100.240.00 26.50
OPS UNIFORMS510-2341
Asst. Chief
001.000.510.522.200.240.00 32.37
Total :179.52
107570 10/16/2008 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3209146 SR CENTER KITCHEN UPGRADE ADVERTISING
11Page:
Packet Page 79 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107570 10/16/2008 (Continued)006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE
SR CENTER KITCHEN UPGRADE ADVERTISING
116.000.651.519.920.410.00 325.50
Total :325.50
107571 10/16/2008 072189 DATA SITE BUSINESS ARCHIVES 60718 SHREDDING SERVICES
Document Shredding Services City Clerk
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 20.00
Document Shredding Ser Finance
001.000.310.514.230.410.00 20.00
Total :40.00
107572 10/16/2008 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 141147 OPERATNS COMMS
Radio repair
001.000.510.522.200.480.00 290.00
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.200.480.00 25.81
Total :315.81
107573 10/16/2008 070230 DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING CPL STATE SHARE OF CONCEALED PISTOL
State Share of Concealed Pistol
001.000.000.237.190.000.00 561.00
Total :561.00
107574 10/16/2008 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 08-2925 MINUTE TAKING
9/30 & 10/7 Council Minutes
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 252.00
Total :252.00
107575 10/16/2008 007253 DUNN LUMBER 09253788 LUMBER & SUPPLIES
LUMBER SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 152.25
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 13.55
Total :165.80
107576 10/16/2008 068803 EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS 3094559 SEWER INVENTORY -~
12Page:
Packet Page 80 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107576 10/16/2008 (Continued)068803 EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS
SEWER INVENTORY -~
411.000.655.535.800.340.00 1,362.00
NON INVENTORY - M/H FRAME & LID
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 484.00
Freight
411.000.655.535.800.340.00 36.89
Freight
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 13.11
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.340.00 124.50
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 44.24
Total :2,064.74
107577 10/16/2008 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 1414 SUPPLIES
GLOVES
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 12.42
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 1.11
Total :13.53
107578 10/16/2008 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 038502 COPIER MAINT
COPIER MAINT
001.000.230.512.500.480.00 66.33
Total :66.33
107579 10/16/2008 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 038541 Canon 5870 copier maintenance 9/7 -
13Page:
Packet Page 81 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107579 10/16/2008 (Continued)008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES
Canon 5870 copier maintenance 9/7 -
001.000.610.519.700.480.00 46.93
Canon 5870 copier maintenance 9/7 -
001.000.220.516.100.480.00 46.92
Canon 5870 copier maintenance 9/7 -
001.000.210.513.100.480.00 46.91
Sales Tax
001.000.610.519.700.480.00 4.18
Sales Tax
001.000.220.516.100.480.00 4.18
Sales Tax
001.000.210.513.100.480.00 4.17
Total :153.29
107580 10/16/2008 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 28791A ADMIN SMALL EQUIPMT
copier/printer/scanner
001.000.510.522.100.350.00 890.00
Sales Tax
001.000.510.522.100.350.00 79.21
Total :969.21
107581 10/16/2008 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU14390 STREET - SUPPLIES
STREET - SUPPLIES
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 1.76
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 0.15
STREET SIGN SHOP - LAG BOLTS, GLOVESWAMOU14516
STREET SIGN SHOP - LAG BOLTS, GLOVES
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 15.80
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.640.310.00 1.41
Total :19.12
107582 10/16/2008 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 1327466 17983
14Page:
Packet Page 82 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107582 10/16/2008 (Continued)009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC
REPAIR KITS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 63.82
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.68
Total :69.50
107583 10/16/2008 072516 FORD, MORGAN 8-18450 RE: #08-5801-SVJM UTILITY REFUND
RE: #08-5801-SVJM Utility Refund
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 141.39
Total :141.39
107584 10/16/2008 010660 FOSTER, MARLO 75 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
009.000.390.517.370.230.00 196.55
Total :196.55
107585 10/16/2008 018495 GLACIER NORTHWEST 90574763 STREET - CONCRETE
STREET - CONCRETE
111.000.653.542.610.310.00 386.75
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.610.310.00 34.81
STREET - CONCRETE90578645
STREET - CONCRETE
111.000.653.542.610.310.00 386.75
Sales Tax
111.000.653.542.610.310.00 34.81
Total :843.12
107586 10/16/2008 072515 GOOGLE INC MONTHLY INTERNET ANTI-VIRUS & SPAM MAINT FEE
Oct 08 Internet Anti-Virus & Spam Maint
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 571.48
Total :571.48
107587 10/16/2008 012199 GRAINGER 9747464585 PS - MOTOR
15Page:
Packet Page 83 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107587 10/16/2008 (Continued)012199 GRAINGER
PS - MOTOR
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 191.16
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 16.44
Total :207.60
107588 10/16/2008 071391 GRAY & OSBORNE INC 08591 E8FB.Upper Edmonds Storm Dsn
E8FB.Upper Edmonds Storm Dsn
412.200.630.594.320.410.00 3,569.66
Total :3,569.66
107589 10/16/2008 064721 HATZENBUHLER, HAROLD 76 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
617.000.510.522.200.230.00 197.70
Total :197.70
107590 10/16/2008 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1032425 6035322500959949
BRUSHES
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 69.70
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.27
60353225009599491091093
ADAPTER
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 74.46
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.70
603532250095994932827
SCREWS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 5.38
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 0.48
16Page:
Packet Page 84 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107590 10/16/2008 (Continued)067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
60353225009599494070337
LIQUID NAILS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 13.50
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1.21
60353225009599497060359
BATTERIES
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 19.94
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 1.79
60353225009599499069953
CONDUIT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 26.90
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 2.42
6035322500959949FCH002923264
LATE FEE
411.000.656.538.800.490.00 20.00
Total :248.75
107591 10/16/2008 072092 HSBC BUSINESS SOLUTIONS B02867 SEEDS
SEEDS
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 488.00
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 42.94
Total :530.94
107592 10/16/2008 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 19444 E7FA.Talbot Rd/Cty Wide Storm
E7FA.Talbot Rd/Cty Wide Storm
412.200.630.594.320.410.00 2,273.01
E4GA.L/S services thru 98/27/0819445
E4GA.L/S services thru 98/27/08
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 154.68
17Page:
Packet Page 85 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107592 10/16/2008 (Continued)060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC
E5MC.Testing thru 09/27/0819453
E5MC.Testing thru 09/27/08
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 7,628.95
Total :10,056.64
107593 10/16/2008 067265 IAPMO 2008 RENEWAL SUBS.WATER / SEWER - ONE YR SUBS~
WATER / SEWER - ONE YR SUBS~
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 42.00
Total :42.00
107594 10/16/2008 070042 IKON FINANCIAL SERVICES 77567688 COPIER LEASE
Cannon Image Runner 8/22-9/22
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 973.08
Total :973.08
107595 10/16/2008 068952 INFINITY INTERNET 2768139 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL INTERNET ACCESS
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL INTERNET ACCESS
001.000.640.575.560.420.00 15.00
Total :15.00
107596 10/16/2008 072494 INTEGRAL CONSULTING INC 0001565 XEN SERVER LICENSE
5 pk Xen Server License Part310-00108
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 11,465.00
Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 1,020.39
Total :12,485.39
107597 10/16/2008 014900 INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 2513 MEMBERSHIP DUES
IIMC Annual Membership fee for City~
001.000.250.514.300.490.00 225.00
Total :225.00
107598 10/16/2008 015270 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 409248 54278825
18Page:
Packet Page 86 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107598 10/16/2008 (Continued)015270 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC
HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 3,431.72
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 301.99
Total :3,733.71
107599 10/16/2008 015490 K & K CONCRETE PRODUCTS 31626 GROUT
GROUT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 36.50
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 3.25
GROUT31651
GROUT
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 13.90
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1.24
Total :54.89
107600 10/16/2008 015490 K & K CONCRETE PRODUCTS 31546 STORM - CEMENT
STORM - CEMENT
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 378.00
PALLET DEPOSIT
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 15.00
Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 34.98
Total :427.98
107601 10/16/2008 017135 LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC 0023728 810 WALNUT PROF SVC - THROUGH 8/30/08
810 WALNUT PROF SVC - THROUGH 8/30/08
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 168.70
Total :168.70
107602 10/16/2008 067631 LODESTAR COMPANY INC 20363 2795
19Page:
Packet Page 87 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107602 10/16/2008 (Continued)067631 LODESTAR COMPANY INC
HVAC REPAIR
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 193.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 17.18
Total :210.18
107603 10/16/2008 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 099169 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 390.16
SUPPLIES099262
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 150.26
Total :540.42
107604 10/16/2008 066191 MACLEOD RECKORD 5111 E5MC.Const Mgt Services September
E5MC.Const Mgt Services September
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 5,530.73
Total :5,530.73
107605 10/16/2008 019582 MANOR HARDWARE 236332-00 SEWER - BITS
SEWER - BITS
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 9.78
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 0.87
Total :10.65
107606 10/16/2008 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 184 INTERPETER FEE
INTERPETER FEE
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 108.77
INTERPETER FEE199
INTERPETER FEE
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 108.77
INTERPETER FEE200
INTERPETER FEE
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 108.77
20Page:
Packet Page 88 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107606 10/16/2008 (Continued)069362 MARSHALL, CITA
INTERPETER FEE207
INTERPETER FEE
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 102.92
INTERPETER FEE208
INTERPETER FEE
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 108.77
Total :538.00
107607 10/16/2008 072510 MC ARTHUR, KELLEY MCARTHUR1002 REFUND
REFUND - RETURNING CREDIT ON ACCOUNT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 107.00
Total :107.00
107608 10/16/2008 019920 MCCANN, MARIAN 74 LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
LEOFF 1 Reimbursement
009.000.390.517.370.290.00 5,790.75
Total :5,790.75
107609 10/16/2008 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 11336029 123106800
MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 418.97
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 7.46
Total :426.43
107610 10/16/2008 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC 77989 OIL CAP
OIL CAP
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 7.65
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.68
Total :8.33
107611 10/16/2008 071123 MOORS, JAMES 2467 TRAVEL/MOORS
TRAVEL/MOORS
411.000.656.538.800.430.00 177.33
21Page:
Packet Page 89 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :177.3310761110/16/2008 071123 071123 MOORS, JAMES
107612 10/16/2008 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0236196-IN EDM110
SENSOR TRANSMITTER
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 750.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 10.61
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 67.69
Total :828.30
107613 10/16/2008 067694 NC POWER SYSTEMS CO.PSW00075348 SEWER - LS 12 - REPAIR ENGINE
SEWER - LS 12 - REPAIR ENGINE
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 374.00
CONSUMABLES & ENV FEES
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 22.44
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 35.68
SEWER LS 1 - REPAIRS DUE TO VOLTAGEPSW00075359
SEWER LS 1 - REPAIRS DUE TO VOLTAGE
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 3,977.00
Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.480.00 353.95
Total :4,763.07
107614 10/16/2008 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 0095340 SODIUM HYDROXIDE
SODIUM HYDROXIDE
411.000.656.538.800.310.52 4,608.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.52 410.11
SODIUM BISULFITE0095444
SODIUM BISULFITE
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 1,422.00
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 126.56
22Page:
Packet Page 90 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :6,566.6710761410/16/2008 066391 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC
107615 10/16/2008 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 0828076 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 98.02
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0828077
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 98.02
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0828078
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 360.58
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL0830544
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:~
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 398.38
Total :955.00
107616 10/16/2008 064215 NORTHWEST PUMP & EQUIP CO 1787915 142549
REPAIR SENSOR
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 220.50
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 19.62
Total :240.12
107617 10/16/2008 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 582 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 10/8/08.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 10/8/08.
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 224.00
Total :224.00
107618 10/16/2008 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 539618 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 602.41
SUPPLIES652303
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 311.98
SUPPLIES888562
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 217.81
23Page:
Packet Page 91 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :1,132.2010761810/16/2008 063511 063511 OFFICE MAX INC
107619 10/16/2008 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 728707 OFFICE SUPPLIES
CLOCK
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 16.04
Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 1.42
Total :17.46
107620 10/16/2008 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 890513 520437
COPIER PAPER/INK CARTRIDGES
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 70.22
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.41 6.24
Total :76.46
107621 10/16/2008 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 588051 OFFICE SUPPLIES
Keyboard tray
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 307.15
Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 27.33
OFFICE SUPPLIES789570
Keyboard Tray
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 -307.15
Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 -27.33
OFFICE SUPPLIES808479
Office Supplies
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 7.17
Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 0.64
Total :7.81
107622 10/16/2008 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER August COURT, BLDG CODE & JIS TRANSMITTAL
24Page:
Packet Page 92 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107622 10/16/2008 (Continued)070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER
Emergency Medical Services & Trauma
001.000.000.237.120.000.00 1,177.67
PSEA 1, 2, 3 Account
001.000.000.237.130.000.00 25,609.32
Building Code Fee Account
001.000.000.237.150.000.00 139.50
State Patrol Death Investigations
001.000.000.237.170.000.00 502.21
Judicial Information Systems Account
001.000.000.237.180.000.00 4,137.82
School Zone Safety Account
001.000.000.237.200.000.00 410.29
auto theft
001.000.000.237.250.000.00 2,043.79
brain injury
001.000.000.237.260.000.00 374.57
25Page:
Packet Page 93 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107622 10/16/2008 (Continued)070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER
COURT, BLDG CODE & JIS TRANSMITTALJuly
Emergency Medical Services & Trauma
001.000.000.237.120.000.00 1,468.88
PSEA 1, 2,3 Account
001.000.000.237.130.000.00 33,383.42
Building Code Fee Account
001.000.000.237.150.000.00 144.00
state patrol death investigations
001.000.000.237.270.000.00 50.37
state patrol death investigations
001.000.000.237.170.000.00 913.34
Judicial Information Systems Account
001.000.000.237.180.000.00 4,988.92
School Zone Safety Account
001.000.000.237.200.000.00 239.69
brain injury
001.000.000.237.260.000.00 461.06
auto theft
001.000.000.237.250.000.00 2,475.14
Total :78,519.99
107623 10/16/2008 072514 OPPIE, LYNLEA OPPIE1015 CONTEST WINNER
2ND PLACE CONTEST WINNER
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 75.00
Total :75.00
107624 10/16/2008 070931 PATTON BOGGS LLP 092008 DC LOBBYIST FOR SEPTEMBER 2008
DC Lobbyist for September 2008
001.000.610.519.700.410.00 4,000.00
Total :4,000.00
107625 10/16/2008 072119 PEAK INTERNET LLC 081005-0066 CEMETERY INTERNET ACCESS
INTERNET ACCESS FOR CEMETERY OFFICE
130.000.640.536.200.420.00 17.95
26Page:
Packet Page 94 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :17.9510762510/16/2008 072119 072119 PEAK INTERNET LLC
107626 10/16/2008 063951 PERTEET ENGINEERING INC 27096.000-10 E7CB.Shell Valley thru 08/24/08
E7CB.Shell Valley thru 08/24/08
112.200.630.595.440.410.00 2,111.25
E7CB.Shall Valley thru 09/28/0827096.000-11
E7CB.Shall Valley thru 09/28/08
112.200.630.595.440.410.00 1,035.00
E7CB.Shell Valley thru 07/27/0827096.000-9
E7CB.Shell Valley thru 07/27/08
112.200.630.595.440.410.00 4,560.00
Total :7,706.25
107627 10/16/2008 066796 PETTY CASH - COURT 101408 MAIL EHM BOXES
MAIL EHM BOXES
001.000.230.512.501.420.00 38.28
JURY SNACKS
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 24.02
MAIL EHM BOXES
001.000.230.512.501.420.00 99.40
DONUTS FOR JURY
001.000.230.512.540.490.00 13.98
MAIL EHM BOXES
001.000.230.512.501.420.00 13.11
Total :188.79
107628 10/16/2008 064735 PNWS - AWWA 1240 WASHINGTON WATER UTILITY COUNCIL 2008
WASHINGTON WATER UTILITY COUNCIL 2008
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 1,000.00
Total :1,000.00
107629 10/16/2008 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 3689976003 200 Dayton St-Vacant PW Bldg
200 Dayton St-Vacant PW Bldg
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 37.17
Total :37.17
107630 10/16/2008 070809 PUGET SOUND EXECUTIVE 08-644 COURT SECURITY
27Page:
Packet Page 95 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107630 10/16/2008 (Continued)070809 PUGET SOUND EXECUTIVE
COURT SECURITY
001.000.230.512.500.410.00 2,613.75
Total :2,613.75
107631 10/16/2008 064291 QWEST 206-Z02-0478 332B TELEMETRY
TELEMETRY
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 137.85
Total :137.85
107632 10/16/2008 071696 RANKINS, KATE RANKINS1011 PLAZA ROOM MONITOR
PLAZA ROOM MONITOR~
001.000.640.574.100.410.00 105.00
Total :105.00
107633 10/16/2008 069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN 7180 PUBLIC DEFENDER
PUBLIC DEFENDER
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 1,600.00
Total :1,600.00
107634 10/16/2008 069879 SALTER JOYCE ZIKER PLLC 21395 ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL SERV SEPTEMBER 2008
810 Walnut St Legal Services
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 92.00
Gen Environmental Legal Services
001.000.610.519.700.410.00 65.89
Total :157.89
107635 10/16/2008 072375 SAMIONE, JAMI SAMIONE10137 FAIRY TALE FUN
FAIRY TALE FUN #10137
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 126.00
Total :126.00
107636 10/16/2008 070880 SANDERS & ASSOCIATES INC 0509106CE-03 C-299
C-299 SEDIMENT SAMPLING
414.000.656.594.320.650.00 21,056.56
Total :21,056.56
28Page:
Packet Page 96 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107637 10/16/2008 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 08-2626 SUPPLIES FOR WATER WAGON
FLANGE
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 41.00
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 17.50
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.20
Total :63.70
107638 10/16/2008 062830 SEBERS, ROD 1219 TRAVEL/SEBERS
TRAVEL/SEBERS
411.000.656.538.800.430.00 349.41
Total :349.41
107639 10/16/2008 065724 SENSUS METERING SYSTEMS 00000001 WATER METERING STUDY PROPAGATION
Water Metering Study Propagation
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 300.00
Sales Tax
001.000.310.518.880.410.00 26.70
Total :326.70
107640 10/16/2008 072511 SIDERIS, SHARON SIDERIS1010 REFUND
REFUND - INSUFFICIENT REGISTRATION
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 35.00
Total :35.00
107641 10/16/2008 069219 SIEMENS WATER TECHNOLOGIES COR 2576362 RENTAL DI TANKS
RENTAL DI TANKS
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 686.95
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 61.13
Total :748.08
107642 10/16/2008 036509 SIGNATURE FORMS INC 1081915 UTILTIY BILLING- PINK NOTICE PAPER
29Page:
Packet Page 97 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107642 10/16/2008 (Continued)036509 SIGNATURE FORMS INC
UTILTIY BILLING- PINK NOTICE PAPER
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 236.50
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 44.40
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 25.00
Total :305.90
107643 10/16/2008 071725 SKAGIT GARDENS INC 52142635 WINTER COLOR PROGRAM FLOWERS
PLANTS FOR WINTER COLOR PROGRAM
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 327.82
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 28.66
CREDIT FOR PLANTSCR-009434
CREDIT FOR PLANTS
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 -260.28
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 -20.82
Total :75.38
107644 10/16/2008 036955 SKY NURSERY 268241 CYPRESS REPLACEMENT/5TH & MAIN
BONE MEAL, CYPRESS
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 30.91
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.810.310.00 2.78
Total :33.69
107645 10/16/2008 036955 SKY NURSERY 268173 WATER - PLANTING MIX
WATER - PLANTING MIX
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 129.85
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 11.69
Total :141.54
107646 10/16/2008 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 5320018384 SIERRA PARK BALLFIELD
30Page:
Packet Page 98 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107646 10/16/2008 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
SIERRA PARK BALLFIELD
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.74
Total :29.74
107647 10/16/2008 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 3205023064 463-001-671-7
8421 244TH SW/RICHMOND PARK
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 27.14
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 1.63
206-001-485-5588020736
24400 HIGHWAY 99/RICHMOND PARK
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 27.14
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 1.63
Total :57.54
107648 10/16/2008 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2470018124 SIGNAL LIGHT
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 34.73
SIGNAL LIGHT2880012519
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 35.14
NEW TRAFFIC CONTROL LIGHT AT 215TH &3630573867
NEW TRAFFIC CONTROL LIGHT AT 215TH &
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 73.61
BLINKING LIGHT3970013599
BLINKING LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.23
SIGNAL LIGHT4320010194
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 34.47
TELEMETRY SYSTEM4640017416
TELEMETRY SYSTEM
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 27.14
31Page:
Packet Page 99 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107648 10/16/2008 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
SIGNAL LIGHT5380011832
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 29.74
TRAFFIC LIGHT5450016042
TRAFFIC LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 142.72
SCHOOL FLASHING LIGHTS5470012336
SCHOOL FLASHING LIGHTS
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 29.74
Total :437.52
107649 10/16/2008 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY I000206999 SOLID WASTE CHARGES
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL~
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 458.51
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 16.49
Total :475.00
107650 10/16/2008 070167 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER aug 2008 crime victims- august 2008
crime victims- august 2008
001.000.000.237.140.000.00 758.93
july crime victimsJuly
july crime victims
001.000.000.237.140.000.00 975.07
Total :1,734.00
107651 10/16/2008 037800 SNOHOMISH HEALTH DISTRICT C000106 SEWER - HEP B
SEWER - HEP B
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 88.00
Total :88.00
107652 10/16/2008 038500 SO COUNTY SENIOR CENTER INC Oct-08 10/08 RECREATION SERVIES CONTRACT FEE
10/08 Recreation Servies Contract Fee
001.000.390.519.900.410.00 5,000.00
Total :5,000.00
32Page:
Packet Page 100 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107653 10/16/2008 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 03587-0930 DISPOSAL SERVICES
DISPOSAL SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 595.53
Total :595.53
107654 10/16/2008 038413 SOUND TRACTOR IN69660 MOWER SUPPLIES
WASHER, BOLT, BLADE
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 118.98
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 5.14
Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 10.67
Total :134.79
107655 10/16/2008 069997 SRI TECHNOLOGIES INC 89341 E5GA.Roberts thru 09/27/08
E5GA.Roberts thru 09/27/08
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 130.00
E5MC.Roberts thru 09/27/08
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 1,007.50
E4GA.Roberts thru 09/27/08
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 292.50
E3JB.Roberts thru 09/27/08
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 65.00
Roberts Office Design thru 09/27/08
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 260.00
E5GA.Roberts thru 10/04/0889618
E5GA.Roberts thru 10/04/08
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 227.50
E5MC.Roberts thru 10/04/08
125.000.640.594.750.650.00 455.00
E4GA.Roberts thru 10/04/08
412.300.630.594.320.650.00 325.00
E3JB.Roberts thru 10/04/08
412.100.630.594.320.650.00 65.00
Roberts thru 10/04-Office Design
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 552.50
33Page:
Packet Page 101 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :3,380.0010765510/16/2008 069997 069997 SRI TECHNOLOGIES INC
107656 10/16/2008 065941 SvR DESIGN CO 7305 E8MA.4th Ave Corridor study
E8MA.4th Ave Corridor study
132.000.640.594.760.410.00 7,748.93
Total :7,748.93
107657 10/16/2008 068619 SWENSON, LINDA 1180 CRAZE COVER PHOTO
CRAZE JANUARY - APRIL~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 166.67
Total :166.67
107658 10/16/2008 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 10734804 100323
MAINTENANCE SUPPLIES
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 874.88
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 77.86
Total :952.74
107659 10/16/2008 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1614732 NEWSPAPER AD
Notice re: 2009/2010 Budget
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 38.48
NEWSPAPER AD1616317
10/21 Council Hearing
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 47.36
NEWSPAPER AD1616319
10/21 Council Budget Hearing
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 37.00
Total :122.84
107660 10/16/2008 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1615988 BUTTERFIELD/SM-08-60/ADB-08-61 LEGAL
BUTTERFIELD/SM-08-60/ADB-08-61 LEGAL
001.000.620.558.600.440.00 20.72
Total :20.72
107661 10/16/2008 027269 THE PART WORKS INC 242555 MINI PARK RESTROOM
34Page:
Packet Page 102 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
35
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107661 10/16/2008 (Continued)027269 THE PART WORKS INC
FAUCET SINGLE HOLE SENSOR
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 440.00
Freight
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 8.78
Sales Tax
125.000.640.576.800.310.00 39.94
Total :488.72
107662 10/16/2008 040924 TMG SERVICES INC 0028778-IN 0504131
SENSOR CLEANING SOLUTION
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 450.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 40.94
Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 43.69
Total :534.63
107663 10/16/2008 068322 TRANE 81164546 PS - SCHEDULED MAINT INSPECT CONTRACT -
PS - SCHEDULED MAINT INSPECT CONTRACT -
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 287.00
Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 25.55
Total :312.55
107664 10/16/2008 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8024219 WATER INVENTORY -~
WATER INVENTORY -~
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 2,796.01
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 248.84
WATER INVENTORY - ~8031800
WATER INVENTORY - ~
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 189.56
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 16.87
35Page:
Packet Page 103 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
36
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107664 10/16/2008 (Continued)061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY
WATER INVENTORY -~8034630
WATER INVENTORY -~
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 758.24
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 67.49
Total :4,077.01
107665 10/16/2008 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 8090166 utility locates~
utility locates~
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 106.79
utility locates~
411.000.655.535.800.410.00 106.79
utility locates~
411.000.652.542.900.410.00 106.82
Total :320.40
107666 10/16/2008 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425-744-1681 SEAVIEW PARK IRRIGATION MODEM
SEAVIEW PARK IRRIGATION MODEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 44.31
SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION MODEM425-744-1691
SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION MODEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 43.66
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL425-745-5055
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL
001.000.640.575.560.420.00 57.96
GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FAX MODEM425-776-5316
GROUNDS MAINTENANCE FAX MODEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 107.64
Total :253.57
107667 10/16/2008 011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST 425 771 5553 030210101452264107
AUTO DIALER
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 56.99
36Page:
Packet Page 104 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
37
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107667 10/16/2008 (Continued)011900 VERIZON NORTHWEST
030210107956941310425 NW1-0060
BPS TELEMETRY
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 41.25
030210109956941902425 NW1-0155
TELEMETRY
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 216.92
Total :315.16
107668 10/16/2008 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 35.90
LIBRARY ELEVATOR PHONE425-776-1281
LIBRARY ELEVATOR PHONE
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 44.31
CITY HALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEM425-776-6829
CITY HALL FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 116.52
1ST & PINE CIRCUIT LINE PT EDWARDS425-AB9-0530
1st & Pine Circuit Line for Pt Edwards
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 45.53
Total :242.26
107669 10/16/2008 064649 VERMEER NW SALES INC S02146 WATER - SUPPLIES
WATER - SUPPLIES
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 353.53
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 31.47
Total :385.00
107670 10/16/2008 061485 WA ST DEPT OF HEALTH 203361 PW ID 22500 SURVEY FEE FOR COE
PW ID 22500 SURVEY FEE FOR COE
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 612.00
Total :612.00
107671 10/16/2008 045912 WASPC 80153 ELECTRONIC MONITORING
37Page:
Packet Page 105 of 374
10/16/2008
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
38
1:04:18PM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
107671 10/16/2008 (Continued)045912 WASPC
ELECTRONIC MONITORING
001.000.230.523.200.510.00 310.50
Total :310.50
107672 10/16/2008 061395 WASTE MANAGEMENT NW 5277669-26 201-0170717-2677-6
ASH DISPOSAL
411.000.656.538.800.474.65 1,874.38
Total :1,874.38
107673 10/16/2008 072000 WCI 082742157 C/A 00100362301
Fiber Optic Internet Connection
001.000.310.518.870.420.00 2,800.00
Total :2,800.00
107674 10/16/2008 066337 WOOD~HARBINGER INC 017712 SR CENTER - MECH & ELECT ENG DESIGN
SR CENTER - MECH & ELECT ENG DESIGN
116.000.651.519.920.410.00 10,000.00
Total :10,000.00
107675 10/16/2008 072512 YOUNKIN, JAYNE YOUNKIN1008 REFUND
POINT OF SALE REFUND
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 49.01
Total :49.01
Bank total :410,660.86143 Vouchers for bank code :front
410,660.86Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report143
38Page:
Packet Page 106 of 374
AM-1832 2.D.
Claim for Damages
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Linda Hynd
Submitted For:Sandy Chase Time:Consent
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages from Eric Thuesen ($750.00).
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
It is recommended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Claim for Damages by minute
entry.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
A Claim for Damages has been received from the following individual:
Eric Thuesen
19500 80th Avenue West
Edmonds, WA
($750.00)
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Thuesen Claim for Damages
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/13/2008 01:50 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/13/2008 01:53 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2008 02:22 PM APRV
Form Started By: Linda
Hynd
Started On: 10/06/2008 12:04
PM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2008
Packet Page 107 of 374
Packet Page 108 of 374
Packet Page 109 of 374
AM-1823 2.E.
Police Support Collective Bargaining Agreement
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Al Compaan Time:Consent
Department:Police Department Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Police Support Collective Bargaining Agreement.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Review and approval of Police Support Collective Bargaining Agreement, authorizing Mayor
Haakenson to sign the agreement.
Previous Council Action
Council was briefed about the Police Support CBA during Executive Session on September 23,
2008 and approved certain economic parameters for conclusion of negotiations.
Narrative
The Police Support Collective Bargaining Agreement was negotiated between representatives of
the City and the Edmonds Police Officers' Association (EPOA). A tentative agreement resulted,
subject to approval and ratification by the parties. The EPOA (Police Support) Bargaining Unit
employees have voted to ratify the CBA. The next step is City Council review and ratification.
The CBA, as negotiated, is within the economic parameters previously approved by City Council.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: CBA Police Support
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/13/2008 01:50 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/13/2008 01:52 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/13/2008 02:22 PM APRV
Form Started By: Al
Compaan
Started On: 10/02/2008 09:32
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/13/2008
Packet Page 110 of 374
Packet Page 111 of 374
Packet Page 112 of 374
Packet Page 113 of 374
Packet Page 114 of 374
Packet Page 115 of 374
Packet Page 116 of 374
Packet Page 117 of 374
Packet Page 118 of 374
Packet Page 119 of 374
Packet Page 120 of 374
Packet Page 121 of 374
Packet Page 122 of 374
Packet Page 123 of 374
Packet Page 124 of 374
Packet Page 125 of 374
Packet Page 126 of 374
Packet Page 127 of 374
Packet Page 128 of 374
Packet Page 129 of 374
Packet Page 130 of 374
Packet Page 131 of 374
Packet Page 132 of 374
Packet Page 133 of 374
Packet Page 134 of 374
AM-1817 2.F.
SCSC Kitchen Upgrades
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Jim Stevens
Submitted For:Noel Miller Time:Consent
Department:Public Works Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Authorize award of the contract for the South County Senior Center kitchen upgrades construction
project to the lowest responsible bidder (Construction Specialties LLC) as determined October 6,
2008. This consent agenda item was not reviewed by a Council Committee.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Authorize the award of this contract to Construction Specialties LLC.
Previous Council Action
At the City Council meeting September 16, 2008, approval was given to solicit construction bids
for this project expected to be in excess of $50,000. Also, on September 16, 2008, the City
Council approved the award of a contract for the purchase of new kitchen equipment valued at
$56,132.80 for the South County Senior Center kitchen.
Narrative
As a result of Community Block Development Grant (CDBG) awards for 2004, the City of
Edmonds obtained federal funding for a number of projects at the South County Senior Center
(SCSC). A roofing project covering part of the SCSC has already been completed. Although there
is insufficient funding available now for all original projects, the remaining funding will take care
of one additional.
This final project is composed of three major parts. The first is the purchase of new cooking and
serving equipment, much of which is already on order. The second is the associated remodel work
necessary for this new kitchen equipment to operate as specified and designed. Lastly, resolving a
compliance issue, we must upgrade the kitchen to meet required, current fire codes at the exhaust
hood over the cooking area. The City Fire Inspector will shut down the kitchen operations if the
fire suppression system in this area is not brought into code compliance. Additionally, the existing
cooking and serving equipment is far beyond serviceability and can no longer be counted upon for
safe and reliable operation.
Another consideration is that construction activities will negate the ability of the SCSC to generate
revenues from the use of its kitchen, so it is imperative to begin and finish the work as
expeditiously as possible. The term of the work is set in the documents at 35 days to substantial
completion. With the timing in motion at this moment, it is believed that this project can be fully
Packet Page 135 of 374
completed just ahead of the holiday season.
The amount of 2004 CDBG funding remaining as of this date is $73,716. There is also Boeing
grant funding of $40,000 available strictly for purchasing kitchen equipment. The acquisition of all
needed project equipment will total approximately $60,000, primarily because of a
commercial-grade cooking/serving equipment contract already in place with Smith & Greene. This
equipment has been specified as high-efficiency and will be eligible for utility rebates where
available. The City is also purchasing a new kitchen exhaust fan and several plumbing fixtures
that are to be reimbursed from grant funding. This means approximately $20,000 of the 2004
CDBG funding will be needed to supplement the Boeing grant funding to purchase all the
equipment needed for the kitchen.
Still then left on the table from the 2004 CDBG funding is approximately $54,000. The bid value
from Construction Specialties for the construction contract, including sales tax, is $45,273.30.
With the customary 10% additional reserved for contingency on such remodel work, the total
budget set aside for this project will need to be $49,800.63. Between the funding from 2004
CDBG award and the Boeing equipment grant, there is sufficient capital available for the purchase
of all equipment and the needed alterations to the facility. Therefore, this work is expected to all be
funded as pass-through expenses from the City, fully reimbursed from the available grants.
See the attached file on Kitchen Bids for a recap of all information from the construction bid
opening held on October 6, 2008.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2008-09
Revenue:$49,800.63
Expenditure:$49,800.63
Fiscal Impact:
See the attached file on SCSC Kitchen Financials.
Attachments
Link: Kitchen Bids
Link: SCSC Kitchen Financials
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 Public Works Noel Miller 10/16/2008 11:37 AM APRV
2 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:28 PM APRV
3 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 01:35 PM APRV
4 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:40 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jim
Stevens
Started On: 09/30/2008 05:38
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 136 of 374
BI
D
T
A
B
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
H
E
E
T
AB
S
T
R
A
C
T
O
F
Q
U
O
T
E
S
/
B
I
D
S
A
U
T
H
O
R
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
D
A
T
E
:
0
9
/
1
6
/
0
8
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
D
A
T
E
:
1
0
-
0
6
-
0
8
AW
A
R
D
D
A
T
E
:
Su
pp
li
e
s
o
r
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
:
NA
M
E
O
F
B
I
D
D
E
R
S
:
Re
m
a
r
k
s
SC
S
C
K
i
t
c
h
e
n
U
p
g
r
a
d
e
s
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
12
3
4
Or
i
g in
a
t
i
n
g O
f
f
i
c
e
:
P
u
b
l
i
c
W
o
r
k
s
E
b
e
n
a
l
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
t
c
m
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
S
p ec
.
N
o
r
t
h
w
e
s
t
e
r
n
C
o
n
.
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
:
P
u
b
l
i
e
W
o
r
k
s
IT
E
M
1
B
A
S
E
B
I
D
$1
2
9
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6
3
,
7
3
0
.
0
0
$
4
1
,
5
7
3
.
2
8
$
8
2
,
2
9
1
.
5
6
2 3 WA
S
t
a
t
e
S
a
l
e
s
T
a
x
$1
1
,
4
8
1
.
0
0
$
5
,
6
7
1
.
9
7
$
3
,
7
0
0
.
0
0
$
7
,
3
2
3
.
9
5
TO
T
A
L
$1
4
0
,
4
8
1
.
0
0
$
6
9
,
4
0
1
.
9
7
$
4
5
,
2
7
3
.
3
0
$
8
9
,
6
1
5
.
5
1
Bi
d
D
e
p
o
s
i
t
Bo
n
d
Bo
n
d
C
a
s
h
i
e
r
'
s
C
h
e
c
k
B
o
n
d
Bi
d
S
i
g
n
e
d
Di
s
c
o
u
n
t
De
l
i
v
e
r
y
Wa
r
r
a
n
t
y
Re
c
'
d
A
d
d
e
n
d
a
i
f
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
ch
e
c
k
ch
e
c
k
ch
e
c
k
ch
e
c
k
Is
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
a
W
A
S
t
a
t
e
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
i
t
e
m
?
Y
e
s
N
o
X
X
X
In
d
i
c
a
t
e
v
e
n
d
o
r
s
f
r
o
m
a
b
o
v
e
l
i
s
t
i
n
g w
h
o
h
a
v
e
p re
v
i
o
u
s
l
y p ro
v
i
d
e
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
o
r
p ro
d
u
c
t
s
t
o
t
h
e
C
i
t
y a
n
d
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
t
h
e
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
w
e
r
e
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y or unsatisfactor y :
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
A
w
a
r
d
e
e
:
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
I
C
E
R
T
I
F
Y
T
H
A
T
A
L
L
B
I
D
S
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
D
I
N
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
E
T
O
T
H
E
I
N
V
I
T
A
T
I
O
N
W
E
R
E
O
P
E
N
E
D
,
R
E
A
D
A
N
D
R
E
C
O
R
D
E
D
A
C
C
O
R
D
I
N
G
T
O
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
.
Lo
w
B
i
d
T
h
a
t
I
s
U
n
a
c
c
e
p
t
a
b
l
e
:
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
A
g
e
n
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
f
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
:
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
No
t
e
:
I
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
N
/
A
i
n
e
a
c
h
o
f
t
h
e
a
b
o
v
e
c
a
t
e
g or
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
a
pp
l y t
o
t
h
e
b
i
d
b
e
i
n
g p re
s
e
n
t
e
d
EX
C
E
L
D
A
T
A
\
A
D
M
I
N
\
B
I
D
S
BI
D
T
A
B
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
S
H
E
E
T
Pa
c
k
e
t
Pa
g
e
13
7
of
37
4
AB
S
T
R
A
C
T
O
F
Q
U
O
T
E
S
/
B
I
D
S
A
U
T
H
O
R
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
D
A
T
E
:
O
P
E
N
I
N
G
D
A
T
E
:
AW
A
R
D
D
A
T
E
:
Su
p
p
l
i
e
s
o
r
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
:
NA
M
E
O
F
B
I
D
D
E
R
S
:
5
6
7
8
Re
m
a
r
k
s
Or
i
g in
a
t
i
n
g O
f
f
i
c
e
:
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
:
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
IT
E
M 1 2
3 WA
S
t
a
t
e
S
a
l
e
s
T
a
x
TO
T
A
L
Bi
d
D
e
p
o
s
i
t
Bi
d
S
i
g
n
e
d
Di
s
c
o
u
n
t
De
l
i
v
e
r
y
Wa
r
r
a
n
t
y
Re
c
'
d
A
d
d
e
n
d
a
i
f
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
Is
t
h
i
s
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
a
W
A
S
t
a
t
e
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
i
t
e
m
?
Y
e
s
N
o
In
d
i
c
a
t
e
v
e
n
d
o
r
s
f
r
o
m
a
b
o
v
e
l
i
s
t
i
n
g w
h
o
h
a
v
e
p re
v
i
o
u
s
l
y p ro
v
i
d
e
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
o
r
p ro
d
u
c
t
s
t
o
t
h
e
C
i
t
y a
n
d
i
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
w
h
e
t
h
e
r
t
h
e
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
w
e
r
e
s
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
o
r
y or unsatisfactor y :
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
A
w
a
r
d
e
e
:
__
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
I
C
E
R
T
I
F
Y
T
H
A
T
A
L
L
B
I
D
S
R
E
C
E
I
V
E
D
I
N
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
E
T
O
T
H
E
I
N
V
I
T
A
T
I
O
N
W
E
R
E
O
P
E
N
E
D
,
R
E
A
D
A
N
D
R
E
C
O
R
D
E
D
A
C
C
O
R
D
I
N
G
T
O
C
U
R
R
E
N
T
R
E
Q
U
I
R
E
M
E
N
T
S
.
Lo
w
B
i
d
T
h
a
t
I
s
U
n
a
c
c
e
p
t
a
b
l
e
:
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
A
g
e
n
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
C
i
t
y
o
f
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
:
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
No
t
e
:
I
n
d
i
c
a
t
e
N
/
A
i
n
e
a
c
h
o
f
t
h
e
a
b
o
v
e
c
a
t
e
g or
i
e
s
t
h
a
t
d
o
e
s
n
o
t
a
pp
l y t
o
t
h
e
b
i
d
b
e
i
n
g p re
s
e
n
t
e
d
EX
C
E
L
D
A
T
A
\
A
D
M
I
N
\
C
H
E
M
B
I
D
Pa
c
k
e
t
Pa
g
e
13
8
of
37
4
SCSC Kitchen Upgrades Budget:
Funding Sources:
2004 CDBG $73,716.84
Boeing Grant $40,000.00
Total Available Grant Funding:$113,716.84
Expenditures:
Construction Cost:$49,800.63
Equipment Purchases:
Smith & Greene $59,521.16
Exhaust Fan $1,799.03
Plumbing Fixtures (approx.):$800.00
Total Expenditures:$111,920.82
Net Difference:$1,796.02
Packet Page 139 of 374
AM-1838 2.G.
Surplus Equipment
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Kim Karas
Submitted For:Noel Miller Time:Consent
Department:Public Works Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Authorization to contract with James G. Murphy to sell a surplus city vehicle, Unit #15, a 1995
Chevrolet van. This consent agenda item was not reviewed by a Council Committee.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Recommend that authorization be given to Public Works to contract with James Murphy to sell a
surplus City vehicle.
Previous Council Action
City Council has previously allowed Public Works to utilize James G. Murphy to auction surplus
vehicles when necessary.
Narrative
The following vehicle has become surplus; therefore Public Works would like to again utilize
Murphy Auctioneer services to manage the City's surplus vehicles in the most cost effective way.
Unit #15 Facility Division, a 1995 Chevrolet Van Vin # 1GCFG35K3SF113871
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2008
Revenue:$3,500
Expenditure:0.00
Fiscal Impact:
Proceeds from the auction will be deposited into the Equipment Rental B-Fund Accounts.
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:28 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 01:35 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:40 PM APRV
Packet Page 140 of 374
Form Started By: Kim
Karas
Started On: 10/09/2008 09:32
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 141 of 374
AM-1847 2.H.
2007-2008 Fire Department Work Plan Update #3
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Tom Tomberg Time:Consent
Department:Fire Type:Information
Review Committee:Public Safety
Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
2007-2008 Fire Department Work Plan Update #3. Reviewed by the Public Safety Committee on 10-14-08.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Information only.
Previous Council Action
On November 28, 2006, Council approved the 2007-2008 Fire Department Work Plan. Update #1
was presented on June 12, 2007, and Update #2 on February 12, 2008. Both on Consent as
Information Only.
Narrative
The 2006 Council approval of the 2007-2008 Work Plan complied with City of Edmonds Strategic
Plan II. Council Public Safety Statement, Objective D., Develop Public Safety Plans.
At the October 14 presentation, the Public Safety Committee directed Fire Administration to place
Update #3 on a future Council Consent Agenda and on the Fire Department website
www.edmondsfire.org.
The fourth and final plan update is scheduled for the first quarter of 2009, along with the
2009-2010 Fire Department Work Plan.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:
Revenue:
Expenditure:
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Attachments
Link: 2007-2008 Work Plan Update #3
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
Packet Page 142 of 374
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/15/2008 12:11 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/15/2008 12:15 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/15/2008 02:41 PM APRV
Form Started By: Tom
Tomberg
Started On: 10/15/2008 11:18
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/15/2008
Packet Page 143 of 374
EDMONDS FIRE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
Date: October 14, 2008
To: Public Safety Committee
From: Thomas J. Tomberg, Fire Chief
Subject: 2007-2008 Fire Department Work Plan Update #3 Attachment
Administration
1. Inculcate the workplace safety ethic into every aspect of Department operations.
#1. Over the past several years the fire service has become increasingly alarmed
about Firefighter deaths and injuries. Edmonds has integrated a number of safety
programs described in the Series 600 Safety Standard Operating Procedure into
Department operations including a brief “Tailboard” review of a safety topic at the
beginning of each shift, a Near-Miss Reporting System, annual participation in
the international Firefighter and EMS “Safety Stand Down,” holding members
accountable for safe work practices, and a formal accident review process.
#2. Safety continues to be a major Department focus when engaged in routine
activities, during training, and/or on the emergency ground.
#3. The Department continues to study and implement safety procedures
and programs from a list of required written programs that include:
• Accident Prevention Program per WAC 296-305-01509(12)(b). Done -
SOP 600 Health and Safety.
• Safety Committee per WAC 296-305-01505(4). Done - SOP 600.01.
• Lock Out / Tag Out Program per WAC 296-24-110. Done - SOP
605.02.
• Emergency Responses, Notification, Evacuation, Training Programs
per WAC 296-800-310, 296-24-550, 296-24-567. Numerous
Department SOPs address these subjects.
• Hazard Communication Program per SOP 296-305-01505(3)(a)(v).
• Program requirements re wearing respiratory protection on the job
per WAC 296-305-04001(4) is under development.
• Program to protect employees from occupational exposure to
bloodborne pathogens per WAC 296-305-02501, 296-62-08001. Done
- SOP 604.02 and SOP 606.02.
• Hearing Conservation Program per WAC 296-305-02005, 296-62-
09015 is under development.
OFFICE OF THE FIRE CHIEF
Packet Page 144 of 374
2. Conclude a new collective labor agreement with IAFF Union Local 1828.
#1. Negotiations are expected to begin in mid-2007. The current CLA expires on
December 31, 2007.
#2. IAFF Union Local #1828 approved a new collective labor agreement on
January 29. Council approved the 2008-2010 agreement on February 5.
#3. Nothing new to report.
3. Improve the Washington State Rating Bureau rating of the City from Class 4 to
Class 2 over time and within budget.
#1. Improving the City’s fire defense rating from a 4 to a 2 is a long term goal
pursued incrementally over time through the regular budget process. The WSRB
last evaluated Edmonds in 1990.
#2. Fire Administration continues to look for opportunities to improve in areas
judged deficient by WSRB raters; however, financial and staffing constraints
preclude any significant progress in the near term.
#3. The Department is meeting with Public Works personnel to discuss
procedures for purchasing and installing fire hydrants throughout the City.
Additional stakeholders are the Olympic View Water District, developers
and individual property owners. Improvements to the emergency water
delivery system reduces the number of Washington State Rating Bureau
deficiency points and improves the fire protection rating of the City which
in turn could lead to a reduction in fire insurance premiums paid by
residential property owners and some commercial property owners.
4. Review business practices with the Mayor, Directors, and Fire Staff with the
intent of reducing General Fund expenditures by 2009.
#1. The Mayor has scheduled individual department presentations at Director’s
Meetings through October 2007 aimed at reducing General Fund operating costs
and running an efficient and effective local government.
#2. Fire Administration made their department presentation on July 30, 2007.
The financial challenges each department faces were included in the packet at
the February 1-2 Council Retreat.
#3. Fire Administration proposed three initiatives to reduce financial
pressure on the General Fund:
(1) adopt EMS Transport User Fees in 2009.
(2) renegotiate the Esperance fire/EMS service contract with Snohomish
County Fire Protection District #1 effective 2009.
(3) participate in a Southwest Snohomish County consultant study on
establishment of a Regional Fire Protection Service Authority.
2
Packet Page 145 of 374
5. Implement the City of Edmonds Substitute House Bill 1756 Compliance Plan.
#1. The plan was approved by Council on November 28, 2006. The first 1756
compliance report based on 2006 response data is scheduled for presentation to
the Public Safety Committee on June 12, 2007.
#2. Completed. See above paragraph.
#3. Council approved the 2007 Substitute House Bill Compliance Plan
report on July 15, 2008.
6. Educate and inform the public on the emergency medical services levy.
#1. At the March 2007 retreat, Council decided to run the EMS levy no sooner
than 2008.
#2. Although subject to change, at the February 2008 Retreat, Council expressed
their unofficial preference to run the EMS levy lid lift on April 22, 2008.
#3. On May 20, 2008, Edmonds citizens voted to lift the lid on the
permanent EMS levy with a vote of 74.68% (7,851) for and 25.32% (2,662)
against out of 10,513 ballots cast. The EMS levy is expected to generate
3.856 million dollars in 2009. In 2008, the levy generated 2.4 million dollars.
7. Review alternate funding sources for Department operations.
#1. The Department keeps an inventory of alternate funding sources, for
example, EMS transport fees, charging for false alarms, and an annual benefit
charge. As directed, Fire Staff is prepared to analyze and report on alternate
funding sources.
#2. At the February 2008 Retreat, Council directed Fire Administration to bring
forward more information including potential models for an EMS transport billing
system that would only bill insurance carriers.
#3. Fire Administration proposed three initiatives to reduce financial
pressure on the General Fund:
(1) Adopt EMS Transport User Fees in 2009
(2) Renegotiate the Esperance fire/EMS service contract with Snohomish
County Fire Protection District #1 in 2008, effective 2009
(3) Participate in a Southwest Snohomish County consultant study on
establishment of a Regional Fire Protection Service Authority.
8. Align the annual work plans of the Fire Chief, Assistant Chief, Fire Marshal,
Battalion Chiefs, and Executive Assistant with the Mayor’s annual goals and
objectives, and policies that emerge from the annual Council Retreat, and
majority policy directives received from elected officials through the Mayor.
3
Packet Page 146 of 374
#1. The Assistant Chief, Fire Marshal, Battalion Chiefs, and Executive Assistant
have annual written work plans aligned as described above. The individual work
plans are part of each employee’s annual performance evaluation.
#2. See above paragraph.
#3. Nothing new to report.
9. Align the Fire Work Plan with other City departments and pertinent outside
agency work plans.
#1. The two-year Fire Work Plan is built with an understanding of pertinent
outside agency work plans.
#2. See above paragraph.
#3. Nothing new to report.
10. Work with the Mayor, Council, and Directors on city-wide environmental
stewardship and energy conservation issues.
#1. The Department is working with Public Works Facilities and Fleet
Maintenance to implement city-wide environmental stewardship and energy
conservation issues. The Department instituted a battery recycle system in 2005,
and is investigating opportunities to acquire a hybrid staff vehicle through the
regular replacement program.
#2. Above efforts continuing. The Department expects to participate in new City-
wide initiatives as they are presented.
#3. Under the leadership of Battalion Chief Don White and Firefighters Dean
Warren and David Stevens a Department-wide Conservation Program is
under development to begin in 2009. Goals include:
(1) Reduce the use of consumable products.
(2) Reduce annual utility and service costs at each Fire Station by 20
percent.
(3) Reduce annual vehicle fuel costs by 15 percent.
(4) Increase participation in recycling.
The Conservation Committee will meet with Facilities Manager Jim Stevens
on October 21 to discuss the Energy Star Partners Program to learn how
Fire can specifically fit into the program.
11. Work with the Snohomish County law enforcement and fire consortium to
implement a wireless network.
#1. As the contact, AC Correira receives regular updates on the progress of the
county-wide wi-fi initiative.
4
Packet Page 147 of 374
#2. The Public Safety Technology Committee (PSTC) has been reconstituted into
a county-wide organization and has taken on responsibility for steering the
wireless project. SNOCOM Director Steve Perry chairs the PSTC.
#3. Work is continuing. If the City institutes EMS Transport User Fees in
2009, computer tablets and paperless reporting will be the method of
documenting all emergency incidents.
12. Review the Civil Service Commission hiring/promotional requirements for
Assistant Fire Chief and Fire Marshal.
#1, #2, #3. Nothing to report.
13. Review the annual Performance Appraisal form.
#1. Battalion Chief Doug Dahl developed draft changes and lead the discussion
on the new department performance appraisal system at the April 17 Officer’s
Meeting. The new appraisal system is out for intra-Departmental review and
comment and will be implemented July 1.
#2. The new performance appraisal system was implemented July 1. Some
minor modifications are under discussion.
#3. SOP 501.08 Performance Appraisal has been updated several times
since mid-summer. With the cooperation of IAFF Union Local 1828, the
annual appraisal form dimensions have been incorporated into the new
Peer Review component of promotional assessment centers.
14. Continue working towards a paperless office.
#1. The Fire Chief, Assistant Chief, Fire Marshal, four Battalion Chiefs, and the
Executive Assistant met with Chief Information Officer Carl Nelson to review
Department needs and City paperless and electronic initiatives on April 12. The
energy, interest, and ideas were interesting, funding best practices and
technology upgrades will be challenging.
#2. Discussions are ongoing with Administrative Services and Information
Technology personnel.
#3. See the #3 response to items 10. and 11. above. Paperwork reduction is
implicitly part of the Conservation Program referenced in 10. above. To
date steps have been taken to transmit and store documents electronically
where feasible and reduce the use of paper in the following areas:
• Performance appraisal process
• Accidents reports
• Dailey Time Report
• Vacation forms
• Shift Trade forms
• On-line storage of SCBA forms
5
Packet Page 148 of 374
15. Actively seek out grant opportunities.
#1. The Department submitted a $111,000 F.I.R.E. Act Grant to replace turnout
boots, turnout pants, suspenders, turnout coat, gloves, helmet and hood.
#2. The Department was unsuccessful in this grant request.
#3. Nothing new to report.
#1. AC Correira has applied for a $1,500 Injury Prevention Grant as a
representative from the North Region EMS (Snohomish, Island, Skagit,
Whatcom, and San Juan counties) with a focus on elderly fall prevention (See
#22). Stevens Hospital and the Edmonds Parks and Recreation Department
have been invited to partner in the endeavor.
#2. The grant was awarded and the Public Safety Committee will receive a
presentation on Edmonds Stay In-Step, Guide to Maintaining Your Quality of Life
at the February 12 meeting.
#3. A Stay in Step Fall-Prevention, Steps You Can Take brochure was
developed and made available for distribution throughout the City in hard
copy and on the Fire Department and City web. The Department has
submitted articles on falls prevention to the print media and information
appears on the Fire Department website. On September 23, Assistant Chief
Mark Correira participated in a Falls Prevention Symposium sponsored by
North Region EMS.
Operations and Training
16. Place the public safety boat in service.
#1. The Public Safety Boat / Marine 16 / Charles W. Cain was placed in service
on May 1, 2007. Missions include EMS, fire suppression, hazardous materials
response, technical rescue, command and control, and Police Dive Team
support. The boat was formally commissioned on June 2.
#2. Both public safety departments anticipate active deployment of the vessel
when the 2008 boating season begins.
#3. The public safety boat has been deployed as required to date.
17. Study acquiring access to or construction of a local training facility that allows
on-duty crews to remain in the immediate area. Consider existing facilities, a
new facility, multidisciplinary use, scope, costs, location, and political feasibility.
#1. An internal Department committee continues to meet in an effort to determine
the most cost-effective way to provide training that does not require, or minimizes
6
Packet Page 149 of 374
the need for, on-duty units to be placed out of service. As emergency call volume
increases, it becomes more and more challenging to deliver training on duty.
#2. The committee continues to meet but the costs for a local facility are daunting
and suitable land scarce.
#3. Property adjacent to Fire Station 16 came up for sale to the City under a
previously negotiated right of first refusal. A City purchase offer was
subsequently refused and no counter offer has been forthcoming. The City
has asked the principle to make a counter offer or to present an offer from
a qualified buyer so the City can consider its options. The site offers many
options to include a site for Fire Administration, a non-burning training
facility, both uses, or for resale if a more appropriate site becomes
available. Fire Administration is the only department administration in the
City whose leadership is not located in a building where it can readily see,
communicate, and interact with the employees it is expected to lead,
supervise, and manage.
18. Identify future staffing and apparatus needs to keep pace with call volume
increases and community demographics.
#1. The Department has long sought to bring the 8 to 5 staff up to the 7.5
positions as recommended by the Council-commissioned Ewing & Company
Study published in 1997. The Department currently has six daytime staff. The
EMS levy offers the best opportunity to address this deficiency. Farther out, the
Edmonds demographic will require additional EMS capability both in on-duty shift
personnel and additional vehicles (See #24).
#2. Council has determined to hold an EMS levy lid lift in 2008. In preparing the
2009-2010 biennial budget, the Department will seek a combined Fire Inspector
– Public Educator position for the Fire Prevention Division who had three
personnel in 1985, lost one employee and have not added additional personnel
for 26 years.
#3. Fire Administration elected not to pursue the Fire Inspector – Public
Educator position due to the lack of space in Fire Administration, the
challenging financial times, the potential for property acquisition and the
construction of a Fire Administration building, and the possibility of future
regionalization.
19. Plan for two retirements that create two promotional opportunities at both the
battalion and company officer levels.
#1. One of the two retirements announced for 2008 was unexpectedly
accelerated to December 2006. One Battalion Chief and one Lieutenant were
promoted to fill the vacancies. Both the Battalion Chief and Lieutenant eligibility
lists were extended by the Civil Service Commission to April 5, 2008.
7
Packet Page 150 of 374
#2. In addition to the planned vacancies discussed above, 2007-2008 unplanned
departures included a Firefighter/Paramedic and Firefighter. In 2008, another
Battalion Chief, and one Firefighter/Paramedic have announced plans to retire.
#3. Nothing new to report.
20. Finalize the career development plan for interested employees.
#1, #2, and #3. Soon to be under development.
21. Implement a new computer-based training records management system.
#1. Computer-based, RMS training plan has been implemented and is in the
feedback stage.
#2. Nothing new to report.
#3. The computer-based training records system is fully implemented.
Emergency Medical Services
22. Study the opportunities for targeting specific demographic groups with public
education programs that reduce their use of the EMS system, for example,
address fall hazards for the elderly population.
#1. AC Correira has applied for a $1,500 Injury Prevention Grant from North
Region EMS (Snohomish, Island, Skagit, Whatcom, and San Juan counties) with
a focus on elderly fall prevention. (See #15).
#2. See #15 above.
#3. A Stay in Step Fall-Prevention, Steps You Can Take brochure was
developed and made available for distribution throughout the City in hard
copy and on the Fire Department and City web. The Department has
submitted articles on falls prevention to the print media and information
appears on the Fire Department website. On September 23, Assistant Chief
Mark Correira participated in a Falls Prevention Symposium sponsored by
North Region EMS.
23. Work with Snohomish County Public Health Department to prepare for an
influenza pandemic (bird flu), as required.
#1. The Snohomish County bird flu plan remains under development by the
Snohomish County Health Care Pan Flu Planning Task Force. Fire Staff provided
an April 24 update on task force progress to the Mayor, Directors, Fire Group,
and SNOCOM.
8
Packet Page 151 of 374
#2. The Snohomish County Health Care Response to Pandemic Influenza was
published in November 2007. Assistant Chief Correira represented EMS on the
Committee.
#3. Nothing new to report.
Fire Prevention and Public Education
24. Add one staff person to the Fire Prevention Division to perform fire inspector
and public educator duties. Address vehicle and space needs.
#1. When Council decided to move the EMS levy lid lift back to 2008, this
opportunity was postponed (See #18).
#2. See #18 above.
#3. Fire Administration elected not to pursue the Fire Inspector – Public
Educator position due to the lack of space in Fire Administration, the
challenging financial times, the potential for property acquisition and the
construction of a Fire Administration building, and the possibility of future
regionalization.
25. Develop a succession plan for the Fire Inspector position.
#1, #2, #3. Nothing to report.
26. Work with City, Port of Edmonds, and State staff to ensure the Edmonds
Crossing Project and/or waterfront development ensure unimpeded vehicle
access to the west side of the BNSF railroad tracks.
#1. Fire Staff keeps in regular contact with Community Services Director
Stephen Clifton who assures the Department that public safety access to the
Edmonds Crossing project overhead access to and from the ferry, and west of
the railroad tracks when a train is blocking will be addressed.
#2. On November 30, 2007 the Mayor and Director Clifton invited Department
representatives to meet with WSF staff designing the project. This meeting is yet
to occur.
#3. Nothing new to report other than tough economic times have rendered
this project precarious.
Recommended Action
Place on the City Council Consent Agenda, and post on the Fire Department
website. Providing a status report on the Council-approved 2007-2008 Fire
Department Work Plan to the Public Safety Committee meets the intent of the City
of Edmonds Strategic Plan II. Council Public Policy Statement, Objective D.
Develop Public Work Plans, Tasks 1 – 4.
9
Packet Page 152 of 374
10
Packet Page 153 of 374
11
Packet Page 154 of 374
AM-1846 2.I.
Interlocal Agreement for Automatic First Response and Mutual Assistance
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Tom Tomberg Time:Consent
Department:Fire Type:Action
Review Committee:Public Safety
Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Authorization for Mayor to sign Interlocal Agreement for Automatic First Response and Mutual
Assistance. Reviewed by the Public Safety Committee on 10-14-08.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Authorize Mayor to Sign Interlocal Agreement for Automatic First Response and Mutual
Assistance.
Previous Council Action
The City Council authorized the Mayor's signature on the initial Automatic First Response and
Automatic Assistance Agreement on June 27, 2000.
Narrative
The initial agreement, approved by Council on June 27, 2000, formalized the previous “handshake
agreement” between fire/EMS agencies to provide automatic emergency assistance and share fire,
medical, hazardous materials, technical rescue, and disaster resources area-wide without regard to
jurisdictional borders and at no cost. This document is an extraordinary example of mitigating
local emergencies by marshaling resources far beyond the capability of a single agency.
Approximately 32 agencies will have the opportunity to sign the agreement. The City Attorney
approved the revised agreement as to form.
In addition to correcting typos and formatting errors, substantive changes include:
4.4 Process for withdrawal of automatic aid from another agency.
11.1 No compensation for assistance provided absent a separate agreement.
11.2 Abide by local agency rules with regard to EMS fees except as provided in a separate
agreement.
13.2 Insurance liability for damage to borrowed equipment subject to separate pre-agreement.
16.2 “Hosting party” responsibility to provide safe training site.
Appendix A calls out the use of specific Snohomish County policies during automatic aid
incidents to include the use of the Incident Management System, Passport Accountability,
Fire/EMS Resource Plan, and the Mayday Policy.
On October 14, the Public Safety Committee approved forwarding this item to the Council
Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve.
Packet Page 155 of 374
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:
Revenue:
Expenditure:
Fiscal Impact:
None.
Attachments
Link: Auto Aid Agreement
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/15/2008 12:11 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/15/2008 12:15 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/15/2008 02:41 PM APRV
Form Started By: Tom
Tomberg
Started On: 10/15/2008 10:43
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/15/2008
Packet Page 156 of 374
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
FOR AUTOMATIC FIRST RESPONSE
AND MUTUAL ASSISTANCE
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into this ___ day of
_____________, 2008 by and between various governmental entities who are signatories
hereto (individually “Party” or collectively “Parties”) under the authority of RCW 52.12.031(3)
and Chapter 39.34 RCW (the “Interlocal Cooperation Act”) to assist each other in emergency
response.
ARTICLE I
RECITALS
This Agreement is made with reference to the following facts:
a. Each of the Parties owns and maintains equipment for providing fire, medical,
and/or specialized services that shall include but shall not be limited to Hazardous
Materials Response Teams, Technical Rescue Teams and Fire Investigation Services.
Also, each of the Parties retain personnel to provide various levels of services;
b. Each of the Parties hereto are authorized to perform the services contemplated
herein;
c. The Parties recognize that the Department of Labor and Industries has
established standards for training and equipment used for emergency response; that
these standards, set by the Department of Labor and Industries, have increased the
need for resources to perform emergency response;
d. It is not feasible for each of the Parties to establish, maintain and operate
specialized teams within the geographical area served;
e. The geographical boundaries of each Party are located in such a manner as to
enable each Party to provide assistance to the other Parties;
f. It is necessary for each Chief Executive Officer, City Council, Board or
Commission Chair and Fire Chief of each Party to determine what specialized areas
each Party may participate in as a fire department, communications center, advanced
life support, paramedic service or a joint venture;
g. Each of the Parties has the necessary equipment and personnel to enable it to
provide service to the other Parties in the event of an emergency;
h. The Parties may provide backup or standby service to each other as needed
and available;
i. It is the purpose of the Agreement to establish a mutual aid response between
the Parties to the Agreement;
j. It is the purpose of the Agreement to establish authority to provide automatic
aid response when approved by the respective Fire Chiefs between the Parties;
PAGE 1
Packet Page 157 of 374
k. The Parties often have occasion to purchase many of the same items;
l. In order to provide for economies of scale and increase efficiency in purchasing
fire, rescue, EMS and other type of equipment deemed necessary, the parties desire to
enter into an agreement to allow the usage of other Parties’ purchasing contracts;
m. The Parties often train together to provide economy of scale, joint training to
provide common procedures, and use the expertise of personnel within each
department; and
n. The Parties, to carry out the purpose and functions described above and in
consideration of the benefits to be received by each of the Parties, agree to do the
following:
ARTICLE II
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants and
performances contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE
1.1 Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to improve the provision of Services
within the respective jurisdictions of the Parties.
1.2 No Financial Obligation. Except as specifically provided herein, it is not
contemplated that any Party will incur a financial obligation as a result of this Agreement
beyond the normal cost of providing Services.
1.3 Participation in Mutual Aid and Automatic Aid. This Agreement is intended to be
flexible to allow each Party to participate to the degree it is able to do so, from a financial
and operational standpoint. A Party to this Agreement may participate in Mutual Aid and/or
Automatic Aid to the extent determined by the Fire Chiefs of the Parties hereto.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS
The following terms shall have the following meanings in this Agreement, unless the
context indicates otherwise:
a. “Incident Commander” means the individual charged with overall management
and command of an emergency incident pursuant to the National Incident
Management System, established by Presidential Directive for the purpose of
managing emergency incidents.
b. “Automatic Aid” means a Party’s provision of apparatus, personnel, and
equipment to areas within the jurisdictional boundaries of another Party pursuant
to agreed upon dispatch protocols and computerized run cards.
PAGE 2
Packet Page 158 of 374
c. "Mutual Aid” means the provision of such apparatus, personnel, and equipment
as reasonably necessary and available to assist a Requesting Agency in matters
relating to the Services as needed by a Requesting Agency.
d. “Requesting Agency” means a Party to this Agreement who has requested
Mutual Aid from another Party pursuant to the terms of this Agreement or to whom
another Party will be providing Automatic Aid.
e. "Responding Agency" means a Party to this Agreement who has either (i)
received a request from another Party to provide Mutual Aid pursuant to the terms
and conditions of this Agreement, or (ii) been dispatched pursuant to the
Automatic Aid protocols herein.
f. “Services” includes the following: fire suppression, emergency medical services
(including Basic Life Support and Advanced Life Support), and specialized
services including but not limited to Hazardous Materials Response, Technical
Rescue and Fire Investigation.
g. “Qualified Chief Officer” means an officer of a Party who has been qualified
and/or authorized by that Party to serve as an Incident Commander.
SECTION 3. MUTUAL AID
3.1 Request for Assistance. The Incident Commander or his/her designee may request
Mutual Aid assistance from another Party if confronted with an emergency situation in which
the Requesting Agency has need for equipment or personnel in excess of that available
through the Requesting Agency. Such requests shall be submitted pursuant to standard
operating procedures established by the Parties.
3.2 Response to Request. Upon receipt of such a request the commanding officer of the
Responding Agency shall immediately take the following actions:
3.2.1 Determine if the Responding Agency has equipment and personnel available to
respond to the Requesting Agency and determine the type of the equipment and
number of personnel available.
3.2.2 Determine what available equipment, apparatus and/or personnel should be
dispatched in accordance with the operating plans and procedures established by
the Parties.
3.2.3 In the event the needed equipment, apparatus and/or personnel are available, to
dispatch such equipment, apparatus and personnel to the scene of the
emergency with proper operating instructions.
3.2.4 In the event the needed equipment, apparatus and/or personnel are not available,
to immediately advise the Requesting Agency.
3.2.5 The Parties recognize that time is critical during an emergency and diligent efforts
will be made to respond to a request for Mutual Aid as rapidly as possible,
including any notification(s) that requested resources are not available.
PAGE 3
Packet Page 159 of 374
3.3. No Requirement to Render Aid. All personnel, resources and services provided
under the terms of this Agreement are furnished and/or supplied voluntarily and at the
discretion of the Responding Agency. The Responding Agency shall have the primary interest
of protecting its own constituency. Nothing herein shall limit the legislative discretion of the
governing bodies of the parties to determine their budget needs and determine appropriate
levels of service, and nothing in this Agreement shall imply a duty to levy taxes, appropriate
funds or enter into specific terms of a collective bargaining unit agreement in order to
effectuate the terms of the Agreement.
SECTION 4. AUTOMATIC AID
4.1 Emergency Response Services. The Services described herein shall be on an
automatic dispatch basis. The dispatch shall be based upon a pre-determined basis within the
computer aided dispatch software. The response shall be established and agreed to by the
Fire Chiefs of the Parties. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, each Party reserves the
right to control its own resources.
4.2 Automatic Response Procedure. On receipt of an alarm covered by a run card, the
dispatched "Unit(s)" of the Responding Agency shall immediately respond with apparatus,
equipment and/or personnel.
4.3. Temporary Inability to Provide Aid. Prior to or upon receiving a call for automatic
aid, the Requested Party shall inform the Requesting Party of inability to provide automatic
response. It is anticipated that this inability will only occur at times when the requested
resources of the Requested Party are otherwise committed.
4.4 Total Withdrawal from Automatic Aid. In the event a Party who is participating in
Automatic Aid elects to withdraw from Automatic Aid with another agency, the withdrawing
Party shall work with that agency, in good faith, to coordinate a reasonable phase-out period of
Automatic Aid services.
SECTION 5. SPECIAL SERVICES
5.1 The Fire Chief of each Party shall determine, from time to time, the nature and level of
specialized services (e.g., HAZMAT, rescue, etc.) that his or her jurisdiction shall provide
under the terms of the Agreement, including participation with other Parties in establishing joint
services.
PAGE 4
Packet Page 160 of 374
SECTION 6. COMMAND RESPONSIBILITY AT EMERGENCY SCENES
6.1 The first arriving Officer to the scene of an emergency incident shall assume Command
of the incident. Command may be assumed by a higher ranking officer from any jurisdiction.
Command, however, shall be relinquished to an officer of the agency having jurisdiction upon
that officer's request. All of the individuals in Command positions, of any incident related to
this Agreement, shall be governed by the "Incident Command' safety considerations, as
established by WAC 296-305 and the specific Snohomish County Chief Association Policies
listed in Appendix A. Appendix A may change based on formal action by the Snohomish
County Fire Chiefs Association. Any changes will be forwarded to all Parties.
SECTION 7. ACTION
7.1 When a Responding Agency assists a Requesting Agency, the Responding Agency
acts under the direction of the Requesting Agency’s authorized commander or his/her
representative. This Section shall not require compliance with the direction of the on-scene
commanding officer if, in the opinion of the commanding officer of the Responding Agency,
such compliance would create an unreasonable risk to the health or safety of the Responding
Agency’s personnel. In the event that direction is refused by the commanding officer of the
Responding Agency for safety considerations, a complete review after the incident shall be
conducted by the Fire Chief of both parties to address the situation.
SECTION 8. TERMINATION OF SERVICE
8.1 The Incident Commander shall release the Responding Agency’s equipment and
personnel from service and allow them to return to the Responding Agency as soon as
conditions warrant or upon request of the Responding Agency.
SECTION 9. LIABILITY - INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS
9.1. No Liability for Responding Agency. Except as expressly provided herein, no
Party shall be liable for (i) failure to comply with any provision of this Agreement, or (ii)
liability arising from providing or refusing to provide Mutual Aid or Automatic Aid under this
Agreement.
9.2. Mutual Releases. Except as specifically provided herein, each Party hereby
forever releases or discharges each other Party, its officers, officials, employees,
volunteers and/or agents from any claim related to this Agreement or providing Mutual or
Automatic Aid hereunder.
9.3 Liability to Other Parties - Damage or Destruction to Apparatus or Equipment.
Except as expressly provided herein, the Requesting Agency or any other Party shall not be
obligated to pay the Responding Agency or any other Party for any damage to or
destruction of any apparatus or equipment used in Mutual Aid. This provision shall not
apply to the extent this provision would void applicable casualty insurance available to
provide payment for the damage or loss of such apparatus or equipment. It is the intent of
the Parties that the risk of loss to apparatus or equipment will be addressed by each Party
through the purchase of casualty insurance or self insurance as opposed to seeking
reimbursement from other Parties.
PAGE 5
Packet Page 161 of 374
9.4 Liability to Third Parties. The term "third party” means any person, firm or entity
other than the Parties hereto. With regard to the Mutual Aid and Automatic Aid provided
hereunder, each Party shall be responsible for all liability arising from or related to the
negligent acts or willful misconduct of that Party, its officers, officials, employees,
volunteers and/or agents which causes damage to third parties, to the extent and in
proportion that such liability is caused by the negligent acts or willful misconduct of that
Party, its officers, officials, employees, volunteers and/or agents. Notwithstanding the
foregoing, nothing in this Agreement is intended to create a cause of action or standing in
favor of third parties to initiate legal claims of any nature against any Party.
9.5 Cross Indemnification. To the extent permitted by law, each Party agrees to
indemnify, defend and hold harmless the other Parties, their officers, officials, employees,
volunteers and/or agents from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, lawsuits,
costs, including attorneys' fees, losses, judgments, awards or liabilities to any third party,
arising out of the negligent acts or willful conduct of the indemnifying Party, its officers,
officials, employees, volunteers and/or agents in connection with the performance of this
Agreement.
9.6 Survival. The provisions of this Section shall survive the expiration or termination of
this Agreement.
SECTION 10. INSURANCE
10.1 For the duration of this Agreement, each Party shall maintain its own public liability and
property damage insurance or be self insured against claims for injuries to persons or damage
to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of this Agreement by
its officers, officials, employees or volunteers. The Fire Chiefs of the Parties may establish
minimum insurance requirements. It is expressly understood that no Party shall be
responsible to provide the other Party's employees with coverage required under Chapter
41.26 RCW, as the same now exists or may be hereafter amended.
10.2 To the extent permitted by the applicable insurance policies, each Party hereby
waives any right of subrogation against the other Parties. In this regard each Party utilizing
a self insurance retention program waives subrogation for any payment thereunder.
SECTION 11. COMPENSATION
11.1 The Requesting Agency shall not be obligated to pay the Responding Agency for any
damage to, loss of, or any expense(s) incurred in the operation of any equipment used in
responding for aid, and for the cost incurred in connection with such requests, as long as the
Requesting Agency’s negligence was not the cause of such damage, loss or expense. Except
as may be mutually agreed between any Parties hereto in a separate interlocal agreement,
each Party agrees that it will not seek compensation for services rendered under this
Agreement from another Party to the Agreement; provided, however, that the Party requesting
assistance shall attempt to obtain financial assistance from federal, state agencies or private
Parties where financial assistance is available to reimburse the Responding Agency for losses
or damages incurred in providing assistance under this Agreement. This provision shall not
limit two or more Parties, of the Agreement, from entering into an agreement in other areas or
different conditions for compensation.
PAGE 6
Packet Page 162 of 374
11.2 Except as may be provided in a separate agreement, the Responding Agency will
comply with the collection policy of the Requesting Agency and all applicable laws and
regulations with respect to billing and collection of transport fees or other emergency response
related fees. Nothing in this Section shall require a Responding Agency to charge any such
fees.
SECTION 12. SPECIALIZED RESPONSE TEAMS
12.1 Each Party or combination of Parties that operate a special response team shall
establish policies and procedures to meet all requirements set by state and federal law. Any
specialized team shall have Standard Operational Procedures or Guidelines.
SECTION 13. TEMPORARY USE OF EQUIPMENT OR VEHICLE
13.1 In the event a Party has equipment or a vehicle that is temporarily out of service and
has an immediate need for that type of equipment and another Party has similar reserve
equipment available, the Party in need may request that the other Party lend the necessary
equipment. The Party borrowing the equipment shall be responsible for the maintenance of
the loaned equipment during the period of time it is in their custody. The Party borrowing the
equipment shall return the equipment to the lending Party when requested or when the
equipment is no longer needed, whichever occurs first. The borrowed equipment shall be
returned in a clean condition and within the same operable condition as it was provided.
13.2 The Party supplying the equipment and the Party borrowing the equipment shall enter
into a written agreement in advance as to which Party’s insurance shall cover the equipment if
damage occurs while the equipment is being borrowed. In the absence of any such
agreement, the lending Party’s insurance shall be responsible.
13.3 The Party receiving the equipment must ensure that all employees who will be
operating the equipment are properly trained to operate the specific equipment being
borrowed.
13.4 Each Party understands that it is responsible under applicable regulations to maintain
its equipment, including the equipment available to be loaned pursuant to this Agreement, in
accordance with applicable manufacturer’s specifications and any applicable laws and
regulations.
SECTION 14. TRAINING
14.1 The Parties may provide or attend joint training classes as approved by the Fire Chiefs
of the Parties. Training includes, but is not limited to the following list:
a. Recruit or post recruit academies;
b. Apparatus familiarization;
c. HAZMAT team training;
d. Technical Rescue team training;
e. Disaster or response drills;
f. Specialty subject drills and classes; and
g. Incident Command System Training.
PAGE 7
Packet Page 163 of 374
14.2 Training Supplies, Equipment and Facilities. The participating Parties shall decide
between themselves if they shall share the cost of training supplies, equipment or facility rental
when conducting joint training.
SECTION 15. DUTY CHAPLAINS AND SUPPORT
15.1 The Parties have established a cadre of Duty Chaplains who respond to emergency
calls and assist with family relocation caused by fire and other misfortunes as well as a
Support Units. The Chaplains and rehabilitation units may be shared as allowed by the
Parties.
SECTION 16. USE OF FACILITIES
16.1 The Parties may jointly use facilities and equipment owned or provided by any Party,
as allowed by the party owning or providing such facilities (the “Hosting Party”). The Hosting
Party shall take reasonable measures to ensure the site is safe for the intended training
activity prior to conducting training. The defense and indemnification provisions in Section 9
shall apply to any joint use of facilities.
SECTION 17. REVIEW OF THE AGREEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION
17.1 Administration of this Agreement. Unless the Parties otherwise agree, there
shall be no lead agency responsible for the administration of this Agreement. This
Agreement shall be administered jointly by the Chief Officers of the respective Parties.
17.2. Meeting. The Fire Chief or Chief Executive Officer of each Party shall meet to
review all of the operations of this Agreement every five (5) years or earlier upon request of
a Party.
SECTION 18. NON-EXCLUSIVE PROVISION
18.1 The Parties to this Agreement shall not be precluded from entering into similar
agreements with others.
SECTION 19. EQUIPMENT SALVAGE
19.1 All Parties to this Agreement shall exercise due diligence in salvaging damaged
equipment and insuring that it is returned to its rightful owner.
SECTION 20. STATUS OF PERSONNEL
20.1 No employee of any Party to this Agreement shall be deemed to have become an
employee of another Party or be covered by any insurance or pension plans of another Party
by the employee's participation in the performance of this Agreement.
PAGE 8
Packet Page 164 of 374
SECTION 21. AUTHORITY TO PURCHASE ON OTHER PARTIES’ CONTRACTS
21.1 Whenever possible, a Party that solicits bids for equipment and material purchases will
conduct its solicitation in a manner that will allow other Parties to utilize its purchase contract.
To enable other Parties to utilize this benefit, the initial contracting Party shall:
A. Comply with the public bidding laws of the State of Washington as they apply to
such Party;
B. Provide in its bid specifications or contract documents that other municipal
corporations may utilize the contract for independent purchases;
C. Either (i) post the bid or solicitation notice on a web site established and maintained
by a government, purchasing cooperative or similar service provider or (ii) provide an access
link to the state’s web portal to the notice.
21.2 This Agreement is intended to constitute the Interlocal Agreement required by RCW
39.04.030 for utilizing other Parties’ purchase contracts.
SECTION 22. DURATION AND TERMINATION
22.1. Effective Date. This Agreement shall take effect and be in full force and effect after all
of the following has occurred:
A. The Agreement is approved by the official action of the governing bodies of at least
two (2) Parties;
B. The Agreement is executed by the duly authorized representative of at least 2
Parties; and
C. A copy of the Agreement is filed with the Snohomish County Auditor’s Office.
22.2 Additional Parties. When a new Party becomes a signatory to this Agreement, the
signature page of such Party shall be recorded with the Auditor.
22.3 Duration. The initial term of this Agreement shall be for a period of ten (10) years.
22.4 Extension. This Agreement shall automatically be renewed and extended for
additional ten (10) year periods upon the same terms and conditions set forth herein, or as
amended, unless terminated in accordance with subsection D below.
22.5 Withdrawal. Subject to Section 4.4, each Party shall have the right to withdraw from
this Agreement at any time during the term of this Agreement, including the initial term, by
providing every other Party with written notice of intention to terminate. The withdrawal by
one or more Parties shall have no effect on the remaining Parties to the Agreement.
PAGE 9
Packet Page 165 of 374
SECTION 23. NOTICE
23.1 Any notices given under this Agreement shall be deemed to be sufficient if in writing
and delivered personally or sent via certified mail to the Party affected at the address set forth
on the signature page.
SECTION 24. NO BENEFIT TO THIRD PARTIES
24.1 This Agreement shall not be construed to provide any benefits to any third parties,
including but not limited to the employees or volunteers of any Party. Without limiting the
foregoing, this Agreement shall not create or be construed as creating an exception to the
Public Duty Doctrine.
SECTION 25. SEPARATE PROPERTY
25.1. It is not contemplated that any property, real or personal, will be acquired by any
Party separately or jointly as a result of this Agreement. No separate fund shall be
established with regard to this Agreement. Any acquisition of joint property shall be subject
to a separate Interlocal Agreement executed prior to or at the time of such joint acquisition.
All equipment and property owned or acquired solely by a Party hereto shall remain the
equipment and property of that Party.
SECTION 26. DRAFTING
26.1. Each Party has fully participated in the drafting of this Agreement. Therefore, this
Agreement shall be construed according to its fair meaning without regard to which Party
drafted a particular provision.
SECTION 27. SEVERABILITY
27.1. Any invalidity, in whole or in part, of any provision of this Agreement, shall not affect
the validity of any other of its provisions.
SECTION 28. WAIVER
28.1. No term or provision herein shall be deemed waived and no breach excused unless
such waiver or consent shall be in writing and signed by the Party claimed to have waived
or consented.
SECTION 29. AMENDMENT
29.1. No modification, termination or amendment of this Agreement may be made except
by written agreement signed by all Parties.
PAGE 10
Packet Page 166 of 374
SECTION 30. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
30.1. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties concerning
the matters addressed herein. This Agreement supersedes and nullifies any previous
agreements or understandings, whether written and oral, between those Parties to this
Agreement.
SECTION 31. COUNTERPARTS
31.1 This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, and each such
counterpart hereof shall be deemed to be an original instrument, but all such counterparts
together shall constitute but one agreement.
PAGE 11
Packet Page 167 of 374
SIGNATURE PAGE TO INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
AUTOMATIC AID AND MUTUAL AID
The Party below has executed the Interlocal Agreement for Automatic Aid and Mutual Aid
dated ____________, 2008, as of the day and year noted below and certifies that this
Agreement has been duly approved by the governing body of such Party.
THIS AGREEMENT CONTAINS A RELEASE AND INDEMNIFICATION FOR LIABILITIES
DATE: _________________________
ATTEST: _______________________
BY: ____________________________ BY: ______________________________
Title:____________________________ Title: _____________________________
PAGE 12
Packet Page 168 of 374
PAGE 13
APPENDIX A
The following policies adopted by the Snohomish County Fire Chiefs Association shall be
followed for incident response when using automatic or mutual aid:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Incident Management System
Passport Accountability
Fire/EMS resource Plan
Mayday Policy
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Packet Page 169 of 374
AM-1850 2.J.
SR99 International District Enhancement Project
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Conni Curtis
Submitted For:Robert English Time:Consent
Department:Engineering Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Authorization to purchase light poles and electrical components for the SR99 International District
enhancement project through US Communities Interlocal Cooperative Purchasing Agreement.
This consent agenda item was not reviewed by a Council Committee.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Council authorize the purchase of light poles and electrical components for the SR99 International
District enhancement project.
Previous Council Action
On March 4, 2008, Council authorized Staff to call for bids for the decorative illumination portion
of the SR99 International District enhancement project.
Narrative
The 2008 adopted capital budget includes $373,000 for construction of the SR99 International
District enhancement project in Fund 129. The City received a Federal grant in the amount of
$316,000 in 2006 and a supplemental grant in the amount of $57,000 in 2007 for this project. The
poles and electrical components will be purchased by the City through US Communities Interlocal
Cooperative for a total amount of $52,635.85 and will be reimbursed from the grant through
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). US Communities is a nonprofit
instrumentality of government that assists public agencies in reducing the cost of purchased goods
through pooling the purchasing power of public agencies nationwide. All US Communities
contracts have been competitively solicited by a lead public agency in accordance with their
public purchasing rules and regulation and satisfy the competitive solicitation requirements of
local government agencies. The City of Edmonds ratified an interlocal agreement with US
Communities on May 16, 2006.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 Engineering Robert English 10/16/2008 11:41 AM APRV
Packet Page 170 of 374
1 Engineering Robert English 10/16/2008 11:41 AM APRV
2 Parks and Recreation Brian McIntosh 10/16/2008 01:37 PM APRV
3 Public Works Noel Miller 10/16/2008 03:39 PM APRV
4 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 03:40 PM APRV
5 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 03:42 PM APRV
6 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 03:51 PM APRV
Form Started By: Conni Curtis Started On: 10/16/2008 10:06
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 171 of 374
AM-1852 2.K.
Contract with SRI Technologies, Inc. for a Part Time Capital Projects Manager
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Conni Curtis
Submitted For:Robert English Time:Consent
Department:Engineering Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Council approval of contract with SRI Technologies, Inc. for a part time Capital Project Manager.
This consent agenda item was not reviewed by a Council Committee.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Council approve contract with SRI Technologies, Inc. for a part time Capital Projects Manager.
Previous Council Action
Council approved a contract with SRI Technologies, Inc. in 2007 for a part time Capital Projects
Manager.
Narrative
In February, 2008, the City executed a contract with SRI Technologies, Inc. to provide a part time
Capital Projects Manager to assist staff with the contract administration and inspection of City
construction projects. The Capital Projects Manager that is being provided under the SRI
Technologies contract is a retired City of Edmonds employee who is very familiar with city
policies and procedures and has significant experience in construction practices and standards.
The part time employee has assisted in the management of the 2008 Street Overlay project,
improvements to Lift Stations 7, 8 and 13, Olympic View Drive improvements with Lynnwood
and the Old Woodway Park project.
It is anticipated that part time services will be required until the end of the year since several
projects are under construction. The total cost of this contract is expected to be less than $55,000
and may vary slightly depending upon weather and contractor work schedules. The cost of the
temporary Capital Project Manager is charged to the capital projects he manages and is paid from
funds budgeted for these projects.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Feb 2008 SRI Contract
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
Packet Page 172 of 374
1 Engineering Robert English 10/16/2008 05:04 PM APRV
2 Public Works Noel Miller 10/17/2008 09:30 AM APRV
3 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/17/2008 09:31 AM APRV
4 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/17/2008 09:32 AM APRV
5 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/17/2008 09:34 AM APRV
Form Started By: Conni
Curtis
Started On: 10/16/2008 11:25
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/17/2008
Packet Page 173 of 374
Packet Page 174 of 374
Packet Page 175 of 374
AM-1849 3.
Public Service Announcement - Friends of the Library
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Jana Spellman
Submitted For:Councilmember Peggy Pritchard Olson Time:10 Minutes
Department:City Council Type:Information
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Public Service Announcement - Friends of the Library
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
N/A
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
President of the Friends of the Library, Judith Works, will give a brief presentation about
the Friends of the Edmonds Library 28th Annual Book Sale. The sale will be held October 25,
2008 at the Frances Anderson Center from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Thousands of fiction, nonfiction and
children's books as well as DVDs and CDs are available. Funds raised are used to provide
programs and services to the Edmonds Library.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 09:31 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 10:59 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:28 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jana
Spellman
Started On: 10/15/2008 03:50
PM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 176 of 374
AM-1857 4.A.
Potential Budget Cuts in Lieu of Forming a Regional Fire Authority
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Kathleen Junglov
Submitted For:Mayor Haakenson Time:
Department:Administrative Services Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:Recommend Review by Full Council
Information
Subject Title
Potential budget cuts in lieu of forming a Regional Fire Authority.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
None.
Previous Council Action
City Council Budget Workshop October 7, 2008.
Narrative
During the meeting of October 7, Councilmembers Dawson and Wilson asked me to bring back
budget cuts as alternatives to the proposed Regional Fire Authority (RFA) that I presented as a
way to balance the budget and not reduce the services that we provide to the citizens of Edmonds.
You will find those budget cuts listed below with their associated loss of services.
A budget assumption, and a question after the October 7 meeting are that 1) all projected new
revenues for 2009 are acceptable to Council, and 2) what budget cuts would be necessary if the
RFA is not implemented?
For 2008 and 2009 we have further reduced our estimated revenue collections, which makes our
deficit even worse; however, it is the right thing to do.
For 2008 we have eliminated $157,000 in needed computer hardware purchases. The affect of this
cut would be felt if our system goes down, and it will be down for a significant amount of time. It
simply means that we have no adequate protection for a computer hardware failure.
I have withdrawn the requests for three new IT staff and a half FTE in HR. Obviously this cut will
not allow for needed upgrades to our website and will not allow citizens to do additional business
with the City online. HR staff will continue to fall further behind in their workloads.
And for 2009 and 10, if the Council prefers cuts over the RFA recommendation, the following are
no longer in the budget:
Packet Page 177 of 374
The Economic Development cost center totaling $75,000. We would no longer perform any
economic development work or advertising with the Chamber. This cost center also pays for the
printing and mailing of the “Update on Edmonds” quarterly citywide newsletter, so it will no
longer be delivered to citizens homes.
The entire Crime Prevention cost center, totaling $120,000, would be eliminated from the Police
Department budget. Also cut from Police would be the DARE program at a reduction of $85,000.
The Chief has also withdrawn his plan to add a third Assistant Chief, along with dropping a
sergeant position. The loss of Crime Prevention speaks for itself. The DARE program has been a
great addition to our local schools. Both the youth and our greater community have benefited
from it. The Chief’s reorganization plan will simply not happen.
From the Parks Department, cuts would be in the Discovery Programs, eliminating Beach
Rangers, Birdfest, and other environmental programs at a reduction of $41,000. Yost Pool will be
closed at a savings of $108,000. The loss to the community of the Discovery Program and Yost
Pool will be felt across many ages of Edmonds residents.
In Development Services, a Planning position would be cut, saving $85,000, and a slow-down of
review times will be the result. It should be obvious that permit applications have slowed due to
the economy, but remember, we were short-staffed during the busy time and quite possibly we are
correctly staffed now.
In Finance, an Accounting position would be cut, saving $66,000, and a position in the City
Clerk’s Office also would be eliminated, saving $60,000.
In Public Works we will eliminate an Engineering tech position, saving $61,000. Along with
cutting a planner, this will again slow down permit review times.
I have asked the City Attorney to attend Council meetings only on the first and third meetings of
the month. No longer will he be available on the fourth or fifth Tuesdays. The Council President
will have to be careful with setting the Council’s future agendas. This will create a cost savings of
$10,000.
Finally, for 2009, we would scrap the fiber-optic cable project, reducing costs by $139,000. I still
believe in the eventual success of the project, but it isn’t something we can afford in these tough
times.
These cuts total $1,041,000 for 2009 and would carry on into the future.
For the 2010 budget there would be one additional reduction, and that would come from a
one-third reduction in the Parks maintenance budget, resulting in a savings of $500,000. The result
of this cut will be no maintenance performed in our 31 neighborhood parks. Only the ballfields
will continue to see work performed on them due to the fact that field rentals and joint agreements
with the School District necessitate ongoing maintenance.
Our neighborhood parks will become ones in which we ask users to clean up their own trash, and
hopefully neighbors can form their own maintenance crews for beautification.
Packet Page 178 of 374
I would also ask the Council President to set up a Council committee for 2009 to look at the
possibility of eliminating our Municipal Court in 2010 and signing an agreement with the County
court system. Several years ago when I looked at it, it didn’t show any appreciable savings to
switch. A cursory look now tells me that maybe there are savings to be had by such a move.
While no cuts were made from the Fire Department, it is worth noting that we have not filled the
Fire Marshall position while he has been on active duty. The cost savings there have been
significant.
So with the reduction of $157,000 in 2008 purchases and the elimination of new position requests
adding up to $240,000, there still was need to cut $800,000 for 2009.
I have identified those additional cuts totaling $800,000 in 2009, which would be made if the RFA
is rejected.
For 2010 there is another $500,000 in cuts.
The budget cuts and reductions for 2009-10 identified to be made if the RFA is rejected total
almost $2.7 million over the two-year budget period.
These cuts allow the ending cash balance to meet the GFOA recommended level through 2012;
however, in 2013, the ending cash balance begins to fall below the threshold, and continues to
decline. That would not be the case with the approval of an RFA. This is a reflection on the fact
that new revenues will sustain our operations on a permanent basis while budget cuts are only a
temporary fix.
As is always the case, the Council’s choices are new revenue streams or budget cuts that provide
less service to our citizens.
Staff will be in attendance on Tuesday night to answer your questions.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 02:27 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 03:00 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 03:44 PM APRV
Form Started By: Kathleen
Junglov
Started On: 10/16/2008 02:03
PM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 179 of 374
AM-1853 4.C.
Public Hearing on 2009-2010 Budget and Revenue Sources
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Kathleen Junglov Time:
Department:Administrative Services Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:Recommend Review by Full Council
Information
Subject Title
Public Hearing on 2009-2010 budget and revenue sources.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Receive public input.
Previous Council Action
Council Retreat August 18, 2008
City Council meeting September 2, 2008
City Council meeting September 30, 2008
City Council meetiing October 7, 2008
Narrative
The public hearing is an opportunity for the Council to receive public input on the 2009-10
Preliminary Budget. Following a brief budget overview and discussion of revenue and property
tax proposals, interested parties will have an opportunity to comment on the budget.
Attached is a short narrative on the 2009-2010 Preliminary Budget and Revenue Sources as well
as, the Property Tax Ordinance, an ordinance increasing Utility Taxes and and ordinance
increasing Business License fees for Council review and consideration.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Public Hearing 2009-2010 Preliminary Budget
Link: Property Tax Ordinance
Link: Utility Tax Ordinance
Link: Business License Fee Ordinance
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 03:40 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 03:42 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 03:44 PM APRV
Packet Page 180 of 374
Form Started By: Kathleen
Junglov
Started On: 10/16/2008 11:37
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 181 of 374
CITY OF EDMONDS
GARY HAAKENSON
121 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH MAYOR
EDMONDS, WA 98020 • (425) 771-0240 • FAX (425) 771-0265
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
The 2009-2010 Biennial Budget as presented to Council on September 30, 2008 included no new
programs or FTE’s. Department Directors were made aware of the dire condition of the General
Fund prior to submitting their departmental budgets and were instructed that decision packages
were not being accepted and to hold the line on spending. Beginning with the 2009-2010 budget,
the fiber project is included as a stand alone cost center. In previous years these costs were paid
from either the Non-departmental or the Administrative Services budgets.
There were two exceptions made for decision packages. Human Resources and Information
Services both submitted decision packages which are included at the end of the Mayor’s budget
section for your consideration. They include a request for new software as well as a total of 4
new positions (3 total FTE’s).
Items that have been eliminated in this budget are:
• The Administrative Services Director position
• The Economic Development Director position
• The Assistant City Engineer position
• The General Fund subsidy of the Cemetery Fund
• The Patton Boggs contract from the Community Services budget
Positions that have been budgeted for, but are not being filled:
• An Accountant in Finance
• An Administrative Assistant in the City Clerk’s Office
• A Utility Engineer (this position is offset by revenue from the Utility Fund)
All salary budgets were impacted by the significant increase in CPI-U and CPI-W.
Since the presentation of the Preliminary budget, an updated Sales Tax Revenue forecast caused
us to reduce our 2008 Sales Tax Revenue by another $300,000 for a total decrease of $700,000.
We also decreased our 2009 estimate by $150,000.
The Regular Property Tax levy was increased by 1% or $90,461 for a total of $9,265,000. The
EMS levy was increased by the voters to the statutory limit of $.50 cents per thousand or
$1,400,000 for a total of $3,865,000.
Revenue options utilized to balance the 2009-2010 Biennial Budget are as follows:
1. Utility tax increase to 10% (a 4% increase) on Water, Sewer, and Stormwater Utilities –
provides $405,000 of revenue per year.
• The average residential utility bill is approximately $110
• A 4% increase would amount to $4.40
• Annual impact $4.40 (x) 6 billings (=) $26.40
• The City offers a low income discount program
Public Hearing 2009-2010 Preliminary Budget Page 1 of 4
Packet Page 182 of 374
Public Hearing 2009-2010 Preliminary Budget Page 2 of 4
2. Increase Cable TV utility tax to 6% (a 5% increase) – provides $460,000 of revenue per
year.
• Assume an average cable bill is $100
• A 5% increase would amount to $5.00
• Annual impact $5.00 (x) 12 billings (=) $60.00
The total impact to the average consumer of increasing the above utility taxes is $86.40 or $7.20
per month.
3. Increasing Business License fees – provides $87,000 of revenue per year.
4. Increasing Development Services fees – provides $67,000 of revenue per year.
5. Forming a Transportation Benefit District effective July 1, 2009 – provides $350,000 of
revenue in 2009 and $700,000 per year thereafter.
• Cost to taxpayer $20 per vehicle
• Requires a separate public hearing
6. Implementing EMS Transport User Fees – provides $700,000 of revenue per year.
7. Forming a Regional Fire Authority effective January 1, 2011. This option requires a vote
of the people.
Revenue options not utilized in balancing the 2009-2010 Budget are as follows:
1. B & O Tax - $1,500,000.
2. Utility Tax increase on Electric, Natural Gas, Telephone, Solid Waste - $650,000. This
option requires a vote of the people.
3. General Property Tax Levy Lid Lift - $2,000,000. This option requires a vote of the
people.
4. Gambling - $500,000. This option requires a vote of the people.
5. Transportation Benefit District additional $20 Annual Vehicle Fee for Capital - $700,000.
This option requires a vote of the people.
The following pages include two Executives Summaries. The summary on Page 3 shows the
impact on the budget of including the revenue options listed above as “utilized” to balance the
budget including the formation of a Regional Fire Authority effective January 1, 2011.
The summary on Page 4 shows the impact on the budget of including the revenue options listed
above as “utilized” to balance the budget, as well as the impact of the cuts requested by council
as an alternative to the RFA.
Packet Page 183 of 374
Executive Summary (Regional Fire Authority as of 1/1/2011)
16-Oct-08 City of Edmonds: Strategic Outlook
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
RESOURCES Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook
Beginning Fund Balance 3,641,250 821,355 642,815 187,648 2,125,215 3,669,597 4,795,329
Property Tax 12,318,023 13,930,174 14,160,062 10,416,044 10,584,568 10,755,305 10,935,259
Sales Tax 5,872,412 6,035,850 6,185,850 6,465,807 6,707,800 6,993,516 7,326,884
Utility Tax 4,585,756 5,102,314 5,225,311 5,366,765 5,512,676 5,663,207 5,818,531
Other Taxes 297,400 297,500 297,500 302,900 308,403 314,009 319,723
Licenses/Permits/Franchise 823,565 1,389,943 1,417,437 1,452,873 1,489,194 1,526,424 1,564,585
Construction Permits 695,000 707,000 689,767 655,278 622,514 591,389 561,819
Grants 30,680 11,144 4,644 - - - -
State Revenues 702,110 745,942 752,426 744,791 752,284 759,908 767,668
Intergov't Service Charges 973,496 1,323,320 1,356,705 393,347 409,174 425,697 442,948
Interfund Service Charges 1,242,448 1,322,009 1,355,059 1,388,936 1,423,659 1,459,251 1,495,732
Chgs. for Goods & Services 1,761,747 2,778,154 3,200,194 2,515,301 2,533,157 2,553,709 2,576,915
Fines & Forfeits 525,050 592,500 640,300 656,308 672,715 689,533 706,771
Misc Revenues 659,167 580,193 521,276 519,096 523,424 531,141 540,692
Annual Revenues 30,486,854 34,816,042 35,806,530 30,877,445 31,539,568 32,263,091 33,057,527
Annual Revenue Growth 14.2%2.8%-13.8%2.1%2.3%2.5%
Resources 34,128,104 35,637,397 36,449,345 31,065,093 33,664,783 35,932,688 37,852,855
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Expenses by Function Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook
Labor 22,775,243 24,422,213 25,507,434 18,913,687 19,674,299 20,507,750 21,388,252
Supplies 877,770 712,990 704,996 600,031 615,032 630,407 646,168
Services 3,895,765 3,848,136 3,862,901 3,781,958 3,915,728 4,056,574 4,205,034
Intergov't 1,813,968 2,038,555 2,094,083 1,896,694 1,964,814 2,035,672 2,109,387
Capital 78,000 40,000 30,000 30,750 31,519 32,307 33,114
Debt Service 1,393,921 1,415,817 1,423,951 1,429,441 1,445,858 1,464,450 1,476,245
Transfers 1,417,786 1,396,111 1,486,970 1,349,966 1,387,151 1,425,395 1,494,728
Interfund 1,054,296 1,120,761 1,151,362 937,351 960,785 984,804 1,009,425
Total Expenses 33,306,749 34,994,583 36,261,697 28,939,878 29,995,186 31,137,359 32,362,353
Expense Growth 5.1%3.6%-20.2%3.6%3.8%3.9%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook
Current Resources 30,486,854 34,816,042 35,806,530 30,877,445 31,539,568 32,263,091 33,057,527
Total Expenses 33,306,749 34,994,583 36,261,697 28,939,878 29,995,186 31,137,359 32,362,353
Annual Balance (2,819,895) (178,541) (455,167) 1,937,567 1,544,382 1,125,731 695,174
Ending Fund Balance 821,355 642,815 187,648 2,125,215 3,669,597 4,795,329 5,490,503
Revenue Options included: Water, Sewer, Stormwater Utility Taxes to 10% / Cable TV Utility Tax to 6%
Increase Business License Fees / Increase Development Services Fees
Transportation Benefit District effective 7/1/2009 / Fire District #1 Contract
EMS Transport User Fees
Revenue Options not Included: B & O Tax / Electric, Natural Gas, Telephone, and Solid Waste Utility Tax increase
Gambling / General Property Tax Levy Lid Lift
Public Hearing 2009-2010 Preliminary Budget Page 3 of 4
Packet Page 184 of 374
Executive Summary (No RFA as of 1/1/2011 - Reduction in Services)
16-Oct-08 City of Edmonds: Strategic Outlook
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
RESOURCES Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook
Beginning Fund Balance 3,641,250 977,951 1,840,586 2,882,529 3,371,921 3,316,632 2,677,737
Property Tax 12,318,023 13,930,174 14,160,062 14,399,791 14,631,329 14,864,831 15,107,333
Sales Tax 5,872,412 6,035,850 6,185,850 6,465,807 6,707,800 6,993,516 7,326,884
Utility Tax 4,585,756 5,102,314 5,225,311 5,366,765 5,512,676 5,663,207 5,818,531
Other Taxes 297,400 297,500 297,500 302,900 308,403 314,009 319,723
Licenses/Permits/Franchise 823,565 1,389,943 1,417,437 1,452,873 1,489,194 1,526,424 1,564,585
Construction Permits 695,000 707,000 689,767 655,278 622,514 591,389 561,819
Grants 30,680 11,144 4,644 - - - -
State Revenues 702,110 745,942 752,426 744,791 752,284 759,908 767,668
Intergov't Service Charges 973,496 1,323,320 1,356,705 1,398,224 1,441,123 1,485,452 1,531,265
Interfund Service Charges 1,242,448 1,322,009 1,355,059 1,388,936 1,423,659 1,459,251 1,495,732
Chgs. for Goods & Services 1,761,747 2,644,004 3,062,345 3,091,507 3,123,767 3,159,085 3,197,425
Fines & Forfeits 525,050 592,500 640,300 656,308 672,715 689,533 706,771
Misc Revenues 659,167 513,594 453,231 450,710 454,687 462,046 471,228
Annual Revenues 30,486,854 34,615,293 35,600,637 36,373,889 37,140,151 37,968,651 38,868,963
Annual Revenue Growth 13.5%2.8%2.2%2.1%2.2%2.4%
Resources 34,128,104 35,593,244 37,441,222 39,256,418 40,512,072 41,285,283 41,546,700
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Expenses by Function Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook
Labor 22,775,243 23,473,213 24,089,149 25,069,091 26,058,707 27,134,448 28,271,653
Supplies 726,174 668,940 651,413 667,698 684,391 701,501 719,038
Services 3,890,765 3,640,412 3,687,982 3,816,003 3,950,625 4,092,342 4,241,697
Intergov't 1,813,968 2,038,555 2,094,083 2,172,724 2,254,645 2,339,994 2,428,926
Capital 78,000 - - - - - -
Debt Service 1,393,921 1,415,817 1,423,951 1,429,441 1,445,858 1,464,450 1,476,245
Transfers 1,417,786 1,396,111 1,486,970 1,576,267 1,619,110 1,663,152 1,738,429
Interfund 1,054,296 1,119,611 1,125,145 1,153,274 1,182,105 1,211,658 1,241,950
Total Expenses 33,150,153 33,752,659 34,558,693 35,884,497 37,195,440 38,607,546 40,117,938
Expense Growth 1.8%2.4%3.8%3.7%3.8%3.9%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook Outlook
Current Resources 30,486,854 34,615,293 35,600,637 36,373,889 37,140,151 37,968,651 38,868,963
Total Expenses 33,150,153 33,752,659 34,558,693 35,884,497 37,195,440 38,607,546 40,117,938
Annual Balance (2,663,299) 862,634 1,041,944 489,391 (55,289) (638,895) (1,248,975)
Ending Fund Balance 977,951 1,840,586 2,882,529 3,371,921 3,316,632 2,677,737 1,428,762
Revenue Options included: Water, Sewer, Stormwater Utility Taxes to 10% / Cable TV Utility Tax to 6%
Increase Business License Fees / Increase Development Services Fees
Transportation Benefit District effective 7/1/2009 / Fire District #1 Contract
EMS Transport User Fees
Revenue Options not Included: B & O Tax / Electric, Natural Gas, Telephone, and Solid Waste Utility Tax increase
Gambling / General Property Tax Levy Lid Lift
Public Hearing 2009-2010 Preliminary Budget Page 4 of 4
Packet Page 185 of 374
ORDINANCE NO. ______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE ANNUAL TAX LEVY
BY INCREASING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY
BY THE CURRENT 101% LEVY LIMIT, THEREBY LEVYING
AN ESTIMATED REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY OF
$9,265,000, BY RESTORING THE EMS LEVY TO $0.50 PER
$1,000 OF ASSESSED VALUATION, THEREBY LEVYING
AN EMS LEVY OF $3,865,000 AND LEVYING $839,084 FOR
VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMPLEX, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL
BECOME EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, the City Council and the City of Edmonds have properly given
notice of the public hearing held on October 21, 2008, to consider the City's current expense
budget for 2009, pursuant to RCW 84.55.120; and
WHEREAS, the City Council in the course of considering the budget for 2009
have reviewed all sources of revenue and examined all anticipated expenses and obligations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby determines following public hearing that it
is in the best interest of and necessary to meet the expenses and obligations of the City to
increase the regular property levy by 1%, and to restore the EMS levy to $0.50 per $1,000 of the
assessed value of property as approved by voters at the Special Election held on May 20, 2008
and certified by the County Canvassing Board; and
WHEREAS, the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office has requested that all
Snohomish County Taxing Districts submit their levy certifications to the county on the State
Department of Revenue standardized form REV 64 0100; NOW, THEREFORE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 1 of 5
Packet Page 186 of 374
Section 1. The limit factor for the regular levy to be collected in budget year
2009 shall be 101% of the highest amount of regular property taxes that could have been levied
in the City in any year since 1985.
Section 2. The 2008 regular property tax levy for collection in 2009 is the amount
levied in 2007 for collection in 2008, plus an increase of $90,461 which is a percentage increase
of 1%, plus an increase equal to the amount allowed under the new construction provisions of
RCW 84.55.010 for an estimated total of $9,265,000.
Section 3. There shall be and is hereby levied for the 2008 Emergency Medical
Services (EMS) property tax levy for collection in 2009 current taxes of $3,865,000 which is
$0.50 cents per $1,000 of assessed valuation levied on property with an estimated assessed
valuation in 2008 of $7,713,702,675 of all said taxable property, the purpose of which is to fund
the provision of emergency medical care and services. This levy is subject to amendment upon
receipt of 2008 assessed valuation from Snohomish County.
Section 4. There shall be and is hereby levied current taxes of $839,084, the
purpose of which is to make debt service payments on voter approved bonds.
Section 5. The levies contained in sections 2 through 4 are subject to amendment
upon receipt of 2008 assessed valuation from Snohomish County.
Section 6. Pursuant to the request by the Snohomish County Assessor’s Office,
the Administrative Services Director is hereby authorized to submit to the Snohomish County
Council certification of the hereby approved levies on the State Department of Revenue
standardized form REV 64 0100 attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Section 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 2 of 5
Packet Page 187 of 374
such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Section 8. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power
specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take
effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of
the title. It is enacted on a vote of a majority plus one of the City Council.
APPROVED:
MAYOR, GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 3 of 5
Packet Page 188 of 374
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2008, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed
Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the
title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, PROVIDING FOR THE
ANNUAL TAX LEVY BY INCREASING THE REGULAR PROPERTY TAX LEVY BY THE
CURRENT 101% LEVY LIMIT, THEREBY LEVYING AN ESTIMATED REGULAR
PROPERTY TAX LEVY OF $9,265,000, BY RESTORING THE EMS LEVY TO $0.50 PER
$1,000 OF ASSESSED VALUATION, THEREBY LEVYING AN EMS LEVY OF $3,865,000
AND LEVYING $839,084 FOR VOTED INDEBTEDNESS FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMPLEX, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of _________________, 2008.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 4 of 5
Packet Page 189 of 374
Exhibit A – Levy Certification
Levy Certification
Submit this document to the county legislative authority on or before November 30 of the year preceding
the year in which the levy amounts are to be collected and forward a copy to the assessor.
In accordance with RCW 84.52.020, I, Kathleen Junglov, Finance Director, for the City of
Edmonds, do hereby certify to the Snohomish County legislative authority that the Council of
said district requests that the following levy amounts be collected in 2009 as provided in the
district’s budget, which was adopted following a public hearing on October 21, 2008.
Regular Levy: $9,265,000
Excess Levy: $839,084
EMS Levy: $3,865,000
___________________________________________
Signature Date
2008 Property Tax Ordinance Page 5 of 5
Packet Page 190 of 374
ORDINANCE NO. ______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC
3.20.050 TO SET CERTAIN UTILITY TAXES, PROVIDING
FOR SEVERABILITY, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE
SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, the City imposes certain taxes for cable television, water, sewer and
stormwater services; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the tax rates referenced above need to be
changed to recover a greater portion of certain costs associated with administering, regulating
and providing the services; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 Subsections E, F, H and I of Edmonds City Code Section 3.20.050,
Occupation Subject to Tax - Amounts. are hereby amended to read as follows:
3.20.050 Occupation Subject to Tax - Amounts.
. . .
E. Cable Television.
Pursuant to Chapter 4.68 ECC, community antenna television
systems, commonly known as cable television franchisees, are
herby levied a franchise fee of five percent, as authorized by 47
U.S.C. §542(a) and RCW 35.21.860, on all gross revenues derived
from any source of revenue by cable television franchisees from
their cable television operations in the city of Edmonds. In addition
thereto, a business license tax, as authorized in part by 47 U.S.C.
§542(g)(2)(A), is hereby levied equal to six percent on all gross
revenues derived from any source of revenue by cable television
Utility Tax Increase Ordinance Page 1 of 4
Packet Page 191 of 374
franchisees from their cable television operations in the city of
Edmonds.
F. City Sewer Utility.
The city of Edmonds, as a seller of sewer services, shall be subject
to the tax imposed by this chapter. The sewer utility shall pay a
license fee or tax equal to ten percent on the gross income from the
city's sewer utility.
. . .
H. City Water Utility.
The City of Edmonds, as the seller of water services, shall be
subject to the tax imposed by this chapter. The water utility shall
pay a license tax or fee equal to ten percent on the gross income
from the City's water utility.
I. City Storm Water Utility.
The City of Edmonds, as the seller of storm water services, shall be
subject to the tax imposed by this chapter. The storm water utility
shall pay a license tax or fee equal to ten percent on the gross
income from the City's storm water utility.
. . .
Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power
specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take
effect on the latter date of 01/01/09 or five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved
summary thereof consisting of the title.
Utility Tax Increase Ordinance Page 2 of 4
Packet Page 192 of 374
APPROVED:
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Utility Tax Increase Ordinance Page 3 of 4
Packet Page 193 of 374
Utility Tax Increase Ordinance Page 4 of 4
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2008, the City Council of the City of
Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said
ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING
THE PROVISIONS OF ECC 3.20.050 TO SET CERTAIN UTILITY TAXES,
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME
SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2008.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 194 of 374
ORDINANCE NO. ______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC
4.72.040 TO SET CERTAIN BUSINESS LICENSE FEES,
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND FIXING A TIME
WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, the City charges certain fees as a condition precedent to issuing and
renewing certain business licenses; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the fees referenced above need to be changed to
recover a greater portion of certain costs associated with administering, regulating and providing
the services; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Subsection B, including all its parts, of the Edmonds City Code
4.72.040, Fee - Terms - Penalty, is hereby amended to read as follows:
4.72.040 Fee - Terms - Penalty.
. . .
B. Fees for an annual business license issued hereunder shall
be as follows:
1. The fee for an application for a new business license for
any business that is not a home occupation, as provided in Chapter
20.20 ECDC, to be operated from any real estate within the city of
Edmonds shall be $125.00;
2. The fee for an application for a new business license for a
new home occupation business, as provided in Chapter 20.20
ECDC, to be operated from any residential real estate within the
city of Edmonds shall be $100.00; and
Business License Fee Ordinance Page 1 of 4
Packet Page 195 of 374
3. The fee for an application for a new business license for
any other business conducted for, under contract with or by
providing services to any person within the city shall be $50.00;
and
4. The fee for an application for an annual renewal of a
business license shall be $50.00 for any business operated within
the city of Edmonds.
. . .
Section 2. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power
specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take
effect on the latter date of 01/01/09 or five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved
summary thereof consisting of the title.
APPROVED:
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
Business License Fee Ordinance Page 2 of 4
Packet Page 196 of 374
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Business License Fee Ordinance Page 3 of 4
Packet Page 197 of 374
Business License Fee Ordinance Page 4 of 4
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2008, the City Council of the City of
Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said
ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING
THE PROVISIONS OF ECC 4.72.040 TO SET CERTAIN BUSINESS LICENSE FEES,
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME
SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2008.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 198 of 374
AM-1833 5.
Public Hearing on the Planning Board recommendation regarding Code changes
related to the BD1 zones.
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Rob Chave Time:60 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Public Hearing on the Planning Board recommendation regarding Code changes related to
the BD1 zones.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance to implement the Planning Board's
recommendation.
Previous Council Action
Council approved interim zoning ordinance #3691 on July 22, 2008, clarifying how the ground
floor rules applied within the downtown BD1 zone. In adopting the ordinance, the Council also
referred the issue to the Planning Board to "review the existing code provisions and this
interpretation, in order to make recommendations that would permit property owners to make
profitable and efficient use of their properites while meeting the purposes and intent of the City's
Comprehensive Plan and the BD-1 zone."
Narrative
At the request of the City Council, the Planning Board reviewed the ground floor provisions
pertinent to the BD1 zone and has formulated a recommendation to the Council (see Exhibit 1 for
the code language, and Exhibit 2 for the Planning Board's discussion and hearing minutes).
Essentially, the proposal reserves the first 30 feet of BD1-zoned buildings for retail-oriented
space, and provides the opportunity for other commercial or parking uses behind that "designated
street front." Residential uses are still not permitted on the ground floor in the BD1 zone, and the
overall height limits have not been changed. The amendments also provide additional clarification
that commercial uses may locate in non-conforming building spaces, regardless of whether they
comply with the new ground floor requirements.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1: Planning Board Recommendation
Link: Exhibit 2: Planning Board Minutes
Link: Exhibit 3: Planning Board Packet for 9/10/2008
Link: Exhibit 4: Planning Board Packet from 8/13/2008, pt1
Packet Page 199 of 374
Link: Exhibit 4: Planning Board Packet from 8/13/2008, pt1
Link: Exhibit 5: Planning Board Packet from 8/13/2008, pt2
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:28 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 01:35 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:40 PM APRV
Form Started By: Rob
Chave
Started On: 10/08/2008 11:25
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 200 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 1 Planning Board Recommendation
The following are the BD zone amendments recommended by the Planning
Board on September 10, 2008.
Chapter 16.43
BD – DOWNTOWN BUSINESS
Sections:
16.43.000 Purposes.
16.43.010 Subdistricts.
16.43.020 Uses.
16.43.030 Site development standards.
16.43.040 Operating restrictions.
16.43.000 Purposes.
The BD zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for
business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC.
A. Promote downtown Edmonds as a setting for retail, office, entertainment and
associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community,
and as a destination for visitors from throughout the region.
B. Define the downtown commercial and retail core along streets having the strongest
pedestrian links and pedestrian-oriented design elements, while protecting downtown's
identity.
C. Identify supporting arts and mixed use residential and office areas which support and
complement downtown retail use areas. Provide for a strong central retail core at
downtown's focal center while providing for a mixture of supporting commercial and
residential uses in the area surrounding this retail core area.
D. Focus development between the commercial and retail core and the Edmonds Center
for the Arts on small-scale retail, service, and multifamily residential uses. [Ord. 3624
§ 1, 2007].
16.43.010 Subdistricts.
The “downtown business” zone is subdivided into five distinct subdistricts, each intended
to implement specific aspects of the comprehensive plan that pertain to the Downtown
Packet Page 201 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 2 Planning Board Recommendation
Waterfront Activity Center. Each subdistrict contains its own unique mix of uses and
zoning regulations, as described in this chapter. The five subdistricts are:
BD1 – Downtown Retail Core;
BD2 – Downtown Mixed Commercial;
BD3 – Downtown Convenience Commercial;
BD4 – Downtown Mixed Residential;
BD5 – Downtown Arts Corridor. [Ord. 3624 § 1, 2007].
16.43.020 Uses.
A. Table 16.43-1.
Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5
Commercial Uses
Retail stores or sales A A A A A
Offices A A A A A
Service uses A A A A A
Retail sales requiring intensive outdoor display or storage areas,
such as trailer sales, used car lots (except as part of a new car
sales and service dealer), and heavy equipment storage, sales or
services X X X X X
Enclosed fabrication or assembly areas associated with and on
the same property as an art studio, art gallery, restaurant or food
service establishment that also provides an on-site retail outlet
open to the public A A A A A
Automobile sales and service X A A X X
Dry cleaning and laundry plants which use only nonflammable
and nonexplosive cleaning agents C A A A X
Printing, publishing and binding establishments C A A A C
Community-oriented open air markets conducted as an outdoor
operation and licensed pursuant to provisions in the Edmonds
City Code A A A A A
Residential Uses
Single-family dwelling A A A A A
Packet Page 202 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 3 Planning Board Recommendation
Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5
Multiple dwelling unit(s) A A A A A
Other Uses
Bus stop shelters A A A A A
Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020 A A A A A
Primary and high schools subject to the requirements of ECDC
17.100.050(G) through (R) A A A A A
Local public facilities subject to the requirements of ECDC
17.100.050 C C C A C
Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks
with an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC
17.100.070 A A A A A
Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted use B B B B B
Commuter parking lots in conjunction with a facility otherwise
permitted in this zone B B B B X
Commercial parking lots C C C C X
Wholesale uses X X C X X
Hotels and motels A A A A A
Amusement establishments C C C C C
Auction businesses, excluding vehicle or livestock auctions C C C C C
Drive-in businesses C C A C X
Laboratories X C C C X
Fabrication of light industrial products not otherwise listed as a
permitted use X X C X X
Day-care centers C C C A C
Hospitals, health clinics, convalescent homes, rest homes,
sanitariums X C C A X
Museums and art galleries of primarily local concern that do not
meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC
21.85.033 A A A A A
Zoos and aquariums of primarily local concern that do not meet
the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC
21.85.033 C C C C A
Packet Page 203 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 4 Planning Board Recommendation
Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5
Counseling centers and residential treatment facilities for current
alcoholics and drug abusers X C C A X
Regional parks and community parks without a master plan
subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070 C C C C C
Outdoor storage, incidental to a permitted use D D D D D
Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC D D D D D
A = Permitted primary use
B = Permitted secondary use
C = Primary uses requiring a conditional use permit
D = Secondary uses requiring a conditional use permit
X = Not permitted
For conditional uses listed in Table 16.43-1, the use may be permitted if the proposal
meets the criteria for conditional uses found in Chapter 20.05 ECDC, and all of the
following criteria are met:
1. Access and Parking. Pedestrian access shall be provided from the sidewalk. Vehicular
access shall only be provided consistent with ECDC 18.80.060. When a curb cut is
necessary, it shall be landscaped to be compatible with the pedestrian streetscape and
shall be located and designed to be as unobtrusive as possible.
2. Design and Landscaping. The project shall be designed so that it is oriented to the
street and contributes to the pedestrian streetscape environment. Fences more than four
feet in height along street lot lines shall only be permitted if they are at least 50 percent
open, such as a lattice pattern. Blank walls shall be discouraged, and when unavoidable
due to the nature of the use, shall be decorated by a combination of at least two of the
following:
a. Architectural features or details;
b. Artwork;
c. Landscaping. [Ord. 3624 § 1, 2007].
Packet Page 204 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 5 Planning Board Recommendation
16.43.030 Site development standards.
A. Table 16.43-2.
Sub
District
Minimum
Lot Area
Minimum
Lot Width
Minimum
Street
Setback
Minimum
Side
Setback1
Minimum
Rear
Setback1
Maximum
Height2
Minimum
Height of
Ground Floor
within the
Designated
Street-Front4
BD15 0 0 0 0 0 25' 15'
BD25 0 0 0 0 0 25' 12'
BD35 0 0 0 0 0 25' 12'
BD43,5 0 0 0 0 0 25' 12'
BD55 0 0 0 0 0 25' 12'
1 The setback for buildings and structures located at or above grade (exempting buildings and structures
entirely below the surface of the ground) shall be 15 feet from the lot line adjacent to residentially (R)
zoned property.
2 Specific provisions regarding building heights are contained in EDCD 16.43.030(C).
3 Within the BD4 zone, site development standards listed in Table 16.43-2 apply when a building contains a
ground floor consisting of commercial space to a depth of at least 60 feet measured from the street front of
the building. If a proposed building does not meet this ground floor commercial space requirement (e.g., an
entirely residential building is proposed), then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply.
See ECDC 16.43.030(B)(48) for further details.
4 “Minimum height of ground floor within the designated street-front” means the vertical distance from top
to top of the successive finished floor surfaces for that portion of the ground floor located within the
designated street front (see ECDC 16.43.030(B)); and, if the ground floor is the only floor above street
grade, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the ceiling joists or, where there is not a ceiling, to the
top of the roof rafters. “Floor finish” is the exposed floor surface, including coverings applied over a
finished floor, and includes, but is not limited to, wood, vinyl flooring, wall-to-wall carpet, and concrete, as
illustrated in Figure 16.43-1. Figure 16.43-1 shows a ground floor height of 15 feet; note that the “finished”
ceiling height is only approximately 11 feet in this example. Existing buildings may be added onto or
remodeled without adjusting the existing height of the ground floor to meet the specified minimum height
so long as the addition or remodel does not increase the building footprint or its frontage along a street by
more than 25 percent.
5 Site development standards for single-family dwellings are the same as those specified for the RS-6 zone.
Packet Page 205 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 6 Planning Board Recommendation
Map 16.43-1: Designated Street Front for Properties in the BD1 Zone
Packet Page 206 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 7 Planning Board Recommendation
Figure 16.43-1: Ground Floor Height Measurement
B. Ground Floor. This section describes requirements for development of the ground
floor of buildings in the BD zones.
1. For all BD zones, the ground floor is considered to be that floor of a building which is
closest in elevation to the finished grade along the width of the side of the structure that is
principally oriented to the designated street front of the building (this is normally the
adjacent sidewalk). For the purposes of this section, the ground “floor” is considered to
be the sum of the floor planes which, in combination, run the full extent of the building
and are closest in elevation to one another. For the purposes of this Chapter, the
definition of “ground floor” contained in ECDC 21.35.017 does not apply.
2. Designated street front. Map 16.43-1 shows the designated street front for all
properties lying within the BD1 zone, which is 30 feet measured perpendicular to the
indicated street front of the building lot. For all other BD zones, the designated street
front is established as the first 60 feet of the lot measured perpendicular to any street
right-of-way, excluding alleys.
Packet Page 207 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 8 Planning Board Recommendation
3. The minimum height of the ground floor within the designated street front. The
minimum height of the ground floor specified in Table 16.43-2 only applies to the height
of the ground floor located within the designated street front established in ECDC
16.43.030(B)(2).
14. Access to commercial uses within the designated street front. When a commercial use
is located on the ground floor within a designated street front as defined in ECDC
16.43.030(B)(2), the elevation of the ground floor and associated entry shall be within
seven inches of the grade level of the adjoining sidewalk. “Grade” shall be as measured at
the entry location. Portions of the ground floor outside the designated street front of the
building need not comply with the access requirements specified in this section.
25. When the designated street frontage of a building is on a slope which does not allow
both the elevation of the entry and ground floor within the designated street front to be
entirely within seven inches of the grade level of the sidewalk, as specified in ECDC
16.43.030(B)(4), the portion of the ground floor of the building located within the
designated street front may be designed so that either:
a. The entry for the commercial portion of the ground floor is located within seven
inches of the grade of the adjacent sidewalk, and the commercial portion of the
ground floor located within the designated street front is within seven inches of the
grade level of the entry; or
b. The building may be broken up into multiple frontages, so that each entry/ground
floor combination is within seven inches of the grade of the sidewalk.
c. For corner lots, a primary entry shall be established for the purposes of determining
where the ground floor entry rules detailed in this section shall apply. The first choice
for the primary entry shall be either 5th Avenue or Main Street. In the case of the
BD5 zone, the primary entry shall always be on 4th Avenue.
36. Within the BD1 zone, development on the ground floor shall consist of only
commercial uses. , except that parking may be located on the ground floor so long as it is
not located within the designated street front.
7. Within the BD2 and BD3 zones, development on the ground floor shall consist of only
commercial uses within the designated street frontto a minimum building depth of 60
feet, as measured from the street front of the building. Any permitted use may be located
on the ground floor outside of the designated street front.
48. Within the BD4 zone, there are two options for developing the ground floor of a
building. One option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space, meeting the
same requirements detailed for the BD2 and BD3 zones in subsection (B)(3#) of this
section. As a second option, if more residential space is provided so that the ground floor
does not meet the commercial use requirements described in subsection (B)(3#) of this
section, then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. In the case
Packet Page 208 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 9 Planning Board Recommendation
where RM-1.5 setbacks are required, the required street setback shall be landscaped and
no fence or wall in the setback shall be over four feet in height above sidewalk grade
unless it is at least 50 percent open, such as in a lattice pattern.
59. Within the BD5 zone, one option is to develop the ground floor with commercial
space, meeting the same requirements detailed for the BD2 zone in subsection (B)(37) of
this section. When development of the ground floor does not conform to these
requirements, then development within the BD5 zone shall meet the following
requirements:
a. The building shall be oriented to 4th Avenue. “Orientation to 4th Avenue” shall
mean that:
i. At least one building entry shall face 4th Avenue.
ii. If the building is located adjacent to the public right-of-way, architectural
details and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building design to add
interest at the pedestrian (i.e., ground floor) level.
iii. If the building is set back from the street, landscaping and/or artwork shall be
located between the building and the street front.
b. Live/work uses are encouraged within the BD5 zone, and potential live/work space
is required for new residential buildings if no other commercial use is provided on-
site.
i. If multiple residential uses are located on the ground floor, the building shall
incorporate live/work space into the ground floor design in such a way as to
enable building occupants to use portion(s) of their space for a commercial or
art/fabrication use. Live/work space means a structure or portion of a structure
that combines a commercial or manufacturing activity that is allowed in the zone
with a residential living space for the owner of the commercial or manufacturing
business, or the owner's employee, and that person's household. The live/work
space shall be designed so that a commercial or fabrication or home occupation
use can be established within the space.
Packet Page 209 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 10 Planning Board Recommendation
Figure 16.43-2: BD5 Development
Building at right (foreground) shows landscaping located between building and street.
Building at left (background) shows commercial space integrated with residential uses, and the entry
oriented to the street.
610. Exceptions and Clarifications. The regulations for the ground floor contained in
subsections (B)(1) through (59) of this section apply with the following exceptions or
clarifications.
a. That in all areas the provision of pedestrian access to permitted residential uses is
allowed as a permitted secondary use.
b. The restrictions on the location of residential uses shall not apply when a single-
family use is the only permitted primary use located on the property.
c. Existing buildings may be added onto or remodeled without adjusting the existing
height of the ground floor to meet the specified minimum height so long as the
addition or remodel does not increase the building footprint or its frontage along a
street by more than 25 percent. Permitted uses may occupy an existing space
regardless of whether that space meets the ground floor requirements for height.
cd. Parking is not considered to be a commercial use for the purposes of satisfying the
ground floor commercial use requirement within the designated street front (i.e.e.g.,
when the first 60 30 feet of the a building is within a designated street front in the
BD1 zone, as measured perpendicular to the street, is required to be in commercial
use, parking may not be located within that 60 30 feet).
e. However, for For properties within the BD2 or BD3 zone which have with less
than 90 feet of depth measured from the street front, parking may be located in the
rearmost 30 feet of the property, even if a portion of the parking extends into the first
60 feet of the building. In no case shall the depth of commercial space as measured
from the street front of the building be less than 30 feet.
df. Within the BD2, BD3 and BD4 zones, if the first 60 feet of the building as
measured perpendicular to the street consists only of commercial uses and permitted
Packet Page 210 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 11 Planning Board Recommendation
secondary uses, then permitted multiple-family residential unit(s) may be located
behind the commercial uses.
eg. Within the BD1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be
transparent and unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings intended
to obscure the interior from public view from the sidewalk. This provision does not
apply to any residential uses located behind commercial uses.
fh. Within the BD1 zone, each commercial space located on the ground floor within
the designated street front shall be directly accessible by an entry from the sidewalk.
C. Building Height Regulations.
1. The basic height limit is 25 feet (see definition of “height” detailed in ECDC
21.40.030).
2. Step-Back Rules. The following rules apply when calculating the maximum building
height for any building in the specified zone(s) (see Figures 16.43-3 and 16.43-4 for
illustrated examples).
a. Within the BD2, BD3, or BD4 zones, an additional five feet of building height, not
to exceed 30 feet, may be obtained if the building is designed to meet all of the
following conditions:
i. A building step-back is provided within 15 feet of any street front. Within the
15-foot step-back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet above
grade at the property line (e.g., normally the back of the sidewalk) or 30 feet
above the “average level” as defined in ECDC 21.40.030. For corner lots, a 15-
foot step-back is required along both street fronts. If a building located on a
corner lot has insufficient lot width (i.e., less than 40 feet of lot width) to enable it
to provide the required step-back on both street fronts, then the step-back may be
waived facing the secondary street. This waiver may not be granted for building
step-backs required from Fifth Avenue, Dayton Street, or Main Street.
ii. A 15-foot step-back is provided from the property line opposite the street front.
Within the 15-foot step-back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet
above grade or 30 feet above the “average level” as defined in ECDC 21.40.030.
For corner lots for which a 15-foot step-back is required on more than one street
front, there is no 15-foot step-back required from the property line opposite each
street front. For the purpose of determining step-back requirements, alleys are not
considered to be streets.
iii. A building setback, in which the entire building is set back from the property
line, may be substituted on a foot-for-foot basis for the required building step-
back. For example, a five-foot building setback can be combined with a 10-foot
building step-back to meet the 15-foot step-back requirement.
Packet Page 211 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 12 Planning Board Recommendation
b. Within the BD1 zone, building height may be a maximum of 30 feet in order to
provide for a minimum height of 15 feet for the ground floor. The allowable building
height is measured from the “average level” as defined in ECDC 21.40.030.
Packet Page 212 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 13 Planning Board Recommendation
3. Within the BD5 zone, the maximum height may be increased to 30 feet if the building
meets one of the following conditions. In addition, if the building is located within 15
feet of the public right-of-way, architectural details and/or applied art shall be
incorporated into the building design, and the ground floor shall be distinguished from
the upper portions of the building through the use of differences in materials, windows,
and/or architectural forms.
a. All portions of the building above 25 feet consist of a pitched roof such that the
pitch of all portions of the roof are at least six-in-12 and the roof includes
architectural features, such as dormers or gables of a steeper pitch, that break up the
roof line into distinct segments.
b. If the building does not make use of a pitched roof system as described in
subsection (C)(3)(a) of this section, step-backs shall be required the same as for the
BD2 zone, as described in ECDC 16.43.030(C)(2).
4. Height Exceptions. In addition to the height exceptions listed in ECDC 21.40.030, the
following architectural features are allowed to extend above the height limits specified in
this chapter.
a. A single decorative architectural element, such as a turret, tower, or clock tower,
may extend a maximum of five feet above the specified height limit if it is designed
as an integral architectural feature of the roof and/or facade of the building. The
decorative architectural element shall not cover more than five percent of the roof
area of the building.
b. Roof or deck railings may extend a maximum of 42 inches above the specified
height limit within any building step-back required under ECDC 16.43.030(C)(2);
provided, that the railing is constructed so that it has the appearance of being
transparent. An example meeting this condition would be a railing that is comprised
of glass panels.
D. Off-Street Parking and Access Requirements. The parking regulations included here
apply specifically within the BD zone. Whenever there are conflicts between the
requirements of this chapter and the provisions contained in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, Off-
Street Parking Regulations, the provisions of this chapter shall apply.
1. Within the BD1 zone, no new curb cuts are permitted along 5th Avenue or Main
Street.
2. No parking is required for any commercial floor area of permitted uses located within
the BD1, BD2, BD4, and BD5 zones.
3. No parking is required for any floor area in any building with a total building footprint
of less than 4,800 square feet.
Packet Page 213 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 14 Planning Board Recommendation
E. Open Space Requirements.
1. For buildings on lots larger than 12,000 square feet or having an overall building width
of more than 120 feet (as measured parallel to the street lot line), at least five percent of
the lot area shall be devoted to open space. Open space shall not be required for additions
to existing buildings that do not increase the building footprint by more than 10 percent.
Open space shall be provided adjacent to the street front (street lot line). Such open space
may be provided as any combination of:
a. Outdoor dining or seating areas (including outdoor seating or waiting areas for
restaurants or food service establishments);
b. Public plaza or sidewalk that is accessible to the public;
c. Landscaping which includes a seating area that is accessible to the public.
2. Required open space shall be open to the air and not located under a building story.
3. In overall dimension, the width of required open space shall not be less than 75 percent
of the depth of the open space, measured relative to the street (i.e., width is measured
parallel to the street lot line, while depth is measured perpendicular to the street lot line).
Packet Page 214 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 15 Planning Board Recommendation
F. Historic Buildings. The exceptions contained in this section apply only to buildings
listed on the Edmonds register of historic buildings.
1. If a certificate of appropriateness is issued by the Edmonds historic preservation
commission under the provisions of Chapter 20.45 ECDC for the proposed project, the
staff may modify or waive any of the requirements listed below that would otherwise
apply to the expansion, remodeling, or restoration of the building. The decision of staff
shall be processed as a staff decision, notice required, as provided for in ECDC
20.95.050.
a. Building step-backs required under subsection (C)(2) of this section.
b. Open space required under subsection (E) of this section.
2. No off-street parking is required for any permitted uses located within a building listed
on the Edmonds register of historic buildings. Note that additional parking exceptions
involving building expansion, remodeling or restoration may also apply, as detailed in
ECDC 17.50.070(C).
Packet Page 215 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 16 Planning Board Recommendation
3. Within the BD5 zone, if a building listed on the Edmonds register of historic buildings
is retained on-site, no off-street parking is required for any additional buildings or uses
located on the same property. To obtain this benefit, an easement in a form acceptable to
the city shall be recorded with Snohomish County protecting the exterior of the historic
building and ensuring that the historic building is maintained in its historic form and
appearance so long as the additional building(s) obtaining the parking benefit exist on the
property. The easement shall continue even if the property is subsequently subdivided or
any interest in the property is sold.
G. Density. There is no maximum density for permitted multiple dwelling units.
H. Screening. The required setback from R-zoned property shall be landscaped with trees
and ground cover and permanently maintained by the owner of the BD lot. A six-foot
minimum height fence, wall or solid hedge shall be provided at some point in the setback,
except for that portion of the BD zone that is in residential use.
I. Signs, Parking and Design Review. See Chapters 17.50, 20.10, and 20.60 ECDC. Sign
standards shall be the same as those that apply within the BC zone.
J. Satellite Television Antennas. In accordance with the limitations established by the
Federal Communications Commission, satellite television antennae greater than two
meters in diameter shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of ECDC
16.20.050. [Ord. 3624 § 1, 2007].
16.43.035 Design Standards - BD1 Zone.
Design standards for the BD1 zone are contained in ECDC 22.43.
16.43.035 Application of requirements to the BD-1 zone.
The application and interpretation of Chapter 16.43 BD Downtown Business to any
development permit or application within the BD-1 zone shall conform to the
requirements of this section. These requirements are enacted in order to clarify the intent
of the City Council and the application of existing language of the Code. In the event of
conflict or ambiguity with any provision of this chapter, or the definition sections of the
Community Development Code, these provisions shall control.
The ground floor of the development in the BD-1 zone shall be devoted entirely to
commercial uses as provided by the first sentence of ECDC 16.43.030(B)(3). The ground
floor shall be no less than fifteen feet in height measured in accordance with ECDC
16.43.030. Except to the minimum extent necessary to exercise the rights granted
pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030(B)(2)(b), the ground floor shall be in one plane, extending
the entire width and breadth of the building.
16.43.040 Operating restrictions.
Packet Page 216 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 17 Planning Board Recommendation
A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed
building, except:
1. Public uses such as utilities and parks;
2. Off-street parking and loading areas, and commercial parking lots;
3. Drive-in businesses;
4. Plant nurseries;
5. Seasonal farmers' markets;
6. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC;
7. Bistro and outdoor dining meeting the criteria of ECDC 17.70.040;
8. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC.
B. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Performance Standards.
[Ord. 3624 § 1, 2007].
Packet Page 217 of 374
APPROVED SEPTEMBER 24TH
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
September 10, 2008
Chair Guenther called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:04 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public
Safety Complex, 250 – 5th Avenue North.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Cary Guenther, Chair
Michael Bowman, Vice Chair
John Dewhirst
Judith Works
Jim Young
John Reed
Don Henderson
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT
Philip Lovell (Excused)
STAFF PRESENT
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager
Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director/Acting Economic
Development Director
Karin Noyes, Recorder
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
BOARD MEMBER REED MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 13, 2008 BE APPROVED AS
PRESENTED. BOARD MEMBER YOUNG SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY, WITH BOARD MEMBER HENDERSON ABSTAINING.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
No changes were made to the agenda.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
No one in the audience expressed a desire to address the Board during this portion of the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING ON POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 16.43 OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) PRIMARILY INTENDED TO CLARIFY THE RULES GOVERNING THE
CONFIGURATION AND USES ALLOWED ON THE GROUND FLOOR N THE BD1 DOWNTOWN RETAIL
CORE.
Mr. Chave provided a map of the existing BD1, BD2, BD3, BD4 and BD5 zones. He noted that the BD1 zone was recently
formed when the City redid the downtown zoning to implement the Comprehensive Plan. He recalled that when the
downtown zones were developed, it was understood that issues would likely surface as the new zoning was implemented.
Recently, property owners expressed interest in redeveloping a property in the BD1 zone, but they were concerned about the
Packet Page 218 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 2
current requirement that the entire first floor must be used for commercial space. They expressed concern that if their
building was too deep, the retail space at the back of the building would be difficult to use.
Mr. Chave referred the Board to minutes from the City Council’s discussion a few years ago when they decided to require
commercial uses on the entire ground floor of a structure in the BD1 zone. He pointed out that they did not discuss potential
configurations for the ground floor spaces. He said the proposed revisions are an attempt to fine tune the regulations to make
them more specifically geared towards workable commercial spaces. He reviewed the proposed amendments as follows:
1. Clarify that the 15-foot ground floor height requirement in BD1 only applies to the first 45 feet of commercial
space measured from the street front. Behind 45 feet, the ground floor would be considered to be floor that is
closest in elevation to the ground floor, but that floor would not have a minimum height requirement. Mr. Chave
pointed out that the Planning Board discussed whether 45 feet or 60 feet was the appropriate minimum depth, and they
chose 45 feet for purposes of drafting the amendment.
2. Clarify that only those commercial spaces within 45 feet of the street front in BD1 must have direct access to the
street.
3. Clarify that the 30-foot minimum depth mentioned in ECDC 16.43.030(b)(10)(e) was intended to apply only to
properties in the BD2 and BD3 zones. Reducing store front depths to less than 45 feet for “shallow” lots in the
BD1 zone would not be allowed. Mr. Chave explained that some lots in the downtown are quite limited in depth. In
order to allow parking behind the commercial area, there is a provision in the code that would allow a developer to go as
low as 30 feet for commercial space, but this provision only applies to the BD2 and BD3 zones and not the BD1 zone.
4. Clarify that parking is allowed on the ground floor in the BD1 zone if it is located behind the first 45 feet. The
BD2 and BD3 zones would continue to allow parking or residential uses behind the first 60 feet.
5. Clarify that for corner lots, the 45-foot requirement noted above would not apply to street fronts of buildings
when they are located on side streets at the edge of the BD1 zone district. However, all street fronts along Main
and 4th will always have the 45-foot requirements applied, corner or not. This can be accomplished by means of
a specific map showing where the designated street front of each lot in the BD1 zone is located.
6. Clarify that conversion of existing building space to commercial use does not trigger the ground floor height
requirements. This is covered under the non-conforming regulations, but it would help to clarify the issue in the
BD zones so no questions could be raised.
Mr. Chave reported that, since the last meeting, the Economic Development Department conducted a survey of 43
commercial spaces in the downtown to find out what actually exists. He provided a chart to illustrate the survey findings and
summarized that there is a wide range of store depths in the downtown. The average depth of commercial space in the BD1
zone is 64 feet, and the average store area is about 1,900 square feet. The median depth (the point at which half are smaller
and half are larger) is 60 feet, and the median square footage is 1,500. About 25% of the commercial space is less than 50
feet deep and 1,100 square feet in size. On the other hand, about 25% of the commercial space is more than 75 feet deep and
2,200 square feet in size.
Mr. Chave recalled that when the Board discussed the proposal earlier, staff had recommended that the rules for retail
frontage on the ground floor be made more flexible in the BD1 zone. Staff suggested it did not make sense to create deep
commercial spaces that would have great difficulty being productively used. The Board’s discussion centered on how much
space is necessary to have retail friendly store fronts in the BD1 zone. Staff noted that the other BD zones require a 60-foot
depth, and they recommended that would be a reasonable requirement for the BD1 zone, as well. He noted that the survey
conducted by staff supports this recommendation, since the median depth is 60 feet and the average depth is 64 feet.
Mr. Chave advised that the proponents of property at 555 Main Street pointed out that identifying a minimum depth
requirement would not result in an average that is the same. Instead, they suggested the code identify a number that is the
absolute minimum depth necessary to ensure a vibrant downtown. However, the number should not be so low that it
Packet Page 219 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 3
becomes the normal and spaces are developed that are simply inadequate. Mr. Chave recalled that staff has heard from
merchants for years that it is difficult for them to find large useable spaces when they need to grow, and that is why the
ground floor requirement was initially established. They indicated the existing spaces were not good for retail in their
current state, and this was born out in the market study that was done for the downtown.
Mr. Chave reminded the Board that several years ago, the driving force behind development in the downtown was for
residential space. In order to construct two stories of residential space, developers created commercial space as an
afterthought. The ceiling heights were not sufficient to make the space desirable for commercial uses. The City Council’s
decision to require 15-foot ceiling heights on the ground floor in the BD1 zone was intended to address this concern. The
intent was to make sure that, especially in the downtown retail core, the commercial spaces were adequate in size to sustain
future economic development.
Mr. Chave said the Board’s charge is to review the existing code language and make proper amendments that adequately
preserve the downtown retail spaces. Rather than just addressing the issue of depth, Mr. Chave said staff is now
recommending a two-prong approach. The minimum depth requirement could be set at 60 feet. However, a lower depth of
no less than 45 feet could be allowed as long as the total area of the commercial space was at least 1,100 square feet. He
emphasized that staff does not recommend allowing store front depths of less than 45 feet in the BD1 zone.
Chair Guenther said his quick research verifies staff’s study results. He found that the appropriate depth of commercial
space should be between 60 and 80 feet, and the appropriate square footage should be between 900 and 1,400 square feet.
Board Member Bowman referred to the map of the downtown properties and noted there is a lot of symmetry in the way the
lots were divided. They all tend to be divided in increments of 30, 60, 90 and 120 feet. Mr. Chave agreed that is true to
some extent, but some buildings have alleys located behind them and others do not. For example, properties on 5th Avenue
consistently have larger spaces for alley access and parking, and the Main Street properties tend to be much smaller with no
direct alley access. He noted that the older buildings in the downtown are located along Main Street, and building depth is
typically shorter than in other areas of the downtown. Board Member Bowman pointed out that the original plat of the
downtown comes into play on the east side of 5th Avenue and Main Street, and these lots tend to be long and narrow. Mr.
Chave pointed out that the lots on 5th Avenue would not be divided because of the alley location. These older buildings were
constructed as commercial spaces with some form of parking behind the buildings. The buildings did not occupy the entire
lots. However, the newer developments in the downtown tend to have parking under them because the leasable space is too
valuable to minimize. This has resulted in a need to reevaluate the requirement that the entire ground floor must be devoted
to commercial space, with a 15-foot high ceiling since it would eliminate the possibility of constructing below grade parking
in most situations.
Board Member Reed inquired if the minimum depth requirement would take into account the entire building from front to
back. Mr. Chave said it would be measured from the sidewalk to the back of the building, including the storage spaces, etc.
He recalled that storeowners that Mr. Clifton spoke to indicated the importance of taking into account the need for storage
space, office space, and other accessory uses. Mr. Clifton explained that for the survey, he measured the businesses where
the owners allowed him to go clear to the back of the building.
Mr. Chave advised that the typical depth of lots in the BD1 zone is between 100 and 120 feet deep. Board Member Reed
pointed out that there is typically open space of 50 to 70 feet behind the buildings, which is often used for parking. Mr.
Chave agreed that most buildings have a depth of between 50 and 72 feet. He said it is also true that 25 percent of the
buildings are even deeper than 72 feet.
Mr. Chave reminded the Board of the importance of maintaining a mixture of commercial spaces in the downtown so there is
an opportunity for existing businesses to grow. Staff fears that if the minimum depth requirement is set too low, it would
result in space that is insufficient in size for businesses to grow into. If there is no ability for the businesses in the downtown
to grow locally, they could move out of Edmonds.
Mark Trumper, Edmonds, said he is a proponent of the property at 555 Main Street. He said he recently reviewed the
City’s code, but he could not figure out where the 60-foot minimum depth requirement came from. He said he has found no
Packet Page 220 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 4
other jurisdiction that requires a 60-foot minimum depth for ground floor commercial space. He referred to Carmel,
California, which is one of the most retail friendly towns he knows. He pointed out that while they do have a minimum
square foot requirement, they do not regulate the depth of commercial spaces. They also require parking at the back of their
retail and office spaces, and this has worked very well for them. He summarized that this is a great example of appropriate
development code requirements.
Mr. Trumper said he recently spoke to the owner of Namas Candies in downtown Edmonds and learned that their retail space
is 20’ by 48’. The owner said that, ideally, he would like the store to be wider, but not deeper than 40 feet. He stressed the
importance of building space that meets the needs of prospective tenants. If a tenant wants a deep commercial space, a
developer could accommodate this need, but they should not be required to construct deep commercial spaces. He urged the
Board to consider changing the minimum depth requirement for all of the downtown BD zones, and not just the BD1 zone.
He suggested that if this were a good requirement, other jurisdictions would use it. He pointed out that Edmonds is unique
because of their small, quaint retail shops. A developer can always construct a larger building, but retailers should not be
forced into long, narrow places that are unnecessary.
City Council Member Steve Bernheim, Edmonds, said he owns property in the BD1 zone and he sympathizes with the
property owners at 555 Main Street. They have wasted a substantial amount of money as a result of this code oversight. He
related that he recently considered a business opportunity that could have involved 100’s of thousands of dollars. His
decision about whether to invest or not came down to whether or not he could use his home for a commercial purpose. He
discovered to his dismay that the zoning code required commercial space on 4th Avenue to be within 7 inches of the sidewalk
entry, which meant his house on the arts corridor could not be transformed into any type of commercial space. He
summarized that this situation illustrates the very real impact the code requirements can have on potential business owners.
City Council Member Bernheim said he was happy to see the data presented by staff, which was very helpful. He expressed
his belief that the 60-foot minimum depth requirement in the downtown zones is, in his opinion, an unacceptable error in the
code language. However, he has not perceived any acknowledgement from staff that an error was made, and this is
inappropriate. He urged the Board to really execute their critical thinking when proposals of this type come before them and
not advance them to the next level without a thorough vetting of skepticism. It is important to understand that the code failed
in a big way, and prospective businesses owners are losing substantial dollars as a result.
City Council Member Bernheim expressed his belief that the need for parking is on its way out. He said he has an office in
downtown Seattle, but he doesn’t need parking for his clients. He suggested that people would drive less over time, which
makes it necessary to have central pedestrian squares that pedestrians walk through without having to worry about cars.
Again, he urged the Board not to accept the proposed changes without carefully examining all of the issues, including the
need for parking behind buildings. He expressed his belief that the demand for parking would decrease significantly over the
next five years, and the City would greatly benefit in the future from having some non parking areas.
City Council Member Bernheim observed that he was very happy with the previous Community Business (BC) zone, and he
felt it would have been better to stick with this zone and fix the problems instead of creating entirely new zones for the
downtown area. If they could have identified the specific problems that existed with the previous BC zoning, they could
have amended the code slightly but stayed with the same system they knew well. The BD zones represent an entirely new
concept that they have no experience with. Again, he said that when codes are amended, the City should not entirely throw
out the old language. He also suggested it would be appropriate to seek sample language from other jurisdictions to see what
works well.
Bob Gregg, Edmonds, said he is the developer for the Old Mill Town project in the BD1 zone. He said he supports some
tweaks to the BD1 zone. He recalled that it took the City several years to change the zoning of the downtown from BC to
BD. He specifically referred to the proposed amendment that clarifies that only those commercial spaces within 45 feet of
the street front in the BD1 zone must have direct access to the street. He explained that the current code language requires
the access points along the street front to be within 7 inches of the street height. He said this code requirement became the
issue of an appeal for the Old Mill Town project. While the appellant withdrew his appeal the day of the hearing, he
suggested it would be helpful to clarify exactly what the requirement entails. He noted that the current code language refers
to “entrance” which implies a singular entrance. However, the language is confusing. He referred to the Copperstone
Packet Page 221 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 5
Building as a good example of why the depth and entrance requirements are necessary. This building has a sunken entrance
and shallow depths. The developers’ goal was to make money on the residential units, and they were not so concerned about
creating viable commercial space. He noted there are other mixed-use developments that provide token commercial space on
the ground floor as was required by the code. The rest of the ground floor space was dedicated to parking and office space.
These situations point to a need for entrance and depth requirements.
Mr. Gregg said it is important for the Board to keep in mind that Edmonds is not flat, and this places the entrances at
different elevations. If the west entrance it at grade, there is no way to make the entrance located further up the street at
grade without raising the floor. Raising the height of the floor would make it difficult to provide the 15-foot ceiling height.
The only other option would be to place the entrance at street grade, but then provide steps down into the building. He urged
the Board to amend the code to make this requirement clearer.
Mr. Gregg said he tends to develop larger ground floor retail spaces. The Old Mill Town spaces are wide at the front and
deep, too. He expressed his belief that if a commercial space has a narrow width, the depth of the space should be at least
twice the width. He said he supports the staff’s recommendation for duel criteria. The minimum depth requirement could be
set at 60 feet. If a developer cannot provide this depth, they could reduce the depth to 45 feet as long as the space could meet
a square foot minimum requirement. He emphasized that most of the blocks in the BD1 zone are set up in 30-foot
increments, depending on the number of lots that have been assembled over time. Therefore, having 45-foot increments
could be awkward. Again, he said he supports staff’s recommendation that if a commercial space is going to be less than 60-
feet deep, the minimum square footage should be at least 1,100. He said it is important to have some type of minimum
standard, and 45 feet appears to be a good compromise, and an absolute 60-foot requirement would be too large.
Mr. Gregg suggested the code language could include another criteria that is based on the type of use proposed for the new
commercial space. If there is no specific reason for deviation, a developer could be required to meet the 60-foot depth
requirement. A developer could only be allowed a lower depth if they could provide a specific reason for the deviation and it
provides a public benefit. He referred to the property at 555 Main Street, where the developers are proposing to construct
off-street parking as part of their project. He noted that this additional parking space would provide a benefit to the
community. He suggested it would be appropriate to require the developer to only construct commercial space at a depth of
45 feet, and the remaining of the ground floor space could have a lower ceiling height. He said he supports a proposed code
amendment that would enable a developer to construct off-street underground parking, which would result in a public
benefit.
Rick Kent, Edmonds, said he is also part owner of the property located at 555 Main Street. He said the current code
language has cost the developers thousands of dollars, and delayed their project. They had originally intended to be
constructing the building by now. He said he believes the current circumstances are unreasonable. He said they are
proposing two retail components along the street front, at a depth of 45 feet. If they were allowed to reduce the depth to 30
feet, they would still end up with 1,200 to 1,500 square foot commercial spaces, which are very useable. He expressed his
belief that the street front is the most important component of the retail area.
Mr. Kent referred to the graphic illustration that was provided by staff to identify the size of businesses in the BD1 zone, and
inquired if all businesses were measured. Mr. Chave answered that only 43 businesses were measured. Mr. Clifton added
that they measured the businesses between Dayton and Bell Streets and 5th and 6th Avenues, but that is not all the businesses
in the BD1 zone. Mr. Kent suggested that in order for the staff’s statistics to be accurate, they would have had to measure all
buildings in the BD1 zone. Since not all buildings were measured, the numbers are inaccurate and misleading. He also said
it is misleading to plot the average depth on the same line as the average square foot area.
Mr. Kent said it has been mentioned that the property owners at 555 Main Street are advocating a 45-foot minimum depth
requirement, which is not true. Their proposed plan called for a 45-foot depth, but they have not advocated that this be the
minimum depth requirement. He said he actually thinks the minimum depth requirement should be smaller and set at the
absolute minimum depth workable for the BD1 zone. He recalled his comments at a previous meeting suggesting that a 30-
foot minimum depth requirement would be more practical and typical of what is found in other jurisdictions with downtowns
similar to Edmonds.
Packet Page 222 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 6
Mr. Kent said he agreed with the comment made by Stephen Clifton at the August 13th Planning Board Meeting that as the
depth of a commercial space lessens, the number and types of retail uses that can be accommodated in the space diminishes.
However, if the minimum depth requirement is set at 30 feet, there would be nothing to prevent a developer from creating
commercial space that is greater in depth. He suggested that the depth of the commercial space should be a market decision
as to what a developer thinks he/she can rent. If the minimum requirement is too onerous, there would be insufficient
flexibility for developers to create the space that the market demands. A minimum depth requirement of 60 feet would
effectively eliminate many small retailers such as book stores, candy stores, etc., because these business owners cannot
afford to lease more space than they need. This extra space could not be rented to another business because there would be
no access. He recalled Board Member Bowman’s previous comment that he receives inquiries all the time for space that is
about 1,250 square feet in total area, and this size of commercial space could be eliminated by a 60-foot minimum depth
requirement.
Mr. Kent referred to a comment made by Mr. Chave at the August 13th Planning Board Meeting that different types of retail
stores and restaurants require differently sized spaces, and that is what would result from a reasonable minimum depth
requirement. However, if the requirement is set at 60 feet, it would mandate uniform, large and narrow spaces. This doesn’t
make sense for downtown Edmonds. He requested clarification about where the proposed 60-foot requirement came from.
He noted that while staff was unable to find literature that references a good retail depth, he was able to find multiple
examples using the Google search engine of how other similar communities regulate their downtown commercial areas.
None of these other jurisdictions had a 60-foot minimum depth requirement, and most (including Kirkland) required a depth
of only 30 feet.
Mr. Kent recalled that, according to Mr. Clifton, Mark Hinshaw, LMN Designs, stated that although cities can establish any
dimension, a minimum depth of 60 feet would provide a space that most retailers would find useable. However, it turns out
that this comment was not based on any study. He said he contacted Mr. Hinshaw, who said he had never suggested a 60-
foot minimum depth for retail space in Edmonds. In fact, he said 60 feet would be impractical and counter productive
because developers have to provide space for parking, too. Mr. Hinshaw indicated that many communities have a 30-foot
minimum depth requirement, and some even use 20 feet. However, he cautioned that 20 feet might be too cramped. Mr.
Hinshaw suggested the City Council may have gotten the notion that he was recommending a 60-foot minimum depth
requirement because when he spoke to them a few years ago, he said that built depths of between 40 and 60 feet would be
typical, but he did not say 60 feet should be the minimum. He said he informed the City Council that the most important
thing to consider in the downtown area is street frontage. He also said that first floor ceiling height was important for retail
space, but he did not recommend a 15-foot ceiling height requirement. Mr. Hinshaw emphasized that deep retail space can
be a negative, as well.
Board Member Young reminded Mr. Kent that the Board agreed at their last meeting that they did not want to pursue a 60-
foot minimum depth requirement. Therefore, the purpose of the hearing is not to discuss 60 feet or staff’s data. The purpose
of the hearing is to gather input from the public and developers in Edmonds about what would be the best way to ensure that
adequate retail space is developed. He specifically asked Mr. Kent to share his viewpoint on what he feels would be an
appropriate depth requirement and/or another way to regulate the size of commercial space in the BD1 zone. Mr. Kent said
he wanted to respond to all of the statements provided by Mr. Chave and Mr. Clifton regarding the proposed code
amendments. He noted that while both of the staff members were allowed to make an in-depth presentation to the Board, the
information they presented was misleading. He said it is his duty and right, as a citizen and developer in Edmonds, to point
out these errors.
Chair Guenther reminded the Board and public that the purpose of the hearing is to discuss the proposed amendments as
outlined in the staff report. He recalled that the statistical data was provided by staff at the request of the Board. He
recognized that the data represents a random sample of downtown businesses, and not all businesses were measured. He
reminded the Board and public that at their last meeting, the Board agreed that a 60-foot minimum depth requirement would
be too significant, and they decided to propose a 45-foot minimum requirement for the public hearing. Mr. Kent said he
never heard the Board make the actual decision that the 60-foot minimum requirement would no longer be considered. Chair
Guenther agreed the Board never took a formal vote to change the number to 45, but that was their direction to staff.
Packet Page 223 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 7
Again, Board Member Young invited Mr. Kent to identify what he believes would be a reasonable depth for businesses in
the BD1 zone. Mr. Kent answered that most communities use 30, and that is what Mr. Hinshaw recommended to him, as
well. He summarized that a 30-foot minimum depth requirement would effectively establish the absolute minimum the City
would accept. However, developers could use the market conditions to determine the appropriate depth of their commercial
space. Some would likely be greater than 30 feet deep. He recalled Mr. Chave’s earlier comment that the City should not set
the minimum so low that it becomes the norm, and questioned what study this comment was based on. If the minimum depth
is set at 30, there is no indication that would be the common depth of commercial space.
Mr. Kent recalled that Mr. Clifton said earlier that the City’s previous Economic Development Director indicated that some
spaces in the downtown were not rentable because of size, but he suggested this was more related to the ceiling height than
to the depth. While staff has indicated that a minimum depth of 30 feet would be too short, he questioned where their
supporting data came from. He said all information he has found on the internet and in talking to Mr. Hinshaw supports a
30-foot minimum depth requirement. He questioned why the Planning Department staff is dismissing all of this data.
Board Member Young again asked Mr. Kent to share why 30 feet would be the appropriate number for the minimum depth
requirement. Mr. Kent answered that 30 feet seems to be a common requirement in other communities the size of Edmonds.
Mr. Clifton said that because his credibility was being questioned, it is important to go back and look at what he said at the
last meeting and put it in the context of his notes from his conversation with Mr. Hinshaw. He clarified that although cities
can establish any dimension, a minimum depth of 60 feet would develop a space that most retailers would find useable. He
said he did not say that 60 feet must be used, and that was not the intent of what he was trying to convey to the Board. He
wanted to convey that if the City establishes a 60-foot depth requirement, the space would be marketable. He said this point
was born out in his conversations with retailers in the downtown.
Mr. Clifton emphasized that staff is no longer recommending a flat 60-foot minimum depth requirement. Instead, they are
recommending the code establish a depth that would ensure that commercial space is large enough for business owners to
have the ability to expand. He recalled that business owners indicated to him that it is currently difficult to find space in the
BD1 zone to expand their businesses, and they wanted this taken into consideration when new developments are constructed.
Board Member Dewhirst asked Bob Gregg, who has a lot of experience developing buildings in downtown Edmonds, to
share comments he has received from prospective tenants as to what the ideal space size would be. Mr. Gregg said he has
developed numerous projects in both Green Lake and Downtown Edmonds, and the commercial space falls into two distinct
categories. Tenants either want space that is around 1,000 square feet or they want space that is significantly larger. That is
why he tries to construct buildings without the demising walls installed. He summarized that 80% of the prospective tenants
want 1,000 square feet of space, and the remaining 20% want a much larger floor plat. He suggested that prospective tenants
don’t always measure the depth; they are more interested in the square footage numbers. He said there is also a difference in
demand between new and older buildings, and this makes the newer spaces more expensive. Typically, the businesses that
can pay more rent have been in existence for a longer period of time and have already expanded their business. They usually
need more space. While there is a need for smaller 1,000 square foot spaces in downtown Edmonds and even slightly
smaller, there is also a need for some larger spaces that can attract and accommodate the larger businesses.
Mike Perry, Dimensions Architecture, said he is the architect for the project at 555 Main Street. He said that about 60
percent of his business is designing strip mall retail commercial spaces, which can accommodate a plethora of mom and pop
businesses. The average stores are 60 feet deep and 20 to 25 feet wide. However, they also have tenants who want 45-foot
deep buildings with more storefront exposure. He suggested a better way to regulate the size of commercial spaces in
Edmonds would be to establish a minimum square foot requirement. While 1,200 square feet is a common size for the
national chains, the mom and pop businesses typically want a little less space. He suggested that forcing larger spaces would
diminish the opportunity for mom and pop businesses to get a foot hold in Edmonds. They are usually specific about the
square footage they need and they can’t afford to pay for space they will not use. He said that in strip mall developments, it
is possible to change the demising walls inside a building to accommodate different sizes of businesses. He recommended
that the appropriate size of a commercial space should be determined by a combination of depth and square footage, and
1,200 square feet may be too great. He emphasized that the city should support mom and pop businesses that typically need
smaller spaces.
Packet Page 224 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 8
THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mr. Chave said he is not sure the Board actually received comments from the public on the draft amendments to the
Development Code. They received a lot of comments about numbers, but these comments did not necessarily relate to the
draft language. He noted that the current draft identifies 45 feet as the minimum depth requirement. He recalled the
recommendation he made earlier in the staff report that one way to address the issue is to have a minimum depth requirement
of 60 feet. Another alternative would be to lower the minimum depth requirement to 45 feet if a commercial space could
meet a minimum square footage requirement, too. He said there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding about what the
Board is considering. They are not talking about the square foot space of a particular business, but the portion of building
area that must be reserved for commercial uses. He explained that buildings can be parceled out into large or small spaces.
The proposed amendments would not change a building owner’s ability to parcel the buildings based on the needs of tenants.
He summarized that most of the public comments were consistent with the draft language, with the exception of the 45-foot
minimum depth requirement.
Mr. Chave referred to Mr. Kent’s comment that staff was unable to come up with examples from other jurisdictions to
support their recommendation. He said that rather than finding code language from other jurisdictions about how they
regulate the size of their commercial spaces, staff was looking for studies that talked about what is good retail space and they
were trying to focus on information that would better inform them of the kinds of things they should look at when setting
standards in the zoning code. Staff did find information that suggested the ideal minimum space would be a 60-foot depth
and a floor area of 2,000 square feet, and he reminded the Board that the goal of the proposed amendment is to establish a
minimum.
Mr. Chave pointed out that the proposed amendments would not impact the other BD zones. The suggestion that some of the
proposed amendments be applied to other BD zones should be considered as a separate issue in the future. He reminded the
Board that the Council’s direction to the Board was to amend the BD1 zone language only.
Board Member Reed requested clarification from staff regarding the issue raised by Mr. Gregg about the entrance
requirements. Mr. Chave explained that Mr. Gregg’s building is fairly unique because it is on a corner lot. He noted there is
an exception for corner lots, and this enabled staff to resolve the issue. He clarified that while it is possible to divide a
building into different frontages, the access issue is complicated for buildings that are located on a slope. The fairly simple
way to address this is to have a single entry or divide the building into frontages with separate entries. He noted that the
proposed code amendments were not intended address this issue.
Board Member Henderson pointed out that the lots in the downtown are divided in increments of 30 feet (i.e. 30, 60, 90 and
120), so using the number 45 could be awkward. He suggested it would be more appropriate to establish a minimum depth
requirement of 30 feet. Mr. Chave pointed out that while lot widths are typically divided using increments of 30, this is not
true for lot depth. He noted that the original lots in the downtown were platted at 30’ by 100’ or 30’ by 120’. Board
Member Henderson summarized his belief that a minimum depth requirement of 30 feet would be more appropriate, and the
minimum area size should be set at 1,200. Mr. Chave pointed out that the 30-foot deep buildings that have been developed
in the past in Edmonds are not typically acceptable for retail use. He cautioned against setting a minimum requirement that
is too small.
Board Member Reed inquired if the proposed amendments include a revision to the way corner lots are regulated. Mr.
Chave answered that the corner lot provision is already part of the code in Section 16.43.030.B.5.c, and no changes have
been proposed. He explained that, as proposed, the portion of the ground floor that is beyond the 45-foot depth would not be
required to provide a 15-foot high ceiling. The ceiling height requirement would only apply to the front 45 feet of the
ground floor.
Board Member Dewhirst said flexibility is important, not only because of the different needs of prospective tenants, but
because of changes in market demand over time. He expressed his belief that the height of the first floor is the most
important issue, and they should maintain the 15-foot ceiling height requirement for the entire ground floor. This would
allow the buildings to be divided as needed. He recalled that some members of the audience commented that the market
Packet Page 225 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 9
should determine the depth and size of commercial spaces. However, he recalled that the reason the City is in their current
predicament is because the market demand in Edmonds had written off commercial space for the most part. The current code
was intended to resolve this problem.
Board Member Dewhirst said he is perplexed about what the minimum depth requirement should be. He cautioned the
Board to keep in mind that the downtown was platted in increments of 30. He said he is not sure that using unusual numbers
such as 1,100 square feet would make the situation any better. He recommended the City not establish a minimum depth or
square footage requirement for the commercial space on the ground floor in the BD1 zone. Instead, they should leave the
first floor ceiling height requirement as it currently exists, and require that the entire ground floor be developed in a manner
that would allow it to be used for commercial space in the future.
Vice Chair Bowman said he started his business with 1,000 square feet of space. Because his particular building could not
be changed to accommodate growth, he moved to another location that allowed him 2,000 square feet of space. His new
store will have about 3,000 square feet of space, but the tenant next to him will only have 600 square feet with a depth of 20
feet. He suggested that when considering flexibility, the Board should keep in mind that they want developers to construct
new commercial space, and Mr. Gregg has indicated that approximately 80% of prospective tenants want space that is about
1,000 square feet in size. He said he has learned the same thing from inquiries he has received from prospective business
owners in downtown Edmonds. He summarized that it would be appropriate to have a mixture of spaces that are around
1,200 square feet in size so they could be reconfigured to be smaller or larger units. However, there should be some larger
spaces, as well. He said that what he sees and hears from the Downtown Merchant’s Association is that the types of
businesses people want to locate in Edmonds are of the boutique type, which typically require a space of between 1,000 and
1,200 square feet. He said he doesn’t foresee many national chain businesses locating in Edmonds in the near future, so it is
not really necessary to keep a large stock of these types of spaces.
Board Member Young recalled the Board’s discussion of a few weeks ago about how the building height situation led to the
type of development that provided two floors of residential space above a ground floor of commercial space that was often
rendered unusable because of insufficient ceiling heights. The existing BD1 language was intended to be a compromise that
works for both the City and the development community. The cautionary note that was raised a few weeks ago was that if
the City sets specific limits for depth, there is a risk that would be all that gets built. He said that before he can make a
recommendation on the proposal, he needs more information about whether or not setting a minimum depth requirement
would result in buildings that have unusable commercial space in order to provide as much residential space as possible. He
noted that none of the public testimony addressed this issue.
BOARD MEMBER YOUNG MOVED TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. BOARD MEMBER DEWHIRST
SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Bob Gregg, Edmonds, referred to Board Member Young’s question and explained that there are enough safeguards in place
in the existing code to assuage his concerns. He reminded the Board that the current BD1 language includes specific
elements to address the problem. First, the entrances to all commercial development must be located at or within 7 inches of
grade. This provision, combined with the building height limitation, eliminates any possibility of constructing a third story
of residential space in the BD1 zone. There would be no possibility of constructing a “throw away” first floor of commercial
space in order to construct two stories of residential space because it would require dropping the first story in order to meet
the height requirement. Again, he reminded the Board that the entry must be at ground level. Mr. Gregg agreed the
minimum depth should not become the average depth of space in the downtown. However, he also agreed with staff’s
concern about spaces being too small. He suggested that a 45-foot minimum depth requirement would be a good
compromise all the way around.
THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING WAS CLOSED AGAIN.
Board Member Works said she would feel comfortable recommending a 45-foot minimum depth requirement, and then
allowing developers to construct whatever type of space the market demands behind this depth. She summarized her belief
that 45 feet would be a reasonable depth and could be supported by most of the testimony she heard during the hearing.
Packet Page 226 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 10
Vice Chair Bowman pointed out that a 60-foot minimum depth requirement has been in place in the BD2 and BD3 zones for
quite some time, and nothing drastic has happened. He agreed it would be appropriate to establish a 45-foot minimum depth
requirement, recognizing that the requirement could be changed in the future if deemed appropriate.
Chair Guenther pointed out that much of the public testimony and Board discussion has centered on just one of the six
proposed code amendments. At his request, the Board discussed each of the amendments as follows:
1. Clarify that the 15-foot ground floor height requirement in BD1 only applies to the first 45 feet of commercial
space measured from the street front. Behind 45 feet, the ground floor would be considered to be floor that is
closest in elevation to the ground floor, but that floor would not have a minimum height requirement.
Board Member Dewhirst expressed his desire that the 15-foot minimum ceiling height requirement be applied to the
entire ground floor of buildings in the BD1 zone. This would allow a structure to accommodate a variety of
configurations and uses inside. A 60 or 45-foot depth requirement would limit this flexibility. He said he would not
support the proposed amendment to establish a minimum depth requirement. Mr. Chave agreed that the current code
language would provide maximum flexibility within the space that is built. However, it might minimize a developer’s
options as to the type of building that could be constructed. For example, stacking three floors of space, with parking
located behind the front commercial space would not be allowed by the current code language.
Board Member Reed pointed out that underground parking would be the only option available to a developer. Mr.
Chave said the proposed code language would allow a three-story project, with two floors above the parking that is
located behind the ground floor commercial space. If the entire ground floor must have a 15-foot ceiling height, this
option would be precluded. Chair Guenther summarized that offering maximum flexibility for the retail space would
minimize flexibility for the building design. Board Member Works expressed her belief that the code should allow
flexibility for developers to provide on-site parking whenever possible. Vice Chair Bowman agreed. He pointed out
that there is already a parking problem in the downtown during most hours of the day, and he likes the idea of allowing
developers more flexibility to provide on-site parking as part of a project. Board Member Reed recalled that eliminating
the parking requirement for commercial uses in the BD1 zone was a trade off to property owners for requiring a
minimum ceiling height of 15-feet for the ground floor commercial space.
Board Member Young pointed out that the proposed amendment would allow a developer to provide more on-site
parking opportunities by waiving the 15-foot ceiling height requirement for the portion of the first floor that is located
behind the required commercial space. He said he would be inclined to support a minimum depth requirement of less
than 45 feet, and then see what happens in the future. If the current demand in the community is for smaller spaces, then
a 30-foot minimum depth requirement or something close to that number would accommodate the need and allow
developers to use the space at the back of a building for parking. Both of these results would be good for the
community. He said he supports the efforts of developers to provide parking in the BD1 zone, as long as the change
does not result in the negative situation that occurred before the 15-foot ceiling height requirement was adopted.
Board Member Henderson agreed that the code should allow flexibility for a developer to place parking on the ground
floor behind the required commercial space. He recalled that while the staff’s original proposal called for a minimum
depth requirement of 60 feet, the Board agreed to use 45 feet as a placeholder for public hearing purposes. However, the
Board never took action to officially take the staff’s original 60 foot recommendation off the table.
Board Member Reed said he recently reviewed the City Council’s discussion on the BD1 zone issues, which indicated
they would be willing to consider something less than 60 feet. He pointed out that no one knows where the 60-foot
proposal came from. He said he would prefer a 60-foot minimum depth requirement, but he would be willing to go as
low as 45-feet. He said he would not support a requirement that is any less than 45 feet because he also agreed with
Board Member Dewhirst’s concern that it is important to maintain flexibility for the commercial spaces to be used
adequately. He reminded the Board of the City’s goal to increase sales tax revenue in the City, as well as other revenue
producing activities.
Packet Page 227 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 11
Vice Chair Bowman pointed out that if the 15-foot ceiling height requirement were carried throughout the entire ground
floor of a structure in the BD1 zone, it would prohibit a developer’s ability to provide on-site parking. Board Member
Young said that is why he supports and amendment that would allow a developer to do whatever he/she wants behind
the first 30-feet of commercial space. He summarized his belief that it does not make sense to require commercial space
for the entire ground floor, with a 15-foot minimum ceiling height since that would prohibit parking opportunities.
Chair Guenther added that assigning the entire ground floor as retail space would limit the overall flexibility of the site,
as well as the building. It would also eliminate the ability to provide on-site parking and other uses that might be
suitable to lower ceiling heights.
2. Clarify that only those commercial spaces within 45 feet of the street front in BD1 must have direct access to the
street.
Mr. Chave pointed out that, as proposed, the area behind the required commercial space would not have direct access to
the street.
3. Clarify that the 30-foot minimum depth mentioned in ECDC 16.43.030(b)(10)(e) was intended to apply only to
properties in the BD2 and BD3 zones. Reducing store front depths to less than 45 feet for “shallow” lots in the
BD1 zone would not be allowed.
Mr. Chave clarified that the 30-foot minimum depth requirement was only intended to apply to the BD2 and BD3 zones
where there are unique situations of shallow lots that make it difficult to provide parking behind a structure. He noted
that commercial spaces in the BD2 and BD3 zones are slightly less important.
4. Clarify that parking is allowed on the ground floor in the BD1 zone if it is located behind the first 45 feet. The
BD2 and BD3 zones would continue to allow parking or residential uses behind the first 60 feet.
None of the Board Members or staff had additional comments regarding this proposed amendment.
5. Clarify that for corner lots, the 45-foot requirement noted above would not apply to street fronts of buildings
when they are located on side streets at the edge of the BD1 zone district. However, all street fronts along Main
and 4th will always have the 45-foot requirements applied, corner or not. This can be accomplished by means of
a specific map showing where the designated street front of each lot in the BD1 zone is located.
Mr. Chave clarified that the 45-foot minimum depth requirement would not apply to street fronts of buildings that are
located on sides streets of properties on the periphery of the BD1 zone. He displayed a map that was prepared by staff
to identify where the 45-foot minimum depth requirement would not be applied. Board Member Dewhirst said he is
unclear as to the intent behind this proposed amendment. If the properties at the corner of 6th Avenue and Main Street
and 5th Avenue and Walnut Street are not required to provide commercial space on both street fronts, the City would be
giving up the potential to provide good commercial space in the downtown area. Mr. Chave expressed his belief that it
would not be necessary to require commercial space to loop around the corner at 6th Avenue and Main Street, because 6th
Avenue is not a well traveled commercial corridor. Board Member Dewhirst disagreed. Mr. Chave noted that at 6th
Avenue, once you get off of Main Street the uses become more residential and office in nature. Board Member
Dewhirst agreed that office and residential uses exist today, but the Board must also keep in mind their desires for the
future. He noted that the residential developments would generate a lot of pedestrian traffic past the corner of 6th
Avenue and Main Street. Chair Guenther reminded the Board that the Comprehensive Plan indicates the City’s goal is
to encourage retail and commercial growth from the heart of the downtown to the waterfront. Mr. Chave agreed and
said the Comprehensive Plan also talks about connecting the commercial uses to the arts center on 4th Avenue.
Board Member Reed suggested, and the remainder of the Board concurred, that the proposed amendment should be
changed to make it clear that the provision would not apply to properties on the western periphery of the BD1 zone since
the goal is to encourage connectively to the waterfront.
Packet Page 228 of 374
APPROVED
September 10, 2008 Page 12
6. Clarify that conversion of existing building space to commercial use does not trigger the ground floor height
requirements. This is covered under the non-conforming regulations, but it would help to clarify the issue in the
BD zones so there could be no question raised.
Mr. Chave pointed out that City Council Member Bernheim’s concerns were addressed by the non-conforming
provisions that already exist in the code. However, the language would be inserted into this section of the code, as well,
to make it clearer.
BOARD MEMBER YOUNG MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD FILE NUMBER AMD-08-11 TO THE
CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF ALL SIX AMENDMENTS AS
PRESENTED IN THE STAFF REPORT, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE MINIMUM LOT DEPTH
REQUIREMENT BE ESTABLISHED AS 30 FEET. BOARD MEMBER HENDERSON SECONDED THE
MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-2, WITH BOARD MEMBERS DEWHIRST AND REED VOTING IN
OPPOSITION.
Board Member Henderson pointed out that perhaps proposed Amendment 3 would no longer be applicable given that the
minimum commercial depth requirement would be set at 30 feet. Mr. Chave suggested that it be forwarded as part of the
package to the City Council, recognizing that the City Council may decide to establish a minimum depth requirement that is
greater than 30. The Board concurred.
THE BOARD TOOK A BREAK AT 9:12 P.M. THE MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 9:22 P.M.
CODE RE-WRITE PROJECT UPDATE AND TOPICAL DISCUSSION
Mr. Bowman announced that the Board would discuss the following three potential code update items at their next meeting:
• Staff would present their redraft of the performance standards before they are actually crafted into a code amendment
proposal for public hearing purposes.
• An issue recently came before the City Council about the Hearing Examiner’s interpretation regarding town house
subdivisions. Currently, town houses subdivisions in multi-family zones are handled through a code interpretation that
was issued in 2003, but the Hearing Examiner disagreed with this determination. The Hearing Examiner’s decision was
appealed to the City Council, and they upheld the appeal on a 4-3 vote. The issue was quickly referred to the Community
Services/Development Services Committee for further review, and they suggested the issue be presented to the Planning
Board for review and a recommendation. The City Council would like the Board to deal with the issue as soon as
possible, since it would likely be a high priority on the list of concerns presented by the Hearing Examiner to the City
Council on October 2nd. Staff intends to prepare a draft code amendment for the City Council to review preliminarily in a
work session so they can provide additional direction to the Board.
• Recently, a property owner decided to attach a garage to an existing house via a breezeway in order to maximum the full
height limit allowed for the garage. The garage ended up blocking a neighbor’s view, and the matter was referred to the
City Council’s Community Services/Development Services Committee for review. Staff pointed out that the project did
not violate the City’s existing code requirements, and the Committee discussed the need to address the matter as soon as
possible. He pointed out that another permit application has been filed where property owner wants to put a garage on the
higher portion of the property with a hall way or bridge to the house. This would allow him to use the corners of the
garage as part of the measurement to determine average height, thus making it possible for him to raise the lower portion
of his house. Staff has prepared some draft code language to address the issue, and it would be presented to the Board for
discussion at their next meeting.
Mr. Bowman announced that the Planning Board and the Mayor’s Climate Control Committee are scheduled to meet jointly
with the City Council on September 23rd to discuss the issue of sustainability. He noted that the City Council meeting would
start at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Chave agreed to forward the City Council packet to each of the Board Members prior to the joint
Packet Page 229 of 374
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
August 13, 2008 Page 6
Board Member Guenther said he likes the concept of applying form-based zoning and design guidelines together. He said he
has been trying to visualize the “urban village” concept based on the drawings provided by Mr. Shapiro. He recalled Mr.
Shapiro’s statement that they could provide more than 400 parking spaces on site. He questioned if that is the number of
spaces needed to construct the desired amount of floor area. Mr. Shapiro answered that the parking spaces would serve
approximately 120 residential units and between 60,000 and 80,000 square feet of commercial retail space. In discussions
with developers from Seattle, it has been suggested that they ask the City to lower the parking requirement slightly for the
residential portion of the project. He invited the Board to provide further direction regarding this option. He pointed out that
transit service is immediately available to the site, and the Aurora Village Park and Ride is located just over the hill. Both of
these aspects make the subject property conducive to a parking reduction. He concluded that 440 parking spaces would cost
a significant amount of money, and it would be desirable to minimize these costs, if possible.
Board Member Lovell said he likes the form-based zoning approach that has been proposed. He asked if the property is
currently owned by one person and if it would be developed as a single project. Mr. Shapiro said the property is currently
owned by one ownership team, and their intent is to sell it entirely or join forces with another developer to redevelop the site
as one project.
THE BOARD TOOK A BREAK AT 8:10 P.M. THEY RECONVENED THE MEETING AT 8:2O P.M.
WORK SESSION ON GROUND FLOOR ISSUES IN THE BD1 ZONE
Mr. Chave announced that a recent code interpretation was requested involving the configuration of the ground floor in the
BD1 zone. The City Council confirmed staff’s interpretation, and adopted an interim zoning ordinance to clarify the code
language. At that time, they indicated it would be desirable for the Planning Board to review the ground floor requirements
in the BD1 zone and make a recommendation to the City Council as to any appropriate changes that would improve the
function of the code.
Mr. Chave explained that the existing code language requires that the entire ground floor be dedicated to commercial uses.
This does not acknowledge or allow for situations where the depth of a lot potentially results in retail commercial space that
is too deep from the street front to be useable. He advised that this problem came to light when the City recently received an
application for a project at 555 Main Street. Without some allowance for varying use of the ground floor, inefficient use of
space could result. In addition, although parking is not required for commercial space in the BD1 zone, providing parking is
a general benefit to the downtown if it does not detract from available quality retail space.
Mr. Chave referred to the comment made earlier in the meeting by Mr. Kent regarding the resources staff used to prepare
their proposal. He explained that staff was looking for different information than what Mr. Kent found on the internet. Staff
was not so much concerned about what other jurisdictions were doing. Instead, they were trying to focus on information that
would better inform them of the kinds of things they should look at when setting standards in the zoning code.
Stephen Clifton, Acting Economic Development Director, cautioned that his comments were not intended to apply to a
specific site. Instead, his focus is on ensuring that whatever new commercial/retail spaces are created or developed are
highly marketable, leasable, and effectively add to the overall inventory needed to ensure that the downtown retail core
remains financially healthy. He summarized that the issue before the Board is not whether to amend the code to fit a
particular development or use, but to determine the kind of commercial spaces the City wants to create within the BD1 zone.
He expressed his belief that it is imperative that any new commercial/retail space that is created in the downtown area
provides for maximum flexibility and allows a variety of uses. He emphasized that once a commercial/retail shell is created,
the outer perimeter or building wall is unlikely to change and the wall will remain fixed. Once established, the entire
commercial space can either be rented to one business or divided into smaller spaces depending on tenant needs. He said the
question before the Board is what kind of spaces does the City need and want to create within the downtown retail core. He
said that in answering this question, it is important to keep in mind that as the depth of a commercial space lessens, the
number and types of retail uses that can occupy a space diminishes.
Packet Page 230 of 374
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
August 13, 2008 Page 7
Mr. Clifton referred to Mr. Kent’s earlier comments related to the size of the Council Chambers. In order to provide some
overall context for the discussion, Mr. Clifton pointed out that the dimension between the interior entry doors in the hallway
of the City Council Chambers is 60 feet. He said he also visited several downtown Edmonds businesses (Namas Candy
Store, Garden Gear, Savvy Traveler, Edmonds Flower Shop, Rosa Mundi, and Cole Art Gallery) within the retail core and
measured the depth of each one. He said he also spoke to several business owners about their needs. He noted that the
depths of businesses ranged from 55 to 90+ feet, measured from the sidewalk abutting the entrance of each building. He
agreed that some commercial spaces in the downtown core are less than 55-feet deep, but the question is what kind of space
they want to create. Does the City want to create spaces that are as marketable as possible or spaces that create a more
limited business shell? Mr. Clifton said that in addition to conducting site measurements and meeting with business owners,
he called a few of his colleagues in other cities. He also called Mark Hinshaw with LMN Architects. Mr. Hinshaw stated
that although cities can establish any dimension, a minimum depth of 60 feet would provide a space most retailers would find
useful. Considering that the BD2 and BD3 zones require a minimum depth of 60 feet, Mr. Clifton questioned why the City
would require anything less in the BD1 zone, which currently requires only commercial uses on the ground floor.
Mr. Clifton said he also received a valuable piece of information from Bill Trim, who serves as the City of Mill Creek’s
Community Development Director. Mr. Trimm stated that the recent buildings along the main street of Mill Creek Town
Center range between 55 and 70-feet deep for complete tenant spaces. The tenant spaces are all required to have their main
entry on the main street and secondary entries from the rear and side parking lot. Mr. Trimm said that since the shells were
being developed prior to many of the spaces being leased, Mill Creek tried to make sure that the demising walls would
correspond to the exterior pilasters that separate the windows. He further mentioned that if the City is going to set a standard
for tenant space depth, a range of between 60 and 70 feet seems appropriate for new buildings. Mr. Clifton reported that he
also spoke with his predecessor, Jennifer Gerrand, who stated that the issue is about looking at the desirability of a space.
Good ceiling heights, entrances at sidewalk level, transparent façades, and good square footage are all highly important
elements of a building. She suggested that square footage would dictate the types of businesses that can be located in a
structure. She pointed out that many restaurants need larger spaces in order to locate a kitchen, bathrooms, storage, customer
seating, etc.
In closing his remarks, Mr. Clifton shared the following comments he received from business owners he spoke to:
• I can’t imagine creating depths less than 60 to 70 feet. In addition to the main presentation and sales area of retail
businesses, an owner also needs office and storage spaces, restrooms, etc. Restaurants also need kitchens, seating, office
and storage areas.
• For businesses wishing to expand and stay in the downtown area, it is extremely difficult to find spaces that allow a
business to grow.
• Tall ceiling heights are quite important. The lower the ceiling height, the lower the desirability of retail and commercial
spaces. Tall ceiling heights provide more options for all businesses.
• Storage seems to be a big issue. Once you designate a certain portion of your business to storage, the amount left over
must be useable, thus the need for larger spaces.
Board Member Lovell inquired what the interim ordinance that was passed by the City Council accomplished. Mr. Chave
answered that it basically clarifies the intent of the City Council’s discussions during the Downtown Waterfront Planning
process. The intent was that the entire ground floor in the BD1 zone should be devoted to commercial uses, and a 15-foot
ceiling height should be required.
Mr. Chave advised that staff believes that several clarifications and corrections would be appropriate to include in a public
hearing draft of proposed BD zone changes. The staff and Board reviewed each of the six proposed changes as follows:
• Clarify that the 15-foot ground floor height requirement in the BD1 zone only applies to the first 60-feet of commercial
space measured from the street front. Behind 60 feet, the ground floor would be considered to be the floor that is
closest in elevation to the ground floor, but the floor does not have a minimum height requirement.
Mr. Chave advised that staff actually agrees with Mr. Kent that having a minimum depth requirement makes sense. The
question the Board must consider is what the requirement should be. He said that in reviewing information related to
Packet Page 231 of 374
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
August 13, 2008 Page 8
retail space sizes and dimensions, staff found several patterns. First, it was very difficult to find a clear discussion of
desirable retail store depths independent of any other factor. Instead, the literature identifies ranges of desirable store
sizes, and approximately 2,000 square feet seems to be a good average for downtown retail space. The literature indicated
that store front spacing of every 20 to 30 feet was desirable. As expected, Mr. Chave pointed out that different types of
retail stores and restaurants require differently-sized spaces, and a consistent pattern of store fronts and usable space is
critical.
Mr. Chave said the literature also made it clear that it is important to retain flexibility in retail space so that businesses can
come and go without being constrained by a limited supply of desirable quality space. He noted that this has been a
problem in Edmonds in the past, with businesses that wish to locate downtown being discouraged by lack of adequate
retail space. He recalled that, in previous years, residential space drove the financial viability of development in the
downtown, and developers did not really focus on creating usable retail space. This resulted in situations where the retail
space has remained vacant because it is not conducive to most retail types of uses. He suggested that setting a retail store
depth requirement that is too shallow could endanger the desired flexibility of space that is necessary to retain and allow
expansion of retail businesses in the future. He cautioned that it is important to keep in mind that the necessary depth of a
retail space does not only include the display space that is seen by customers, but storage and office spaces, etc.
Board Member Bowman said that, at this time, he is negotiating for a second store at Renton Landing, and one undesirable
aspect of the space is the high ceilings. He expressed his belief that retailers do not typically desire higher ceilings
because it is difficult to light the space adequately. While the building he is leasing has incredible vaulted ceilings, they
are not necessarily conducive or desirable for many retail uses. He said he has had difficulty renting out some of his
current space because it is long and deep. They will likely have to redo the space to make it more marketable. He said he
has people drop by his store on a weekly basis, looking for retail space in Edmonds. Most of these people are interested in
space that is approximately 1,250 square feet in size.
Board Member Bowman said he recently visited Mill Creek; and it is a true lifestyle center, which Edmonds is not.
Edmonds has only a few retail chains, and most of the businesses consist of mom and pop stores that do not require a large
amount of space because they can’t afford it. He expressed his belief that the code should allow flexibility for developers.
He referred to the proposed project at 555 Main Street and expressed his belief that the designs represent examples of
good retail space. He said he would prefer to have more store front and shallower space inside. He expressed his support
for allowing developers the opportunity to provide off-street parking as part of future projects. He noted that it is very
difficult to find parking space in the downtown during the daytime hours. He concluded by stating his belief that a 60-
foot mandatory depth requirement would be too much. Chair Guenther cautioned that the design plans for the project at
555 Main Street were submitted just for the Board’s information. Mr. Chave pointed out that this project is what triggered
the discussion about proposed changes.
Rick Kent said he is the developer of the project at 555 Main Street. He pointed out that, as proposed, the commercial
space would be 45-feet deep, with 13 off-street parking spaces located behind. They would be screened from the street
and covered. He said he believes the designs are amazing and would solve the problem of having to do full underground
parking, which is very costly. He said their intent is for the 45-foot deep commercial spaces to be retail uses, and it is
desirable to have adequate parking available to serve these uses. He recognized that a restaurant use would need more
space than what would be provided in the new development, but they shouldn’t be required to provide enough space to
accommodate a restaurant.
Board Member Bowman asked what the parking requirement in the BD1 zone is. Mr. Chave answered that no parking is
required for commercial space in the BD1 zone. However, the residential space that is part of the project would be
required to meet the City’s parking standard. He noted that while commercial space in the BD1 zone does not require
parking, it has been established that more parking is needed in the downtown area. Therefore, it would be desirable for
new development to provide additional parking space.
Board Member Reed pointed out that all the commercial lots in the BD1 zone are relatively the same depth. He asked if
parking is provided behind the buildings that do not extend all the way to the rear property line. Mr. Chave answered that
there is open space and a small amount of parking area behind many of these buildings.
Packet Page 232 of 374
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
August 13, 2008 Page 9
Mr. Chave reviewed that, at this time, the Development Code considers the entire depth of a building in the BD1 zone to
be considered ground floor, which requires commercial space only. Board Member Young suggested a developer be
allowed to construct commercial space to whatever depth they determine is feasible for their project. He also suggested
that the 15-foot ceiling height requirement may be overkill. Mr. Chave clarified that the ceiling height requirement is 15
feet, measured from floor to floor, and this allows for a 12-foot ceiling height. Mr. Clifton reminded the Board that the
Development Code is intended to dictate desirable development and serves as a parameter for development. At this time,
the Development Code requires the entire first floor to be dedicated to commercial uses in the BD 1 zone, and the proposal
is to relax this requirement to a depth that is appropriate.
Board Member Young said he is not convinced, based on the evidence, that 60 feet of depth is the depth that should be
required. Again, he suggested that a developer be allowed to build retail space to whatever depth they find appropriate to
make the project feasible. Mr. Clifton cautioned the Board against making a decision based on the single application that
was submitted for 555 Main Street. They must keep in mind all of the potential projects in the BD1 zone that would be
impacted by the changes. Mr. Chave strongly advised in favor of establishing a minimum depth requirement. He invited
the Board to discuss the issue further and identify an appropriate number to include in the amendment language for public
hearing purposes.
Board Member Lovell pointed out that the new requirements would only apply to new development in the BD1 zone. Mr.
Clifton agreed and explained that existing configurations would be allowed to continue. Board Member Lovell
summarized that staff is recommending that in order to maximum the potential use of new buildings in the BD1 zone, the
minimum depth of a building should be 60 feet. However, that is not to say that a future business would be required to
use all of the space. The space could be divided into whatever square footage a tenant wants. Board Member Lovell
inquired if the minimum ceiling height could be varied as part of tenant improvements. Mr. Chave said this would be
allowed, but it would have to be done in such a way that someone in the future could go back to the 12-foot ceiling height.
Board Member Young noted that the City’s previous code language required a certain amount of commercial development
in the BD1 zone. He suggested that rather than set a minimum depth requirement, they should identify the percentage of
space that must be devoted to commercial uses. Mr. Chave said the percentage method would do nothing to regulate how
the spaces are arranged and oriented to the street. Board Member Young suggested that the commercial space could be
required to orient towards the street.
Board Member Works said she is bothered by the idea of using an arbitrary number to establish a minimum depth
requirement. If the merchants are saying they do not need this provision, maybe depth should not be mandated. Mr.
Clifton recalled that none of the business owners he spoke with expressed a concern about having too much space.
Instead, they wanted to make sure that retail space is sufficient enough in size to accommodate office and storage space
and still have enough area to market their goods. Reducing the depth of the buildings in the BD1 zone would result in
fewer types of uses that can occupy the spaces. Again, he said he measured a number of the downtown business and
found the average depth to be between 55 and 90 feet. He concluded that, historically, a context has been established for
downtown Edmonds. While there are smaller spaces, most are within this range.
Board Member Dewhirst said he is bothered that the Board is being asked to come up with a specific number for depth
without having enough information to make an informed decision. Board Member Bowman questioned why they must
adopt a single number as the minimum depth requirement. He suggested a better approach would be to offer flexibility to
developers by reducing the minimum depth requirement to 30 feet. He noted that developers typically have tenants lined
up before they start a construction project. Mr. Chave explained that the number 60 was used in other BD zones, and the
current BD1 zone requires commercial space on the entire ground floor.
Board Member Young said he supports the proposed change that would allow other uses on the ground floor, but he is not
sure he understands why they need to set a minimum depth requirement. Again, Mr. Chave reminded the Board of
situations that occurred previously when residential projects drove development in the downtown, and developers
constructed residual office or commercial space to meet the code requirements. This resulted in commercial space that is
Packet Page 233 of 374
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
August 13, 2008 Page 10
not marketable. He expressed his belief that it is important to set a minimum standard to ensure that future development
provides meaningful space for commercial uses.
Board Member Dewhirst left the meeting at 9:10 p.m.
Mr. Chave suggested the Board advertise the proposed amendment for a public hearing using 45 feet as the minimum
depth requirement. The hearing information could inform the public that 60 feet has also been considered.
Mr. Clifton reminded the Board that the Comprehensive Plan talks about the downtown retail core being compatible with
the historic character of the area. He said he visited the businesses in the BD1 zone to get a context for what has
historically been built. He said he talks to a number of people each month who want to locate in downtown Edmonds, but
they are unable to find space that has an adequate ceiling height. Their concerns were not necessarily related to depth. He
referred to a study commissioned by the City of Seattle to figure out why the retail spaces were not being leased. The
study indicated that in order to be marketable, a space must have a 15-foot ceiling height, which is similar to what
Edmonds currently requires.
The Board agreed to proceed with a public hearing on this proposed amendment, using a 45-foot depth requirement.
Board Member Reed said he read through the attachment containing excerpts from the City Council’s discussion
regarding the BD1 zone. He noted that there was only one small comment related to depth. Most of the comments were
about the overall height of the structures and/or the need to have a 15-foot minimum ceiling height requirement. He
questioned when the City Council discussed the depth requirement. Mr. Chave said the City Council’s entire discussion
related to the BD1 zone assumed that the entire ground floor would be commercial, with a 15-foot ceiling height. No one
argued the depth issue because the main issue of concern was related to height.
• Clarify ECDC 16.43.030.B.6.f so that only those commercial spaces within 60 feet of the street front in the BD1 zone
must have direct access to the street. The current requirement would make no sense if additional commercial spaces
are located to the rear of the building, behind the street front commercial space.
Mr. Chave explained that if a minimum commercial depth is establish and other uses are allowed to occur beyond that
depth, it makes since to require the store front to have direct access to the street. The Board agreed to move forward with
a public hearing on this proposed amendment.
• Clarify ECDC 16.43.030.B.6.c so that it is clear that the 30-foot minimum depth was intended to apply only to
properties in the BD2 and BD3 zones. We would not recommend reducing store front depths to less than 60 feet even
for “shallow” lots in the BD1 zone.
Mr. Chave said this particular amendment is aimed at the BD2 and BD3 zones where developers want to put parking
behind the main commercial uses. He advised that the Development Code currently allows a developer to reduce the
commercial frontage space to a depth of 30 feet if a lot is 60-feet deep in order to provide parking space in the rear. He
pointed out that in the BD1 zone, commercial frontage is very important, and staff recommends the code not allow a
developer to reduce this space just to put in parking that is not even required.
Board Member Lovell summarized that the existing code requires that the entire ground floor of a project in the BD1 zone
be dedicated to commercial space. However, the BD2 and BD3 zones only require commercial space to a depth of 60
feet, measured from the front of a building. Mr. Chave agreed that in the BD2 and BD3 zones, residential uses could be
constructed behind the 60-foot deep commercial area. The area could also be used for parking space.
The Board agreed to move forward with a public hearing on this proposed amendment.
• Clarify the uses allowed on the ground floor located behind the first 60 feet. Parking should be allowed behind the
first 60 feet. In addition, the BD2 and BD3 zones should continue to allow residential uses behind the first 60 feet.
Packet Page 234 of 374
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
August 13, 2008 Page 11
If it is desirable to preserve the character of storefronts in the BD1 zone, Mr. Chave said it is important to allow
developers to construct parking and other uses behind the commercial space. He explained that this proposed amendment
would make it clear that parking would be allowed behind the first 45-feet (if that is the number set for minimum depth).
The provision would not change the current BD2 and BD3 requirements, since residential and parking uses are already
allowed behind the required commercial depth. The Board agreed to move forward with a public hearing on this proposed
amendment.
• Clarify that for corner lots, the 60-foot requirements do not apply to street fronts of buildings when they are located on
side streets at the edge of the BD1 zone district (i.e. when the lot is on a corner that is transitioning into another zone
across the street). However, all street fronts along Main and 5th Avenue will always have the 60-foot requirements
applied, corner or not.
Mr. Chave referred to the proposed project at 555 Main Street as an example of the current problem. He explained that
the lot is technically a corner lot, which faces on both Main Street and 6th Avenue. The lot is on the edge of the BD1
zoning district, and BD2 property is located directly to the east. He invited the Board to consider whether corner lots on
the edge of the BD1 zone should be treated differently. He suggested it makes sense that if a property is located on the
periphery of the BD1 zone, the orientation should be on the main street rather than on the side streets. The Board agreed
to move forward with a public hearing on this proposed amendment.
• Clarify that conversion of existing building space to a commercial use would not trigger the ground floor height
requirements. This is covered under the non-conforming regulations, but it would help to clarify the issue in the BD
zones so there can be no question raised.
Mr. Chave advised that this issue came up in the context of the BD5 (4th Avenue) zone. He explained that the non-
conformance chapter in the Development Code allows commercial uses in existing structures without requiring an
applicant to meet the 15-foot minimum ceiling height. However, rather than having to rely on a code interpretation, it
makes sense to make it clear that if an applicant is putting a commercial use into an existing space, it would not trigger the
ground floor requirement of additional ceiling height. The Board agreed to move forward with a public hearing on this
proposed amendment.
Chair Guenther said it would also be helpful to know, prior to the public hearing, the median depth of all of the existing
commercial spaces in downtown Edmonds. Mr. Chave advised that this information would be very difficult for staff to
obtain. Board Member Works suggested staff ask the Downtown Merchant’s Association to provide this type of
information. Mr. Chave advised that Mr. Clifton would meet with the Chamber of Commerce, as well.
WORK SESSION ON PROPOSED COMPREHESIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS ADDRESSING SUSTAINABILITY
AND CLIMATE CHANGE
Mr. Chave recalled that the City Council recently passed resolutions supporting the work of the Mayor’s Climate Protection
Committee. The State is moving forward to address climate change issues, as well. He suggested it is quite possible that
within the next year or two, the State may even mandate that jurisdictions adopt comprehensive plan elements related to
climate change.
Mr. Chave reported that staff has been working with the Mayor’s Climate Protection Committee on the development of a
new Comprehensive Plan element called “Community Sustainability” to address issues surrounding climate change. This
element would likely contain subsections regarding climate change, environmental quality, and community health. Emphasis
would be placed on showing the inter-dependence of these various policy areas while trying to clarify how they are mutually
supportive and provide a unified vision for the City.
Mr. Chave referred to the draft overview of goal and policy statements related to the new Community Sustainability Element.
He suggested that this list could be used as a checklist to ensure that all the elements go forward consistently from a
sustainability standpoint. This would be a good way to make sure all the goals and policies are aligned, which is a
Packet Page 235 of 374
Packet Page 236 of 374
3. Clarify that the 30-foot minimum depth mentioned in ECDC 16.43.030(B)(10)(e) was
intended to apply only to properties in the BD2 and BD3 zones; reducing store front
depths to less than 45 feet for “shallow” lots in the BD1 zone should not be allowed.
4. Clarify that parking is allowed on the ground floor in the BD1 zone if it is located behind
the first 45 feet. The BD2 and BD3 zones continue to allow parking or residential uses
behind the first 60 feet.
5. Clarify that for corner lots, the 45-foot requirements noted above do not apply to street
fronts of buildings when they are located on side streets at the edge of the BD1 zone
district. However, all street fronts along Main and 5th will always have the 45 foot
requirements applied, corner or not. This is accomplished by means of a specific map
showing where the “designated street front” of each lot in the BD1 zone is located.
6. Clarify that conversion of existing building space to commercial use does not trigger the
ground floor height requirements. This is covered under the non-conforming regulations,
but it would help to clarify the issue in the BD zones so there can be no question raised.
The clarification is contained in ECDC 16.43.030(B)(10)(c).
Attachments:
1. Draft code changes
2. Planning Board minutes
3. Planning Board discussion memo from 8/13/2008 meeting
Packet Page 237 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 1 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
[Note: The following code sections are as they exist in the Edmonds
Community Development Code on August 18, 2008. Approved amendments
incorporating design standards into the BD1 Zone are not yet included in
the following chapter.]
Chapter 16.43
BD – DOWNTOWN BUSINESS
Sections:
16.43.000 Purposes.
16.43.010 Subdistricts.
16.43.020 Uses.
16.43.030 Site development standards.
16.43.040 Operating restrictions.
16.43.000 Purposes.
The BD zone has the following specific purposes in addition to the general purposes for
business and commercial zones listed in Chapter 16.40 ECDC.
A. Promote downtown Edmonds as a setting for retail, office, entertainment and
associated businesses supported by nearby residents and the larger Edmonds community,
and as a destination for visitors from throughout the region.
B. Define the downtown commercial and retail core along streets having the strongest
pedestrian links and pedestrian-oriented design elements, while protecting downtown's
identity.
C. Identify supporting arts and mixed use residential and office areas which support and
complement downtown retail use areas. Provide for a strong central retail core at
downtown's focal center while providing for a mixture of supporting commercial and
residential uses in the area surrounding this retail core area.
D. Focus development between the commercial and retail core and the Edmonds Center
for the Arts on small-scale retail, service, and multifamily residential uses. [Ord. 3624
§ 1, 2007].
Packet Page 238 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 2 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
16.43.010 Subdistricts.
The “downtown business” zone is subdivided into five distinct subdistricts, each intended
to implement specific aspects of the comprehensive plan that pertain to the Downtown
Waterfront Activity Center. Each subdistrict contains its own unique mix of uses and
zoning regulations, as described in this chapter. The five subdistricts are:
BD1 – Downtown Retail Core;
BD2 – Downtown Mixed Commercial;
BD3 – Downtown Convenience Commercial;
BD4 – Downtown Mixed Residential;
BD5 – Downtown Arts Corridor. [Ord. 3624 § 1, 2007].
16.43.020 Uses.
A. Table 16.43-1.
Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5
Commercial Uses
Retail stores or sales A A A A A
Offices A A A A A
Service uses A A A A A
Retail sales requiring intensive outdoor display or storage areas,
such as trailer sales, used car lots (except as part of a new car
sales and service dealer), and heavy equipment storage, sales or
services X X X X X
Enclosed fabrication or assembly areas associated with and on
the same property as an art studio, art gallery, restaurant or food
service establishment that also provides an on-site retail outlet
open to the public A A A A A
Automobile sales and service X A A X X
Dry cleaning and laundry plants which use only nonflammable
and nonexplosive cleaning agents C A A A X
Printing, publishing and binding establishments C A A A C
Packet Page 239 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 3 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5
Community-oriented open air markets conducted as an outdoor
operation and licensed pursuant to provisions in the Edmonds
City Code A A A A A
Residential Uses
Single-family dwelling A A A A A
Multiple dwelling unit(s) A A A A A
Other Uses
Bus stop shelters A A A A A
Churches, subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.020 A A A A A
Primary and high schools subject to the requirements of ECDC
17.100.050(G) through (R) A A A A A
Local public facilities subject to the requirements of ECDC
17.100.050 C C C A C
Neighborhood parks, natural open spaces, and community parks
with an adopted master plan subject to the requirements of ECDC
17.100.070 A A A A A
Off-street parking and loading areas to serve a permitted use B B B B B
Commuter parking lots in conjunction with a facility otherwise
permitted in this zone B B B B X
Commercial parking lots C C C C X
Wholesale uses X X C X X
Hotels and motels A A A A A
Amusement establishments C C C C C
Auction businesses, excluding vehicle or livestock auctions C C C C C
Drive-in businesses C C A C X
Laboratories X C C C X
Fabrication of light industrial products not otherwise listed as a
permitted use X X C X X
Day-care centers C C C A C
Hospitals, health clinics, convalescent homes, rest homes,
sanitariums X C C A X
Packet Page 240 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 4 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
Permitted Uses BD1 BD2 BD3 BD4 BD5
Museums and art galleries of primarily local concern that do not
meet the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC
21.85.033 A A A A A
Zoos and aquariums of primarily local concern that do not meet
the criteria for regional public facilities as defined in ECDC
21.85.033 C C C C A
Counseling centers and residential treatment facilities for current
alcoholics and drug abusers X C C A X
Regional parks and community parks without a master plan
subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.100.070 C C C C C
Outdoor storage, incidental to a permitted use D D D D D
Aircraft landings as regulated by Chapter 4.80 ECC D D D D D
A = Permitted primary use
B = Permitted secondary use
C = Primary uses requiring a conditional use permit
D = Secondary uses requiring a conditional use permit
X = Not permitted
For conditional uses listed in Table 16.43-1, the use may be permitted if the proposal
meets the criteria for conditional uses found in Chapter 20.05 ECDC, and all of the
following criteria are met:
1. Access and Parking. Pedestrian access shall be provided from the sidewalk. Vehicular
access shall only be provided consistent with ECDC 18.80.060. When a curb cut is
necessary, it shall be landscaped to be compatible with the pedestrian streetscape and
shall be located and designed to be as unobtrusive as possible.
2. Design and Landscaping. The project shall be designed so that it is oriented to the
street and contributes to the pedestrian streetscape environment. Fences more than four
feet in height along street lot lines shall only be permitted if they are at least 50 percent
open, such as a lattice pattern. Blank walls shall be discouraged, and when unavoidable
due to the nature of the use, shall be decorated by a combination of at least two of the
following:
a. Architectural features or details;
b. Artwork;
c. Landscaping. [Ord. 3624 § 1, 2007].
Packet Page 241 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 5 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
16.43.030 Site development standards.
A. Table 16.43-2.
Sub
District
Minimum
Lot Area
Minimum
Lot Width
Minimum
Street
Setback
Minimum
Side
Setback1
Minimum
Rear
Setback1
Maximum
Height2
Minimum
Height of
Ground Floor
within the
Designated
Street-Front4
BD15 0 0 0 0 0 25' 15'
BD25 0 0 0 0 0 25' 12'
BD35 0 0 0 0 0 25' 12'
BD43,5 0 0 0 0 0 25' 12'
BD55 0 0 0 0 0 25' 12'
1 The setback for buildings and structures located at or above grade (exempting buildings and structures
entirely below the surface of the ground) shall be 15 feet from the lot line adjacent to residentially (R)
zoned property.
2 Specific provisions regarding building heights are contained in EDCD 16.43.030(C).
3 Within the BD4 zone, site development standards listed in Table 16.43-2 apply when a building contains a
ground floor consisting of commercial space to a depth of at least 60 feet measured from the street front of
the building. If a proposed building does not meet this ground floor commercial space requirement (e.g., an
entirely residential building is proposed), then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply.
See ECDC 16.43.030(B)(48) for further details.
4 “Minimum height of ground floor within the designated street-front” means the vertical distance from top
to top of the successive finished floor surfaces for that portion of the ground floor located within the
designated street front (see ECDC 16.43.030(B)); and, if the ground floor is the only floor above street
grade, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the ceiling joists or, where there is not a ceiling, to the
top of the roof rafters. “Floor finish” is the exposed floor surface, including coverings applied over a
finished floor, and includes, but is not limited to, wood, vinyl flooring, wall-to-wall carpet, and concrete, as
illustrated in Figure 16.43-1. Figure 16.43-1 shows a ground floor height of 15 feet; note that the “finished”
ceiling height is only approximately 11 feet in this example. Existing buildings may be added onto or
remodeled without adjusting the existing height of the ground floor to meet the specified minimum height
so long as the addition or remodel does not increase the building footprint or its frontage along a street by
more than 25 percent.
5 Site development standards for single-family dwellings are the same as those specified for the RS-6 zone.
Packet Page 242 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 6 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
Map 16.43-1: Designated Street Front for Properties in the BD1 Zone
Packet Page 243 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 7 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
Figure 16.43-1: Ground Floor Height Measurement
B. Ground Floor. This section describes requirements for development of the ground
floor of buildings in the BD zones.
1. For all BD zones, the ground floor is considered to be that floor of a building which is
closest in elevation to the finished grade along the width of the side of the structure that is
principally oriented to the designated street front of the building (this is normally the
adjacent sidewalk). For the purposes of this section, the ground “floor” is considered to
be the sum of the floor planes which, in combination, run the full extent of the building
and are closest in elevation to one another. For the purposes of this Chapter, the
definition of “ground floor” contained in ECDC 21.35.017 does not apply.
2. Designated street front. Map 16.43-1 shows the designated street front for all
properties lying within the BD1 zone, which is 45 feet measured perpendicular to the
indicated street front of the building lot. For all other BD zones, the designated street
front is established as the first 60 feet of the lot measured perpendicular to any street
right-of-way, excluding alleys.
Packet Page 244 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 8 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
3. The minimum height of the ground floor within the designated street front. The
minimum height of the ground floor specified in Table 16.43-2 only applies to the height
of the ground floor located within the designated street front established in ECDC
16.43.030(B)(2).
14. Access to commercial uses within the designated street front. When a commercial use
is located on the ground floor within a designated street front as defined in ECDC
16.43.030(B)(2), the elevation of the ground floor and associated entry shall be within
seven inches of the grade level of the adjoining sidewalk. “Grade” shall be as measured at
the entry location. Portions of the ground floor outside the designated street front of the
building need not comply with the access requirements specified in this section.
25. When the designated street frontage of a building is on a slope which does not allow
both the elevation of the entry and ground floor within the designated street front to be
entirely within seven inches of the grade level of the sidewalk, as specified in ECDC
16.43.030(B)(4), the portion of the ground floor of the building located within the
designated street front may be designed so that either:
a. The entry for the commercial portion of the ground floor is located within seven
inches of the grade of the adjacent sidewalk, and the commercial portion of the
ground floor located within the designated street front is within seven inches of the
grade level of the entry; or
b. The building may be broken up into multiple frontages, so that each entry/ground
floor combination is within seven inches of the grade of the sidewalk.
c. For corner lots, a primary entry shall be established for the purposes of determining
where the ground floor entry rules detailed in this section shall apply. The first choice
for the primary entry shall be either 5th Avenue or Main Street. In the case of the
BD5 zone, the primary entry shall always be on 4th Avenue.
36. Within the BD1 zone, development on the ground floor shall consist of only
commercial uses. , except that parking may be located on the ground floor so long as it is
not located within the designated street front.
7. Within the BD2 and BD3 zones, development on the ground floor shall consist of only
commercial uses within the designated street frontto a minimum building depth of 60
feet, as measured from the street front of the building. Any permitted use may be located
on the ground floor outside of the designated street front.
48. Within the BD4 zone, there are two options for developing the ground floor of a
building. One option is to develop the ground floor with commercial space, meeting the
same requirements detailed for the BD2 and BD3 zones in subsection (B)(3#) of this
section. As a second option, if more residential space is provided so that the ground floor
does not meet the commercial use requirements described in subsection (B)(3#) of this
section, then the building setbacks listed for the RM-1.5 zone shall apply. In the case
Packet Page 245 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 9 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
where RM-1.5 setbacks are required, the required street setback shall be landscaped and
no fence or wall in the setback shall be over four feet in height above sidewalk grade
unless it is at least 50 percent open, such as in a lattice pattern.
59. Within the BD5 zone, one option is to develop the ground floor with commercial
space, meeting the same requirements detailed for the BD2 zone in subsection (B)(37) of
this section. When development of the ground floor does not conform to these
requirements, then development within the BD5 zone shall meet the following
requirements:
a. The building shall be oriented to 4th Avenue. “Orientation to 4th Avenue” shall
mean that:
i. At least one building entry shall face 4th Avenue.
ii. If the building is located adjacent to the public right-of-way, architectural
details and/or applied art shall be incorporated into the building design to add
interest at the pedestrian (i.e., ground floor) level.
iii. If the building is set back from the street, landscaping and/or artwork shall be
located between the building and the street front.
b. Live/work uses are encouraged within the BD5 zone, and potential live/work space
is required for new residential buildings if no other commercial use is provided on-
site.
i. If multiple residential uses are located on the ground floor, the building shall
incorporate live/work space into the ground floor design in such a way as to
enable building occupants to use portion(s) of their space for a commercial or
art/fabrication use. Live/work space means a structure or portion of a structure
that combines a commercial or manufacturing activity that is allowed in the zone
with a residential living space for the owner of the commercial or manufacturing
business, or the owner's employee, and that person's household. The live/work
space shall be designed so that a commercial or fabrication or home occupation
use can be established within the space.
Packet Page 246 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 10 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
Figure 16.43-2: BD5 Development
Building at right (foreground) shows landscaping located between building and street.
Building at left (background) shows commercial space integrated with residential uses, and the entry
oriented to the street.
610. Exceptions and Clarifications. The regulations for the ground floor contained in
subsections (B)(1) through (59) of this section apply with the following exceptions or
clarifications.
a. That in all areas the provision of pedestrian access to permitted residential uses is
allowed as a permitted secondary use.
b. The restrictions on the location of residential uses shall not apply when a single-
family use is the only permitted primary use located on the property.
c. Existing buildings may be added onto or remodeled without adjusting the existing
height of the ground floor to meet the specified minimum height so long as the
addition or remodel does not increase the building footprint or its frontage along a
street by more than 25 percent. Permitted uses may occupy an existing space
regardless of whether that space meets the ground floor requirements for height.
cd. Parking is not considered to be a commercial use for the purposes of satisfying the
ground floor commercial use requirement within the designated street front (i.e.e.g.,
when the first 60 45 feet of the a building is within a designated street front in the
BD1 zone, as measured perpendicular to the street, is required to be in commercial
use, parking may not be located within that 60 45 feet).
e. However, for For properties within the BD2 or BD3 zone which have with less
than 90 feet of depth measured from the street front, parking may be located in the
rearmost 30 feet of the property, even if a portion of the parking extends into the first
60 feet of the building. In no case shall the depth of commercial space as measured
from the street front of the building be less than 30 feet.
df. Within the BD2, BD3 and BD4 zones, if the first 60 feet of the building as
measured perpendicular to the street consists only of commercial uses and permitted
Packet Page 247 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 11 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
secondary uses, then permitted multiple-family residential unit(s) may be located
behind the commercial uses.
eg. Within the BD1 zone, ground floor windows parallel to street lot lines shall be
transparent and unobstructed by curtains, blinds, or other window coverings intended
to obscure the interior from public view from the sidewalk. This provision does not
apply to any residential uses located behind commercial uses.
fh. Within the BD1 zone, each commercial space located on the ground floor within
the designated street front shall be directly accessible by an entry from the sidewalk.
C. Building Height Regulations.
1. The basic height limit is 25 feet (see definition of “height” detailed in ECDC
21.40.030).
2. Step-Back Rules. The following rules apply when calculating the maximum building
height for any building in the specified zone(s) (see Figures 16.43-3 and 16.43-4 for
illustrated examples).
a. Within the BD2, BD3, or BD4 zones, an additional five feet of building height, not
to exceed 30 feet, may be obtained if the building is designed to meet all of the
following conditions:
i. A building step-back is provided within 15 feet of any street front. Within the
15-foot step-back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet above
grade at the property line (e.g., normally the back of the sidewalk) or 30 feet
above the “average level” as defined in ECDC 21.40.030. For corner lots, a 15-
foot step-back is required along both street fronts. If a building located on a
corner lot has insufficient lot width (i.e., less than 40 feet of lot width) to enable it
to provide the required step-back on both street fronts, then the step-back may be
waived facing the secondary street. This waiver may not be granted for building
step-backs required from Fifth Avenue, Dayton Street, or Main Street.
ii. A 15-foot step-back is provided from the property line opposite the street front.
Within the 15-foot step-back, the maximum building height is the lesser of 25 feet
above grade or 30 feet above the “average level” as defined in ECDC 21.40.030.
For corner lots for which a 15-foot step-back is required on more than one street
front, there is no 15-foot step-back required from the property line opposite each
street front. For the purpose of determining step-back requirements, alleys are not
considered to be streets.
iii. A building setback, in which the entire building is set back from the property
line, may be substituted on a foot-for-foot basis for the required building step-
back. For example, a five-foot building setback can be combined with a 10-foot
building step-back to meet the 15-foot step-back requirement.
Packet Page 248 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 12 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
b. Within the BD1 zone, building height may be a maximum of 30 feet in order to
provide for a minimum height of 15 feet for the ground floor. The allowable building
height is measured from the “average level” as defined in ECDC 21.40.030.
Packet Page 249 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 13 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
3. Within the BD5 zone, the maximum height may be increased to 30 feet if the building
meets one of the following conditions. In addition, if the building is located within 15
feet of the public right-of-way, architectural details and/or applied art shall be
incorporated into the building design, and the ground floor shall be distinguished from
the upper portions of the building through the use of differences in materials, windows,
and/or architectural forms.
a. All portions of the building above 25 feet consist of a pitched roof such that the
pitch of all portions of the roof are at least six-in-12 and the roof includes
architectural features, such as dormers or gables of a steeper pitch, that break up the
roof line into distinct segments.
b. If the building does not make use of a pitched roof system as described in
subsection (C)(3)(a) of this section, step-backs shall be required the same as for the
BD2 zone, as described in ECDC 16.43.030(C)(2).
4. Height Exceptions. In addition to the height exceptions listed in ECDC 21.40.030, the
following architectural features are allowed to extend above the height limits specified in
this chapter.
a. A single decorative architectural element, such as a turret, tower, or clock tower,
may extend a maximum of five feet above the specified height limit if it is designed
as an integral architectural feature of the roof and/or facade of the building. The
decorative architectural element shall not cover more than five percent of the roof
area of the building.
b. Roof or deck railings may extend a maximum of 42 inches above the specified
height limit within any building step-back required under ECDC 16.43.030(C)(2);
provided, that the railing is constructed so that it has the appearance of being
transparent. An example meeting this condition would be a railing that is comprised
of glass panels.
D. Off-Street Parking and Access Requirements. The parking regulations included here
apply specifically within the BD zone. Whenever there are conflicts between the
requirements of this chapter and the provisions contained in Chapter 17.50 ECDC, Off-
Street Parking Regulations, the provisions of this chapter shall apply.
1. Within the BD1 zone, no new curb cuts are permitted along 5th Avenue or Main
Street.
2. No parking is required for any commercial floor area of permitted uses located within
the BD1, BD2, BD4, and BD5 zones.
3. No parking is required for any floor area in any building with a total building footprint
of less than 4,800 square feet.
Packet Page 250 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 14 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
E. Open Space Requirements.
1. For buildings on lots larger than 12,000 square feet or having an overall building width
of more than 120 feet (as measured parallel to the street lot line), at least five percent of
the lot area shall be devoted to open space. Open space shall not be required for additions
to existing buildings that do not increase the building footprint by more than 10 percent.
Open space shall be provided adjacent to the street front (street lot line). Such open space
may be provided as any combination of:
a. Outdoor dining or seating areas (including outdoor seating or waiting areas for
restaurants or food service establishments);
b. Public plaza or sidewalk that is accessible to the public;
c. Landscaping which includes a seating area that is accessible to the public.
2. Required open space shall be open to the air and not located under a building story.
3. In overall dimension, the width of required open space shall not be less than 75 percent
of the depth of the open space, measured relative to the street (i.e., width is measured
parallel to the street lot line, while depth is measured perpendicular to the street lot line).
Packet Page 251 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 15 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
F. Historic Buildings. The exceptions contained in this section apply only to buildings
listed on the Edmonds register of historic buildings.
1. If a certificate of appropriateness is issued by the Edmonds historic preservation
commission under the provisions of Chapter 20.45 ECDC for the proposed project, the
staff may modify or waive any of the requirements listed below that would otherwise
apply to the expansion, remodeling, or restoration of the building. The decision of staff
shall be processed as a staff decision, notice required, as provided for in ECDC
20.95.050.
a. Building step-backs required under subsection (C)(2) of this section.
b. Open space required under subsection (E) of this section.
2. No off-street parking is required for any permitted uses located within a building listed
on the Edmonds register of historic buildings. Note that additional parking exceptions
involving building expansion, remodeling or restoration may also apply, as detailed in
ECDC 17.50.070(C).
Packet Page 252 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 16 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
3. Within the BD5 zone, if a building listed on the Edmonds register of historic buildings
is retained on-site, no off-street parking is required for any additional buildings or uses
located on the same property. To obtain this benefit, an easement in a form acceptable to
the city shall be recorded with Snohomish County protecting the exterior of the historic
building and ensuring that the historic building is maintained in its historic form and
appearance so long as the additional building(s) obtaining the parking benefit exist on the
property. The easement shall continue even if the property is subsequently subdivided or
any interest in the property is sold.
G. Density. There is no maximum density for permitted multiple dwelling units.
H. Screening. The required setback from R-zoned property shall be landscaped with trees
and ground cover and permanently maintained by the owner of the BD lot. A six-foot
minimum height fence, wall or solid hedge shall be provided at some point in the setback,
except for that portion of the BD zone that is in residential use.
I. Signs, Parking and Design Review. See Chapters 17.50, 20.10, and 20.60 ECDC. Sign
standards shall be the same as those that apply within the BC zone.
J. Satellite Television Antennas. In accordance with the limitations established by the
Federal Communications Commission, satellite television antennae greater than two
meters in diameter shall be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of ECDC
16.20.050. [Ord. 3624 § 1, 2007].
16.43.035 Application of requirements to the BD-1 zone.
The application and interpretation of Chapter 16.43 BD Downtown Business to any
development permit or application within the BD-1 zone shall conform to the
requirements of this section. These requirements are enacted in order to clarify the intent
of the City Council and the application of existing language of the Code. In the event of
conflict or ambiguity with any provision of this chapter, or the definition sections of the
Community Development Code, these provisions shall control.
The ground floor of the development in the BD-1 zone shall be devoted entirely to
commercial uses as provided by the first sentence of ECDC 16.43.030(B)(3). The ground
floor shall be no less than fifteen feet in height measured in accordance with ECDC
16.43.030. Except to the minimum extent necessary to exercise the rights granted
pursuant to ECDC 16.43.030(B)(2)(b), the ground floor shall be in one plane, extending
the entire width and breadth of the building.
16.43.040 Operating restrictions.
A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed
building, except:
1. Public uses such as utilities and parks;
Packet Page 253 of 374
ECDC 16.43 Page 17 Planning Board Draft 8/27/2008
2. Off-street parking and loading areas, and commercial parking lots;
3. Drive-in businesses;
4. Plant nurseries;
5. Seasonal farmers' markets;
6. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC;
7. Bistro and outdoor dining meeting the criteria of ECDC 17.70.040;
8. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC.
B. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Performance Standards.
[Ord. 3624 § 1, 2007].
Packet Page 254 of 374
Packet Page 255 of 374
Packet Page 256 of 374
Packet Page 257 of 374
Packet Page 258 of 374
Packet Page 259 of 374
Packet Page 260 of 374
Packet Page 261 of 374
Packet Page 262 of 374
Packet Page 263 of 374
Packet Page 264 of 374
Packet Page 265 of 374
Packet Page 266 of 374
Packet Page 267 of 374
Packet Page 268 of 374
Packet Page 269 of 374
Packet Page 270 of 374
Packet Page 271 of 374
Packet Page 272 of 374
Packet Page 273 of 374
Packet Page 274 of 374
Packet Page 275 of 374
Packet Page 276 of 374
Packet Page 277 of 374
Packet Page 278 of 374
Packet Page 279 of 374
Packet Page 280 of 374
Packet Page 281 of 374
Packet Page 282 of 374
Packet Page 283 of 374
Packet Page 284 of 374
Packet Page 285 of 374
Packet Page 286 of 374
Packet Page 287 of 374
Packet Page 288 of 374
Packet Page 289 of 374
Packet Page 290 of 374
Packet Page 291 of 374
Packet Page 292 of 374
Packet Page 293 of 374
Packet Page 294 of 374
Packet Page 295 of 374
Packet Page 296 of 374
Packet Page 297 of 374
Packet Page 298 of 374
Packet Page 299 of 374
Packet Page 300 of 374
Packet Page 301 of 374
Packet Page 302 of 374
Packet Page 303 of 374
Packet Page 304 of 374
Packet Page 305 of 374
Packet Page 306 of 374
Packet Page 307 of 374
Packet Page 308 of 374
Packet Page 309 of 374
Packet Page 310 of 374
Packet Page 311 of 374
Packet Page 312 of 374
Packet Page 313 of 374
Packet Page 314 of 374
Packet Page 315 of 374
Packet Page 316 of 374
Packet Page 317 of 374
Packet Page 318 of 374
Packet Page 319 of 374
Packet Page 320 of 374
Packet Page 321 of 374
Packet Page 322 of 374
Packet Page 323 of 374
Packet Page 324 of 374
Packet Page 325 of 374
Packet Page 326 of 374
Packet Page 327 of 374
Packet Page 328 of 374
Packet Page 329 of 374
Packet Page 330 of 374
Packet Page 331 of 374
Packet Page 332 of 374
Packet Page 333 of 374
Packet Page 334 of 374
Packet Page 335 of 374
Packet Page 336 of 374
Packet Page 337 of 374
Packet Page 338 of 374
Packet Page 339 of 374
Packet Page 340 of 374
Packet Page 341 of 374
Packet Page 342 of 374
Packet Page 343 of 374
Packet Page 344 of 374
Packet Page 345 of 374
Packet Page 346 of 374
AM-1854 7.
Report on Senior Center
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Linda Carl
Submitted For:Gary Haakenson Time:30 Minutes
Department:Mayor's Office Type:Information
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Report on Senior Center proposal (Bob Gregg).
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Bob Gregg will give a presentation to the City Council regarding a private partnership for building
a new senior center.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:28 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 01:35 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:41 PM APRV
Form Started By: Linda
Carl
Started On: 10/16/2008 11:40
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 347 of 374
AM-1844 8.
Amendment ECDC 19.00.005 Building Permit Timelines
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Duane Bowman Time:10 Minutes
Department:Development Services Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Proposed ordinance amending ECDC 19.00.005 modifying the time limitations on permit
applications
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Adopt the proposed ordinance.
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Due to the difficult economic situation that presently exists, staff and the Mayor have identified a
way to assist permit applicants by modifying the current code language relating to time limitations
on building permits. Specifically, the proposed amendments would:
- Extend the timeline for applications from 180 days to 360 days from the date of application;
- Act on a building permit that has been issued from 180 days to 360 days; and
- Extensions cannot exceed 720 days instead of 360 days.
Because this amendment is in Chapter 19 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, it can
be considered directly by the City Council.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1 - Proposed Ordinance
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 05:04 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/17/2008 09:02 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/17/2008 09:06 AM APRV
Form Started By: Duane
Bowman
Started On: 10/10/2008 03:23
PM
Packet Page 348 of 374
Final Approval Date: 10/17/2008
Packet Page 349 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 -
0006.9000
WSS/gjz
10/15/08
ORDINANCE NO. _______
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF
SECTION 19.00.005 SECTION AMENDMENTS RELATING
TO THE AMENDMENTS TO THE STATE BUILDING CODE
TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF BUILDING PERMIT
APPLICATIONS FROM 180 DAYS TO 360 DAYS, AND
EXTENSIONS FROM 180 DAYS TO 360 DAYS, AND FIXING
A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, the process of construction and application review can be expensive
and time consuming, and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in the public interest to permit
applications to be valid for and extended for periods of 360 rather than 180 days in order to
permit applicants and staff time for adequate review and supplementation of materials, NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Edmonds Community Development Code Section 19.00.005
Section Amendments is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.00.005 Section amendments.
The following sections of the IBC have been added, amended,
deleted or replaced as follows:
A. Chapter 1, Administration.
1. Section 104.3 Notices and orders. The building official
shall issue all necessary notices or orders to ensure compliance
with this code. The building official is also authorized to use
Packet Page 350 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 -
Chapter 20.110 ECDC for code compliance in addition to the
remedies provided for in this code.
2. Section 105.1.1 Annual permit. Deleted.
3. Section 105.1.2 Annual permit records. Deleted.
4. Section 105.2 Work exempt from permit. Replaced by
ECDC 19.00.010.
5. Section 105.3.2 Time limitation of permit application.
a. Applications, for which no permit is issued within 360
days following the date of application, shall expire by limitation,
and plans and other data submitted for review may thereafter be
returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official.
b. The building official may extend the time for action by the
applicant for a period not exceeding 360 days prior to such
expiration date.
c. No application shall be extended more than once for a total
application life of 720 days. In order to renew action on an
expired application, the applicant shall submit a new application,
revised plans based on any applicable code or ordinance change,
and pay new plan review fees.
6. Section 105.5 Permit expiration and extension.
a. Every permit issued under ECDC Title 19 shall expire by
limitation 360 days after issuance, except as provided in ECDC
19.00.005(A)(6)(b) and 19.10.010(A)(4)(a).
b. The following permits shall expire by limitation, 180 days
after issuance and may not be extended:
i. Demotion permits required by ECDC 19.00.030;
ii. Permits for Moving Buildings required by Chapter 19.60
ECDC;
iii. Mechanical permits;
iv. Tank removal, tank fill, or tank placement permits;
v. Grading, excavation and fill permits;
vi. Water service line permits;
Deleted: 180
Deleted: 180
Deleted: 360
Packet Page 351 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 -
vii. Plumbing permits;
viii. Gas piping permits;
ix. Deck and dock permits;
x. Fence permits;
xi. Re-roof permits;
xii. Rockery and retaining wall permits;
xiii. Swimming pool, hot tub and spa permits;
xiv. Sign permits;
xv. Shoring permits;
xvi. Foundation permits.
c. Prior to expiration of an active permit the applicant may
request in writing an extension for an additional year. If the plans
and specifications for the permit extension application are the same
as the plans and specifications submitted for the original permit
application and provided there has been at least one (1) required
progress inspection conducted by the city building inspector prior
to the extension, the permit shall be extended. Permit fees shall be
charged at a rate of one half the original building permit fee to
extend the permit.
d. If the applicant cannot complete work issued under an
extended permit within a total period of two (2) years, the
applicant may request in writing, prior to the second year
expiration, an extension for a third and final year. Provided there
has been at least one (1) required progress inspection conducted by
the city building inspector prior to the extension, the permit shall
be extended for a third and final year. In lieu of permit fees for the
third year extension, inspection fees shall be charged for the
remaining work based on the number of required inspections
remaining for the project for all city departments.
e. The maximum amount of time any building permit may be
extended shall be a total of three (3) years. At the end of any three
(3) year period starting from the original date of permit issuance,
the permit shall become null and void and a new building permit
shall be required, with full permit fees, in order for the applicant to
complete work. The voiding of the prior permit shall negate all
previous vesting of zoning or building codes. Whenever an appeal
Packet Page 352 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 4 -
is filed and a necessary development approval is stayed in
accordance with ECDC 20.105.020(B), the time limit periods
imposed under this section shall also be stayed until final decision.
f. The building official may reject requests for permit
extension where he determines that modifications or amendments
to the applicable zoning and building codes have occurred since
the original issuance of the permit and/or modifications or
amendments would significantly promote public health and safety
if applied to the project through the issuance of a new permit.
7. Section 105.5.1 Recommence work on an expired permit.
a. In order to recommence work on an expired permit, a new
permit application with full permit fees shall be submitted to the
building official.
b. New permit applications shall be reviewed under current
zoning and building codes in effect at the time of complete
application submittal. If a new permit is sought to recommence
work on an expired permit, the new permit shall be vested under
the codes in effect when an application for a new permit is
submitted which fully complies with ECDC 19.00.015. When
additional plan review is required, plan review fees shall be
charged.
8. Section 106.3.3 Phased approval for multi-family and
commercial development.
a. The building official may issue partial permits for phased
construction as part of a development before the entire plans and
specifications for the whole building or structure have been
approved provided architectural design board approval has been
granted.
b. Phased approval means permits for grading, shoring and
foundation may be issued separately, provided concurrent approval
is granted by the planning manager, city engineer and fire marshal,
when applicable. No phased approval permit shall be issued unless
approved civil plans detailing the construction of all site
improvements including, but not limited to: curbs, gutters,
sidewalks, paved streets, water lines, sewer lines, and storm
drainage have been signed as approved by the city engineer.
c. With such phased approval, a performance bond shall be
posted with the city pursuant to Chapter 17.10 ECDC, to cover the
estimated cost of construction to city standards for the
improvements.
Packet Page 353 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 5 -
9. Section 107 Temporary structures for uses. Deleted.
10. Section 108 Fees. Replaced by Chapter 19.70 ECDC.
11. Section 112 Appeals. Replaced by Chapter 19.80 ECDC.
B. Chapter 5, General Building Heights and Areas.
1. Section 501.2 Premises identification. Approved numbers
or addresses shall be installed by the property owner for new
buildings in such a position as to be clearly visible and legible
from the street or roadway fronting the property. Letters or
numbers shall be a minimum six (6) inches in height and stroke a
minimum of .75 inch of a contracting color to the building base
color.
C. Chapter 31, Special Construction.
1. Section 3103 Temporary structures. Deleted.
2. Section 3108.1.1 Radio, television and cellular
communication related equipment and devices.
a. A permit is required for the installation or relocation of
commercial radio, television or cellular tower support structures
including monopoles, guyed or lattice towers, whip antennas, panel
antennas, parabolic antennas and related accessory equipment, and
accessory equipment shelters (regardless of size) including roof
mounted equipment shelters.
3. Section 3109.1 Applicability and maintenance. Swimming
pools, hot tubs and spas of all occupancies shall comply with the
requirements of this section and other applicable sections of this
code.
a. It is the responsibility of the owner to maintain the
swimming pool, hot tub or spa in a clean and sanitary condition
and all equipment maintained in a satisfactory operating condition
when the swimming pool, hot tub or spa is in use. A swimming
pool, hot tub or spa that is neglected, not secured from public entry
and/or not maintained shall be determined to be a hazard to health
and safety and shall be properly mitigated to the satisfaction of the
building official.
4. Section 3109.1.1 Permit required. It shall be unlawful for
any person to install, remove, alter, fill with material other than
water, repair or replace any swimming pool, hot tub or spa in a
building or on premises without first obtaining a permit to do such
Packet Page 354 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 6 -
work from the building official. Reference ECDC 19.00.010(K)
for permit exemptions.
5. Section 3109.3 Public swimming pools. Deleted.
6. Section 3109.4 Residential swimming pools. Deleted.
7. Section 3109.6 Fences and gates.
a. The swimming pool area shall be completely surrounded by
a substantial fence at least six (6) feet in height. No openings shall
be greater than two (2) inches, and a self-closing, self-latching gate
shall be provided, with an inside lock inaccessible to children aged
five (5) years or younger.
b. The gate shall be securely locked when the swimming pool
is unattended.
c. Any swimming pool not presently fenced as required by
this section shall be fenced within sixty (60) days of this code
adoption.
8. Section 3109.7 Location and setbacks. Swimming pools,
hot tubs, and spas shall meet requirements of the zoning code of
the city of Edmonds.
a. Minimum setbacks are measured from property lines to the
inside face of the pool, hot tub or spa as required by the zoning
code for accessory structures.
b. All other accessory buildings and equipment shall meet the
normally required setbacks for accessory structures in the zone in
which they are located.
9. Section 3109.8 Equipment foundations and enclosures.
a. All mechanical equipment supported from the ground shall
rest on level concrete or other approved base extending not less
than three (3) inches above the adjoining ground level.
b. All heating and electrical equipment, unless approved for
outdoor installation, shall be adequately protected against the
weather or installed within a building.
10. Section 3109.9Accessibility and clearances. Equipment
shall be so installed as to provide accessibility for cleaning,
operating, maintenance and servicing.
Packet Page 355 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 7 -
11. Section 3109.10 Tests and cross connection devices.
a. All swimming pool, hot tub and spa piping shall be
inspected and approved before being covered or concealed.
b. Washington State Department of Health approved cross
connection devices are required to be provided when used to fill
any swimming pool, hot tub or spa.
12. Section 3109.1 Wastewater disposal. A means of disposal
of the total contents of the swimming pool, hot tub or spa
(including partial or periodic emptying) shall be reviewed and
approved by the public works director.
a. No direct connection shall be made between any swimming
pool, hot tub or spa to any storm drain, city sewer main, drainage
system, seepage pit, underground leaching pit, or sub-soil drain.
b. A sanitary tee (outside cleanout installed on the man
building side sewer line) shall be provided for draining of treated
water into the cit sanitary sewer system.
13. Section 3109.12 Inspection requirements. The appropriate
city inspector shall be notified for the following applicable
inspections:
a. Footing, wall, pre-form, pre-gunite, erosion control,
underground plumbing, sanitary extension and cleanout,
mechanical pool equipment, gas piping, mechanical enclosure
location, cross connection and final inspection.
b. An initial cross connection control installation inspection is
required by the city cross connection control specialist prior to the
final installation approval.
c. All backflow assemblies shall be tested by state certified
backflow assembly testers upon initial installation and then
annually thereafter. Copies of all test reports shall be submitted to
the city water division for review and approval.
D. Appendix E, Accessibility Requirements.
1. Section E107 Signage. Deleted.
2. Section E108 Bus stops. Deleted.
3. Section E108 Airports, Deleted.
Packet Page 356 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 8 -
4. Section E111, Referenced standards. Deleted
E. Appendix H, Signs.
1. Section H101.2 Signs exempt from permits. Replaced by
ECDC 19.00.010(A0.
2. Section H101.2.1 Prohibited signs.
a. It is unlawful for any person to advertise or display any
visually communicated message, by letter or pictorially, of any
kind on any seating bench, or in direct connection with any bench.
b. All signs not expressly permitted by Chapter 20.60 ECDC.
c. Signs which the city engineer determines to be a hazard to
vehicle or pedestrian traffic because they resemble or obscure a
traffic control device or pose a hazard to a pedestrian walkway or
because they obscure visibility needed for safe traffic passage.
Such signs shall be immediately removed at the request of the city
engineer.
d. All signs which are located within a public right-of-way
and that have been improperly posted or displayed are hereby
declared to be a public nuisance and shall be subject to immediate
removal and confiscation per ECDC 20.50.090.
3. Section H104 Identification. Deleted.
4. Section H106.1.1 Internally illuminated signs. Deleted.
5. Section H107 Combustible materials. Deleted.
6. Section H108 Animated devices. Deleted.
7. Section H109.1 Height restrictions. Deleted.
8. Section H110 Roof signs. Deleted.
F. Appendix J, Grading.
1. Section J103.2 Exemptions. Replaced by 19.00.010(M).
Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect
Packet Page 357 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 9 -
five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the
title.
APPROVED:
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
W. SCOTT SNYDER
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
Packet Page 358 of 374
{WSS708117.DOC;1/00006.900000/}- 10 -
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. __________
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the ____ day of ___________, 2008, the City Council of the City of Edmonds,
passed Ordinance No. _____________. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting
of the title, provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE
PROVISIONS OF SECTION 19.00.005 SECTION AMENDMENTS RELATING TO THE
AMENDMENTS TO THE STATE BUILDING CODE TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF
BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS FROM 180 DAYS TO 360 DAYS, AND
EXTENSIONS FROM 180 DAYS TO 360 DAYS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME
SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this _____ day of ________________, 2008.
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 359 of 374
AM-1855 9.
Contract for Professional Services - Prosecutor
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Debi Humann Time:10 Minutes
Department:Human Resources Type:Action
Review Committee:
Action:Recommend Review by Full Council
Information
Subject Title
Contract for Professional Services - Prosecutor.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
City Staff (Police Chief and HR Director), along with the Mayor, recommend approval.
Previous Council Action
The proposed Contract for Professional Services for the City of Edmonds Prosecutor went before
the Finance Committee on Tuesday, October 14. The recommendation was to bring the Contract
forward for full Council review.
Narrative
The term of the previous Contract was for three years commencing April 1, 2005 through April 1,
2008. The Contract had a renewal clause for up to two one-year extensions without further action
of either party. We are currently in one of the extensions as we negotiate through the new services
and associated costs.
The previous Contract contained a monthly retainer of $6,000 with an hourly rate of $75 for any
work outside the scope of the agreement. The new Contract has a monthly retainer of $9500 from
April 1 through August 31. Beginning September 1, the monthly retainer moves to $11,000. In
addition the hourly rate increased (see the attached Contract).
The proposed Contract is significantly more costly than the previous Contract. In 2005, the
prosecuting attorneys filed 1078 cases; in 2006, 1310 cases were filed; in 2007, 1433 cases were
filed; and in 2008 (as of July 1), 900 cases were filed. If the 900 cases for 2008 are extrapolated
for the remainder of the year, it is estimated that 1800 cases will be filed. In addition, an
additional court date has been added to the court calendar which also increases the amount of court
time required of the prosecuting attorneys.
This Contract has been reviewed by City Attorney Scott Snyder, and was negotiated by HR
Director Debi Humann, Police Chief Al Compaan, Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless, and
Assistant Police Chief Gerry Gannon. It is respectfully requested that Coucil review and approve
the proposed Contract for Professional Services.
Fiscal Impact
Packet Page 360 of 374
Attachments
Link: Contract for Professional Services - Prosecutor
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/17/2008 08:32 AM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/17/2008 09:02 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/17/2008 09:06 AM APRV
Form Started By: Debi
Humann
Started On: 10/16/2008 11:56
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/17/2008
Packet Page 361 of 374
Page 1
CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
CITY OF EDMONDS PROSECUTOR
WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has established its municipal court
under provisions of Chapter 3.50 RCW in the Edmonds City Code and Chapter
2.15; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to contract with a skilled firm with attorneys
familiar with the prosecution of criminal and infraction matters involving
allegations of violation of municipal ordinances; and
WHEREAS, the law firm of Zachor & Thomas, Inc., P.S. (the principals
who are H. James Zachor, Jr. and Melanie S. Thomas Dane) and its attorneys
are licensed to practice law in the State of Washington with experience as
prosecutors within the State of Washington and the City of Edmonds, and
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and benefits
to be derived, this Contract is entered into on the date specified hereafter
between the City of Edmonds, a municipal corporation, (hereafter referred to as
the “City”) and Zachor & Thomas, Inc., P.S. (hereafter referred to as the
“Prosecutor”), subject to the terms and conditions set forth below:
1. Duties: The Prosecutor shall provide the following services:
1.1 Review police incident reports for determination of charging;
1.2 Maintain all current cases in an appropriate filing system;
1.3 Review and remain familiar with filed criminal misdemeanor and
gross misdemeanor cases;
1.4 Interview witnesses as necessary in preparation of prosecution of
cases;
1.5 Respond to discovery requests, make sentence recommendations
and prepare legal memoranda, when necessary;
1.6 Prepare cases for trial, including the issuance of witness
subpoenas (for service by the Police Department, when applicable),
conduct evidence retrieval (with the assistance of the Police
Department and other City agencies), and prepare jury instructions,
as necessary;
1.7 To assist the City Attorney, when applicable, in response to Public
Disclosure requests;
1.8 Represent the City at all arraignments, pretrial hearings, motion
hearings, review hearings, in-custody hearings, and trials as
scheduled in 2008;
dlh.contracts.08.prosecutor.final.doc
Packet Page 362 of 374
Page 2
1.9 Prosecute contested code and traffic infraction violations which are
scheduled on the regular criminal calendar as scheduled in 2008;
1.10 Represent the City in the prosecution of drug, felony, and firearm
forfeitures that are filed by the City in the Edmonds Municipal Court,
Lynnwood Municipal Court, or heard in Mountlake Terrace.
Forfeitures filed in Superior Court or District Court shall be billed at
the hourly rate set forth hereafter. Notice of Intended Forfeitures
and Seizure Hearings shall be set in the Court of jurisdiction within
90 days of receipt of Notice of Demand for Hearing.
1.11 Be available to the Police Department for questions at all times, by
providing appropriate telephone numbers, cell phone numbers, e-
mail addresses, and voice mail access. Calls are to be returned by
the next business day.
The Prosecutor maintains a business office in the City of Edmonds
and Police Officers may meet with the Prosecutor at anytime during
normal business hours, when the Prosecutor is available.
1.12 Consult with the City Attorney, as needed, regarding Edmonds City
Code amendments.
1.13 Services provided under this agreement play an important part in
fostering public confidence in the criminal justice system and are an
important and essential part of law enforcement. All services
provided under this agreement shall be in accord with the Rules of
Professional Responsibility, local court rules and the normal
standard of care among prosecutors in Western Washington.
2. Compensation
2.1 Base Rate. The Prosecutor shall receive a monthly retainer of
NINE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($9,500.00) per
month for performance of those duties set forth in paragraph 1
above.
2.2 Hourly Rate. Services performed outside the scope of the duties
described in paragraph 1 above, or which may be mutually agreed
upon to be added at a later date, shall be in addition to the base
rate set forth in paragraph 2.1. Any RALJ case filed in Superior
Court shall be billed at the rate of ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS
($100.00) per hour. Any other cases filed at the Court of Appeals,
cases filed at the Supreme Court, cases filed in the Snohomish
County District Court; forfeiture cases filed in courts other than the
Edmonds Municipal Court, Lynnwood Municipal Court, or heard in
dlh.contracts.08.prosecutor.final.doc
Packet Page 363 of 374
Page 3
Mountlake Terrace, which require the appearance of the
Prosecutor; and such other activities agreed to by the City and the
Prosecutor, shall be billed at ONE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE
DOLLARS ($125.00). The Prosecutor shall obtain written approval
from the City prior to pursuing appeal of any matter beyond the
Superior Court.
2.3 Fees Review. The schedule of fees provided for in paragraph 2.1
and 2.2 shall apply for the contract period reflected in Article 4.
Changes in fees shall be first proposed by the Prosecutor to the
Mayor for consideration in the preparation of the biennial mayoral
budget on or before July 1, 2010 and for each even numbered year
thereafter. Increases in such fee and cost structure, if any, shall be
considered by the City Council as a part of its budget process.
Such changes, if any, to the fee structure and the budget process
approved by the City Council shall, upon acceptance by the
Prosecutor, be made a part of this Agreement.
It is understood by the parties hereto that the Edmonds Municipal
Court has advised the City and Prosecutor of its intent to add
additional court days each month commencing September 2008,
wherein the Prosecutor’s time for preparation and presence will be
required. Thus, commensurate with this change in required
appearances and workload, the parties agree to increase the base
rate in paragraph 2.1 herein to ELEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS
($11,000) per month effective September 1, 2008.
2.4 Costs. The City shall be the sole obligor and shall pay all witness
fees, expert witness fees (including but not limited to Speed
Measuring Device Experts), and interpreters’ fees determined to be
necessary by the Prosecutor in the preparation and disposition of
its cases. The City shall approve all other anticipated fees, before
such expense is incurred. The City will not unreasonably delay in
granting approval of such expenses. The City further agrees to
hold the Prosecutor harmless from such expenses and costs as set
forth hereinabove.
2.5 Rate Adjustment. If the number of filings (criminal traffic, criminal
non-traffic, and DUI) exceed 1400 on an annual basis for 2008, a
payment rate adjustment of 3% will become effective January 1,
2009. If the number of filings (criminal traffic, criminal non-traffic,
and DUI) exceed 1800 on an annual basis for 2008, a payment rate
adjustment of 5% will become effective January 1, 2009. At no
time will both a 3% and a 5% rate adjustment be required. Both
parties agree to review the number of filings, court appearances,
dlh.contracts.08.prosecutor.final.doc
Packet Page 364 of 374
Page 4
and/or services rendered beginning on our about July 1, 2009 for a
possible rate adjustment effective January 1, 2010.
3. Assistant Prosecutors. The City contracts with the Prosecutor for a
monthly fee for prosecution services. Should the Prosecutor be absent, it
shall be the responsibility of the Prosecutor to provide substitute coverage
with a properly licensed State of Washington attorney, who has been
previously approved by the City through its Police Chief. In the event of a
dispute regarding approval of any individual, the City Council shall be final
arbiter. All Prosecutors (including substitute) must wear city issued
identification when in the Public Safety Building.
If a “Conflict Prosecutor” is required, such “Conflict Prosecutor” shall be
approved by the City through its Police Chief. In the event of a dispute
regarding approval of any individual, the City Council shall be final arbiter.
The Prosecutor is responsible for any costs associated with the “Conflict
Prosecutor.”
4. Term of Contract. The Term of this Contract shall be from the first day of
April 2008 through March 31, 2010. This Contract may be renewed for up
to two one-year extensions without further action of the parties. Should
either party desire not to renew for that upcoming year, such party must
provide written notice by the first day of July of the year of contract
expiration.
5. Termination. The attorney/client relationship is personal and involves the
ability of the parties to communicate and maintain credibility. Therefore,
the Prosecutor and/or the City Council, in its sole legislative discretion,
reserve the right to terminate this Contract upon one hundred twenty (120)
days written notice. This contract may be terminated by either party at
any time for cause. By way of illustration, and not limitation, cause shall
include violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct of the Washington
State Court Rules of law or ordinance or of any term of this contract.
6. Ownership. All City of Edmonds’ files and other documents maintained by
the Prosecutor shall be the files of the City of Edmonds and accessible by
the City through its City Attorney or other duly authorized representative
during normal business hours, subject to the Washington State Bar
Association Rules of Ethics. At the request of the City, any and all files
maintained by the Prosecutor shall be tendered to the City, subject to the
terms and conditions of this Contract and the Washington State Bar
Association Rules of Ethics. All equipment and facilities furnished by the
City shall remain the sole property of the City. Any equipment, facilities
and materials provided by the Prosecutor shall remain the sole property of
the Prosecutor.
dlh.contracts.08.prosecutor.final.doc
Packet Page 365 of 374
Page 5
7. Independent Contractor. The Prosecutor and its assistants are
professionals and independent contractors, acting without direct
supervision. The Prosecutor waives any claim in the nature of a tax,
charge, cost or employee benefit that would attach if the Prosecutor or its
assistants were held to be employees of the City.
8. Insurance. The Prosecutor shall maintain a policy of professional liability
and malpractice insurance throughout the term of this Contract.
9. Indemnity.
9.1 So long as the Prosecutor is acting within the scope of this Contract
and in accord with its ethical responsibilities under the provisions of
the Rules of Professional Conduct established by the Washington
Supreme Court, it shall be entitled to legal defense and
representation as an official of the City in accord with the provisions
of Chapter 2.06 ECC. Nothing herein shall be interpreted to require
defense or indemnity for acts beyond the scope of this Contract,
including, but not limited to, tortuous or wrongful acts committed by
the Prosecutor.
9.2 Nothing herein shall be interpreted to require the Prosecutor to
indemnify the City, its officers, agents or employees from loss,
claim or liability arising from the negligent, wrongful or tortuous
conduct of the City, its officers, agents or employees.
9.3 Nothing herein shall be interpreted to require the City to indemnify
the Prosecutor, its officers, agents or employees from loss, claim or
liability arising from negligent, wrongful or tortuous conduct of the
Prosecutor, its officers, agents or employees.
10. Sole Contract Between the Parties and Amendment. This Contract is the
sole written Contract between the parties. Any prior written or oral
understanding shall merge with this Contract. It shall be amended only by
the express written consent of the parties hereto.
dlh.contracts.08.prosecutor.final.doc
Packet Page 366 of 374
Page 6
dlh.contracts.08.prosecutor.final.doc
DATED this ____________ day of ______________, 2008.
CITY OF EDMONDS: PROSECUTOR:
Zachor & Thomas, Inc., P.S.
BY: ___________________________ BY:________________________
Mayor Gary Haakenson H. James Zachor, Jr., President
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
________________________________
City Clerk, Sandra S. Chase
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
________________________________
W. Scott Snyder
Packet Page 367 of 374
AM-1851 10.
Report on City Council Committee Meetings
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:10/21/2008
Submitted By:Sandy Chase Time:15 Minutes
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Information
Review Committee:
Action:
Information
Subject Title
Report on City Council Committee Meetings of October 14, 2008.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
N/A
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Attached are copies of the following Committee Meeting Minutes
•10-14-08 Community Services/Development Services Meeting Minutes
•10-14-08 Finance Committee Meeting Minutes
•10-14-08 Public Safety Committee Meeting Minutes
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: CSDS Committee Minutes
Link: Finance Committee Minutes
Link: Public Safety Committee Minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:28 PM APRV
2 Mayor Gary Haakenson 10/16/2008 01:35 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Sandy Chase 10/16/2008 01:41 PM APRV
Form Started By: Sandy
Chase
Started On: 10/16/2008 11:00
AM
Final Approval Date: 10/16/2008
Packet Page 368 of 374
M I N U T E S
Community Services/Development Services Committee Meeting
October 14, 2008
Elected Officials Present: Staff Present:
Peggy Pritchard-Olson, Chair Duane Bowman, Dev. Services Director
D.J. Wilson, Councilmember
Michael Plunkett, Council President
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Rob English, City Engineer
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
The committee convened at 6:05 p.m.
A. Development regulations relating to the fiber optic network.
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director, introduced this topic. This subject was brought
during a presentation by Rick Jenness on the city’s fiber optic program. He noted that in order to
mandate a program of installation of conduit for fiber optic on private property, the city would need to
develop a program to give a basis for the requirement. He described some alternatives where the
city could set standards for its city projects, a voluntary program or a program of the city paying for
conduit for a developer to install. Noel Miller noted that the city still would have to identify a funding
source for purchasing conduit. Rick Jenness indicated that he didn’t believe the cost to be that high.
He noted that for a developer it could actually be cheaper to install conduit and prevent future
disruptions when communications providers decide to install service. Mayor Haakenson pointed out
that the fiber optic program will not be going forward at this time and maybe voluntary installation
would be the best case scenario. Peggy Olson concurred that a voluntary program would work.
Council member Wilson noted that this is probably something that should be considered during next
year’s capital improvement program (CIP) discussion.
ACTION: Staff will continue to refine ideas and come back to the committee during the CIP process
next year.
B. Discussion on Community Sustainability Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Rob Chave introduced the topic. He described the current work on the sustainability element noting
that the format for the new element would be done to fit with the growth management act (GMA)
format of goals and then policies. He noted that the new element would be overarching showing
how the various comprehensive plan elements relate to ‘sustainability,’ while retaining specific detail
within each existing plan element. For example, housing would be discussed in the sustainability
element as it relates to other components of the plan, but the housing element itself would contain
most of the detail on housing policies and programs. The biggest impact of the sustainability
element would likely be to drive more strategic planning and policy review to guide use of city
resources and programs, especially budgeting. For example, a new emphasis on life cycle
efficiency may take precedence over simple least-cost analytical methods. Council member Wilson
thought it would be a good idea to have a preamble at the start of the element stating this overall
intent. He asked about the timeframe to complete the work on the element. Rob Chave indicated
that some portions of the work could be completed within the next two years as various existing
Packet Page 369 of 374
CS/DS Committee Minutes
October 14, 2008
Page 2
2
elements get their regular updates. Council could also undertake specific updates that they felt were
high priorities. However, some elements may have to wait for their next major update; he estimated
that this would mean that all elements of the plan should be updated to reflect sustainability in the
range of five to seven years.
ACTION: Staff will bring back refinements to the draft language for review at the November CS/DS
meeting.
C. Review possible amendments to ECDC Chapter 18.05, Utility Wires, regarding
replacement power poles.
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director, introduced the topic. This matter came to the
attention of the city based upon an incident in the Seaview area when a PUD transmission pole was
replaced with a steel pole as part of the addition of a wireless micro cell on top of the new pole. He
reviewed the draft language and highlighted two key revisions. First, a neighborhood informational
meeting would be required before a permit for a replacement pole with wireless antenna attached
could be issued. Second, replaced poles in residential neighborhoods would have to be wood. Mr.
Bowman distributed an email from a representative from the Snohomish County PUD which raised a
concern about the draft language. They were concerned about the requirement to solely use wood
poles in residential neighborhoods. Mayor Haakenson stated that he did not believe that this was a
major concern and that wood was the proper material for power poles in residential neighborhoods.
Council member Wilson and Olson agreed. Mr. Bowman indicated that he could draft some
language to address the concern raised by the PUD which would require a public hearing if they
wanted a material other than wood.
ACTION: The CS/DS committee recommended the draft language be forwarded to the City Council
for approval and that staff draft possible language to address the concerns raised by the PUD
D. Discussion on commercial uses in residential zones related to house rentals.
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director, introduced the topic. This matter came to the
attention of the city based upon incidents related to the rental of a large house in the Talbot Park
area for weddings, conferences, parties etc. The house is available to rent by the day, week, or
month. The residents in the neighborhood have complained about increased traffic and noise.
Staff believes that the code needs to be amended to address this issue. Mr. Bowman distributed a
draft interim zoning ordinance that would amend Chapter 16.20.010of the Edmonds Community
Development Code (ECDC) to restrict rental of a house to not less than thirty days. He noted that
the city could pick the timeframe (a week or month(s)). Council member Wilson expressed concern
about the ordinance and could not support such an ordinance. He noted that this could potentially
impact other residences that are available to rent in the community. He asked if staff researched the
impact of the ordinance on other property owners. Mr. Bowman indicated that staff had not done
any research.
Packet Page 370 of 374
CS/DS Committee Minutes
October 14, 2008
Page 3
3
ACTION: The CS/DS committee recommended the draft interim ordinance be presented to the City
Council with a timeline to do a code amendment following the normal code amendment process.
Staff was also requested to do research to see if this proposed ordinance would impact other
properties.
The Committee meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
Packet Page 371 of 374
FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
October 14, 2008
6:00 PM
V:\WORDATA\FINANCE COMM MINUTES\10-14-08 FINANCE COMMITTEE.DOC
Present: Councilmember Dave Orvis
Councilmember Ron Wambolt
Staff: Debi Humann
Al Compaan
Kathleen Junglov
Public: Roger Hertrich
Committee Chair Wambolt called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM.
Added Item A: Contract for Professional Services – City of Edmonds Prosecutor
Debi Humann gave an overview of the proposed contract, the contract negotiation
process, and the factors contributing to the large increase in the contract. Committee
members asked Debi to provide information regarding the prosecutor contracts with
neighboring cities, and why the contract isn’t based on an hourly rate. After responding
to committee member questions, it was decided to forward this item to full council.
Committee members requested the Prosecutor attend the meeting to be available to
respond to questions.
Added Item B: Surplus Police Property
Chief Compaan briefly discussed the items to be surplused. This item was recommended
for the consent agenda by the Committee.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:23 PM.
Packet Page 372 of 374
Public Safety Committee Meeting
October 14, 2008
Page 1 of 2
Minutes
Public Safety Committee Meeting
October 14, 2008
Committee Members Present: Council member Deanna Dawson, Chair
Council member Steve Bernheim
Staff Present: Fire Chief Thomas J. Tomberg
Assistant Fire Chief Mark Correira
Assistant Police Chief Gerry Gannon
Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless
Public Works Director Noel Miller
Guests: Mayor Gary Haakenson
Council President Michael Plunkett
Roger Hertrich
Chris Fyall
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m.
A. 2007- 2008 Fire Department Work Plan Update #3
Fire staff reviewed the information contained in the Public Safety Committee Agenda Memo
(AM-1834) briefly discussing the most timely and/or pertinent individual plan elements contained
in Update #3. The fourth and final plan update is scheduled for the first quarter of 2009, along
with the 2009-2010 Fire Department Work Plan.
Action: Place the 2007-2008 Fire Department Work Plan Update #3 on the City Council
Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve, and post on the Fire Department website.
B. Interlocal Agreement for Automatic First Response and Mutual Assistance
Staff reviewed the information contained in the Public Safety Committee Agenda Memo (AM-
1835). The initial agreement, approved by Council on June 27, 2000, formalized the previous
“handshake agreement” between fire/EMS agencies to provide automatic emergency
assistance and share fire, medical, hazardous materials, technical rescue, and disaster
resources area-wide without regard to jurisdictional borders and at no cost. This document is an
extraordinary example of mitigating local emergencies by marshaling resources far beyond the
capability of a single agency. Approximately 32 agencies will have the opportunity to sign the
agreement. The City Attorney approved the revised agreement as to form.
In addition to correcting typos and formatting errors, substantive changes include:
4.4 Process for withdrawal of automatic aid from another agency.
11.1 No compensation for assistance provided absent a separate agreement.
11.2 Abide by local agency rules with regard to EMS fees except as provided in a separate
agreement.
13.2 Insurance liability for damage to borrowed equipment subject to separate pre-
agreement.
16.2 “Hosting party” responsibility to provide safe training site.
Appendix A calls out the use of specific Snohomish County policies during automatic aid
incidents to include the use of the Incident Management System, Passport Accountability,
Fire/EMS Resource Plan, and the Mayday Policy.
Packet Page 373 of 374
Public Safety Committee Meeting
October 14, 2008
Page 2 of 2
Action: Forward to the City Council Consent Agenda with a recommendation to approve as
Authorization for the Mayor to Sign the Interlocal Agreement for Automatic First Response and
Mutual Assistance.
C. Anti Idling Signs
Council member Bernheim discussed the placement of “No Idling” signs in various areas
throughout the city. Noel Miller advised the committee that he would need authorization from
council in order to proceed. Council chair Dawson suggested bringing the issue to full council
for discussion as opposed to putting the issue on the consent agenda.
It was agreed that the issue would be brought to full council.
Action: On October 14, 2008 the Public Safety Committee met. Discussion was held on the
“Anti Idling Signs.” Council chair Dawson and Council member Bernheim agreed that the issue
will be brought to full council for discussion.
D. Discussion on Edmonds City Code Section 5.05 related to dangerous dogs.
Council member Bernheim initiated discussion regarding an appeal process for “Potentially
Dangerous Dog Declarations.” There was discussion between Council member Bernheim,
Council chair Dawson and Assistant Police Chief Lawless regarding the ordinance as it is
currently written as well as an opinion provided by the City Attorney’s office that recommended
no changes be undertaken.
It was noted that there is a provision that allows for an appeal of a dog being declared a
dangerous dog and through that process the original “Potentially Dangerous Dog Declaration”
may be addressed as well.
Council member Bernheim requested the numbers of Potentially Dangerous Dog Declarations
and subsequent Dangerous Dog Declarations that have been issued since the beginning of
2007. Assistant Police Chief Lawless advised the committee he would provide the information
requested as soon as Sr. Animal Control Officer Dawson returned from vacation.
Action: On October 14, 2008 the Public Safety Committee met. Discussion was held on
Edmonds City Code Section 5.05 relating to dangerous dogs. Council member Bernheim
requested some statistics on Potentially Dangerous Dog Declarations and subsequent
Dangerous Dog Declarations. Statistics will be brought to a future Public Safety Committee
Meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 1855 hours
Packet Page 374 of 374