2012.06.26 CC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
Council Chambers ~ Public Safety Complex
250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds
JUNE 26, 2012
Work Session
7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE
1.(5 Minutes)Approval of Agenda
2.(5 Minutes)Approval of Consent Agenda Items
A.Roll Call
B.AM-4931 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of June 19, 2012.
C.AM-4929 Approval of claim checks #132695 through #132841 dated June 21, 2012 for
$605,691.24 (replacement check #132800 for $313.83). Approval of payroll direct
deposit & checks #51411 through #51442 for $449,154.89 and benefit checks #51443
through #51450 and wire payments for $192,762.58 for the period June 1, 2012 through
June 15, 2012.
D.AM-4930 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Sulammite Polevoy ($3,090.39).
3.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)*
*Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public
Hearings
4.(30 Minutes)
AM-4926
Report on bids opened June 7, 2012 for the Talbot Road Storm Drain Improvements
project and award of contract to Kamins Construction in the amount of $317,178.62.
5.(30 Minutes)
AM-4928
Updating the City of Edmonds City Code (ECC) 4.12 and portions of Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC) Title 16 to allow Motorized Mobile Vendors.
(File No. AMD20100012)
6.(15 Minutes)Report on outside committee/board meetings.
Packet Page 1 of 129
7.(30 Minutes)Executive session regarding potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)(iii).
8.(5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments
9.(15 Minutes)Council Comments
ADJOURN
Packet Page 2 of 129
AM-4931 2. B.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/26/2012
Time:
Submitted By:Sandy Chase
Department:City Clerk's Office
Review Committee: Committee Action:
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of June 19, 2012.
Recommendation
Review and approval of the draft minutes.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Attached is a copy of the draft minutes.
Attachments
06-19-12 Draft City Council Minutes
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Mayor Dave Earling 06/21/2012 02:09 PM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 06/21/2012 02:12 PM
Form Started By: Sandy Chase Started On: 06/21/2012 12:15 PM
Final Approval Date: 06/21/2012
Packet Page 3 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
June 19, 2012
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Peterson in the
Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Strom Peterson, Mayor Pro Tem
Lora Petso, Council President Pro Tem
Frank Yamamoto, Councilmember
Joan Councilmember Bloom, Councilmember
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember*
*(participated in Agenda Items 7-10 via phone)
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
STAFF PRESENT
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Gerry Gannon, Assistant Police Chief
Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief
Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic
Development Director
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Shawn Hunstock, Finance Director
Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Eng. Program Mgr.
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Frances Chapin, Cultural Services Manager
Rob English, City Engineer
Sharon Cates, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
YAMAMOTO, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
2. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Council President Pro Tem Petso requested Agenda Items C and L be removed from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
YAMAMOTO, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
A. ROLL CALL
B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 30, 2012.
D. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 5, 2012.
E. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #132414 THROUGH #132541 DATED JUNE 7, 2012
FOR $390,731.10, AND #132542 THROUGH #132694 DATED JUNE 14, 2012 FOR
$936,414.33. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #51373
THROUGH #51399 FOR $457,745.61 AND BENEFIT CHECKS & WIRE PAYMENTS
FOR $197,092.97 FOR THE PERIOD MAY 16, 2012 THROUGH MAY 31, 2012.
Packet Page 4 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 2
F. APPROVAL OF REAPPOINTMENT OF BOB RINEHART TO THE PUBLIC
FACILITIES DISTRICT BOARD.
G. SNOHOMISH REGIONAL DRUG & GANG TASK FORCE, 2012-2013 INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT.
H. AUTHORIZATION TO SIGN CONTRACT FOR GRANT FROM SNOHOMISH
COUNTY TOURISM PROMOTION AREA TO PROMOTE WRITE ON THE SOUND.
I. AT&T LEASE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT TO REFLECT A CHANGE IN THE TYPE
AND CONFIGURATION OF THE EQUIPMENT LOCATED IN THEIR LEASE AREA
AT 8505 BOWDOIN WAY.
J. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE CONTRACT WITH REINKE
SPORTS GROUP FOR THE HALF MARATHON.
K. REPORT ON BIDS OPENED JUNE 5, 2012 FOR THE 2012 WATERLINE
REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO D&G BACKHOE IN
THE AMOUNT OF $652,352.23.
M. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN ADDENDUM NO. 2 TO THE
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CHS ENGINEERS, LLC.
N. ORDINANCE NO. 3888 – AMENDING THE EDMONDS CITY CODE (ECC) 8.64.065
PARKING PROVISIONS ON SUNSET AVENUE.
O. ORDINANCE NO. 3889 – AMENDING THE PORTIONS OF ECDC CHAPTER 20.20
RELATED TO URBAN FARMING. (FILE NO. AMD20120002)
ITEM C: APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 4, 2012
Council President Petso explained the June 4, 2012 meeting included the appeal regarding the Burnstead
matter and she pulled this item to abstain from approval of the minutes.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
YAMAMOTO, TO APPROVE ITEM C. MOTION CARRIED (4-0-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PRO TEM PETSO AND COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON ABSTAINING.
Councilmember Johnson also stated that she would like to abstain with regard to the vote on the approval of Consent
Agenda Item B. – May 30, 2012 City Council Minutes.
ITEM L: REPORT ON BIDS OPENED JUNE 7, 2012 FOR THE TALBOT ROAD STORM DRAIN
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO KAMINS
CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $317,178.62.
Council President Pro Tem Petso relayed the Council Committee was informed this project was
generating a great deal of comment. She relayed citizens’ concern with fish passage. Her response has
been she was told this project would not make that situation any worse but that Public Works Director
Phil Williams was meeting with citizens today. She asked Mr. Williams to report on his meeting with the
citizens and his determination with regard to fish passage and this project. Mr. Williams answered staff
met with Mr. and Mrs. Bernhoft today. He displayed an aerial photograph of the area, identifying the
Perrinville Creek channel (depicted in green on the photograph), existing pipe (depicted in gold on the
photograph) that takes stormwater from Talbot Road, about 130 acres of the 930 acre watershed, through
the lower channel and out through an outfall under the railroad tracks. There are two outfalls under the
railroad tracks, one carries the creek.
Packet Page 5 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 3
Mr. Williams identified a property that has had flooding issues in their garage and their residence during
peak storm events. The City has paid several claims and negotiated with the property owner. The project
to resolve the flooding issue was originally designed along an alternate alignment (depicted in red on the
photograph) but staff was unable to work out a suitable easement with the property owner to allow that
alignment and another alternative was developed. The current design (depicted in blue on the photograph)
runs from a point on Talbot Road approximately 20 feet deep, toward the Sound along the property line
and discharges at the point where the two outfalls come together. There is a diversion structure/flow
splitter at that point that has been in place since 1994. The purpose of the diversion structure is to
segregate out high flows in the stream from what may be considered more normal flows, direct the normal
flows down the historic channel and send the peak flows out a manmade pipe out to Puget Sound to keep
both flooding and damage to the lower stream bed to a minimum.
Mr. Williams explained construction of this line will not exacerbate any of the problems that have been
identified in recent weeks. Staff had a good conversation with residents today regarding those problems
including a conceptual idea of how the larger problem might be addressed in a series of future projects.
He requested Council approval to construct the proposed project; the amount is $317,000 with Kamins
Construction who was the lower bidder. Kamins completed the Shell Valley Road last year.
Mr. Williams explained the concerns that have been raised are related to the operation of the diversion
structure as it exists today without this project and how this project will impact it. Staff believes it will not
impact the existing diversion structure. The proposed project includes adding a peak flow of about 37 feet
into the diversion box but also expanding the weir to take a large amount of creek flow down the creek
channel that cannot flow there now, leaving the same amount of water flowing through the diversion
structure in a peak storm event. Some of the existing problems that staff is trying to address with
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) are related to how the diversion box is
maintained. The City currently has a permit to maintain it but the City is only allowed to work in the
stream during the fish window, July 1 – September 30. The diversion box acts as a sediment trap.
Perrinville Creek, like most urban watersheds, has dramatically changed character over the years; peak
flows are much higher due to development in the basin which includes Lynnwood and Edmonds. That
development has created more impervious surface; when it rains heavily, runoff occurs faster and the
peaks are higher which result in more erosion in the streambed and a huge sediment load coming down
Perrinville Creek which is not ideal. That needs to be addressed in Perrinville Creek as well as most urban
streams in the Puget Sound area.
To accommodate some of that, the diversion structure offers a sediment trap for sand, gravel and heavy
rocks until the box fills up. Due to the huge sediment load, one storm can fill the diversion box. Then
when storm flows recede, the creek is flowing on top of that sediment and even under normal flow, water
exits the diversion structure. The concern is fish looking for the chemical signature of Perrinville Creek
try to go up the diversion pipe about 125 feet which is a dead end trip for the fish. There have been
expired fish observed on the beach; that is a concern for the neighbors as well as the City. Staff met with
the WDFW today on site to ask whether the permit could be expanded to allow the box to be cleaned at
other times during the year. It was a very encouraging meeting and he believed the City will be allowed to
maintain the sediment trap any time it is needed upon notifying WDFW which will significantly improve
how the diversion box operates.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed fish are only diverted if the sediment box is filled. Mr. Williams
answered there are two causes of fish mortality, 1) fish could be trying to work their way up the pipe as he
described which is a dead end when they reach the diversion box, or 2) resident fish in the stream during
high flows get washed out and when they reach the diversion box they may end up going through the weir
or flowing into the diversion box and going out the pipe and getting beat up along the way in those high
velocities and ending up not making it out the diversion pipe. He emphasized this situation has existed for
18 years. The key is maintaining the diversion box which may be several times during the winter.
Packet Page 6 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 4
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the range of bids, $317,000 to $755,000, and asked about the
contractor’s experience with stormwater and creeks. Mr. Williams answered Kamins did some utility
work on the Shell Valley project. They were a good contractor on that project and it was a very successful
project. He did not have any concerns with their qualifications or capabilities.
Council President Pro Tem Petso asked if approval could be delayed a week to allow citizens more time
to provide information. Mr. Williams answered the fish window is July 1 to September 30. The contractor
needs to do work at the diversion structure during that window. The contractor has not yet submitted a
proposed schedule so he was uncertain when they proposed to do that work. He did not believe a week
delay would make a big difference but was uncertain what additional information was needed.
Council President Pro Tem Petso asked whether it was Mr. Williams’ opinion that the project will not
make the fish trapping issue any worse. Mr. Williams answered yes, that is the collective opinion of City
staff and the City’s consultant, Herrera. Council President Pro Tem Petso asked whether the fish trapping
issue would be a separate project. Mr. Williams answered yes and acknowledged this is not an ideal
situation. The system was installed nearly 20 years ago and is not the type of system that would be
installed today; hydrologic science and fisheries design have gotten much more sophisticated during that
time. That system currently exists and the intent is to determine how to make it work as efficiently as
possible. One of the suggestions was to build a completely new lower stream channel for Perrinville
Creek that would be very fish friendly with a flat bottom culvert under the railroad tracks. That would be
a very sizable project and it would take time to identify funding for it.
Councilmember Bloom asked what review of this project was done by WDFW. Mr. Williams answered
staff submitted an HPA application as required for this type of project. Staff addressed WDFW’s
questions and WDFW reviewed the design drawings and specifications and issued an approval.
Councilmember Bloom summarized it appeared WDFW had no concerns about the health or safety of
fish. Mr. Williams responded WDFW has not expressed any specific concerns to the City. He
acknowledged there was no perfect answer; WDFW understands the City is trying to improve an existing
situation and that there are other projects that could be done in the drainage basin over time as well.
Councilmember Johnson asked whether this was considered part of the Meadowdale slide area. Mr.
Williams answered no. Councilmember Johnson asked if it was part of a critical area. Mr. Williams
answered the stream channel and shoreline would be.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
YAMAMOTO, TO APPROVE ITEM L. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Williams explained he told Mr. and Mrs. Bernhoft that they would have an opportunity to make
comment before the Council took action.
MAYOR PRO TEM PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO RECONSIDER CONSENT AGENDA ITEM L. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MAYOR PRO TEM PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO MOVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM L TO AGENDA ITEM 6B. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
3. COMMUNITY SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT - EDMONDS SENIOR CENTER
Farrell Fleming, Executive Director, Edmonds Senior Center, described several new programs the
Senior Center has opened over the past six months:
• Naturopathic Medical Clinic with Bastyr University
Packet Page 7 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 5
o Patients seen by student and licensed faculty member
o Open to all ages, Tuesday PM
o Bastyr makes clinic available at no charge
o Senior Center charges a $15 administrative fee that can be easily waived
o All prescribed supplements/herbs available at no cost from dispensary
• Enhanced Wellness Program
o Open to all ages
o Funded by Verdant Health Commission
o Aimed at chronic conditions
• SWEL Timebank
o In coordination with Shoreline, Woodway, Lake Forest Park
• Social Media Bootcamp
o Joint program with Senior Center and Swedish Hospital
• City Government Senior Internships
o Brainchild of former Councilmember Bernheim
o Exploring the concept of an elected official having an intern for 2 or 4 weeks for a project
agreed to by the elected official and intern
o Councilmembers Buckshnis, Fraley-Monillas, and Petso have expressed interest in having an
intern
• 90+ Celebration (July 30)
Mr. Fleming explained tonight’s presentation was to highlight the City Government Senior Internship and
he invited elected officials to participate.
Mr. Fleming explained the Senior Center has approximately 1500 members and serve about 3500 people
annually. Of those 1500 members, 122 are over 90, many of whom are genuinely active. He invited the
City to participate in the 90+ Celebration such as issuing a proclamation.
Mr. Fleming advised applications for the City Government Senior Internship are available at the Senior
Center or can be emailed. He plans to make a more extensive presentation regarding the Senior Center at
a future meeting.
Councilmember Bloom expressed interest in having an intern.
4. SWEARING-IN CEREMONY FOR SERGEANT MIKE RICHARDSON
Police Chief Al Compaan commented one of the highest honors he has as Police Chief is celebrating
achievement by department members. An oath is an important public recognition of personal achievement
and a personal pledge to the highest legal, ethical and professional standards critical to the law
enforcement mission.
Chief Compaan described Corporal Richardson’s background: he has served with the Edmonds Police
Department for 20 years; he was hired on February 1, 1991. He graduated from Meadowdale High School
and attended Shoreline Community College. During his tenure with the department, he served four years
as a detective on the South Snohomish County Narcotics Task Force and was the special assault and
crimes against persons detective for nine years. He also spent five years as an investigator on the
Snohomish County Multiple Agency Response Team that investigates major incidents such as officer-
involved fatalities. During the past year he has been a corporal assigned to the graveyard shift. He has
been a member of the SWAT Team and is a department firearms instructor. He was the department’s
Officer of the Year in 1993, an award he received for administering CPR and reviving an individual
suffering from a drug overdose. He has also received formal letters of commendation in 2005, 2009 and
2012.
Packet Page 8 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 6
Chief Compaan introduced Corporal Richardson’s wife Traci, mother Carol, daughters Victoria and
Ashley, Aunt Christy Richardson and her husband Dr. Jim Mattson, and Bothell Deputy Chief Henry
Simon.
Chief Compaan administered the oath of office to Corporal Richardson. Sergeant Richardson’s wife
pinned his badge.
Sergeant Richardson thanked Chief Compaan for promoting him and Assistant Chief Lawless for his
support. He commented this is the third time he has been in the Council Chambers this year, for his
promotion to corporal, the awards ceremony and now his promotion to sergeant. He commented on how
special it is to work for the City of Edmonds; Edmonds is a great place to work, excellent employees, and
excellent Police Department that goes above and beyond to serve the community.
He thanked Henry Simon whom he has known since eighth grade, a special person in his life and if not
for him, he would not be in this profession. Deputy Chief Simon has been the father that he never had. He
thanked Sergeant Ploeger who was his partner for years; they hold each other accountable and he does a
great deal for his family. He thanked his wife who supports everything he does. He commented people
often do not get a chance to publicly thank the people in their life and tell them how important they are.
He also thanked his children for sacrificing the time he is at work helping other people. He also thanked
Bill Nelson who for 15 years has shown the department the importance of history and traditions. He
concluded it was an honor to be a Police Officer and an honor to be here today.
Chief Compaan presented Sergeant Richardson with a framed Certificate of Promotion.
5. PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
(2013-2018) AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION.
Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss provided an introduction to the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP):
• Revised Code of Washington (RCW) requires that each city update their TIP prior to adoption of
the budget
• Document contains all regionally significant transportation projects that a city plans to undertake
in the next six years
• City of Edmonds policy: TIP is financially constrained the first three years
• Cities are not eligible for state or federal grant funding unless a project is identified on the TIP
• Federal, state and local funds are programmed as revenue source for TIP projects
Mr. Hauss reviewed scheduled construction projects in 2013:
1. 5th Ave. S Overlay (from Elm St. to Walnut St.)
• Project Description
o Water line replacement / asphalt patch on northbound lane (completed in 2011)
o Overlay entire street width => ~ ½ mile stretch
Improve pavement condition of minor arterial
Upgrade ADA curb ramps / non-motorized transportation safety
• Status / Schedule
o Design: Fall 2012 – Spring 2013
o Construction: Summer 2013
• Funding
o Estimated Total Project Cost $774,000
Design: $ 92,000
Packet Page 9 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 7
Construction: $682,000
o Funding sources
Federal grant unsecured*: $551,000
Fund 412: $223,000
*Notified of grant award, pending final PSRC approval
2. Traffic Signal Cabinet Improvements
• Project Description
o Upgrade outdated cabinets, controllers, conflict monitors, sensor units to improve
intersection safety
• Status / Schedule
o Design: Fall 2012
o Construction: Spring / Summer 2013
• Funding
o Estimated Total Project Cost $248,000
Design: $ 16,000
Construction: $232,000
o Funding sources
Federal grant secured $248,000
3. Citywide Pedestrian Countdown Display
• Project Description
o Install countdown display at all signalized intersection w/ pedestrian head
Time remaining in the “Flashing Don’t Walk” interval
• Status / Schedule
o Design: Fall 2012
o Construction: Spring 2013
• Funding
o Estimated Total Project Cost $58,000
Design $ 6,000
Construction $52,000
o Funding sources
Federal grant secured $58,000
4. Five Corners Intersection Improvements - Roundabout
• Project Description
o Installation of a single lane roundabout
o Improvements:
intersection delay: LOS F to LOS B (during PM Peak Hours)
non-motorized transportation safety
stormwater / overhead utility conversion / water line replacement
• Status / Schedule
o Design / ROW: Summer 2011 – Spring 2013
o Construction: Summer 2013
• Funding
o Estimated Total Project Cost $3,476,000
Design: $ 336,000
ROW $ 313,000
Construction $2,827,000
o Funding sources
Federal grant secured $ 463,000
Federal grant unsecured* $1,936,500 (ROW + construction)
Local funds $1,076,500 ($750,000 from Fund 412)
Packet Page 10 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 8
*Notified of grant award, pending final PSRC approval
Mr. Hauss reviewed scheduled projects in design (2013-2015):
1. 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
• Project Description
o Critical east-west connection
Restrict unsafe southbound left turn from Hwy. 99 onto 76th Ave. W
Install traffic signal at Hwy. 99 @ 228th St. SW
– Provide safe left turn for the southbound movement from Hwy. 99 to 76th Ave. W
– Create additional safe pedestrian crossing on Hwy. 99 between 238th and 224th
o Recommended as #1 project in Hwy. 99 Traffic Safety and Circulation Study (2006)
• Status / Schedule
o 15% Design: Completed in 2009
o Design / ROW: Summer 2011 – Spring 2014
o Construction: Summer / Fall 2014
• Funding
o Estimated Total Project Cost $5,000,000
Design $ 602,000
ROW $ 865,000
Construction $3,533,000
o Funding sources
Federal grants secured $4,769,000
Local funds $231,000
2. 76th Av. W @ 212th St. SW Intersection Improvements
• Project Description
o Add left turn lane for NB and SB movements on 76th Av. W and right turn lane for WB
movement on 212th St. SW
o Improve LOS from F to D (in 2015)
• Status / Schedule
o Design / ROW: Fall 2011 – Fall 2013
o Construction: 2014 (pending grant funding)
• Funding
o Estimated Total project cost $2,615,000
Design $ 340,000
ROW $ 975,000
Construction $1,300,000
o Funding Sources
Federal Grant secured $940,000
– $294,000 for design
– $646,000 for ROW
Local Funds $148,000
– $46,000 for design
– $100,000 for ROW
3. Sunset Av. from Bell St. to Caspers St.
• Project Description
o Install sidewalk / bike path on west side of Sunset Av. from Bell St. to Caspers St. to
provide more scenic non-motorized route
o Parking stalls may need to be reconfigured
• Status
o Preliminary concepts / survey: on-going
o Design phase: 2013
Packet Page 11 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 9
o Construction phase: 2016
• Funding
o Estimated total project cost: $866,000
o Pending grant funding for all phases
Mr. Hauss reviewed other projects:
A) Preservation / Safety / Capacity projects
• Annual Street Overlay ($1,500,000 / year from 2016 to 2018)
• Main @ 9th Ave. / Walnut @ 9th Ave. (Interim Solutions / 2013)
• Signal Upgrades:
o 238th St. SW @ 100th Ave. W (2016)
o Puget Dr. @ OVD (2016 – 2017)
o Main St. @ 3rd Ave. (2017 – 2018)
• Intersection Improvements:
o 196th St. SW @ 88th Ave. W (2016-2018)
o 220th St. SW @ 76th Ave. W (2016)
o Hwy. 99 @ 212th St. SW (2016 – 2018)
B) Non-Motorized Transportation Projects
• Sidewalk projects near schools:
o 238th St. SW from 100th Ave. W to 104th Ave. W (2013-2015)
o 15th St. SW from Edmonds Way to 104th Ave. W (2013-2015)
o 236th St. SW from Madrona School to Edmonds Way (2013-2015)
• 4th Ave. Corridor Enhancement Walkway (2013-2017)
• ADA Transition Plan (2016-2018)
• SR-104 / Edmonds Way Pedestrian mid-block crossing north of Pine St. intersection (2013)
• Hwy 99 Enhancement Phase 3 (2013-2014)
o Received $700,000 federal grant with no local match
• Bicycle loops and connections (2016-2018)
Mr. Hauss provided a summary of recently secured grants:
Project name
Grant
Type
Design
Phase
ROW
Phase
Construction
Phase Total
Signal Cabinet Improvements Federal $16,000 $232,000 $248,000
228th St. SW Corridor
Improvement project Federal $100,000 $600,000 $3,533,000 $4,233,000
Pedestrian Countdown Display Federal $2,000 $50,000 $52,000
Hwy. 99 Enhancement Project
(Phase 3) Federal $100,000 $584,000 $684,000
5th Ave. S Overlay
(pending final approval) Federal $66,000 $485,000 $551,000
Five Corners Intersection
(pending final approval) Federal $97,000 $1,839,000 $1,936,000
Total $284,000 $697,000 $6,723,000 $7,704,000
Mr. Hauss recommended the Council approve the 2013-2018 TIP.
Packet Page 12 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 10
Councilmember Buckshnis commended staff for all the grants the City had been awarded. She asked
about Puget Sound Regional Council’s (PSRC) involvement in federal grants. Mr. Hauss explained PSRC
participates in the federal grant review process.
For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Hauss explained the first four projects on the above list (Signal
Cabinet Improvements, 228th St. SW Corridor Improvement project, Pedestrian Countdown Display and
Hwy. 99 Enhancement Project (Phase 3), do not require a local match for the federal grant. The last two
projects on the list (5th Ave. S Overlay and Five Corners Intersection) require a 13.5% local match.
Council President Pro Tem Petso recalled the 196th & 88th intersection improvement project has been
discussed often and then a decision is made not to do anything at that location. She asked what the 196th
& 88th intersection improvement project included. Mr. Hauss responded there are levels of service and
safety issues at that intersection. A project to make the northbound movement on 88th a right-turn only
with raised island was presented to the Council but was not approved. There are other alternatives for that
intersection including installing a traffic signal. Council President Pro Tem Petso asked if the SR524
intersection improvements in the TIP was an island or traffic light. Mr. Hauss stated it was a traffic light.
Council President Pro Tem Petso asked about the SR 104 midblock crossing at Pine Street. Mr. Hauss
answered the intent was a midblock crossing with a refuge island similar to the refuge island on SR 524 at
Puget Drive as well as flashing beacons due to high speeds on SR 104.
Councilmember Bloom asked how projects are prioritized. Mr. Hauss answered the Transportation Plan
prioritized projects in Table 3-18. There are different categories that are weighed differently. Factors
include concurrency, safety, grant eligibility, project size and multimodal elements. The top ranked
project was the 228th Street SW project for which the City recently received a $4.9 million grant.
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson asked when the City will be notified regarding the Safe Routes to Schools
grants. Mr. Hauss responded grants were submitted in May 2012; notification will occur in early 2013.
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, asked if the SR 524 @ 9th & Caspers traffic signal had been removed from
the TIP. He then suggested a project be added to the TIP, widen Edmonds Way westbound and create a
right turn lane, which would reduce congestion at the intersection. With regard to the 196th & 88th project,
he suggested realigning the intersection to improve sight distances. He relayed the public’s opposition to
the Five Corners roundabout project, commenting there were many other projects that the City could
spend $3 million on.
Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, expressed concern that individual reports for each area of the City were not
provided and there were no citizen reports.
Ray Martin, Edmonds, relayed his discomfort driving through roundabouts in Olympia, finding
roundabouts to be more work than the current layout at Five Corners. He preferred the Five Corners
intersection remain in its current configuration. Next, he suggested the westbound signal at SW 196th
Street at 80th Avenue SW be tweaked, explaining it is a blind corner that causes drivers to brake suddenly
when the light changes.
Marc Knauss, Edmonds, referred to the 238th & 100th Avenue signal upgrades that include installation
of video detection and asked whether that was a traffic camera. If so, he was hesitant about installing
traffic cameras.
Packet Page 13 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 11
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Pro Tem Peterson closed the public participation portion of the
public hearing.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether staff had considered Mr. Hertrich’s suggestion for a right turn
lane on Edmonds Way. Public Works Director Williams responded no; staff has not looked at that. There
is limited amount of right-of-way in that location and planning for that intersection and that vicinity has
included a great deal of public input. Unless the Council indicates otherwise, it is staff’s intent to
implement the Transportation Plan which does not include a right-turn lane.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed the City has received positive and negative comments about the Five
Corners roundabout. She is very familiar with roundabouts, having grown up with them in Oregon. She
asked if the anti-roundabout people were the most vocal. Mr. Williams recalled providing the Council
nationwide research about attitudes towards roundabouts. Prior to construction of the roundabout, there is
concern with something new and after the roundabout is constructed attitudes change as drivers discover
the roundabout is not complicated and is more efficient. This is particularly true for the five-legged Five
Corners intersection where the five streets create confusion. He acknowledged Edmonds citizens are
comfortable with the Five Corners intersection; negotiated correctly it can be like a ballet, and negotiated
incorrectly can create problems. A circular intersection allows all five legs of the intersection to be served
continuously which improves movement of traffic through the intersection.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed the roundabout also provides traffic calming and improves
pedestrian safety. Mr. Williams answered it definitely has air quality benefits by reducing congestion and
the amount of time cars are idling at the intersection which is the reason the City received the grant for the
project. It also improves pedestrian safety, does not compromise and may even improve bicycle safety,
and reduces congestion.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed with the receipt of a $3 million grant, the City will only pay
$750,000 for the roundabout project which will be provided by Fund 411. Mr. Williams answered
funding for this project includes $3.476 million which is approximately $750,000 more than has been
presented to the Council in the past as it includes some utility funds to upgrade infrastructure. A 13.5%
match is required for the $1.936 million construction grant; those funds will come from Transportation
Impact Fees which can only be spent on concurrency projects like this project at Five Corners.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented if the City did not accept the federal grant for this project, another
jurisdiction would. As a taxpayer the grants are beneficial and staff has done a great job securing grants.
Mr. Williams explained these are competitive grants. When grants become available, staff identifies
projects and positions the City to be successful. He summarized the highest rated project may not always
be done first; projects with funding will be completed first.
Council President Pro Tem Petso referred to the citizen comment about the traffic signal at 9th & Casper
and asked if that had been removed from the TIP. Mr. Williams answered it was removed from the TIP
last year per Council direction.
Council President Pro Tem Petso referred to the citizen question about video detection and asked whether
that was traffic cameras. Mr. Williams answered video detection is not red light cameras.
Council President Pro Tem Petso recalled the Council previously discussed a signal at 196th & 88th and
citizens expressed concern with cut-through traffic if a light were installed. She recalled there was another
reason the Council did not support a traffic signal at that intersection. Mr. Williams recalled one of the
problems with installing a signal at that intersection is in order to qualify for state funding, the
intersection must meet the warrants for a signal; that intersection does not. That is the reason other more
simple options were considered. The Council did not want to pursue the option Mr. Hauss described and
Packet Page 14 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 12
an alternate plan has not yet been identified. Council President Pro Tem Petso asked why a traffic signal
for that intersection was included in the TIP if it did not meet warrants. Mr. Williams responded it may
meet warrants in the future. It would be difficult to seek a grant for that project if it was not included in
the TIP; it was included in the unsecured portion of the TIP as there was currently no funding for that
project.
Councilmember Yamamoto asked if there was some flexibility with regard to the location of bicycle
lanes. Mr. Hauss answered there was. Councilmember Yamamoto commented it was easy for cyclists to
reach Edmonds but difficult to leave Edmonds. Mr. Hauss answered it will be a combination of signage,
pavement markers, sharrows, bike lanes, etc. Mayor Pro Tem Peterson pointed out staff is working with
the Edmonds Bicycle Group to identify bicycle routes for leaving Edmonds.
Councilmember Bloom asked if there were plans to form another Transportation Advisory Committee.
Mr. Hauss answered that was a possibility in 2015-2016 in preparation for the Transportation Plan update.
Councilmember Johnson thanked and congratulated staff on the receipt of $7.7 million in grants.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON,
TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 1279, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, APPROVING THE 2013-2018 TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (TIP) AND DIRECTING FILING OF THE ADOPTED PROGRAM
WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION.
Council President Pro Tem Petso explained she planned to vote against the TIP because the signature
feature of the plan was the roundabout and she voted against proceeding with that project. She also
expressed the following concerns:
• Loss of parking along Sunset as a result of the Sunset Avenue project
• Potential loss of the bicycle lane on Sunset as a result of the Sunset Avenue project
• The 196th & 88th intersection has never met warrants for a traffic signal and there has been no
public outcry for a signal at that intersection
MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM PETSO VOTING NO.
6A. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Robert Bernhoft, Edmonds, relayed his and his neighbors’ concerns about the drainage project in Talbot
Park. One of the problems that has not been addressed is neither of the storm culverts have ever been
videoed. A civil engineer he knows has evidence the culvert is corroding in an area where freight trains
containing chemicals, coal and heavy loads travel. Another concern is he and Bob Shepard’s classrooms
have been putting salmon in the creek since 1980. The splitter at 8229 Talbot Road is a death trap and
violates WAC 220-110-170. He read data provided by a civil engineer that the high flow bypass to a
permanent stream with the Talbot Road flow violates WAC 220-110-170 by diverting the Talbot Road
flow into the high flow bypass pipe, they will be enticing fish into a steel culvert that would otherwise use
the stream concrete pipe and these fish will become confused, trapped and die. He also recommended the
outfall structure be constructed according to an approved design to prevent this problem from happening.
He was concerned the estuary at Browns Bay would be virtually destroyed. The water force bank and bed
at the point of discharge has to be armored and have some type of device to stop fish from entering the
“tunnel of death.”
Thomas Sawtel, Edmonds, an Edmonds artist, thanked the public who attended the Edmonds Arts
Festival; attendance was great. He also thanked the Festival volunteers. He gave special thanks to this
year’s coordinators for the juried gallery exhibits; there were over 300 pieces. He was impressed by this
Packet Page 15 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 13
year’s children’s art exhibit; it is in dire need of funding because Edmonds School District eliminated
funding for the position that coordinates the exhibit. Each year the festival jurors review all the juried art
pieces for a piece of art that features an Edmonds scene; this year his photograph of two Great Blue
Herons in the Edmonds Marsh was awarded the Best of Edmonds. He encouraged all artists to consider
submitting their art, particularly of Edmonds, in 2013. He noted Congressman Jim McDermott visited the
festival. On the City’s behalf, he lobbied Congressman McDermott about the Edmonds Marsh project,
particularly the eventual daylighting of Willow Creek as well as other projects on salmon-bearing
streams. As a fish biologist, he commented on the importance of fish passage projects on Willow Creek,
Shell Creek, Perrinville Creek and a few others. Perrinville Creek needs a full enhancement project. He
urged the Council to ensure the bypass was done in a way that the weir/collector/splitter fits into an
expertly engineered enhancement project.
Ray Martin, Edmonds, referred to the cat leash law which was the result of a cat trapping incident six
years ago. He recalled the cat leash law was passed after testimony that cats kill birds, but he is now told
it is selectively enforced, only upon a complaint. He found the ordinance overbearing, punitive, and
inequitably enforced. He suggested the Council gather statistics from the Police Department and he has
asked My Edmonds News to conduct a poll. He also commented that most citizens do not support the
Five Corners roundabout.
Mark MacDonald, Edmonds, explained he participated in discussions in 2007 when the Council passed
an animal control ordinance, Running at Large Prohibited, that required cats receive equal treatment
under the law. Some erroneously referred to this as the cat leash law but leashes were never part of the
discussion although they are one method of controlling a pet. At that time the citizens who spoke against
the proposed new ordinance were all cat owners and made the claim that they either could not control
their cats or it was a cat’s nature to roam free. Those who spoke in support of the ordinance were more
varied in their background and expertise and included veterinarians who reported on dead and maimed
cats as a result of confrontation with other animals or automobiles in areas where containment is not
controlled. Veterinarians cited statistics that the per capita number of cat death/injuries was dramatically
less in cities with control ordinances for cats. A manager with the Seattle Health Department and a
physician spoke about viruses and bacteria spread by cat feces deposited into gardens that humans contact
while gardening and the danger this presents especially to older citizens. PAWS and SPCA leaders
expressed support for the ordinance, stating it would result in fewer feral cats roaming and spreading
disease and meeting unseemly death including by human intervention. The Audubon Society stated its
support of the ordinance since controlled cats would not infiltrate neighboring yards dedicated to the
feeding and proliferation of birds. Cat owners also spoke in support of the ordinance, stating they loved
their pets too much to allow them to roam and risk their lives. Manufacturing representatives described
options for cat owners to allow their cats outside while confined to the owner’s yard. He relayed a
comment by a man who said he leashed his cat because he loved him. The existing ordinance was enacted
to protect cats and humans; it requires no more action from law enforcement than the law affecting dogs
and their owners. Overturning the ordinance shows a lack of concern for cats and Edmonds citizens, and
would be an insult to the Council’s predecessors and indicate a vote based on emotion and personal bias
and not facts. He urged the Council to keep the ordinance in place.
Robert Chaffey, Edmonds, a physician at Swedish Edmonds, relayed his research regarding the
astounding number of wild animals killed by free roaming cats; more than a million birds a year and up to
a billion small animals, not all of which are rats or mice. Cats can spread diseases; outdoor cats get viral
diseases that can only be spread to other cats but they can also pick up Toxoplasmosis which can be very
dangerous to humans as well as rabies. Feral cats are a huge problem in communities. Cats allowed to
roam free die approximately 5-10 years earlier on average than cats that do not. The two problem cats in
his neighborhood are both dead; one disappeared and the other was hit and killed by a car. He supported
continuing the law.
Packet Page 16 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 14
Don Hall, Edmonds, a gardener with a backyard wildlife habitat and a cat owner, agreed with the last
two speakers. Mr. Hall announced Edmonds in Bloom is celebrating its 17th year. Their mission statement
of promoting floral beauty for the pleasure of residents as well as attracting visitors to Edmonds has been
a catalyst for annual events. Edmonds has been recognized for its charm and Edmonds in Bloom is part of
that. He described the upcoming garden competition; entries will be accepted until July 3. Vegetable and
fruit gardens in front yards was added as a new category this year. Applications are available at the
Frances Anderson Center, Bountiful Home, Garden Gear, Edmonds Library and the Log Cabin. He
encouraged anyone with a beautiful garden, spectacular containers or especially nice vegetable or fruit
gardens to enter this year’s garden competition to receive an Edmonds in Bloom flag. The garden
competition is an evaluation, not a contest. He also announced the garden tour on July 15, 11:00 a.m. –
4:00 p.m. Tickets are sold through local area merchants beginning on June 1; tickets can be purchased at
Bountiful Home, Garden Gear, Frances Anderson Center, Sky Nursery, Wight’s Home and Garden and
the Plant Shack. The Edmonds in Bloom reception is August 8 from 7:00 – 8:30 p.m. at the Edmonds
Arts Center where all participants in Kids Plants for Mom’s Day, the garden competition and all events
will be honored.
Bob Shepard, Edmonds, a 5th grade teacher in the Edmonds School District, supported Mr. Bernhoft’s
comments about Perrinville Creek. He began having 5th graders work at Perrinville Creek 17 years ago,
putting fish in the creek, water quality testing, and planting near the Perrinville post office. The result is
4,000 fish and the involvement of 500 children. This fall the students questioned the water emersion into
the Sound that was blocked by a metal plate. That was not the situation 17 years ago; he has seen Cut
Throat Trout and salmon spawn in the creek. He commented fish are just as important as the stormwater
problem and there needs to be a better solution than the existing gate. Before spending any more money
on a diversion, the City needs to consider the fish. He assumed it was illegal to prevent fish from
spawning. Perrinville Creek is a small but meaningful creek and it has a great importance to the
community. He preferred a larger project that would solve the problem of stormwater and fish migration;
the current situation simply does not work.
Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, referred to a case between the City, State of Washington and Syd Locke
regarding a driveway at 801 Pine Street that will be heard by the Superior Court in September. Next, Mr.
Rutledge announced the car show at Top Foods on July 14 to benefit the food bank.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, agreed there should be some ability to control cats. With regard to the Talbot
Road Storm Drain Improvements project, he cautioned against hurrying to make a decision and
recommended the Council listen to the people who have experience with fish. He recommended staff
work with the neighbors and the Department of Fish and Wildlife to obtain a report that says this is the
right project.
6B. REPORT ON BIDS OPENED JUNE 7, 2012 FOR THE TALBOT ROAD STORM DRAIN
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO KAMINS CONSTRUCTION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $317,178.62 (CONTINUED DISCUSSION).
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained staff was not in a hurry and was not rushing this project
through; the project has been in the development phase for over four years. Staff has been working with
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) during that time including meeting with them on
site this morning. The only time issue is part of the project must be built within the fish window, July 1 –
September 30. He agreed with many of Mr. Bernhoft’s comments including the suggestion about
videoing or physically examining the culverts under the railroad. One of the culverts is a 40-inch steel
pipe that has been in place for 18 years. The other pipe where the creek channel daylights onto the beach
is a 36-inch concrete pipe. Neither steel nor concrete react well with saltwater. He will determine how to
do a condition assessment on both pipes under the railroad.
Packet Page 17 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 15
Councilmember Buckshnis suggested scheduling this for the June 26 work session to allow
Councilmembers to conduct further research. Mr. Williams explained the proposed project has been
referred to several times as a bypass; this is not a bypass. The stormwater that normally ran across the
Robinson’s was to be placed into a pipe into the creek channel below the diversion structure. That routing
was not possible so it is being moved further down Talbot Road and then into the diversion box. The
bypass/flow splitter already exists and has been in place for 18 years. There is no intent to change in any
meaningful way how that functions. If WDFW allows greater access to the diversion box through the year
it will allow for better maintenance, allow it to perform better, and allow for better protection of fish. That
is a separate issue that is unrelated to this pipe project.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented she is a member of WRIA 8 and needs to do more research.
Council President Pro Tem Petso supported delaying approval to allow more research. She also suggested
scheduling a more global look at the fish situation in that area at Council Committee.
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson expressed support for the proposed project. He appreciated citizens bringing it
to the Council’s attention, recognizing there are issues in all the urban streams in Edmonds. Edmonds has
more urban streams than almost any other community on Puget Sound. He supported moving a project up
on the priority list. He recognized the incredible knowledge base that citizens bring to this issue and the
things citizens have done over the years to protect habitat.
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson advised he will schedule this item for further discussion on June 26.
7. CITIZENS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION - APPOINTMENTS OF MEMBERS
(Councilmember Fraley-Monillas joined the Council meeting by telephone at 8:57 p.m.)
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson explained the Citizens Economic Development Commission has been in place
since 2009. When the Commission was formed, each Council position appointed two members and the
Mayor appointed three. Some existing Commissioners will remain to provide background; the Mayor and
some Councilmembers now have an opportunity to appoint new members. He announced the following
appointments to the Citizens Economic Development Commission:
Councilmember Yamamoto: John Ruben
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas: Doug Purcell
Councilmember Buckshnis: John Eckert
Councilmember Bloom: Nathan Proudfoot and Marc Knauss
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson: John Dewhirst and Kevin Garrett
Mayor Earling: Gail Sarvis, Darlene Stern and Karen Shiveley
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson commented there were a number of great applicants and he encouraged those
not chosen to apply for other volunteer positions.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas thanked Marianne Zagorski for her work on the EDC.
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson commented the EDC has done fantastic work to date and he looked forward to
hearing more great ideas about how to enhance the City and especially enhance revenues.
8. PRESENTATION ON RESIDENTIAL CAR WASHING AND ILLICIT DISCHARGES
Stormwater Engineering Program Manager Jerry Shuster provided the following information:
• What is all the fuss about car washing?
Packet Page 18 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 16
o Washing our car or truck is as American as baseball and apple pie
o Allowing the “dirt” and soapy wash water to enter the City’s storm drain system is
technically a violation of Federal, State, and City regulations – wash water contains: soaps,
oils, grease, heavy metals and other chemicals toxic to aquatic life
o Once in the City’s stormwater system, the dirt and soapy rinse water does not get treated
before discharging to our creeks, lakes, or Puget Sound
• Does using biodegradable soap make it OK to discharge wash water to storm drain?
o No. All soaps including biodegradable soap remove dirt from vehicles that contains the
pollutants toxic to aquatic life.
• Is car washing illegal?
o No, washing your car, truck, boat, or whatever is not illegal
o Allowing anything but clean water to enter the City’s stormwater system is technically
illegal.
o Discharge of pollutants to receiving waters is illegal:
• Federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. §1251 et seq. [1972])
• State Water Pollution Control Law (Chapter 90.48 RCW)
• City Illicit Discharge Ordinance (ECC 7.200) – Mandated by State for our Municipal
Stormwater Permit.
• What are the City’s Car Washing Programs?
o Department of Ecology:
“…adopted an educational rather than enforcement approach to car washing.”
o Behavior Change – Similar to recycling
• What are alternatives to driveway washing?
o Wash your vehicle on a lawn or grassy area or somewhere that drains to a lawn or grassy area
o “Waterless” car wash products
o Commercial car wash (manual or automatic)
o Find a community car wash that manages their soapy wash water
Car wash kits are available free from the City to charitable organizations
Councilmember Buckshnis asked how information is being distributed. Mr. Shuster answered brochures
are available on the table in Council Chambers, on the City’s website and City Hall or via email.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether information could be included in utility billing statements. Mr.
Shuster answered that could be done.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas explained she requested this presentation and suggested it be done
annually as a reminder to the public. She asked whether staff would handout a brochure to someone they
see washing their vehicle in their driveway. Mr. Shuster answered all Public Works staff will have
brochures in their trucks to hand out as a way of educating the public.
9. DRAFT 2011 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
Finance Director Shawn Hunstock referred to page 34 of the report, which shows the General Fund 2011
with a surplus of $701,000 and an ending fund balance of $9.5 million. He explained pages 88-91 are new
statements this year; it has been the City’s practice to report several funds including the Emergency
Financial Reserve Fund ($1.9 million) and Public Safety Reserve ($1.3 million) as the General Fund. The
Total General Fund on page 91 matches with page 34. Every fund is included in the financial statements.
The actual General Fund itself, Fund 001, is $5.7 million; when added to the $1.9 million and $1.3
million reserves and other funds including the LEOFF 1 retirement fund, the total is $9.5 million. He
clarified fund balance is technically two different things, fund balance in the General Fund itself only is
$5.7 million; the consolidated financial statement fund balance is $9.5 million.
Packet Page 19 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 17
Mr. Hunstock referred to page 36 and the beginning budget for the General Fund, the consolidation of the
7 funds, reported as the General Fund. The original budget was a $74,000 surplus for the General Fund;
the amended budget changed that to an expected deficit of $717,961 but the year actually ended with a
$701,000 surplus due to expenditures that were less than budgeted, transfers in and sale of capital assets.
There was a negative variance in revenue of $726,000, primarily due to a transportation grant in the
multimodal fund that did not come to fruition.
Mr. Hunstock referred to pages 55-56 and the implementation of new accounting standards which
changed how funds are displayed in the City’s financial statements. There was a change from restricted,
unrestricted, invested and capital assets to five new funds defined on pages 55-56. There was not a great
deal of guidance from the State auditor regarding implementation of the new accounting standards. Most
cities are just now implementing this new accounting standard. Because Alaska has a June 30 year end
and have already issued their financial statements that incorporate this new accounting standard, many
cities including Edmonds as well as the auditor’s office have referred to their statements.
Mr. Hunstock referred to page 78, part of the long term debt footnote. He pointed out page 78 reflects the
refunding of utility bonds that occurred in late 2011. All the existing utility bonds were refinanced as well
as bonds sold for new utility projects; the two issues outstanding at the end of 2010 were paid off and
some of it was incorporated into the $13.7 million utility bond issue.
Mr. Hunstock referred to a new statement on page 154, Retail Sales Tax Collected by Sector. He pointed
out Motor Vehicle and Parts is the largest source of sales tax, approximately $4.6 million. He compared
sales tax collections in 2007 to 2011, pointing out some industries have not recovered including Motor
Vehicle and Parts. Sales tax collected in 2007 from that industry was $1.5 million compared to slightly
over $1 million in 2011. Other industry sectors that have not recovered include Construction ($965,000 in
2007 compared to $625,000 in 2011). Some industry sectors have recovered such as Food and Beverage
($203,000 in 2007 and $218,000 in 2011) and Accommodations and Food Services ($563,000 in 2007
and over $600,000 in 2011). Sales tax collections in 2011 are $774,000 below 2007, or a 14% decline.
Mr. Hunstock explained the financial statement audit is nearly complete. He expected a clean audit
opinion later this week. There have been no items to date presented as findings; the auditor has requested
some changes to the financial statements, many due to implementation of the new accounting standard.
Staff is working with the auditors to schedule the entrance conference for the accountability audit in late
July/early August. In addition to the financial statement opinion, there will be a separate report for the
accountability audit. The exit conference will cover both the financial statement and accountability audit
and will likely be held in late August/early September. There is less of a timing issue for the
accountability audit; the City’s audited financial statement must be submitted to the federal clearing house
by September 30.
Councilmember Buckshnis commended Mr. Hunstock, noting this was the first statement where
everything balanced. The financial statement is well written, Mr. Hunstock has been a great addition to
the City and she appreciated all his hard work.
Council President Pro Tem Petso thanked Councilmember Buckshnis and Mr. Hunstock for all their hard
work over the past year. The statements reflect that hard work. She referred to the $5.7 million General
Fund and asked whether it included the $1.3 million reserve. Mr. Hunstock referred to pages 90-91 where
the fund balances total across. The $5.7 million is a part of the $9.5 million; the $9.5 million also includes
the six other funds. He clarified the $5.7 million does not include either the $1.9 million Emergency
Financial Reserve or the $1.3 million Public Safety Reserve.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to page 154, Retail Sales Tax Collected by Sector, and asked
what is included in the Information category. Mr. Hunstock was not certain; the sectors are the NAICS
Packet Page 20 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 18
industry codes. Industries that make up that classification can be found on NAICS.org. He offered to
research and report to Council.
10. AMENDMENT TO ECC 5.05.050 - ANIMAL CONTROL (RUNNING AT LARGE PROHIBITED).
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson expressed his appreciation for the comments made during Audience Comments
as well as the emails the Council received. He commented there are times in the life of a Councilmember
where one may make a mistake; fortunately the system allows those to be corrected. He explained the
impetus for the ordinance the Council adopted was rules for the dog park. He thanked Councilmember
Buckshnis for her research to ensure Edmonds’ dog park has rules similar to other dog parks in the
region. The phrase, “with the exception of cats” was also added to the changes in the ordinance. He did
not give that change the weight he should have in view of the discussion in 2007 and instead focused on
the changes to regulations related to the dog park. He apologized for that oversight. He summarized the
issue before the Council is possibly removing the phrase, “with the exception of cats” which would return
that portion of the ordinance to the wording that was passed in 2007.
Councilmember Buckshnis explained she voted in favor of the ordinance last week due to the belief the
ordinance was unenforceable but has since learned it is enforceable. She planned to vote to remove the
language, “with the exception of cats.”
Council President Pro Tem Petso asked how this ordinance related to any other ordinance related to cats.
City Attorney Sharon Cates was unaware of another ordinance. Assistant Chief of Police Jim Lawless
explained the phrase, “with the exception of cats” was inadvertently included and was not noticed by
himself, the Animal Control Officer or the City Attorney until it reached Council Committee. To Council
President Pro Tem Council Petso’s question, he explained the ordinance relates to containment of
animals. Inserting “with the exception of cats” removes cats from the containment requirement. There is
no separate ordinance that addresses the containment of cats. Council President Pro Tem Petso clarified
this is the only code section related to containment of cats. ACOP Lawless answered yes.
For Councilmember Yamamoto, ACOP Lawless explained the intent of the ordinance was to address
concerns at the dog park and enhancing rules at the dog park. Other ordinances were reviewed as part of
that process; the language, “with the exception of cats” was inadvertently included. If the language, “with
the exception of cats” is removed, the ordinance as it relates to cats will be the same as it was.
Councilmember Bloom commented when the Council voted two weeks ago, it was clear the Council was
voting on the issue of cat containment. It was also clear that cat containment is only enforced upon a
complaint by a neighbor against another neighbor. She felt the ordinance was not enforceable; the only
way it was enforced was if a neighbor complained and then the neighbor was forced to contain their cat.
The ordinance has been in place for five years; during that time her neighborhood has not changed. She
sees cats in her yard all the time; she is thankful for the cats because they provide a valuable service by
killing rats. She asked if it was possible to enforce the cat containment law. ACOP Lawless answered yes.
The City does not have the resources to actively determine whether residents are containing their cats.
However it gives law enforcement a tool to initiate an investigation based on a complaint. If the complaint
can be substantiated, charges can be filed. A neighbor calling to complain about another neighbor’s cat
does not automatically trigger enforcement;, it triggers an investigation. Based on the totality of the
circumstances and the investigation, it can be enforceable via citation.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented there are off-leash dogs in her neighborhood; animal control is
doing a wonderful job enforcing that. It was unfortunate that it is neighbor against neighbor, but that often
happens with enforcement issues. She expressed support for the containment of cats.
Packet Page 21 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 19
Councilmember Johnson asked how many civil violations have been issued against cat owners. ACOP
Lawless answered two citations have been issued since the ordinance was enacted, both in November
2007 to the same individual. There has been no further enforcement action since then. Councilmember
Johnson asked whether there had been any investigations based on complaints. ACOP Lawless answered
yes; but he did not know the exact number. He explained many times the police serve as a mediator to
assist neighbors in reaching a resolution. Their last choice is enforcement action. The ordinance provides
a tool if mediation is unsuccessful.
Councilmember Yamamoto asked whether ACOP Lawless liked the way the ordinance was written now.
ACOP Lawless answered the Police Department will enforce whatever the Council approves.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the number of dog running at large violations. ACOP
Lawless did not know but said it was much higher. He explained when the police or animal control are
called about a dog it is typically because the dog is acting aggressively and the police or animal control
are responding to a public safety issue. They do not receive a lot of calls regarding cats.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM PETERSON,
TO REMOVE THE LANGUAGE, “WITH THE EXCEPTION OF CATS” FROM SECTION
5.05.050(A).
Councilmember Bloom explained she will vote against the motion. There have been very few complaints
yet there are a lot of cats running free throughout the City. She felt the change was based on
Councilmember Buckshnis’ neighborhood and was an argument between neighbors in that neighborhood.
A law that is only enforced when a neighbor complains about another neighbor’s cat does not serve the
community well. She sees cats all over the City and in her neighborhood because her neighbors do not
find them objectionable. She did not support adopting a law that pits neighbor against neighbor.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she would vote against the motion. Two violations in 5-6 years
indicate this law is unnecessary. She has seen cats all over Edmonds so the law does not seem to be
working.
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson said he will support the motion. He pointed out many of the City’s codes are
only enforced upon complaint because the City has only one Code Enforcement Officer. Just because
codes are not actively enforced does not mean they should not be enacted. There may have only been two
violations in the past five years, but that may be because the police prefer to mediate the situation.
Similarly the Code Enforcement Officer rarely takes code enforcement action and prefers to work with
the person violating the code to bring the situation into compliance. It is a testament to staff that there are
not more active code violations or tickets written for at large cats because of their efforts to mediate
situations and educate residents. He will support the motion due to the work done in 2007 regarding this
issue. It was a hotly contested issue in 2007 with experts testifying on both sides. There were a number of
public hearings and the Council at that time voted 5-2 to include requirements for the containment of cats.
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson commented the idea that this is a cat leash law is incorrect. He preferred this had
been titled the “Pet Owner Responsibility” ordinance. Ensuring their pet is kept safe as well as ensuring
the community is safe from the actions of that pet is the primary responsibility of any pet owner.
Council President Pro Tem Petso recalled she previously voted against making the change because the
Council had not held a public hearing. For that reason she will again vote against the motion. She
appreciated the citizens who have contacted her over the past week. Given the effort in 2007 and the
amount of public interest in the issue, it is appropriate to hold a public hearing before making a change.
She acknowledged if the Council held a public hearing, Councilmembers would be mocked by citizens
who think the Council has better things to do. She summarized a public hearing was the right thing to do.
Packet Page 22 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 20
Councilmember Yamamoto commented the Council does have bigger things to address. The Council
made a decision and he will follow that decision.
Councilmember Bloom referred to Mayor Pro Tem Peterson’s comment that there have only been a few
violations, pointing out there have only been a few complaints, however there are innumerable violations
of the containment of cats law. That will continue regardless of whether the language “with the exception
of cats” is removed. She reiterated this pitted neighbor against neighbor and makes no sense.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented without that language, enforcement is put back into the hands of
citizens, some of whom have pellet guns and traps. She was under the impression the ordinance was
unenforceable but has since talked with a number of residents who have received warnings. Some of the
warnings have occurred in the Bowl area; it is not occurring in just her neighborhood. If the language is
not changed, she believed citizens would take the situation into their own hands and it would result in
“the wild west of shooting cats.”
Councilmember Johnson asked what other methods the police or animal control have for dealing with an
errant cat. ACOP Lawless answered there is nothing specific to cats in the animal control ordinance
outside the containment ordinance.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented shooting cats was illegal. ACOP Lawless agreed it was.
THE VOTE ON THE MOTION FAILED, (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS AND
PETERSON VOTING YES.
(Councilmember Fraley-Monillas discontinued her participation in the Council meeting at 9:59 p.m.)
11. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF JUNE 12, 2012
Finance Committee
Councilmember Yamamoto reported the Committee was informed that staff applied for and has been
awarded funding from the Snohomish County Tourism Promotion Area (TPA) to nationally advertise the
Edmonds Arts Commission Write on the Sound writers' conference in October. Authorization to sign the
Interlocal Agreement was approved on the Consent Agenda. The Committee was also provided a General
Fund update for April.
Planning, Parks & Public Works Committee
Council President Pro Tem Petso reported all the items the Committee discussed were approved on
tonight’s Consent Agenda with the exception of telephone book opt out. The City’s approach will be
educational outreach to inform residents of their ability to opt out of telephone book delivery.
Public Safety & Personnel
Councilmember Bloom reported the Committee reviewed the Snohomish Regional Drug & Gang Task
Force, 2012 – 2013 Interlocal Agreement. The Committee then had a lengthy discussion with several
residents regarding the taking of notes/minutes and recording executive sessions. The Committee agreed
to forward the issue to full Council for further discussion to include a presentation by the City Attorney,
Washington Citizens for Open Government and possibly AWC and/or the Municipal Research Service
Center. That presentation/discussion will be scheduled on the July 24 Council agenda.
12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Pro Tem Peterson had no report.
Packet Page 23 of 129
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 21
13. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Buckshnis offered a special thanks to the Edmonds Art Festival volunteers.
Councilmember Johnson looked forward to learning more about the City Government Senior Internship
program, commenting it was a wonderful program that would involve seniors in City government.
Council President Pro Tem Petso reported the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) voted to
recommend a new member which was forwarded to the Mayor and will come to Council for
confirmation. She commended Rob Chave for securing a grant to produce the calendar again this year.
14. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m.
Packet Page 24 of 129
AM-4929 2. C.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/26/2012
Time:Consent
Submitted For:Shawn Hunstock Submitted By:Nori Jacobson
Department:Finance
Review Committee: Committee Action: Approve for
Consent Agenda
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Approval of claim checks #132695 through #132841 dated June 21, 2012 for $605,691.24 (replacement
check #132800 for $313.83). Approval of payroll direct deposit & checks #51411 through #51442 for
$449,154.89 and benefit checks #51443 through #51450 and wire payments for $192,762.58 for the
period June 1, 2012 through June 15, 2012.
Recommendation
Approval of claims, payroll and benefit direct deposit, checks and wire payments.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance
#2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or
non-approval of expenditures.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2012
Revenue:
Expenditure:1,247,608.71
Fiscal Impact:
Claims $605,691.24
Claims replacement check $313.83
Payroll Employee checks and direct deposit $449,154.89
Payroll Benefit checks and wire payments $192,762.58
Total Payroll $641,917.47
Attachments
Claim Checks 06-21-12
Packet Page 25 of 129
Project Numbers 06-21-12
Payroll summary 06-20-12
Payroll Benefit payments 06-20-12
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Finance Shawn Hunstock 06/21/2012 11:40 AM
City Clerk Sandy Chase 06/21/2012 12:14 PM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/21/2012 02:01 PM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 06/21/2012 02:12 PM
Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Started On: 06/21/2012 10:31 AM
Final Approval Date: 06/21/2012
Packet Page 26 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132695 6/21/2012 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL 306914 1-13992
PEST CONTROL
411.000.656.538.800.410.23 69.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.410.23 6.56
Total :75.56
132696 6/21/2012 068201 ACTIVE NETWORK INC 11035333 CLASS CASH DRAWER,RECEIPT PRINTERS
CASH DRAWER FOR FRONT DESK
001.000.640.574.100.350.00 358.00
RECEIPT PRINTERS AND RECEIPT PAPER FOR
001.000.640.575.510.350.00 814.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.350.00 34.01
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.510.350.00 77.33
Total :1,283.34
132697 6/21/2012 074036 ADVANCED PLC, LL 2106 C-386 HYPO PROJECT
C-386 HYPO PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 1,313.11
9.5% Sales Tax
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 124.75
C-387 FIBER OPTIC PROJECT2108
C-387 FIBER OPTIC PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 13,062.50
9.5% Sales Tax
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 1,240.94
C-386 HYPO PROJECT2112
C-386 HYPO PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 1,680.56
9.5% Sales Tax
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 159.65
Total :17,581.51
1Page:
Packet Page 27 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132698 6/21/2012 071177 ADVANTAGE BUILDING SERVICES 11-1068 JANITORIAL SERVICE
JANITORIAL SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.410.23 334.00
Total :334.00
132699 6/21/2012 072867 AFFORDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL INC 596A FAC - Asbestos Removal - return of
FAC - Asbestos Removal - return of
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 78.76
Total :78.76
132700 6/21/2012 066417 AIRGAS NOR PAC INC 101011291 M5Z34
CYLINDER RENTAL
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 42.52
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 4.04
Total :46.56
132701 6/21/2012 061540 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES 0197-001473557 3-0197-0807770
ASH DISPOSAL
411.000.656.538.800.474.65 1,591.49
Total :1,591.49
132702 6/21/2012 061540 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES 0197-001472892 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W
FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE W
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 130.35
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW0197-001472970
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
001.000.650.519.910.470.00 26.06
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
111.000.653.542.900.470.00 99.03
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 99.03
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 99.03
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
511.000.657.548.680.470.00 99.03
2Page:
Packet Page 28 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132702 6/21/2012 (Continued)061540 ALLIED WASTE SERVICES
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
411.000.652.542.900.470.00 99.02
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW0197-001473034
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 134.84
CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE RD0197-001473807
CLUBHOUSE 6801 N MEADOWDALE RD
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 60.02
Total :846.41
132703 6/21/2012 074042 AMER LEGION F FREEZE POST 66 1-22375 10-29342 UTILITY REFUND
10-29342 Utility Refund due to
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 24.93
Total :24.93
132704 6/21/2012 069667 AMERICAN MARKETING 15305 PLAQUES FOR HAZEL MILLER PLAZA
CAST BRONZE PLAQUES FOR HAZEL MILLER
132.000.640.594.760.310.00 2,406.00
9.5% Sales Tax
132.000.640.594.760.310.00 228.57
Total :2,634.57
132705 6/21/2012 064335 ANALYTICAL RESOURCES INC UU53 EDMONDS
NPDES SAMPLING
411.000.656.538.800.410.31 130.00
Total :130.00
132706 6/21/2012 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 655-6236301 UNIFORM SERVICES
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 25.88
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 2.46
Total :28.34
132707 6/21/2012 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 14821387 1079462
3Page:
Packet Page 29 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132707 6/21/2012 (Continued)069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
UNIFORM/PALADA
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 141.95
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 19.99
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 15.38
Total :177.32
132708 6/21/2012 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 655-6199886 21580001
UNIFORM SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 57.50
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 5.46
21580001655-6212127
UNIFORM SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 57.50
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 5.46
Total :125.92
132709 6/21/2012 074038 ARTS CORPS 1075 YOUTH LITERACY COURSES
YOUTH LITERACY COURSES
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 900.00
Total :900.00
132710 6/21/2012 070251 ASHBROOK SIMON-HARTLEY 121691 ROLLER ASSEMBLY/SHAFT
ROLLER ASSEMBLY/SHAFT
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 16,016.00
Freight
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 958.77
9.5% Sales Tax
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 1,521.52
ROLLER ASSEMBLE DRIVE/SHAFT121712
ROLLER ASSEMBLE DRIVE/SHAFT
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 16,016.00
4Page:
Packet Page 30 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132710 6/21/2012 (Continued)070251 ASHBROOK SIMON-HARTLEY
Freight
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 958.77
9.5% Sales Tax
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 1,521.52
Total :36,992.58
132711 6/21/2012 074039 ASIMAKOPOULOS, THEO ASIMAKOPOULOS0606 REFUND
CLASS REFUND
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 13.00
Total :13.00
132712 6/21/2012 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0311078-IN 01-7500014
DIESEL FUEL
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 4,614.52
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 438.39
Total :5,052.91
132713 6/21/2012 064343 AT&T 7303860502001 Public Works Fax Lines
Public Works Fax Lines
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 6.36
Public Works Fax Lines
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 24.17
Public Works Fax Lines
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 24.17
Public Works Fax Lines
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 24.17
Public Works Fax Lines
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 24.17
Public Works Fax Lines
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 24.16
Total :127.20
132714 6/21/2012 073866 ATLAS PLUMBING CONTRACTORS BLD2012.0444 Plubing contractor applied for a permit
Plubing contractor applied for a permit
5Page:
Packet Page 31 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132714 6/21/2012 (Continued)073866 ATLAS PLUMBING CONTRACTORS
001.000.000.257.620.000.00 185.00
Total :185.00
132715 6/21/2012 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 64778 E7FG.630 STORMWATER INSERTS
E7FG.630 Stormwater Inserts
412.200.630.594.320.410.00 48.98
E7FG.2873 STORMWATER INSERTS64863
E7FG.2873 Stormwater Inserts
412.200.630.594.320.410.00 223.36
Total :272.34
132716 6/21/2012 001835 AWARDS SERVICE INC 78611 NAME BADGES
ARTS COMMISSION NAME BADGES
117.100.640.573.100.490.00 17.50
Freight
117.100.640.573.100.490.00 3.64
9.5% Sales Tax
117.100.640.573.100.490.00 2.01
Total :23.15
132717 6/21/2012 001702 AWC EMPLOY BENEFIT TRUST July 2012 AWC 07-12 AWC PREMIUMS
07-12 Fire Pension Premiums
617.000.510.522.200.230.00 4,011.32
07-12 Retirees Premiums
009.000.390.517.370.230.00 30,064.63
MM-YY AWC Premiums
811.000.000.231.510.000.00 277,158.25
Total :311,234.20
132718 6/21/2012 074043 BARRY CRAIG, PR N STEWART EST 4-47125 632430 UTILITY REFUND
632430 Utility Refund due to estimated
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 60.79
Total :60.79
132719 6/21/2012 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 4537 E8GA.SERVICES THRU 05/18/12
6Page:
Packet Page 32 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132719 6/21/2012 (Continued)069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC
E8GA.Services thru 05/18/12
412.100.630.594.320.410.00 252.67
E8GA.Services thru 05/18/12
412.300.630.594.320.410.00 757.99
E2GA.SERVICES THRU 05/18/124538
E2GA.Services thru 05/18/12
412.300.630.594.320.410.00 7,778.67
E2GA.Services thru 05/18/12
411.000.656.538.800.410.00 16,600.95
Total :25,390.28
132720 6/21/2012 074047 BJORN THUESEN 2-34655 4222-1859332 UTILITY REFUND
4222-1859332 Utility Refund due to
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 103.24
Total :103.24
132721 6/21/2012 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP 937800 INV#937800 - EDMONDS PD -BOWER
S/S UNIFORM SHIRTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 135.90
SEW NAME TAGS ON SHIRTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 2.00
CLOTH NAMETAGS " M C BOWER"
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 9.90
L/S UNIFORM SHIRT
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 89.95
SEW NAMETAG ON SHIRT
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 1.00
CLOTH NAMETAG "M C BOWER"
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 4.95
SEW ON YEARS OF SERVICE
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 1.00
UNIFORM WOOL PANTS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 216.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 43.77
7Page:
Packet Page 33 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132721 6/21/2012 (Continued)002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORMS & EQUIP
INV#941413 - EDMONDS PD -BULBS941413
STREAMLIGHT FLASHLIGHT SL-20X
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 95.70
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 9.09
INV#942507-01 - EDMONDS PD -NELSON942507-01
SEW ON YEARS OF SERVICE BARS
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 2.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 0.24
INV#942517-01 - EDMONDS PD -BARKER942517-01
REMOVE OLD STYLE SERVICE BARS
001.000.410.521.210.240.00 2.50
SEW ON YEARS OF SERVICE BARS
001.000.410.521.210.240.00 1.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.210.240.00 0.33
INV#942657-01 - EDMONDS PD -INVENTORY942657-01
FLASHLIGHT RING
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 17.90
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 1.70
INV#942792 - EDMONDS PD -RICHARDSON942792
RADIO HOLDER
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 50.95
GOLD CAP STRAP
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 9.95
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 5.79
Total :702.12
132722 6/21/2012 072571 BUILDERS EXCHANGE 1032520 E1JE/E6MA/E9FB.PROJECTS TO BID POSTING
E1JE.Project Bid Doc Posting-$50.50
412.100.630.594.320.410.00 50.50
E1JE.Project Bid Doc Posting-$50.50
8Page:
Packet Page 34 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132722 6/21/2012 (Continued)072571 BUILDERS EXCHANGE
129.000.240.595.700.410.00 26.75
E1JE.Project Bid Doc Posting-$50.50
412.200.630.594.320.410.00 45.00
Total :122.25
132723 6/21/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11938985 INV#11938985 CUST#572105 -EDMONDS PD
COPIER RENTAL 07/01/12
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 581.60
COPY CHARGES 04/30 TO 05/31/12
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 197.54
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 74.02
Total :853.16
132724 6/21/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11938987 C/A 572105 CONTRACT# 001-0572105
Finance dept copier contract charge
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 249.99
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.450.00 23.75
Total :273.74
132725 6/21/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11938988 COPIER LEASE
COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.574.100.450.00 273.74
COPIER LEASE11938992
COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.574.100.450.00 30.65
COPIER LEASE11940417
PARK MAINTENANCE COPIER LEASE
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 36.16
Total :340.55
132726 6/21/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11884457 CANON CONTRACT CHARGE IRC5051
Canon contract charge IRC5051
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 83.50
9Page:
Packet Page 35 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132726 6/21/2012 (Continued)073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES
Canon contract charge IRC5051
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 83.25
Canon contract charge IRC5051
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 83.24
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 7.93
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 7.91
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 7.91
Total :273.74
132727 6/21/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11938986 LEASE CITY CLERK'S COPIER
Lease City Clerk's copier
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 466.97
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 44.36
RECEPTIONIST DESK COPIER LEASE11938989
Recept desk copier lease
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 20.11
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 1.91
Total :533.35
132728 6/21/2012 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 11938981 Lease copier/printer Council Office
Lease copier/printer Council Office
001.000.110.511.100.450.00 30.65
Total :30.65
132729 6/21/2012 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN05121046 2954000
CYLINDER RENTAL
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 55.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.450.21 5.23
10Page:
Packet Page 36 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :60.23132729 6/21/2012 003510 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY
132730 6/21/2012 064291 CENTURY LINK 206 Z02 0478 332B TELEMETRY
TELEMETRY
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 138.73
Total :138.73
132731 6/21/2012 065682 CHS ENGINEERS LLC 451201-1205 E2FA.SERVICES THRU MAY 2012
E2FA.Services thru May 2012
412.200.630.594.320.410.00 1,845.00
Total :1,845.00
132732 6/21/2012 063902 CITY OF EVERETT I12001575 Water Quality - Water Lab Analysis
Water Quality - Water Lab Analysis
411.000.654.534.800.410.00 583.20
Total :583.20
132733 6/21/2012 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 9425 MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS
MONTHLY MAINT/OPERATIONS SEWER COSTS
411.000.655.535.800.472.00 27,602.00
Total :27,602.00
132734 6/21/2012 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE G00091 1-218359-279832
2203 N 205
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 15.68
Total :15.68
132735 6/21/2012 065891 CONLEY, LISA CONLEY061112 PRESCHOOL SUBSTITUTE
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL SUBSTITUTE
001.000.640.575.560.410.00 10.00
Total :10.00
132736 6/21/2012 074044 CRMA INVESTMENTS LLC 4-31400 4291-1869841 UTILITY REFUND
4291-1869841 Utility Refund due to
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 169.63
Total :169.63
11Page:
Packet Page 37 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132737 6/21/2012 005965 CUES INC 367771 Sewer - Supplies
Sewer - Supplies
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 36.42
Freight
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 6.24
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.05
Total :46.71
132738 6/21/2012 074045 DAVID & ELIZABETH HELBER 3-53575 629837 UTILITY REFUND DUE
629837 Utility Refund due to estimated
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 51.72
Total :51.72
132739 6/21/2012 073823 DAVID EVANS & ASSOC INC 319139 E1AA.SERVICES THRU 6/2/12
E1AA.Services thru 6/2/12
112.200.630.595.330.410.00 32,758.45
E1CA.SERVICES THRU 6/2/12319574
E1CA.Services thru 6/2/12
112.200.630.595.330.410.00 2,026.10
Total :34,784.55
132740 6/21/2012 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 44139 PW - Radio Terminal Kit
PW - Radio Terminal Kit
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 34.75
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.30
Total :38.05
132741 6/21/2012 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 06192012 LABORATORY ACCREDITATION
LABORATORY ACCREDITATION
411.000.656.538.800.510.00 800.00
Total :800.00
132742 6/21/2012 068734 DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES AQ15127-1 Overpayment of time loss for the period
Overpayment of time loss for the period
12Page:
Packet Page 38 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132742 6/21/2012 (Continued)068734 DEPT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIES
001.000.410.521.220.110.00 1,455.96
Total :1,455.96
132743 6/21/2012 063064 DEZURIK WATER CONTROLS RPI/58006275 982400
VALVES
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 842.00
Total :842.00
132744 6/21/2012 073772 DIRECT MATTERS 52034 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 459.59
Total :459.59
132745 6/21/2012 007253 DUNN LUMBER 1249710 HICKMAN PARK SANIKAN FENCE
SUPPLIES FOR NEW SANIKAN FENCE
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 244.52
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 23.23
HICKMAN SANIKAN FENCE SUPPLIES1251259
FENCING SUPPLIES FOR SANIKAN
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 221.30
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 21.02
HICKMAN SUPPLIES1258491
SUPPLIES FOR HICKMAN PARK
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 49.31
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 4.68
Total :564.06
132746 6/21/2012 074034 EAGER, MARLENE Eager EC 06-12 EXPENSE CLAIM - DETECTIVE TV&
TV FOR DETECTIVE UNIT
001.000.410.521.210.350.00 244.97
WALL MOUNT DETECTIVE TV
001.000.410.521.210.350.00 74.99
13Page:
Packet Page 39 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132746 6/21/2012 (Continued)074034 EAGER, MARLENE
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.210.350.00 30.40
Total :350.36
132747 6/21/2012 061580 ECKSTROM INDUSTRIES 00048955 1096
FABRUCATE SCREEN TROUGHT
411.000.656.538.800.410.21 1,538.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.410.21 141.50
Total :1,679.50
132748 6/21/2012 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 11285 SUPPLIES
JB KWIK
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 6.25
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 0.59
CEMETERY SUPPLIES11463
SPARK PLUGS, DUST CAPS
130.000.640.536.500.310.00 13.51
9.5% Sales Tax
130.000.640.536.500.310.00 1.28
Total :21.63
132749 6/21/2012 007725 EDMONDS BAKERY 8668 REFRESHMENTS FOR RIBBON CUTTING
REFRESHMENTS FOR RIBBON CUTTING
132.000.640.594.760.310.00 72.00
Total :72.00
132750 6/21/2012 069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP JANOO0608 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIPS
YOUTH SCHOLARSHIPS FOR:IMAN
122.000.640.574.100.490.00 322.00
YOUTH SCHOLARSHIPNIAMKE0619
YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP:MARIE NIAMKE
122.000.640.574.100.490.00 75.00
YOUTH SCHOLARSHIPWHITE0614
14Page:
Packet Page 40 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132750 6/21/2012 (Continued)069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP
YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP: ELLY J.WHITE
122.000.640.574.100.490.00 75.00
Total :472.00
132751 6/21/2012 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 1-00575 CITY PARK
CITY PARK
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 71.71
BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM1-00825
BRACKETT'S LANDING RESTROOM
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 698.25
SPRINKLER1-00875
SPRINKLER
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER1-02125
CITY PARK SPRINKLER METER
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
290 MAIN ST1-03710
290 MAIN ST
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
SPRINKLER1-03900
SPRINKLER
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 98.15
SPRINKLER1-05125
SPRINKLER
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
GAZEBO IRRIGATION1-05285
GAZEBO IRRIGATION
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
CORNER PARK1-05340
CORNER PARK
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05650
EDMONDS CITY PARK
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP1-05675
15Page:
Packet Page 41 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132751 6/21/2012 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION
PARKS MAINTENANCE SHOP
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 596.85
EDMONDS CITY PARK1-05700
EDMONDS CITY PARK
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
CORNER PARK1-09650
CORNER PARK
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
SW CORNER SPRINKLER1-09800
SW CORNER SPRINKLER
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
PLANTER1-10780
PLANTER
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH1-16130
CORNER PLANTER ON 5TH
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
CORNER PARKS1-16300
CORNER PARKS
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 34.65
118 5TH AVE N1-16420
118 5TH AVE N
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
CITY HALL TRIANGLE1-16450
CITY HALL TRIANGLE
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 37.87
6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX1-16630
6TH & MAIN PLANTER BOX
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER1-17475
5TH & DAYTON ST PLANTER
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
PINE STREE PLAYFIELD1-19950
PINE STREE PLAYFIELD
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 60.21
16Page:
Packet Page 42 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132751 6/21/2012 (Continued)008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION
1141 9TH AVE S1-36255
1141 9TH AVE S
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 29.57
Total :2,070.81
132752 6/21/2012 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 1-00655 LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON ST
LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON ST
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 32.11
LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AVE1-00925
LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AVE
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 32.11
LIFT STATION #1 105 CASPERS ST1-01950
LIFT STATION #1 105 CASPERS ST
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 29.57
OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON ST1-03950
OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON ST
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 454.83
OLD PUBLIC WORKS SHOP METER1-05350
OLD PUBLIC WORKS SHOP METER
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 66.53
LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST1-05705
LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 60.19
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N1-13975
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 480.78
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N1-14000
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 78.40
Total :1,234.52
132753 6/21/2012 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 076610 COPIER CHARGES C5051
Monthly color & b/w charges for C5051
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 127.63
Monthly color & b/w charges for C5051
17Page:
Packet Page 43 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132753 6/21/2012 (Continued)008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 127.25
Monthly color & b/w charges for C5051
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 127.25
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 12.12
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 12.09
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 12.09
COPIER CHARGES C1030076764
Monthly color & b/w charges C1030
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 11.14
Monthly color & b/w charges C1030
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 11.11
Monthly color & b/w charges C1030
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 11.10
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.220.516.100.450.00 1.06
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.210.513.100.450.00 1.06
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.610.519.700.450.00 1.05
Total :454.95
132754 6/21/2012 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES 076763 Copies Council Office Copier
Copies Council Office Copier
001.000.110.511.100.450.00 9.63
Total :9.63
132755 6/21/2012 069848 ERICKSON, KATHERINE ERICKSON15479 IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS
IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #15478
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 80.00
IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #15479
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 184.80
18Page:
Packet Page 44 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :264.80132755 6/21/2012 069848 069848 ERICKSON, KATHERINE
132756 6/21/2012 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU25885 Sewer - Suppleis
Sewer - Suppleis
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 44.43
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.22
Total :48.65
132757 6/21/2012 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0337174 Meter Inventory - M-METER -0.625-010
Meter Inventory - M-METER -0.625-010
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 5,402.70
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 513.26
Water Meter Inventory - 2027 2"Omni0338135
Water Meter Inventory - 2027 2"Omni
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 1,399.09
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 132.91
Water Meter Inventory - 2027 2"Omni0338135-1
Water Meter Inventory - 2027 2"Omni
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 1,399.09
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 132.91
Water Meter inventory - 2034 1 1/2"0338296
Water Meter inventory - 2034 1 1/2"
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 1,212.55
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 115.19
Water Meter Inventory - 2034 1 1/2"0339145
Water Meter Inventory - 2034 1 1/2"
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 1,212.55
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 115.19
Water - Water Valve Boxes0339787
Water - Water Valve Boxes
19Page:
Packet Page 45 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132757 6/21/2012 (Continued)009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 2,410.50
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 229.00
Total :14,274.94
132758 6/21/2012 073265 FREESE LAW OFFICES INC PS 6712 PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE
PUBLIC DEFENDER FEE
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 800.00
Total :800.00
132759 6/21/2012 011900 FRONTIER 253-012-9189-040195-AUTO DIALER
AUTO DIALER
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 41.08
AUTO DIALER253-017-7256-040195-
AUTO DIALER
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 217.18
AUTO DIALER425-771-5559-082592-
AUTO DIALER
411.000.656.538.800.420.00 92.26
Total :350.52
132760 6/21/2012 011900 FRONTIER 253-011-1177 PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 5.48
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 20.81
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 20.81
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 20.81
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 20.81
PUBLIC WORKS OMC RADIO LINE TO FIVE
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 20.78
TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE425-712-0417
20Page:
Packet Page 46 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132760 6/21/2012 (Continued)011900 FRONTIER
TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.36
TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 26.35
PUBLIC WORKS OMC ALARM, FAX,425-712-8251
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 13.76
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 68.78
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 57.77
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 57.77
PUBLIC WORKS OMC FIRE AND INTRUSION
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 77.03
CLUBHOUSE ALARM LINES 6801 MEADOWDALE RD425-745-4313
CLUBHOUSE FIRE AND INTRUSION ALARM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 99.44
LIFT STATION #8 VG SPECIAL ACCESS LINES425-774-1031
LIFT STATION #8 TWO VOICE GRADE SPECIAL
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 46.84
CIVIC CENTER ALARM LINES 250 5425-775-2455
CIVIC CENTER FIRE AND INTRUSION ALARM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 50.19
UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE425-775-7865
UTILITY BILLING RADIO LINE TO FIVE
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 52.56
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PHONE LINE425-776-1281
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY ELEVATOR PHONE LINE
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 40.38
Total :726.73
132761 6/21/2012 069571 GOBLE SAMPSON ASSOCIATES INC BINV0003239 EDMOC01
PUMPHEAD
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 639.00
21Page:
Packet Page 47 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132761 6/21/2012 (Continued)069571 GOBLE SAMPSON ASSOCIATES INC
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 34.18
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 58.58
Total :731.76
132762 6/21/2012 072001 GOOD EYE DESIGN 0613122 DESIGN KPLU WEBSITE AD
Design of KPLU radio website ad
001.000.240.513.110.410.00 95.00
Total :95.00
132763 6/21/2012 012199 GRAINGER 9834689425 810393736
DOOR ACCESS
411.000.656.538.800.310.12 180.11
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.12 17.11
Total :197.22
132764 6/21/2012 012199 GRAINGER 9845383059 FAC - Motor
FAC - Motor
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 260.96
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 24.78
Total :285.74
132765 6/21/2012 012233 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO INC 960585028 0000315609
COIL CORD KIT
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 53.51
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 11.14
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 6.14
Total :70.79
132766 6/21/2012 074046 GWEN DEWEY 3-11925 30066587 UTILITY REFUND
22Page:
Packet Page 48 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132766 6/21/2012 (Continued)074046 GWEN DEWEY
30066587 Utility Refund due to
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 83.37
Total :83.37
132767 6/21/2012 012845 HARBOR SQUARE ATHLETIC CLUB 2012 MEMBERSHIP 2012 MEMBERSHIP FEES-EDMONDS PD
2012 GROUP MEMBERSHIP FEES
001.000.410.521.400.410.00 5,760.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.400.410.00 547.20
Total :6,307.20
132768 6/21/2012 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC I3141923 Water - Meter Boxes and Lids
Water - Meter Boxes and Lids
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 3,082.38
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 292.82
Total :3,375.20
132769 6/21/2012 006030 HDR ENGINEERING INC 00000759-B 178323
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
411.000.656.538.800.410.11 559.14
C-38500360669-H
C-385 SWITCHGEAR UPGRADE
414.000.656.594.320.410.10 3,688.28
Total :4,247.42
132770 6/21/2012 062899 HUFF, ARIELE HUGG15596 ONLINE WRITING CLASS
WRITE ABOUT YOUR LIFE:ONLINE
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 55.00
Total :55.00
132771 6/21/2012 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2099558 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.500.310.00 235.36
SUPPLIES2100890
23Page:
Packet Page 49 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132771 6/21/2012 (Continued)073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.500.310.00 108.37
Total :343.73
132772 6/21/2012 064655 INNOVATIVE VACUUM SERVICES INC S18626 4800
VACUUM TRUCK/SAND
411.000.656.538.800.410.21 2,424.75
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.410.21 230.35
Total :2,655.10
132773 6/21/2012 074037 JAMES & KAROLINA CHESHIRE 1-24025 4243-1885462 UTILITY REFUND
4243-1885462 Utility Refund due to
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 91.97
Total :91.97
132774 6/21/2012 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 06042012-03 City Car Washes
City Car Washes
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 20.12
Total :20.12
132775 6/21/2012 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 719 INTERPRETER FEE
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.390.512.520.410.00 88.32
INTERPRETER FEE720
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.32
INTERPRETER FEE885
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.32
INTERPRETER FEE886
INTERPRETER FEE
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32
INTERPRETER FEE891
INTERPRETER FEE
24Page:
Packet Page 50 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132775 6/21/2012 (Continued)069362 MARSHALL, CITA
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.32
Total :441.60
132776 6/21/2012 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 27205220 123106800
PIPE FITTINGS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 94.67
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.29
12310680027483070
V-BELT/UTILITY KNIFE/SOCKETS
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 171.07
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.87
12310680028608111
TIE DOWN CORD/DISC SANDER/SANDER
411.000.656.538.800.350.00 305.45
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.350.00 12.71
Total :597.06
132777 6/21/2012 073865 MICHELS CORPORATION E1FI.Ret Release E1FI.RETAINAGE RELEASE
E1FI.Retainage Release
412.200.000.223.400.000.00 3,259.01
Total :3,259.01
132778 6/21/2012 063773 MICROFLEX 00020696 05-12 TAX AUDIT PROGRAM
TAX AUDIT PROGRAM
001.000.310.514.230.410.00 51.72
Total :51.72
132779 6/21/2012 074035 MORRIS LAW PC June 9, 2012 APPEAL HEARING EXAM BURNSTEAD SUBDIVISON
Legal Services - Appeal of Hearing
001.000.110.550.100.490.00 5,000.00
Total :5,000.00
132780 6/21/2012 069923 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC WA23-246752 101690-01
25Page:
Packet Page 51 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132780 6/21/2012 (Continued)069923 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC
ROW BALL/BEARINGS
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 246.22
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 7.89
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 24.14
Total :278.25
132781 6/21/2012 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY S4546640.001 2091
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 484.90
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 11.34
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 47.14
Total :543.38
132782 6/21/2012 071976 NORTH SOUND EMERGENCY 2-14-12 FORGIESCHMID EDMONDS PD 2-14-12 FORGIESCHMIDT
TX AT PROVIDENCE-EVERETT 12-0518
001.000.410.523.600.310.00 317.00
Total :317.00
132783 6/21/2012 066391 NORTHSTAR CHEMICAL INC 31640 260
SODIUM BISULFITE
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 730.80
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.54 69.43
Total :800.23
132784 6/21/2012 070045 NORTHUP GROUP 2541 INV 2541 PRE-EMPLOY EXAM EDMONDS PD
PRE-EMPLOY EXAM - STRUM
001.000.410.521.100.410.00 340.00
Total :340.00
132785 6/21/2012 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-475041 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
26Page:
Packet Page 52 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132785 6/21/2012 (Continued)061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL @ MARINA BEACH
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 1,141.66
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-475998
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:MARINA BEACH
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 261.51
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-476255
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:PINE STREET PARK
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 112.35
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-476256
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:SIERRA PARK
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 112.35
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-477119
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL:CIVIC CENTER
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 194.62
Total :1,822.49
132786 6/21/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 008741 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 449.65
Total :449.65
132787 6/21/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 146979 PAPER
LEGAL PAPER
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 20.12
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 1.91
OFFICE SUPPLIES168454
PAPER, PENS
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 80.38
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 7.63
Total :110.04
132788 6/21/2012 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 110609 OFFICE SUPPLIES
Office Supplies
27Page:
Packet Page 53 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132788 6/21/2012 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 71.81
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 6.83
OFFICE SUPPLIES136015
Office Supplies
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 62.80
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.310.00 5.97
Total :147.41
132789 6/21/2012 068746 ONYX VALVE CO.027336 EDM002
STEEL FITTINGS/STEEL SEALS
411.000.656.538.800.410.22 488.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.410.22 62.50
Total :550.50
132790 6/21/2012 063750 ORCA PACIFIC INC 056741 YOST POOL SUPPLIES
YOST POOL CHEMCIALS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 369.05
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 35.06
Total :404.11
132791 6/21/2012 073221 ORCHID CELLMARK INC 010-054251 INV#010-054251 - EDMONDS PD
1 EVIDENCE SAMPLE #11-3376
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 405.00
INV#010-054252 - EDMONDS PD010-054252
2 EVIDENCE SAMPLES #11-3296
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 810.00
1 FORENSIC SERVICE NON-SWAB
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 30.00
INV#010-054253 - EDMONDS PD010-054253
1 EVIDENCE SAMPLE #11-3198
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 305.00
28Page:
Packet Page 54 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132791 6/21/2012 (Continued)073221 ORCHID CELLMARK INC
INV#010-054254 - EDMONDS PD010-054254
1 EVIDENCE SAMPLE #11-2944
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 405.00
1 FORENSIC SERVICE NON-SWAB
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 30.00
INV#010-054255 - EDMONDS PD010-054255
4 EVIDENCE SAMPLES #11-3525
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 1,620.00
1 FORENSIC SERVICES-NON-SWAB
001.000.410.521.210.410.00 30.00
Total :3,635.00
132792 6/21/2012 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00064392 Unit 106 - Check Valves, O rings
Unit 106 - Check Valves, O rings
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 373.76
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 15.34
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 36.96
Total :426.06
132793 6/21/2012 071402 PACIFIC NW FLOAT TRIPS PACIFICFLOAT15487 GOLD PANNING RAFT ADVENTURE
GOLD PANNING RAFT ADVENTURE
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 29.22
Total :29.22
132794 6/21/2012 074040 PAPE, TERESA PAPE0615 REFUND
REFUND -PUT INTO WRONG LEVEL
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 52.00
Total :52.00
132795 6/21/2012 063951 PERTEET ENGINEERING INC 20110010.000-10 E7AC.SERVICES THRU 05/27/12
E7AC.Services thru 05/27/12
112.200.630.595.330.410.00 22,794.83
Total :22,794.83
29Page:
Packet Page 55 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132796 6/21/2012 068411 PHILLIPS 66 - CONOCO 76 683 PD Gas Purchases
PD Gas Purchases
511.000.657.548.680.340.12 127.69
Total :127.69
132797 6/21/2012 064552 PITNEY BOWES 9607730 POSTAGE METER LEASE
Lease 5/30 to 6/30
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 718.60
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.250.514.300.450.00 68.26
Total :786.86
132798 6/21/2012 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC 1627490 2196
ELECTRICAL SUPPLIES
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 108.93
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 10.35
Total :119.28
132799 6/21/2012 029117 PORT OF EDMONDS 04371 UNIT F1 B1 FUEL
Fire Boat - Repairs
511.000.657.548.680.320.00 619.16
Total :619.16
132800 6/21/2012 064088 PROTECTION ONE 1988948 FAC
Alarm Monitoring for FAC
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 211.83
MCC2010551
24 hour Alarm Monitoring MCC
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 102.00
Total :313.83
132801 6/21/2012 064088 PROTECTION ONE 2010551 ALARM MONITORING MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE
ALARM MONITORING CLUBHOUSE
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 102.00
ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL31146525
30Page:
Packet Page 56 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132801 6/21/2012 (Continued)064088 PROTECTION ONE
ALARM MONITORING CITY HALL 121 5
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 41.73
Total :143.73
132802 6/21/2012 067263 PUGET SAFETY EQUIPMENT COMPANY 0004847-IN 0000796
METHANE/OXYGEN/HYDROGEN SULFIDE
411.000.656.538.800.310.12 337.00
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.12 32.80
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.12 35.13
Total :404.93
132803 6/21/2012 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 084-904-700-6 WWTP PUGET SOUND ENERGY
WWTP PUGET SOUND ENERGY
411.000.656.538.800.472.63 245.55
Total :245.55
132804 6/21/2012 063452 RADIO SHACK CORPORATION 023896 0000460506005
FUSEHOLDER
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 10.25
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.22 0.97
Total :11.22
132805 6/21/2012 066526 ROCKHURST UNIVERSITY 1554 TRAINING/ZUVELA
TRAINING/ZUVELA
411.000.656.538.800.490.71 199.00
Total :199.00
132806 6/21/2012 071979 SACKVILLE, JODI L AQ15127-2 Time loss from L & I (that cannot be
Time loss from L & I (that cannot be
001.000.410.521.220.110.00 242.66
Total :242.66
132807 6/21/2012 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 12-1944 Sewer - Supplies
31Page:
Packet Page 57 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132807 6/21/2012 (Continued)067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO
Sewer - Supplies
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 198.70
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 18.88
Sewer - Supplies12-2015
Sewer - Supplies
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 41.65
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 3.96
Total :263.19
132808 6/21/2012 067262 SENIOR SOFTBALL USA LEAGUES 1167 RULEBOOKS
RULEBOOKS
001.000.640.575.520.310.00 88.00
Total :88.00
132809 6/21/2012 036070 SHANNON TOWING INC 197200 INV#197200 - EDMONDS PD
TOW 1996 SAAB #341VLM
001.000.410.521.220.410.00 158.00
2.5 DAYS STORAGE @ $41
001.000.410.521.220.410.00 102.50
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.410.00 24.75
Total :285.25
132810 6/21/2012 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0138320-IN Unit 40 - Amber LED
Unit 40 - Amber LED
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 307.97
Unit EQ87WQ - Amber LED's
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 615.94
Unit 40 - Amber LED0138424-IN
Unit 40 - Amber LED
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 219.48
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 22.82
32Page:
Packet Page 58 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :1,166.21132810 6/21/2012 068489 068489 SIRENNET.COM
132811 6/21/2012 069734 SMITH, JOEL SMITH0601 GYMNASTICS SHOW SERVICES
MOVING EQUIPMENT/RUNNING MUSIC FOR
001.000.640.575.550.410.00 130.00
Total :130.00
132812 6/21/2012 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-6027-1 9537 BOWDOIN WAY
9537 BOWDOIN WAY
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 1,894.21
8100 190TH ST SW2025-4064-7
8100 190TH ST SW
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 30.64
Total :1,924.85
132813 6/21/2012 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 110526924 2002-0255-4
24400 HIGHWAY 99/RICHMOND PARK
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 31.68
2019-9517-2113842763
9805 EDMONDS WAY/WESTGATE
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 30.08
2019-2988-2120484738
8421 244 SW/RICHMOND PARK
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 31.68
2025-7952-0136960098
VARIOUS LOCATIONS
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 8.35
Total :101.79
132814 6/21/2012 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2003-9895-6 FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST SW
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,109.95
LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE W2006-1131-7
LIFT STATION #9 19300 80TH AVE W
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 161.05
TRAFFIC LIGHT 21200 84TH AVE W2007-0685-1
33Page:
Packet Page 59 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132814 6/21/2012 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
TRAFFIC LIGHT 21200 84TH AVE W
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.68
TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR2007-2302-1
TRAFFIC LIGHT 961 PUGET DR
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 37.52
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8400 219TH ST SW2011-5141-2
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8400 219TH ST SW
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.68
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUGET DR2014-3124-4
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 9301 PUGET DR
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.64
TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 992014-4175-5
TRAFFIC LIGHT 21531 HWY 99
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 80.93
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST2015-5174-4
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 1,728.09
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW2019-4248-9
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
001.000.650.519.910.470.00 70.22
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
111.000.653.542.900.470.00 266.84
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 266.84
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 266.84
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
511.000.657.548.680.470.00 266.84
PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ST SW
411.000.652.542.900.470.00 266.85
TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 992022-8945-0
TRAFFIC LIGHT 21931 HWY 99
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 147.38
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N2022-9166-2
34Page:
Packet Page 60 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
35
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132814 6/21/2012 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 3,977.92
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8602 188TH ST SW2024-2780-3
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 8602 188TH ST SW
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.68
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N2024-3924-6
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 2,033.08
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 1400 OLYMPIC AVE2025-1986-4
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHTS 1400 OLYMPIC AVE
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 30.64
WATER TOWER 8519 BOWDOIN WAY2036-5215-1
WATER TOWER 8519 BOWDOIN WAY
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 372.37
Total :11,209.04
132815 6/21/2012 006630 SNOHOMISH COUNTY I000299389 SOLID WASTE CHARGES
SOLID WASTE CHARGES
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 789.00
Total :789.00
132816 6/21/2012 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 103584 RECYCLING
RECYCLING
411.000.656.538.800.475.66 28.25
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.475.66 1.70
Total :29.95
132817 6/21/2012 062280 SOUND SEAL & PACKING CO 17092 LOWER SEAL/UPPER SEAL
LOWER SEAL/UPPER SEAL
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 401.47
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 16.50
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 39.71
35Page:
Packet Page 61 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
36
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :457.68132817 6/21/2012 062280 062280 SOUND SEAL & PACKING CO
132818 6/21/2012 009400 STELLAR INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC 3147240 Sewet - Earplugs
Sewet - Earplugs
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 47.76
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.54
Total :52.30
132819 6/21/2012 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S100173085.002 353
SODIUM LAMP
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 120.59
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 11.46
353S100173085.003
SODIUM LAMP
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 120.59
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 11.46
353S100179622.001
50W 120V HPS
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 121.95
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.23 11.59
Total :397.64
132820 6/21/2012 040572 SUPER SEER CORP 52578 Unit 582 - Setcom Helmet Kit
Unit 582 - Setcom Helmet Kit
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 273.00
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 9.54
Total :282.54
132821 6/21/2012 074041 SUTCLIFFE, ERIN SUTCLIFFE0613 REFUND
CUSTOMER REQUESTED REFUND
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 230.00
36Page:
Packet Page 62 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
37
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :230.00132821 6/21/2012 074041 074041 SUTCLIFFE, ERIN
132822 6/21/2012 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1783018 NEWSPAPER AD
Ord. 3887
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 25.80
Total :25.80
132823 6/21/2012 061233 TOWN & COUNTRY CHRYSLER 343144 Unit 86 - Sensor
Unit 86 - Sensor
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 115.20
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 10.94
Total :126.14
132824 6/21/2012 068407 TROUT UNLIMITED TROUT15253 BEGINNING FISHING FOR KIDS
BEGINNING FISHING FOR KIDS ~
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 207.90
Total :207.90
132825 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 5923 PATCH ADVERTISEMENT PARKING FEE
Advertisement for May on Patch online
001.000.240.513.110.440.00 727.26
Parking while attending Tourism
001.000.610.519.700.490.00 3.00
Total :730.26
132826 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 8313 ENG CREDIT CARD MAY 2012
Eng Credit Card May 2012~
001.000.620.532.200.490.00 429.20
Eng Credit Card May 2012~
001.000.620.532.200.430.00 85.89
Total :515.09
132827 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 2519 INV#2519 06/06/12 TRAINING -EDMONDS PD
NEW WORLD/CAB FARE/COLLINS
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 46.86
INV#3181 06/06/12 - BARD -EDMONDS PD3181
37Page:
Packet Page 63 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
38
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132827 6/21/2012 (Continued)062693 US BANK
NEW WORLD/BARD/BAG FEE 05/06
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 20.00
NEW WORLD/BARD/BAG FEE 05/08
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 20.00
NEW WORLD/BARD/PKG CHARGE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 71.50
REPLACE LAMP CANON PROJECTOR
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 91.97
NW FIRE INV/LODGING/MCINTYRE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 342.80
INV#3256 06/06/12 - GANNON -EDMONDS PD3256
NW FIRE INV/FOOD/MCINTYRE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 46.91
NW FIRE INV/FOOD/ MCINTYRE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 7.00
NW FIRE INV/MEAL/ MCINTYRE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 20.27
NW FIRE INVMEAL/ MCINTYRE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 11.83
NW FIRE INV/FOOD/ MCINTYRE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 22.54
NW FIRE INV/MEAL/ MCINTYRE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 5.75
NW FIRE INV/FUEL/ MCINTYRE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 38.39
NW FIRE INV/MEAL/ MCINTYRE
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 32.10
INV#3314 06/06/12 - LAWLESS -EDMONDS PD3314
WASPC/MEAL/LAWLESS-ANDERSON
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 133.62
WASPC/FUEL/LAWLESS-ANDERSON
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 57.50
WASPC/LOGDING/LAWLESS
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 312.24
38Page:
Packet Page 64 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
39
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132827 6/21/2012 (Continued)062693 US BANK
WASPC/LODGING/ANDERSON
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 312.24
INV#3520 06/06/12 TRAINING -EDMONDS PD3520
FEDEX CHG #11-4859,12-0087, 12-0358
001.000.410.521.100.420.00 33.70
FEDEX CHG #12-1538, 12-1574, 12-1208
001.000.410.521.100.420.00 13.22
AMOC/MEAL/ROTH-FALK-HARBINSON
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 80.00
AMOC/FUEL/ROTH-FALK-HARBINSON
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 24.44
AMOC/MEAL/ROTH-FALK-HARBINSON
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 128.25
AMOC/FUEL/ROTH-FALK-HARBINSON
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 20.70
AMOC/LODGING/FALK
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 154.00
AMOC/LODGING/ROTH-HARBINSON
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 154.00
AMOC/MEAL/ROTH-FALK-HARBINSON
001.000.410.521.400.430.00 20.59
INV#7914 06/06/12 - THOMPSON-EDMONDS PD7914
2011 OFFICER OF YEAR PLAQUE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 93.08
2011 EMPLOYEE OF YEAR PLAQUE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 93.08
ENGRAVING DUI/PERPETUAL "OTY
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 22.33
DAY PLANNER REFILL-THOMPSON
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 36.08
COST OF RECORDS SEARCH KING CO
001.000.410.521.110.490.00 32.49
CAMERA LENS CAP
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 5.97
39Page:
Packet Page 65 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
40
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132827 6/21/2012 (Continued)062693 US BANK
OLYMPUS DIGITAL VOICE RECORDER
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 102.50
TELEPHOTO LENS CASE
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 25.94
Total :2,633.89
132828 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 3249 COURT MANAGER CONFERENCE
COURT MANAGER CONFERENCE
001.000.230.512.500.430.00 275.14
POSTAGE FOR PASSPORTS
001.000.230.512.500.420.00 98.00
Total :373.14
132829 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 3447 LEOFF 1 Conference - Ken Jones (5/
LEOFF 1 Conference - Ken Jones (5/
009.000.390.517.370.230.00 393.30
Total :393.30
132830 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 2143 LED MONITORS, IPAD REPAIRS,ITUNES
NHL.com -iPhone case for J Munson
001.000.310.518.880.490.00 34.98
TigerDirect.com - ASUS VS228H-P 22
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 906.08
TigerDirect.com - ASUS VS228H-P 22
001.000.310.518.880.350.00 2,454.67
Jet City Devices - iPad 2 screen repair
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 149.47
Jet City Devices - iPad 3 digi repair
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 272.66
Home Depot - 2 port wall plates, 6 jack
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 7.25
TigerDirect.com - APC Back-UPS ES
001.000.310.518.880.480.00 160.70
TigerDirect.com - Engenius EPE-5818
001.000.310.518.880.350.00 103.67
40Page:
Packet Page 66 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
41
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132830 6/21/2012 (Continued)062693 US BANK
iTunes -Splashtop remote desktop app
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 21.88
Home Depot -
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 29.78
iTunes -Documents Unlimited Office
001.000.310.518.880.310.00 4.37
GoldKey.com -Pro Enterprise Starter
001.000.310.518.880.350.00 600.90
WFOA CONFERENCE &TRAVEL FOR S HUNSTOCK4831
WFOA - Professional Ethics &
001.000.310.514.100.490.00 125.00
WFOA - Conference registration 9/11
001.000.310.514.100.490.00 350.00
Alaska Airlines - Travel to WFOA
001.000.310.514.100.430.00 165.60
BJs Restaurants - Lunch (S Hunstock
001.000.310.514.100.430.00 54.45
WFOA TRAINING FOR D SHARP,AUDITING STND5855
GFOA - Governmental Accounting,
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 159.00
US Government Bookstore -Government
001.000.310.514.230.310.00 16.00
WFOA -Advance Level Governmental
001.000.310.514.230.490.00 150.00
Total :5,766.46
132831 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 4675 CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS
SPRING SHOW GYMNASTICS SUPPLIES
001.000.640.575.550.310.00 62.00
DISCOVERY PROGRAM BINOCULARS
001.000.640.574.350.310.00 549.78
BRINE SHRIMP FOR DISCOVERY PROGRAM
001.000.640.574.350.310.00 46.05
MILLTOWN RAILING PAINT
41Page:
Packet Page 67 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
42
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132831 6/21/2012 (Continued)062693 US BANK
132.000.640.594.760.310.00 58.47
MOUNTING BRACKETS FOR CASH DRAWERS
001.000.640.575.510.350.00 100.58
MEGAPHONE -DISCOVERY PROGRAM
001.000.640.574.350.310.00 37.54
SPONGE FOR TOUCH TANK
001.000.640.574.350.310.00 3.27
YOST POOL SWIPE READER
001.000.640.575.510.350.00 270.12
MATS FOR X FIT CAMP
001.000.640.574.200.350.00 309.85
X FIT CAMP EQUIPMENT
001.000.640.574.200.350.00 124.98
SUPPLIES FOR VISITOR STATION TOUCH TANK
001.000.640.574.350.310.00 39.59
TRASH CANS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 35.02
AD FOR SR.FITNESS INSTRUCTOR
001.000.640.574.200.440.00 25.00
YOST POOL SUPPLIES
001.000.640.575.510.310.00 79.86
SPECIALTY PAPERS, MARKERS,ETC
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 107.65
KEY COILS, LOCKS
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 16.33
PARTS FOR TOUCH TANK
001.000.640.574.350.310.00 129.18
DIP NET
001.000.640.574.350.310.00 26.83
DAY CAMP MEDICAL SUPPLIES
001.000.640.575.530.310.00 107.10
2013 CALENDEARS FOR PLAZA ROOM AND
001.000.640.574.100.310.00 60.28
CREDIT5943
42Page:
Packet Page 68 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
43
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132831 6/21/2012 (Continued)062693 US BANK
CREDIT FOR COOL COILS
001.000.640.574.200.310.00 -7.20
Total :2,182.28
132832 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 3686 AWC CONFERENCE
2012 AWC Annual Conference Registration
001.000.210.513.100.490.00 325.00
Total :325.00
132833 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 2985 NITRILE GLOVES
NITRILE GLOVES
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 299.55
TRAINING/SHORT SCHOOL
411.000.656.538.800.490.71 1,520.00
DESTACO CLAMP
411.000.656.538.800.480.21 1,332.72
Total :3,152.27
132834 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 3462 CITY CLERK PURCHASE CARD
Misc recorded documents
001.000.250.514.300.490.00 419.00
Recording of Utility Liens
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 775.00
Recording of Utility Liens
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 775.00
Total :1,969.00
132835 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 3363 Fisheries - Credit memo 1885689
Fisheries - Credit memo 1885689
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -61.93
Fisheries - Credit memo 1885695
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -45.02
Fisheries - Credit memo 1889556
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -109.49
OReillys Auto Parts - Credit memo~
43Page:
Packet Page 69 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
44
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132835 6/21/2012 (Continued)062693 US BANK
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 -26.47
Fisheries - Boat Supplies3363
Fisheries - Boat Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 300.21
OReillys - Unit 16
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 8.74
OReillys - Unit 23
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 26.47
Laird Plastics - Unit 91
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 445.64
Sears - Unit 93
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.73
Fisheries - Boat Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 109.49
Radio Shack - Unit 424
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.43
Bartlett - Unit 650
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 152.40
Motor Oil Supply - Shop Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 290.12
OReillys - Unit 40
511.000.657.548.680.311.00 5.02
ARC Services Training for Fac Maint3405
ARC Services Training for Fac Maint
001.000.651.519.920.490.00 570.00
Natural Lighting.com - City Hall Light
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 31.94
M A of WA Cities - Conference - J
001.000.651.519.920.430.00 35.00
Guardian Sec - Old PW
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 55.00
Int Assoc DW&P Mag -Water Subscription3546
Int Assoc DW&P Mag -Water Subscription
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 67.00
44Page:
Packet Page 70 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
45
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132835 6/21/2012 (Continued)062693 US BANK
McLendon Hardware -Water Dept Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 551.04
Water Env Fed -Water Dept Mbr Dues
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 123.00
Home Depot - Water Dept Supplies
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 80.70
Skillpath - Training - C Raymond
001.000.650.519.910.490.00 104.00
Rockler Wood -Fac Maint Shop Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 123.50
Total :2,845.52
132836 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 3389 Plaque for Plunkett/Springer
Plaque for Plunkett/Springer
001.000.110.511.100.490.00 128.67
Refreshments for reception for Plunkett
001.000.110.511.100.310.00 60.10
Total :188.77
132837 6/21/2012 062693 US BANK 6045 Urban Land Institute Membership -Eco
Urban Land Institute Membership -Eco
001.000.240.513.110.490.00 112.50
Urban Land Institute Membership -Plng
001.000.620.558.600.490.00 112.50
Manual for Bldg - Cross Connection
001.000.620.524.100.490.00 5.00
Total :230.00
132838 6/21/2012 067917 WALLY'S TOWING INC 47292 INV#47292 - EDMONDS PD
TOW FORD ECONO VAN #B12878D
001.000.410.521.220.410.00 158.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.410.00 15.01
Total :173.01
45Page:
Packet Page 71 of 129
06/21/2012
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
46
10:01:35AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
132839 6/21/2012 045912 WASPC 48667 ELECTRONTIC HOME MONITORING
ELECTRONTIC HOME MONITORING
001.000.230.523.200.510.00 86.25
Total :86.25
132840 6/21/2012 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 5546 SISTER CITY ENVELOPES
SISTER CITY ENVELOPES
138.200.210.557.210.490.00 120.35
9.5% Sales Tax
138.200.210.557.210.490.00 11.43
Total :131.78
132841 6/21/2012 049905 WHITNEY EQUIPMENT CO INC 71182 EDMOCI
REPAIR KIT/SLIDING BRACKET
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1,806.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 171.57
Total :1,977.57
Bank total :606,005.07147Vouchers for bank code :front
606,005.07Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report147
46Page:
Packet Page 72 of 129
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 E0LA
FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB
General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA
General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 E1EA
PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA
PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA
PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB
PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB
PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA
STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE
STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM
STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC
STM NPDES m013 E7FG
STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN
STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1FD
STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF
STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH
STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC
STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1FA
STM Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements c307 E9FB
STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD
STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA
STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB
STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 E0AA
STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA
STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB
STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA
STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC
STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA
STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA
STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB
STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB
STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA
STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA
Revised 6/21/2012Packet Page 73 of 129
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB
STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA
STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA
SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA
SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA
SWR Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA
SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB
SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 E8GC
SWR City-Wide Sewer Improvements c301 E8GD
SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)c298 E8GA
SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB
SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA
SWR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB
WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA
WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA
WTR 2012 Street Overlay Program c388 E2CA
WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE
WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA
WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB
WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA
WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC
WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK
WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB
WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB
WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD
Revised 6/21/2012Packet Page 74 of 129
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
STR E0AA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade
STM E0FC c326 Stormwater GIS Support
WTR E0IA c324 AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements
WTR E0JA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program
FAC E0LA c327 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project
FAC E0LB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs
STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
STR E1AB c343 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming
STR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements
General E1EA c372 SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing
STM E1FA c336 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements
STM E1FD c339 Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades
STM E1FF c341 Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects
STM E1FH c349 Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)
STM E1FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
STM E1FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
SWR E1GA c347 Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement
SWR E1GB c370 Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update
WTR E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR E1JB c344 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood
WTR E1JC c345 Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study
WTR E1JD c346 PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment
WTR E1JE c340 2012 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR E1JK c375 Main Street Watermain
STR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update
STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project
WTR E2CA c388 2012 Street Overlay Program
WTR E2CB c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair
PM E2DB c146 Interurban Trail
STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements
STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System
STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study
STM E2FD c381 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012
STM E2FE c382 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements
Revised 6/21/2012Packet Page 75 of 129
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Funding
Engineering
Project
Number
Project
Accounting
Number Project Title
SWR E2GA c369 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update
SWR E2GB c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
SWR E3GB c142 OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements
WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program
WTR E3JB c141 OVD Watermain Improvements
STR E6DA c245 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project
STR E6DB c256 Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project
General E6MA c238 SR99 Enhancement Program
STR E7AA c265 Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements
STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
STR E7CB c268 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road
STM E7FG m013 NPDES
PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza
SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)
SWR E8GC c300 BNSF Double Track Project
SWR E8GD c301 City-Wide Sewer Improvements
PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking
STR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program
STR E9DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project
STM E9FB c307 Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements
SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design
PM E9MA c321 Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements
Revised 6/21/2012Packet Page 76 of 129
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number Project Title
WTR c141 E3JB OVD Watermain Improvements
SWR c142 E3GB OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements
PM c146 E2DB Interurban Trail
General c238 E6MA SR99 Enhancement Program
STR c245 E6DA 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project
STR c256 E6DB Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project
STR c265 E7AA Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements
STR c268 E7CB Shell Valley Emergency Access Road
PM c276 E7MA Dayton Street Plaza
PM c282 E8MA Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
PM c290 E8MB Marina Beach Additional Parking
STR c294 E9CA 2009 Street Overlay Program
SWR c298 E8GA Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)
SWR c300 E8GC BNSF Double Track Project
SWR c301 E8GD City-Wide Sewer Improvements
SWR c304 E9GA Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design
STM c307 E9FB Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements
STR c312 E9DA 226th Street Walkway Project
PM c321 E9MA Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements
WTR c324 E0IA AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements
STM c326 E0FC Stormwater GIS Support
FAC c327 E0LA Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project
STR c329 E0AA 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade
FAC c332 E0LB Senior Center Roof Repairs
WTR c333 E1JA 2011 Waterline Replacement Program
STM c336 E1FA SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements
STM c339 E1FD Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades
WTR c340 E1JE 2012 Waterline Replacement Program
STM c341 E1FF Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects
STR c342 E1AA Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)
STR c343 E1AB 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming
WTR c344 E1JB 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood
WTR c345 E1JC Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study
Revised 6/21/2012Packet Page 77 of 129
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Funding
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number Project Title
WTR c346 E1JD PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment
SWR c347 E1GA Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement
STM c349 E1FH Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)
STR c354 E1DA Sunset Walkway Improvements
WTR c363 E0JA 2010 Waterline Replacement Program
STR c368 E1CA 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
SWR c369 E2GA 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update
SWR c370 E1GB Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update
General c372 E1EA SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing
STM c374 E1FM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives
WTR c375 E1JK Main Street Watermain
STM c376 E1FN Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement
STM c378 E2FA North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements
STM c379 E2FB SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System
STM c380 E2FC Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study
STM c381 E2FD Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012
STM c382 E2FE 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements
WTR c388 E2CA 2012 Street Overlay Program
WTR c389 E2CB Pioneer Way Road Repair
SWR c390 E2GB Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation
STR c391 E2AA Transportation Plan Update
STR c392 E2AB 9th Avenue Improvement Project
WTR c397 E3JA 2013 Waterline Replacement Program
SWR c398 E3GA 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project
STR i005 E7AC 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
STM m013 E7FG NPDES
Revised 6/21/2012Packet Page 78 of 129
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
STR 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 E0AA
STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA
WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 E0JA
STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB
WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA
STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE
SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA
WTR 2012 Street Overlay Program c388 E2CA
WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE
SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA
WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA
STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA
STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC
STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA
WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB
STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA
STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB
SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation c390 E2GB
SWR Alder/Dellwood/Beach Pl/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA
WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 E0IA
SWR BNSF Double Track Project c300 E8GC
STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB
SWR City-Wide Sewer Improvements c301 E8GD
STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1FM
PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA
WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC
STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC
FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 E0LA
STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W)c342 E1AA
PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA
PM Interurban Trail c146 E2DB
STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD
SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08)c298 E8GA
STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA
Revised 6/21/2012Packet Page 79 of 129
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Funding Project Title
Project
Accounting
Number
Engineering
Project
Number
WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK
PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 E8MB
STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA
STM NPDES m013 E7FG
SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB
WTR OVD Watermain Improvements c141 E3JB
STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1FN
WTR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB
WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD
STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1FD
PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA
FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 E0LB
SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA
SWR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB
STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB
General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 E1EA
General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA
STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1FF
STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity)c349 E1FH
STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 E0FC
STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA
STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB
STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c336 E1FA
STM Talbot Road/Perrinville Creek Drainage Improvements c307 E9FB
STR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA
Revised 6/21/2012Packet Page 80 of 129
PROJECT NUMBERS
(Phase and Task Numbers)
Phases and Tasks (Engineering Division)
Phase Title
ct Construction
ds Design
pl Preliminary
sa Site Acquisition & Prep
st Study
ro Right-of-Way
Task Title
196 Traffic Engineering & Studies
197 MAIT
198 CTR
199 Engineering Plans & Services
950 Engineering Staff Time
970 Construction Management
981 Contract
990 Miscellaneous
991 Retainage
stm Engineering Staff Time-Storm
str Engineering Staff Time-Street
swr Engineering Staff Time-Sewer
wtr Engineering Staff Time-Water
prk Engineering Staff Time-Park
Packet Page 81 of 129
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 550 (06/01/2012 to 06/15/2012)
Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description
-det 0.00 -82.46Salary Correction for DetREGULAR HOURS
121 479.00 15,144.04SICK LEAVESICK
122 1,117.00 36,429.86VACATIONVACATION
123 59.50 2,140.78HOLIDAY HOURSHOLIDAY
124 38.00 1,153.64FLOATER HOLIDAYHOLIDAY
125 128.75 4,065.92COMPENSATORY TIMECOMP HOURS
129 131.00 4,484.98Police Sick Leave L & ISICK
131 10.00 368.78MILITARY LEAVEMILITARY
141 28.50 998.32BEREAVEMENTBEREAVEMENT
150 136.75 4,584.80Kelly Day UsedREGULAR HOURS
155 27.75 1,075.41COMPTIME AUTO PAYCOMP HOURS
170 0.00 57.14COUNCIL BASE PAYREGULAR HOURS
171 4.00 50.00COUNCIL MEETING PAYREGULAR HOURS
190 16,921.05 535,734.49REGULAR HOURSREGULAR HOURS
195 120.00 4,065.55ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVEREGULAR HOURS
196 193.00 6,711.59LIGHT DUTYREGULAR HOURS
210 10.50 431.87OVERTIME-STRAIGHTOVERTIME HOURS
215 36.00 1,591.54WATER WATCH STANDBYOVERTIME HOURS
216 13.00 1,166.80STANDBY TREATMENT PLANTMISCELLANEOUS
220 155.25 8,533.60OVERTIME 1.5OVERTIME HOURS
225 10.00 603.96OVERTIME-DOUBLEOVERTIME HOURS
410 0.00 133.74WORKING OUT OF CLASSMISCELLANEOUS
411 0.00 824.75SHIFT DIFFERENTIALSHIFT DIFFERENTIAL
602 60.50 0.00ACCRUED COMPCOMP HOURS
604 72.55 0.00ACCRUED COMP TIMECOMP HOURS
acc 0.00 22.76ACCREDITATION PAYMISCELLANEOUS
acs 0.00 151.20ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORTMISCELLANEOUS
boc 0.00 78.48BOC II CertificationMISCELLANEOUS
cpl 0.00 132.76TRAINING CORPORALMISCELLANEOUS
crt 0.00 667.88CERTIFICATION III PAYMISCELLANEOUS
det 0.00 92.61DETECTIVE PAYMISCELLANEOUS
det4 0.00 768.66Detective 4%MISCELLANEOUS
ed1 0.00 756.81EDUCATION PAY 2%EDUCATION PAY
06/19/2012 Page 1 of 2
Packet Page 82 of 129
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 550 (06/01/2012 to 06/15/2012)
Hours AmountHour Type Hour Class Description
ed2 0.00 796.44EDUCATION PAY 4%EDUCATION PAY
ed3 0.00 5,114.85EDUCATION PAY 6%EDUCATION PAY
fmls 88.00 2,478.50FAMILY MEDICAL/SICKSICK
hol 8.00 198.89HOLIDAYHOLIDAY
k9 0.00 192.71K-9 PAYMISCELLANEOUS
lg1 0.00 1,998.12LONGEVITY PAY 2%LONGEVITY PAY
lg2 0.00 1,200.97LONGEVITY PAY 4%LONGEVITY PAY
lg3 0.00 4,894.26LONGEVITY 6%LONGEVITY PAY
lg4 0.00 558.37Longevity 1%LONGEVITY
lg5 0.00 64.70Longevity 3%LONGEVITY
lg6 0.00 223.94Longevity .5%LONGEVITY
lg7 0.00 320.83Longevity 1.5%LONGEVITY
mtc 0.00 185.22MOTORCYCLE PAYMISCELLANEOUS
ooc 0.00 236.795% OUT OF CLASSACTING PAY
pds 0.00 43.13Public Disclosure SpecialistMISCELLANEOUS
phy 0.00 1,690.19PHYSICAL FITNESS PAYMISCELLANEOUS
prof 0.00 141.98PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS SERGEANMISCELLANEOUS
sdp 0.00 258.13SPECIAL DUTY PAY 5%MISCELLANEOUS
sgt 0.00 141.98ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANTMISCELLANEOUS
str 0.00 388.94Street CrimesMISCELLANEOUS
traf 0.00 291.71TRAFFICMISCELLANEOUS
Total Net Pay:$449,154.89
$654,360.91 19,848.10
06/19/2012 Page 2 of 2
Packet Page 83 of 129
Benefit Checks Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 550 - 06/01/2012 to 06/15/2012
Bank: front - Union Bank
Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck #
51443 06/20/2012 mebt AST TTEE 77,418.82 0.00
51444 06/20/2012 epoa2 EPOA-POLICE 2,218.50 0.00
51445 06/20/2012 epoa3 EPOA-POLICE SUPPORT 301.50 0.00
51446 06/20/2012 flex FLEX-PLAN SERVICES, INC 464.17 0.00
51447 06/20/2012 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 3,329.05 0.00
51448 06/20/2012 teams TEAMSTERS LOCAL 763 4,143.50 0.00
51449 06/20/2012 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 1,433.33 0.00
51450 06/20/2012 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 14,536.00 0.00
103,844.87 0.00
Bank: wire - FRONTIER BANK
Direct DepositCheck AmtNamePayee #DateCheck #
1941 06/20/2012 front FRONTIER BANK 88,542.21 0.00
1943 06/20/2012 flex FLEX-PLAN SERVICES, INC 167.00 0.00
1944 06/20/2012 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 208.50 0.00
88,917.71 0.00
192,762.58 0.00Grand Totals:
Page 1 of 16/19/2012
Packet Page 84 of 129
AM-4930 2. D.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/26/2012
Time:Consent
Submitted By:Linda Hynd
Department:City Clerk's Office
Review Committee: Committee Action:
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Sulammite Polevoy ($3,090.39).
Recommendation
It is recommended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the Claim for Damages by minute entry.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Sulammite Polevoy
1324 Mill Creek Boulevard
#F110
Mill Creek, WA 98012
($3,090.39)
Attachments
Polevoy Claim for Damages
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Mayor Dave Earling 06/21/2012 02:01 PM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 06/21/2012 02:12 PM
Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 06/21/2012 12:07 PM
Final Approval Date: 06/21/2012
Packet Page 85 of 129
Packet Page 86 of 129
Packet Page 87 of 129
Packet Page 88 of 129
Packet Page 89 of 129
AM-4926 4.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/26/2012
Time:30 Minutes
Submitted For:Rob English Submitted By:Megan Cruz
Department:Engineering
Committee: Planning, Parks, Public Works Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Report on bids opened June 7, 2012 for the Talbot Road Storm Drain Improvements project and award of
contract to Kamins Construction in the amount of $317,178.62.
Recommendation
Accept bid and award contract to Kamins Construction.
Previous Council Action
On February 21, 2012 Council authorized Staff to call for bids for the Talbot Road Storm Drain
Improvements project.
On June 12, 2012, the Planning, Parks and Public Works committee reviewed this item and
recommended it be placed on the consent agenda for approval.
On June 19, 2012, the Council reviewed this item and moved it forward to the June 26, 2012 Council
Meeting for further discussion.
Narrative
On June 7, 2012, the City received six (6) bids for the Talbot Road Storm Drain Improvements Project.
The bids ranged from a low of $317,178.62 to a high of $754,366.00. The bid tabulation summary is
attached as Exhibit 1. Kamins submitted the apparent low bid of $317,178.62. The engineer’s estimate
was $338,410. A review of the low bidder’s record was positive.
The Talbot Road Storm Drain Improvement Project will upgrade portions of the City’s Storm Drain Pipe
system by installing approximately 530 linear feet of 12 and 30-inch storm drain pipe and associated
appurtenances near the 8200 block of Talbot Road. The Projects will focus on mitigating drainage issues
around the construction area and help improve conveyance of stormwater flow.
Estimated Construction Budget
Contract Award $317,179
15% Construction Management $48,000
15% Management Reserve $48,000
1% for the Arts $3,172
Total $416,351
Packet Page 90 of 129
Attachments
Exhibit 1 - Bid Tab
Exhibit 2 - Site Map
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
Engineering Robert English 06/21/2012 11:51 AM
Public Works Phil Williams 06/21/2012 12:00 PM
City Clerk Sandy Chase 06/21/2012 12:14 PM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/21/2012 02:04 PM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 06/21/2012 02:12 PM
Form Started By: Megan Cruz Started On: 06/20/2012 03:08 PM
Final Approval Date: 06/21/2012
Packet Page 91 of 129
Sc
h
e
d
u
l
e
A
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
'
s
C
o
s
t
O
p
i
n
i
o
n
Ka
m
i
n
s
Ne
w
W
e
s
t
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
We
s
t
w
a
t
e
r
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
IC
I
Ka
r
-
V
e
l
Road Constr NW
It
e
m
Qt
y
Un
i
t
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
Sp
e
c
Un
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
To
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Un
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
To
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Un
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
To
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Un
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
To
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Un
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
To
t
a
l
P
r
i
c
e
Un
i
t
P
r
i
c
e
Total Price Unit Price Total Price
A1
1
L
S
M
o
b
i
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
/
D
e
m
o
b
SP
-
9
5 0,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
50
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
40
,
5
5
0
.
4
0
$
40
,
5
5
0
.
4
0
$
28
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
28
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
35
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
35
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
40
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
40
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
60
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
60,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $ 100,000.00 $
A2
1
L
S
S
h
o
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
T
r
e
n
c
h
S
a
f
e
t
y
SP
-
3
&
S
P
-
9
9 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
9,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
7,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
7,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
30
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
30,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $
A3
1
L
S
T
E
S
C
SP
-
2
&
S
P
-
9
4 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,500.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $
A4
40
9
L
F
S
i
l
t
F
e
n
c
e
WS
D
O
T
8
-
0
1
.
3
(
9
)
A
5 .0
0
$
2,
0
4
5
.
0
0
$
4.
8
0
$
1
,
9
6
3
.
2
0
$
5.
0
0
$
2
,
0
4
5
.
0
0
$
5.
0
0
$
2
,
0
4
5
.
0
0
$
3.
0
0
$
1
,
2
2
7
.
0
0
$
3.00
$
1
,
2
2
7
.
0
0
$ 9.00 $ 3,681.00 $
A5
4
E
A
I
n
l
e
t
P
r
o
t
e
c
t
i
o
n
WS
D
O
T
8
-
0 1.
3
(
9
)
D
10
0
.
0
0
$
40
0
.
0
0
$
54
.
0
0
$
21
6
.
0
0
$
85
.
0
0
$
34
0
.
0
0
$
50
.
0
0
$
20
0
.
0
0
$
10
0
.
0
0
$
40
0
.
0
0
$
60.00
$
240.00 $ 90.00 $ 360.00 $
A6
1
L
S
T
r
a
f
f
i
c
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
SP
-
1
&
S
P
-
9
4 0,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
40
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
16
,
9
2
0
.
0
0
$
16
,
9
2
0
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
32
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
32
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
12
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
12
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 40,000.00 $
A7
1
L
S
Su
r
v
e
y
i
n
g
,
S
t
a
k
i
n
g
&
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
i
n
g
SP
-
3
,
S
P
-
1
0
1 5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
15
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
7,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
7,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10,000.00 $ 7,000.00 $ 7,000.00 $
A8
51
0
L
F
I
m
p
o
r
t
e
d
B
a
c
k
f
i
l
l
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
SP
-
1
0
1 2.
0
0
$
6,
1
2
0
.
0
0
$
16
2
.
2
1
$
82
,
7
2
7
.
1
0
$
10
.
0
0
$
5,
1
0
0
.
0
0
$
30
.
0
0
$
1
5
,
3
0
0
.
0
0
$
55
.
0
0
$
2
8
,
0
5
0
.
0
0
$
0.25
$
127.50 $ 45.00 $ 22,950.00 $
A9
20
0
C
Y
Im
p
o
r
t
e
d
F
o
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
B
a
s
e
Ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
SP
-
1
0
1 2.
0
0
$
2,
4
0
0
.
0
0
$
51
.
6
0
$
1
0
,
3
2
0
.
0
0
$
40
.
0
0
$
8,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
40
.
0
0
$
8,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
27.00
$
5,400.00 $ 45.00 $ 9,000.00 $
A1
0
22
L
F
1
2
"
D
i
a
.
D
I
P
S
D
P
i
p
e
C
L
-
5
2
SP
-
1
0
1 00
.
0
0
$
2,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
11
2
.
9
1
$
2,
4
8
4
.
0
2
$
25
0
.
0
0
$
5,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
0
.
0
0
$
2,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
15
0
.
0
0
$
3,
3
0
0
.
0
0
$
15
0
.
0
0
$
3,300.00 $ 300.00 $ 6,600.00 $
A1
1
51
0
L
F
30
"
D
i
a
P
r
o
f
i
l
e
W
a
l
l
P
V
C
S
D
Pi
p
e
SP
-
1
1
1 20
.
0
0
$
61
,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
99
.
3
4
$
5
0
,
6
6
3
.
4
0
$
31
0
.
0
0
$
1
5
8
,
1
0
0
.
0
0
$
28
5
.
0
0
$
1
4
5
,
3
5
0
.
0
0
$
33
0
.
0
0
$
1
6
8
,
3
0
0
.
0
0
$
47
0
.
0
0
$
2
3
9
,
7
0
0
.
0
0
$ 350.00 $ 178,500.00 $
A1
2
11
5
L
F
T
e
m
p
o
r
a
r
y
T
r
e
n
c
h
P
a
t
c
h
SP
-
1
1
5 .0
0
$
57
5
.
0
0
$
22
.
4
3
$
2,
5
7
9
.
4
5
$
20
.
0
0
$
2,
3
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
.
0
0
$
2,
3
0
0
.
0
0
$
30
.
0
0
$
3,
4
5
0
.
0
0
$
8.00
$
920.00 $ 125.00 $ 14,375.00 $
A1
3
11
5
L
F
Cr
u
s
h
e
d
S
u
r
f
a
c
i
n
g
B
a
s
e
Co
u
r
s
e
SP
-
1
1
1 8.
0
0
$
2,
0
7
0
.
0
0
$
39
.
3
9
$
4,
5
2
9
.
8
5
$
18
.
0
0
$
2,
0
7
0
.
0
0
$
20
.
0
0
$
2,
3
0
0
.
0
0
$
30
.
0
0
$
3,
4
5
0
.
0
0
$
2.00
$
230.00 $ 45.00 $ 5,175.00 $
A1
4
11
5
L
F
HM
A
C
L
1
/
2
"
P
G
5
8
-
2
2
,
tr
e
n
c
h
p
a
t
c
h
4
-
i
n
c
h
d
e
p
t
h
SP
-
5
,
S
P
-
1
1
1 60
.
0
0
$
18
,
4
0
0
.
0
0
$
66
.
0
0
$
7,
5
9
0
.
0
0
$
60
.
0
0
$
6,
9
0
0
.
0
0
$
80
.
0
0
$
9,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
0
.
0
0
$
11
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
62.00
$
7,130.00 $ 175.00 $ 20,125.00 $
A1
5
1
L
S
S
i
t
e
R
e
s
t
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
SP
-
4
,
S
P
-
1
2
1 5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
15
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,
7
0
4
.
0
0
$
4,
7
0
4
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
15
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
15
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
15
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
15,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $
A1
6
1
L
S
A
s
-
B
u
i
l
t
s
SP
-
6
,
S
P
-
1
2
2 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
30
0
.
0
0
$
300.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $
A1
7
1
E
S
T
M
i
n
o
r
C
h
a
n
g
e
s
SP
-
1
2
5 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 $
A1
8
1
E
A
MH
6
0
"
D
i
a
m
a
t
e
r
T
y
p
e
3
Le
s
s
T
h
a
n
6
'
d
e
e
p
SP
-
1
2
3 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
9
2
0
.
8
0
$
2,
9
2
0
.
8
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,000.00 $ 9,000.00 $ 9,000.00 $
A1
9
1
E
A
MH
6
0
"
D
i
a
m
a
t
e
r
T
y
p
e
3
6
'
to
L
e
s
s
T
h
a
n
1
2
'
d
e
e
p
SP
-
1
2
5 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
5,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
4
0
9
.
2
0
$
3,
4
0
9
.
2
0
$
4,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
7,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
7,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,000.00 $ 17,000.00 $ 17,000.00 $
A2
0
1
E
A
MH
6
0
"
D
i
a
m
a
t
e
r
T
y
p
e
3
1
2
'
to
L
e
s
s
T
h
a
n
1
8
'
d
e
e
p
SP
-
1
2
8 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
8,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
6
7
6
.
8
0
$
3,
6
7
6
.
8
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
12
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
12
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
17
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
17,000.00 $ 27,000.00 $ 27,000.00 $
A2
1
2
E
A
MH
6
0
"
D
i
a
m
a
t
e
r
T
y
p
e
3
1
8
'
to
L
e
s
s
T
h
a
n
2
4
'
d
e
e
p
SP
-
1
2
1 2,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
24
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,
8
7
3
.
6
0
$
13
,
7
4
7
.
2
0
$
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
12
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
40
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
40,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ 90,000.00 $
A2
2
1
E
A
C
B
T
y
p
e
2
6
0
"
D
i
a
SP
-
1
2
3 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
3
1
6
.
8
0
$
3,
3
1
6
.
8
0
$
2,
6
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,
6
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
6,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $ 11,000.00 $
A2
3
1
E
A
CB
T
y
p
e
2
6
0
"
D
i
a
w
i
t
h
T
i
d
e
Ga
t
e
SP
-
1
3
2 0,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
0
6
4
.
4
0
$
10
,
0
6
4
.
4
0
$
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
12
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
12
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
16
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
16,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000.00 $
A2
4
1
E
A
12
"
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
o
E
x
i
s
t
Dr
a
i
n
a
g
e
S
t
r
u
c
t
WS
D
O
T
7
-
0
5
.
3
(
3
)
,
S P-
1
3
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
60
0
.
0
0
$
60
0
.
0
0
$
1,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
8
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,800.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $
A2
5
1
E
A
30
"
C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
t
o
E
x
i
s
t
Dr
a
i
n
a
g
e
S
t
r
u
c
t
WS
D
O
T
7
-
0
5
.
3
(
3
)
,
S P-
1
3
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
10
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
90
0
.
0
0
$
90
0
.
0
0
$
3,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
8,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
8,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $
A2
6
2
E
A
Pl
u
g
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
P
i
p
e
i
n
E
x
i
s
t
Dr
a
i
n
a
g
e
S
t
r
u
c
t
WS
D
O
T
7
-
0
8
.
3
(
4
)
,
S P-
1
3
50
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
60
0
.
0
0
$
1,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
30
0
.
0
0
$
60
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
4
0
0
.
0
0
$
2,800.00 $ 4,500.00 $ 9,000.00 $
A2
7
3
E
A
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
W
a
t
e
r
Se
r
v
i
c
e
P
i
p
e
SP
-
1
4
1 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
6
0
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
1,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
2
5
0
.
0
0
$
3,
7
5
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
1,500.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $
A2
8
3
E
A
Re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
E
x
i
s
t
i
n
g
S
e
w
e
r
Se
r
v
i
c
e
P
i
p
e
SP
-
1
4
1 ,0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
4
4
0
.
0
0
$
4,
3
2
0
.
0
0
$
1,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
3,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
4,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
1,
2
5
0
.
0
0
$
3,
7
5
0
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
1,500.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 30,000.00 $
A2
9
60
L
F
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
R
o
l
l
C
u
r
b
SP
-
1
4
5 .0
0
$
30
0
.
0
0
$
3.
6
0
$
21
6
.
0
0
$
15
.
0
0
$
90
0
.
0
0
$
20
.
0
0
$
1,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
15
.
0
0
$
90
0
.
0
0
$
8.00
$
480.00 $ 55.00 $ 3,300.00 $
A3
0
60
S
F
A
s
p
h
a
l
t
S
i
d
e
w
a
l
k
SP
-
1
4
2 0.
0
0
$
1,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
6.
0
0
$
36
0
.
0
0
$
8.
0
0
$
48
0
.
0
0
$
25
.
0
0
$
1,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
15
.
0
0
$
90
0
.
0
0
$
16.00
$
960.00 $ 55.00 $ 3,300.00 $
A3
1
10
C
Y
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
l
e
d
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
F
i
l
l
SP
-
1
4
,
W
S
D
O
T
2
-
0 9.
3
(
1
)
E
50
.
0
0
$
50
0
.
0
0
$
12
0
.
0
0
$
1,
2
0
0
.
0
0
$
12
5
.
0
0
$
1,
2
5
0
.
0
0
$
12
5
.
0
0
$
1,
2
5
0
.
0
0
$
11
0
.
0
0
$
1,
1
0
0
.
0
0
$
90.00
$
900.00 $ 400.00 $ 4,000.00 $
A3
2
1
F
A
D
e
w
a
t
e
r
i
n
g
SP
-
7
,
S
P
-
1
4
,
W SD
O
T
1
-
0
9
.
6
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 $
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
3
3
8
,
4
1
0
.
0
0
$
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
3
1
7
,
1
7
8
.
6
2
$
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
3
1
9
,
1
8
5
.
0
0
$
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
3
7
8
,
5
4
5
.
0
0
$
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
4
4
4
,
0
7
7
.
0
0
$
Su
b
t
o
t
a
l
5
1
4
,
0
1
4
.
5
0
$ Subtotal
7
5
4
,
3
6
6
.
0
0
$
9.
5
%
T
a
x
N/
A
9.
5
%
T
a
x
N
/
A
9
.
5
%
T
a
x
N
/
A
9
.
5
%
T
a
x
N
/
A
9
.
5
%
T
a
x
N
/
A
9
.
5
%
T
a
x
N
/
A
9
.
5
%
T
a
x
N
/
A
To
t
a
l
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
33
8
,
4
1
0
.
0
0
$
To
t
a
l
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
31
7
,
1
7
8
.
6
2
$
To
t
a
l
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
31
9
,
1
8
5
.
0
0
$
To
t
a
l
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
37
8
,
5
4
5
.
0
0
$
To
t
a
l
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
44
4
,
0
7
7
.
0
0
$
To
t
a
l
C
o
n
t
r
a
c
t
514,014.50 $ Total Contract 754,366.00 $
7-
J
u
n
-
1
2
CI
T
Y
O
F
E
D
M
O
N
D
S
T
A
L
B
O
T
R
O
A
D
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
A
G
E
E9
F
B
/
c
3
0
7
BI
D
T
A
B
Pa
c
k
e
t
Pa
g
e
92
of
12
9
Packet Page 93 of 129
AM-4928 5.
City Council Meeting
Meeting Date:06/26/2012
Time:30 Minutes
Submitted By:Kernen Lien
Department:Planning
Review Committee: Committee Action:
Type: Action
Information
Subject Title
Updating the City of Edmonds City Code (ECC) 4.12 and portions of Edmonds Community Development
Code (ECDC) Title 16 to allow Motorized Mobile Vendors. (File No. AMD20100012)
Recommendation
Review proposed changes to the ECC 4.12 and ECDC Title 16 and schedule public hearing.
Previous Council Action
This issue was discussed at the July 19, 2011 Council Meeting, the Council directed staff to provide
updates to the code that would specifically allow for motorized mobile vendors in the City of Edmonds.
Narrative
The City of Edmonds continues to receive requests from persons who wish to operate motorized mobile
food vending services within the City. There is confusing and conflicting language within the Edmonds
City Code (ECC) and Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) as to whether motorized mobile
vendors are an allowed activity within Edmonds (Attachment 1).
The City Council directed staff to update relevant sections of City Code and Development Code to make
it clear that motorized mobile vendors are permitted within the City of Edmonds at the July 19, 2011
Council meeting (Attachment 2). Since changes to the zoning code are required, these must be reviewed
by the Planning Board. While the Planning Board would not normally review changes to ECC, there is
significant overlap between allowing motorized mobile vending units in ECC 4.12 and how that use
relates to other provisions within the development code (parking requirements, use restrictions, what
zones allowed). As such, Planning Board reviewed proposed amendments to ECC 4.12 and ECDC Title
16.
The Planning Board discussed possible amendments to allow motorized mobile vending units at the
February 18, 2012 and March 28, 2012 meetings (Attachments 3 and 4). A public hearing before
the Planning Board was held on May 9, 2012 and continued to June 13, 2012 (Attachments 5 and 6). The
Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed amendments to ECC 4.12 and ECDC Title 16 to
the City Council (Attachments 7 and 8).
The Planning Board wanted to highlight a couple of items for discussion before City Council. First is the
zones that motorized mobile vending units would be allowed to operate in. As drafted, motorized mobile
vending units would be allowed to operate in all commercial zones in the City as well as Public zoned
Packet Page 94 of 129
property (in most cases in conjunction with a concessions agreement). Second is whether only mobile
food trucks should be permitted, or could other goods and services be sold out of motorized mobile
vending units. When this item was discussed before City Council on July 19, 2011, only mobile food
trucks were discussed. Since that time, the City has had inquiries about other mobile vendors such as a
mobile boutique. The draft language in ECC 4.12 would allow for more than just mobile food vendors.
Attachment 9 is an email received from Randy and Brooke Baker (Chanterelle Restaurant) regarding the
proposed updates. This email was sent to the junk mail folder by the City's spam filter, as a result, it was
not received until after the public hearing before the Planning Board and the Planning Board did not see
this email.
Attachments
Attachment 1 - July 14, 2011 Staff Memo
Attachment 2 - July 19, 2011 Council Minutes Excerpt
Attachment 3 - February 8, 2012 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt
Attachment 4 - March 28, 2012 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt
Attachment 5 - May 9, 2012 Planning Board Minutes Excerpt
Attachment 6 - June 13, 2012 Planning Board Draft Minutes Excerpt
Attachment 7 - Draft Edmonds City Code Chapter 4.12
Attachment 8 - Draft Changes to Edmonds Community Development Code Title 16
Attachment 9 - Email from Randy and Brooke Baker
Form Review
Inbox Reviewed By Date
City Clerk Sandy Chase 06/21/2012 12:14 PM
Mayor Dave Earling 06/21/2012 02:12 PM
Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase 06/21/2012 02:13 PM
Form Started By: Kernen Lien Started On: 06/21/2012 09:20 AM
Final Approval Date: 06/21/2012
Packet Page 95 of 129
City of Edmonds
Date: July 14, 2011
To: City Council
From: Kernen Lien, Associate Planner
Subject: Motorized Mobile Vendors
________________________________________________________________________
Background
Mobile food vendors are a growing trend across the United States. Some of these vendors move
from location to location (such as parking lots or vacant lots) without staying at any one location
for a significant period of time; others park at one specific location to setup shop and may even
leave the vehicle at the location over night, while others may take the vehicle home at night but
return to the same location day after day.
The City of Edmonds has had some recent requests from persons who wished to operate
motorized mobile food vending services within the City. There is confusing and conflicting
language within the Edmonds City Code (ECC) and Edmonds Community Development Code
(ECDC) as to whether motorized mobile vendors are an allowed activity within Edmonds.
Existing Code
Edmonds City Code (ECC) 4.12 provides the framework for licensing Peddlers, Solicitors and
Street Vendors. ECC 4.12.010 defines these different types of activities as:
A. “Solicitor” or “peddler” means any person who shall sell, offer for or expose for sale, or
who shall trade, deal or traffic in any goods or services in the city by going from house to
house or from place to place or by indiscriminately approaching individuals.
1. Sales by sample or for future delivery, and executory contracts of sale by solicitors or
peddlers are included; provided, however, that this section shall not be deemed
applicable to any salesman or canvasser who solicits trade from wholesale or retail
dealers in the city.
2. Any person who, while selling or offering for sale any goods, services or anything of
value, stands in a doorway, any unenclosed vacant lot, parcel of land, or in any other
place not used by such person as a permanent place of business shall be deemed a
solicitor or peddler within the meaning of this chapter, except as noted in subsection B of
this section.
B. “Street vendor” means any person who shall sell food, flowers, nonalcoholic beverages
only, and/or other goods or services from a nonmotorized mobile vending unit, in the
MEMORANDUM
Attachment 1Packet Page 96 of 129
commercially zoned areas of the city of Edmonds, including unzoned property or right-of-
way adjacent to or abutting on commercially zoned areas, shall be deemed a street vendor
subject to the regulations contained in this chapter. The commercially zoned areas are those
zoned Neighborhood Business (BN), Community Business (BC), Planned Business (BP),
Commercial Waterfront (CW); and General Commercial (CC, CG2).
C. “Mobile vending unit” means a cart, kiosk or other device capable of being pushed by
one person, with at least two functional wheels and positive wheel-locking devices.
Motorized mobile vendors fit within the broad definition of solicitor in that they sell “goods”
from “place to place”. However, motorized mobile vendors do not fit into the more narrow
definition of street vendor which refers to “nonmotorized mobile vending unit” such as hot dog
carts. So under these definitions, motorized mobile vendors may operate as a solicitor under a
solicitors license obtained from the City Clerk. However, where they could operate is limited by
the zoning code.
Within Title 16 of the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), many of the
commercial zones (Downtown Business, Neighborhood Business, Community Business, General
Commercial, and Commercial Waterfront) have operating restrictions which state that, “All uses
shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building…” with different exceptions
depending on the zone. ECDC 21.10 defines a building as “any structure having a roof,
excluding all forms of vehicles even though immobilized.” So while a motorized mobile vendor
may be allowed to operate under a solicitors license, the areas they would most likely locate
restrict uses to buildings, which would exclude motorized mobile vendors.
As the code currently stands, it appears that motorized mobile vendors may be permitted, but
their operation is restricted to certain zones which include the residential zones, Public, and
Planned Business.
Questions and Options
Does the City want to allow Motorized Mobile Vendors within the City?
If yes, some items to consider while drafting regulations for motorized mobile vendors include:
What zones are appropriate for this type of use.
Should access to restrooms be required.
Are items used for the operation allowed to stay on location overnight, or should they be
removed each day.
If the vendor is located over existing parking stalls, the overall site should be verified for
compliance with required number of parking stalls.
Should permits be required for temporary structures.
Should design review be required for the motorized mobile vending units.
If no, we recommend clarifying in ECC 4.12 that motorized mobile vending units are prohibited.
Packet Page 97 of 129
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 19, 2011
Page 19
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested seeking input from the committee members regarding their
selections.
COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR ONE HOUR. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
8. DISCUSSION REGARDING BUSINESS IN PARKS
Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite explained this was first discussed at the CS/DS Committee who
directed it be presented to the full Council for exploration. Business in parks was discussed by the Planning
Board last week; the Board was very supportive of some of the ideas. Business in parks is a priority in the
Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan. Her counterparts in the National Recreation and Parks Association
and Washington Recreation and Parks Association are having similar discussions because of budget
difficulties. Parks are not mandated services and there is an effort to continue service levels to citizens
without new taxes. She highlighted ideas outlined in her memo and invited the Council to provide feedback
with regard to their interest in further exploration:
• Non-resident fees for recreation programs – the City currently charges the same rate for residents
and non-residents. 20-25% of program participants are not residents of Edmonds. Non-resident fees
are very common. The goal is to recover the cost of recreation programs but there are some subsidies
which are funded via the General Fund, thus a justification for differential pricing for non-residents
who participate in programs. A common differential is 20%, either via a discount of resident fees or
increase in non-resident fees. Given current registration rates for 2010, the additional revenue from a
20% additional fee is estimated to be $90,000 - $100,000/year or $70,000 - $75,000/year with
attrition.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented on how amazing Ms. Hite and her department are and she
appreciated their suggestions for increased revenue.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented all the ideas in Ms. Hite’s memo were great, innovative and outside
the box. She commended Ms. Hite for providing ways to enhance the revenue stream. She suggested if a
parking fee were implemented, citizens be allowed to purchase a less expensive yearly pass. She noted
during the Waterfront Festival, dog park users paid $10 to park and use the dog park.
Council President Pro Tem Petso was not as excited about many of the revenue enhancing ideas as some
other Councilmembers. She asked if neighboring jurisdictions charged a non-resident fee. Ms. Hite answered
they do but Edmonds currently does not. Council President Pro Tem Petso was more receptive to the non-
resident fee than some of the other ideas. She suggested food vendors be restricted to community parks and
not allowed in neighborhood parks. She was not interested in citizens paying for parks and then being asked
to pay for parking. She suggested charging non-residents and providing residents a free parking pass. She
encouraged staff to allow for a great deal of public input on the concepts and not invest a lot of staff time
until they received feedback from the Council and the Planning Board. She was also not interested in raising
field rental fees beyond what it costs to maintain and provide the fields. She did not want to sacrifice
participation for revenue.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas advised the CS/DS Committee considered all the ideas. She anticipated
food vendors, particularly in Yost Park and City Park, would attract tourism and encouraged people to visit
Edmonds and stay all day. She cited her experience with training people with disabilities to vend food at
Juanita Beach and Matthews Beach during the summer. Vendors would either have their own facility or
possibly if it was successful enough, the City could provide space. There was no intent to have food vending
in the smaller parks in the City. With regard to the dive permits, she pointed out Edmonds’s Dive Park, the
only saltwater dive park on Puget Sound, attracts a lot of divers from out of town and is a great potential
Attachment 2Packet Page 98 of 129
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 19, 2011
Page 20
source of revenue. She was uncertain whether a fee for parking is feasible and it needs further discussion and
public input. If a levy does not pass and the choice is fencing parks, a parking fee may be the only choice.
Councilmember Bernheim did not support a parking fee. A dive permit or dive park parking is an
opportunity to make a lot of money. The dive park attracts people from out of town and is a unique
experience. He was also interested in food venders in places such as the dog park and Marina Beach that are
located far from restaurants and other services.
With regard to a dive permit, Ms. Hite explained there are some inherent risks with charging an entrance fee
or permit for diving. The City has immunity when providing parks for recreation without charging a fee.
There are other ways to institute a fee such as a parking permit. She explained staff would like to consider
not only food concessions but also recreation concessions; an individual recently approached the City about
renting standing paddleboards at Marina Beach Park. The existing code allows concessions in a park with the
posting of three public notices at the entrance of the park and a public hearing. She suggested staff return to
Council with code amendments that make concessions in parks a less staff intensive process.
Councilmembers indicated their interest in staff providing code amendments.
Planner Kernen Lien explained every year there are inquiries from mobile food vendors interested in locating
in the City. There is one mobile food vender operating in the City now but there is conflicting language in the
code. ECC 4.12 provides a framework for licensing peddlers and solicitors. Mobile food vendors fit those
definitions somewhat in that they are a solicitor and can move around. ECC 4.12 also provides a framework
for street vendors. There is a definition for a mobile vending unit but that is pushed and not motorized.
Mr. Lien explained there are conflicts in the zoning code. Several of the business zones have operating
restrictions such as all uses shall be carried out entirely within a completely enclosed building. The definition
of building does not include vehicles. Therefore a mobile food vendor could obtain a solicitors license but
due to the operating restrictions, they could only operate in residential, public and planned business zones.
He invited the Council to provide feedback regarding their interest in clarifying the code. Questions the
Council would need to consider include what zones mobile food vendors should be allowed in, whether they
should be required to park in a parking lot or would be allowed in the right-of-way, etc.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented mobile food vendors are a great idea; anything that attracts people to
Edmonds is a good thing. She asked whether the City collected any money from mobile food vendors. Mr.
Lien answered they would be required to pay for a solicitors license which City Clerk Sandy Chase indicated
is a modest cost.
Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about mobile food vendors in other cities, recalling Portland has parking
lots with several street food vendors. Mr. Lien was uncertain about Portland’s licensing requirements.
Regulations vary by city; some do not allow mobile food venders in the right-of-way and require they be
located on private property. Seattle recently passed regulations regarding distance from a restaurant. Mayor
Cooper relayed in the past Seattle required mobile food vendors be located on private property and have the
permission of the property owner. The Seattle City Council passed a new ordinance yesterday that allows
food vendors to park on the street and pay the same parking fee a vehicle pays. Mobile food vendors cannot
be located within 50 feet of a restaurant in a building.
Council President Pro Tem Petso commented staff will need to look into the issue regardless of Council
direction due to the discrepancies in the code and existing food vendors. She commented on a person in her
area selling produce from a vehicle who locates on both private property and the right-of-way.
Councilmember Plunkett referred to questions posed in Mr. Lien’s memo such as whether permits should be
required for temporary structures. He asked whether the mobile unit would be considered a temporary
Packet Page 99 of 129
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 19, 2011
Page 21
structure. Mr. Lien answered when this issue was discussed last year, then-City Attorney Scott Snyder
suggested considering them temporary structures because they may park overnight in a parking lot.
Councilmember Plunkett provided responses to other questions in Mr. Lien’s memo:
• What zones are appropriate for this type of use? Business zones
• Should access to restrooms be required? No
• Allowed to park overnight? No
• Should the site where the vendor is parked be verified for compliance with the required number of
parking stalls? Yes
• Temporary structure? Does not apply
• Design review required? No.
Ms. Hite advised staff will bring information back to the Council including code changes. She would like to
implement the concessions by next summer. She will also provide the Council a proposal for non-resident
fees. She encouraged the Council to provide other park-related revenue ideas for staff to explore.
Councilmember Plunkett encouraged staff to return with code language.
Councilmember Plunkett referred to the suggestion regarding business partnerships in Ms. Hite’s memo. He
asked if that was naming rights. Ms. Hite answered it could include naming rights, sponsorships, etc.; it is a
policy that allows public-private partnerships within the City that does not involve a gift of public funds.
Councilmember Plunkett referred to parks and fields in Medford, Oregon, that are all named after large
companies.
Mayor Cooper advised the Council could expect some of the revenue options to be reflected in his budget
message for consideration in the 2012 budget.
9. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN LOCAL AGENCY STANDARD CONSULTANT
AGREEMENT WITH DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained this agenda item is a proposed consulting contract with
David Evans and Associates to complete the design for the Five Corners roundabout. The contract is for
$310,000 and staff requests the Council also authorize a $15,000 management reserve for unanticipated
issues in the design. He provided information on the Five Corners roundabout project:
• Existing conditions
o All-way stop controlled intersection
• Creates driver confusion
o Existing level of service (LOS) F with 110 second intersection delay and 204 second delay in
2025 (during PM peak hours)
o Pedestrian/bicycle transportation safety concerns
• Proposed Improvements
o Modern landscaped roundabout
o LOS B with 12 second intersection delay and 14 seconds in 2025 (during PM peak hours)
• Additional Benefits
o Non-motorized transportation
• Pedestrians
– Refuge island
– High pedestrian activity
» Proximity of two schools and commercial area
• Cyclists
– Bike lanes
Packet Page 100 of 129
APPROVED MARCH 28, 2012
CITY OF EDMONDS
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
February 8, 2012
Chair Lovell called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety
Complex, 250 – 5th Avenue North.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
Philip Lovell, Chair
Valerie Stewart, Vice Chair
Kevin Clarke
Kristiana Johnson
Neil Tibbott (arrived at 7:13 p.m.)
Bill Ellis
STAFF PRESENT
Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager
Kernen Lien, Planner
Karin Noyes, Recorder
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT
John Reed
Todd Cloutier
READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES
BOARD MEMBER ELLIS MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 25, 2012 BE APPROVED AS
AMENDED. VICE CHAIR STEWART SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA
The agenda was accepted as presented.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
There was no one in the audience.
DISCUSSION ON UPDATING THE EDMONDS CITY CODE (ECC) AND EDMONDS COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) TO ALLOW MOTORIZED MOBILE VENDORS (FILE NUMBER AMD
20100012)
Mr. Lien advised that the City continues to receive requests from persons who wish to operate motorized mobile vending
(MMV) services within the City. However, there is currently confusing and conflicting language within the Edmonds City
Code (ECC) and the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) as to whether they are allowed in the City. He
explained that ECC 4.12 provides the framework for licensing peddlers, solicitors and street vendors. While MMVs fit
within the broad definition of “solicitor” in that they sell goods from place to place, they do not fit in the more narrow
definition of street vendor, which refers to non-motorized mobile vending units such as hot dog carts. Under the definitions
in ECC 4.12, an MMV may operate under a solicitor’s license obtained from the City Clerk. However, ECDC 16 requires
that all uses within commercial zones be carried on within a completely enclosed building, with some exceptions depending
on the zone. ECDC 21.10 defines a building as any structure having a roof, excluding all forms of vehicles even though
Attachment 3Packet Page 101 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
February 8, 2012 Page 2
immobilized. He concluded that while a MMV may be allowed to operate under a solicitor’s license, the areas they would
most likely locate restrict the use to buildings only.
Mr. Lien said on July 19, 2011, the City Council directed staff to update relevant sections of the ECC and ECDC to make it
clear that MMV units are permitted within the City of Edmonds. The City Attorney drafted changes to ECC 4.12 to
specifically allow motorized mobile vendors. However, amendments must also be made to ECDC 16 to resolve conflicts,
and these amendments must be reviewed by the Planning Board. He explained that while the Planning Board would not
normally review changes to the ECC, there is a significant overlap between allowing MMV units in ECC 4.12 and how that
use relates to other provisions within the ECDC. Therefore, staff believes that Board review of both the amendments to the
ECC and the ECDC is warranted.
Mr. Lien referred the Board to the proposed amendments to ECC 4.12 (Attachment 3) and reviewed each one as follows:
EEC 4.12.010.B – This section was highlighted because the City may want to designate different allowable zoning
for motorized versus non-motorized vending units. In addition, it might be appropriate to add some or all of the new
commercial zones that have been created in recent years.
ECC 4.12.010.C – This section was modified to provide a definition for both “motorized mobile vending units” and
“non-motorized mobile vending units.”
ECC 4.12.055 – The language throughout this section was changed to indicate that it applies to both motorized and
non-motorized mobile vending units.
ECC 4.12.055.A – If Architectural Design Board (ADB) approval is required for motorized and non-motorized
mobile vending units, the code should provide criteria by which the ADB can base their review. Staff recommends
that this section be deleted and that no design review be required.
ECC 4.12.055.D – As currently proposed, no portion of the vendor’s inventory, sales equipment or any other
structure or equipment can be left overnight. The Board may want to consider allowing motorized mobile vending
units to remain overnight in certain locations.
ECC 4.12.055.G – As currently written, this provision prohibits street vendors from locating within the portion of
improved street right-of-way designed for vehicular traffic or parking. This section could be revised to allow
MMVs to locate in the right-of-way and/or in parking lots across parking spaces. However, the City may want to
require that the overall site still complies with the required number of parking stalls for the existing business.
ECC 4.12.055.J – This provision currently prohibits street vendors from occupying parking spaces on City property
or in improved City rights-of-way reserved for vehicular traffic, parking or other transportation. The City may want
to allow MMVs to parking next to the sidewalk in the downtown area and near the waterfront, so people can be
served from the sidewalk.
ECC 4.12.055. – This section identifies the maximum permissible size of a mobile vending unit. The language may
need to be updated to accommodate current dimensions of an MMV. Staff plans to visit sites and conduct additional
research to identify more appropriate dimension limitations.
Mr. Lien summarized that the City Attorney’s proposed changes to ECC 4.12 are minimal to make it clear that MMVs would
be allowed. In order to make the ECDC consistent with the proposed amendments to ECC 4:12, staff is recommending that
ECDC 16 be amended to accurately identify the commercial zones in which MMVs would be allowed.
Mr. Lien referred to ECC 4.12.010.B and explained that additional commercial zones have been created since the current
ordinance was adopted. He asked the Board to provide direction as to whether or not MMVs should also be allowed in the
Downtown Business (BD) zone, the Firdale Village Mixed-Use (MU-FV) zone, and the Business Commercial Edmonds Way
(EW-BD) zone.
Mr. Chave advised that staff reviewed code language from other jurisdictions and found that regulations vary. Some
jurisdictions encourage MMVs in all commercial zones; others allow them, but limit where they can be located. Some allow
them only in designated areas. He noted that restaurants with fixed locations can become concerned if MMVs are allowed to
operate close to their businesses. It is difficult for them to compete with MMVs because they have to account for overhead
costs that MMVs do not have. Mr. Lien added that the City of Seattle’s code language limits how close an MMV can be
located to an existing restaurant.
Packet Page 102 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
February 8, 2012 Page 3
Chair Lovell asked if the proposed amendments are associated with the amendments proposed by the Parks, Recreation and
Cultural Services Director to allow concession vendors in parks as an additional source of revenue for the City. Mr. Lien
answered that the two issues are somewhat related and were presented to the City Council at the same time. However, the
concession vendor amendments have already been approved by the City Council because no development code amendment
was required. He reminded the Board of the City Council’s charge to amend both the ECC and the ECDC to make it clear
that MMVs are allowed in the City’s commercial zones. Again, he explained that the Board does not typically review ECC
amendments. However, because an ECDC amendment is also necessary, the Board has been asked to hold a public hearing
and make a recommendation to the City Council on both items.
Mr. Chave advised that the issue of MMVs has come up numerous times related to coffee locations. The current code does
not allow carts and trailers, and the solution has been to place a skirting around the structure to make it look like a small
building. However, many potential MMV operators have not been interested in pursuing this approach.
Mr. Lien referred to the bulleted list of questions (see Staff Report) that were initially presented to the City Council and
suggested this would be an appropriate place for the Board to start their discussion. He said staff is particularly seeking
direction about which commercial zones would be appropriate for MMVs. For example, does the Board believe it would be
appropriate to allow MMVs in the BD zones? Vice Chair Stewart reminded the Board that the BD1 zone talks about
promoting restaurants. She expressed her opinion that allowing MMVs in this district could harm the restaurant businesses.
She said she is opposed to allowing MMVs in the BD1 zone, but she would support the use in all other commercial zones as
long as they are regulated appropriately. She said that, typically, a solicitor’s license requires a background check, and
vendors are required to display their licenses. Mr. Lien agreed that a background check would be conducted prior to issuance
of a solicitor’s license.
Board Member Clarke asked if the code would adequately address traffic flow and safety issues associated with MMVs
locating in parking lots. Mr. Lien agreed that this is an important aspect to address. It is also important to ensure that MMVs
and their customers do not take up parking space that is necessary for the business to meet code requirements. Mr. Chave
advised that both of these issues would likely be addressed as part of the solicitor’s licensing process. The applicant would
have to identify a proposed location and provide a circulation plan. MMV’s would not typically be allowed to occupy in
parking spaces that are required for the existing use. Board Member Clarke expressed concern that if MMVs are allowed to
park in regularly striped parking spaces, customers waiting to get food could obstruct the flow of traffic through the parking
lot. He suggested that this concern could be addressed by requiring that food only be served through windows facing the
sidewalk. Mr. Lien said that, typically, MMVs locate in the corner of parking lots where there is generally less traffic.
However, he acknowledged that traffic safety is not specifically addressed in the code language.
Board Member Clarke asked if it would be possible to designate a specific space in a parking lot where MMVs are allowed to
locate. Mr. Chave answered that during the license review process, the applicant would be required to specifically designate
where the MMV would be located. Board Member Clarke voiced concern that this requirement would not ensure the
location is the best and safest. Mr. Lien suggested that language could be added to the review criteria to ensure there is
adequate parking for both the existing and mobile business. A provision could also be added to allow the City to review and
evaluate the site plan to address traffic flow and safety.
Board Member Clarke noted that during events such as the Taste of Edmonds, Arts Festival, etc., food vendors pay a fee to
locate within the venue area. He asked if the proposed code language would allow MMVs to locate within close proximity of
an event venue. Not only would these vendors be able to avoid the participation fee, they could also disrupt the traffic flow
and create safety issues. Mr. Lien agreed it would be reasonable to add some restrictions to address this issue.
Board Member Ellis asked if an MMV operator would be allowed to set up chairs and tables outside to serve customers. Mr.
Lien said this is not addressed in the proposed language. However, the proposed language does require MMV operators to
pack up all their belongings and leave the area at the end of the day.
Board Member Tibbott asked if the proposed language limits the number of parking stalls an MMV could occupy. Mr. Lien
answered that it does not. Board Member Tibbott observed that it would be possible for a vendor to park sideways across
two stalls and then set up an awning and other equipment that occupies several more stalls.
Packet Page 103 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
February 8, 2012 Page 4
Board Member Clarke asked if it would be possible to approve the MMV provisions on a temporary basis, subject to a review
after a one-year period. Mr. Lien said that some regulations are adopted with the provision that staff review the ordinance
and report back to the City Council after one year. The Board could recommend this same approach for the MMV
provisions.
Chair Lovell suggested that because the City Council has indicated their desire to allow MMV activities, the Board should
discuss whether they should be allowed on private property, public property, or both. They need to provide some specific
guidelines for each situation to address such issues as location, traffic flow, and parking requirements. They also need to
discuss which zones should allow MMVs. He referred to Council Member Plunkett’s response to the list of questions
presented by staff on July 19, 2011 (see Attachment 2) and said he agrees that MMVs should not be allowed to stay
overnight, and they should not be required to obtain design approval from the ADB or provide restroom facilities. However,
he suggested the Board should have further discussion about whether or not MMVs should be allowed in all commercial
zones.
Board Member Tibbott questioned if it would be appropriate to limit MMVs to only those parking spaces that are along
streets and sidewalks as opposed to parking lots. If MMVs are allowed in parking lots, they can occupy multiple stalls and
create traffic and pedestrian safety issues. Vice Chair Stewart cautioned against excluding parking lots altogether because the
use could work well in some parking lot situations. If MMVs are only allowed to park along streets, they could take up
valuable parking space that is used by the existing businesses. Mr. Lien reminded the Board that before obtaining a
solicitor’s license to locate in a privately-owned parking lot, an MMV operator would have to obtain permission from the
property owner. A property owner would not likely grant this permission if it would negatively impact the business. On the
other hand, no such approval would be required for an MMV operator to obtain a solicitor’s license to park along a public
right-of-way. If the Board decides it would be appropriate to limit the use to public rights-of-way, he suggested they should
designate certain areas where the units could be located. This approach would also address distance requirements from
existing restaurants. Board Member Tibbott expressed his belief that MMVs should not be allowed to park along streets in
the BD1 zone.
Vice Chair Stewart suggested that if the City chooses to limit MMVs to designated streets, a map should be provided with the
solicitor’s license application to inform potential vendors of where they can locate. Mr. Lien said this approach would be a
way to limit the number of MMVs allowed within the City’s right-of-way, but it would not address MMVs on private
property.
Board Member Clarke asked if MMVs would be allowed to use “human” signs to advertise their businesses. Mr. Lien
answered that sign related issues are addressed by the sign code. Mr. Chave added that some jurisdictions have tried to single
out this use, but they have run into freedom of speech issues. Mr. Lien said that MMVs typically only have one or two
employees on site at any given time because the actual units are small.
Board Member Tibbott asked if the proposed language assumes the MMVs will be owner operated or would employees other
than the owner be allowed to operate the unit. Mr. Lien said the majority of MMVs are owner operated, but some are
successful enough that they have two or three units and hire employees. Board Member Tibbott asked if a background check
is required for all employees or just the owner. Mr. Lien answered that ECC 4.12.040.B requires a background check for
anyone who works inside an MMV.
Vice Chair Stewart asked about the City Council’s reasons for wanting to promote MMVs. She expressed her belief that
MMVs could offer an opportunity for additional revenue for the City. She asked what other cities charge for solicitor’s
licenses and street use permits. Mr. Lien pointed out that a street use permit would not be required for an MMV that is
located on private property. Vice Chair Stewart asked if the City receives tax revenue from the items that are sold at MMVs
located within the City.
Chair Lovell once again referred to the minutes from the July 19th City Council meeting, at which the City Council expressed
general support for MMVs to increase the livelihood of the City. Tonight’s discussion should focus on how to make the ECC
and ECDC language consistent as it relates to MMVs. He suggested the Board should specifically focus their discussion on
which zones MMVs should be allowed to locate in. Board Member Clarke suggested it would be helpful for staff to provide
Packet Page 104 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
February 8, 2012 Page 5
examples of how other jurisdictions address MMVs. Mr. Lien said the City of Seattle recently updated their MMV
provisions, but they are probably more complex than what the City Council is looking for. The City of Portland allow
MMVs, but they are clustered in specific locations. He said he found examples from a few jurisdictions in Texas that were
not too complex, but addressed some of the issues raised by the Board.
Board Member Johnson suggested that the first step is for the Board to decide exactly what they want the code language to
achieve. If they want a lively street and sidewalk scene, the current proposed language is overly prohibitive because MMVs
would only be allowed in a few limited locations. She suggested they answer the basic question of whether they want to
promote MMVs for the liveliness of the street and the vivaciousness of the City or if they want to limit MMVS as much as
possible and only allow the use where it would have minimal adverse impact. She observed that, as currently written, the
language is contradictory. It talks about allowing MMVs, but then says they cannot park on the street. It requires that they
be oriented towards the sidewalk, which will be difficult if they are not allowed to park in the street. Again, she said that
until the Board identifies what it is they want to achieve, it will be difficult to address the details.
Board Member Johnson said it would be helpful to understand MMVs from a business standpoint. For example, would the
City receive sales tax revenue from a catering business that is licensed in the City of Lynwood but operates in the City of
Edmonds a few days a week? If there is no benefit to the City from an economic standpoint, perhaps the real benefit is
providing ambiance and opportunities.
Chair Lovell agreed with Board Member Johnson. Rather than over structuring the MMV provisions, they should create
some basic guidelines for where and how MMVs can operate in the City. Mr. Lien agreed to review the comments provided
by the Board and update the draft ordinance. He also agreed to solicit feedback from the Engineering and Parks, Recreation
and Cultural Services Departments. When he presents the updated code language to the Board for continued discussion, he
would provide maps to illustrate where MMVs could potentially locate. He said staff’s goal is to have the MMV provisions
adopted before summer.
Board Member Tibbott said another option is to identify specific areas in the City where MMVs can locate for a daily
reservation rate. MMV operators could reserve the sites in advance and the City would receive revenue from the daily fee.
STAFF PRESENTATION OF 2012 EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) UPDATE
Mr. Chave reported that staff presented an approach to updating the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) at the
recent City Council retreat. He said the intent is for a team of staff members to attempt a comprehensive rewrite of the
ECDC this year, given that this is probably staff’s last opportunity for the foreseeable future and it is a critical item to
accomplish.
Mr. Chave emphasized the importance of distinguishing between the Edmonds City Code (ECC) and the Edmonds
Community Development Code (ECDC). The ECC consists of Titles 1 through 10 and addresses issues such as health,
safety, finance, officials, boards and commissions. The ECDC consists of Titles 15 through 23 and addresses issues such as
building, planning and land use, public works, design and natural resources.
Mr. Chave said the current ECDC is a combination of legal documents and mystery. There is no entry point and no roadmap
or guide. It is not easy to read and understand, and there are numerous inconsistencies and contradictions because it has been
amended frequently. Staff is proposing a comprehensive structural change in the way the ECDC is written; the document
will be reconfigured so it is easier for staff to administer and for the public to access and understand.
Mr. Chave said that the current ECDC is a written manual that is organized topic by topic, and the new version will be a
hyperlinked roadmap that is integrated according to project and purpose. He explained that people using the code do not
typically care which department administers a permit. They are most interested in learning about the requirements and
process associated with a particular project. Using the current code, it is difficult to figure out which parts are applicable to
any given project. There are few cross references so it is difficult for people to figure out where to start, and defined and
undefined terms are dispersed throughout the document. For example sometimes the code talks about a dictionary definition
for height, and other times it talks about a specific mechanism for calculating height. It is often difficult to determine which
one applies. The new ECDC will clarify when and how the terms are used.
Packet Page 105 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
March 28, 2012 Page 3
Board Member Johnson observed that ECDC 20.20.010.C.2.a and ECDC 20.20.010.C.3 appear to say the same thing. She
suggested, and the Board concurred, that ECDC 20.20.010.C.2.a should be clarified and ECDC 20.20.010.C.3 should be
eliminated.
Vice Chair Stewart said it makes sense to eliminate the permit requirement to be consistent with state law. However, she is
concerned about allowing someone to grow and sell produce using someone else’s land, which is what the CSA concept
would allow. Mr. Mearns said their goal is to eventually establish a CSA, but he understands that the proposed amendment
would not address this issue.
Board Member Tibbott questioned what potential problems could result from allowing someone to bring produce from
another property to sell at their stand. Chair Lovell said it is possible that the produce could be contaminated and make
someone sick. It would also be possible for a small neighborhood stand to grow into a local produce market. Board Member
Tibbott pointed out that the proposed language would require an applicant to submit a site plan showing how visitors to the
site could be accommodated without creating a traffic hazard or nuisance to adjoining properties. Ms. Machuga agreed that if
a stand was too big, the property owners would probably not be able to adequately accommodate traffic.
While he understands that the City must consider what could possibly happen, Mr. Mearns suggested the Board keep in mind
how much produce could reasonably be grown on a property in Edmonds. He said it would be impossible for him to create a
farmer’s market. His 3,000 square foot garden is just enough to feed his neighborhood, and his stand is just one table. Board
Member Tibbott asked if the Mearns anticipate their produce stand could grow in the future. Mr. Mearns said that would be
fantastic. However, once it reaches a certain size, it would make more sense to purchase space at the Edmonds Summer
Market. He said that, in addition to providing his neighbors with good food, the community building that occurs through the
process is incredibly important.
Mr. Mearns also explained that there are significant misconceptions about how foods become tainted. Most of the problems
occur at industrial farms and not from food grown in private backyards. Vice Chair Stewart expressed concern about liability
issues that could come up if property owners are allowed to sell produce that is harvested from numerous locations
throughout the City. Again, Mr. Mearns said the real concern about food safety comes from large industrial produce farms
that use chemicals and fertilizers and locate their growing areas within close proximity to livestock. He expressed his belief
that the public should have the choice of purchasing local produce, and the City should not be responsible for policing their
food choices. Vice Chair Stewart suggested that additional language should be added to the code to make it clear that urban
farming is intended to provide food for the local neighborhood. Mr. Mearns agreed that could be the focus of the urban
farming regulation, but the regulations should not prohibit urban farms from selling their produce outside of the
neighborhood, either.
Board Member Johnson asked staff to provide more information about why this issue has come up and what the concerns are.
Ms. Machuga explained that when the home occupation code was written, the City was not aware of the conflicting RCW.
The Mearns brought the conflict to the City’s attention, and staff passed the concern along to the City Attorney.
Chair Lovell summarized the Board’s consensus to move the proposed amendment forward to a public hearing on April 11th,
with the change identified earlier by the Board to clarify ECDC 20.20.010.C.2.a and eliminate ECDEC 20.20.010.C.3.
DISCUSSION ON UPDATING THE CITY OF EDMONDS CITY CODE (ECC) 4.12 AND EDMONDS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) TO ALLOW MOTORIZED MOBILE VENDORS (FILE
NUMBER AMD20100012)
Mr. Lien reminded the Board that they began discussions on Motorized Mobile Vending Units (MMVs) on February 8th. At
that time, they directed staff to evaluate appropriate zones and areas for MMVs, revise ECC 4.12 accordingly, and bring the
proposed draft language back to the Board for further review. Mr. Lien and the Board reviewed the draft language as
follows:
• ECC4.12.555.A. Mr. Lien explained that because the Board indicated that NMVs would be appropriate uses in all
commercial zones but may not be appropriate for all commercial zones, separate language was created for each type of
use. He referred the Board to the proposed changes in ECC 4.12.055.A to identify the zones where Non-motorized
Attachment 4Packet Page 106 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
March 28, 2012 Page 4
Mobile Vending units (NMVs) and MMVs would be allowed. As currently proposed, NMVs would be allowed in the
following zones: Neighborhood Business (BN), Community Business (BC), Planned Business (BP), Downtown
Business (BD1, BD2, BD3, BD4 and BD5), Commercial Waterfront (CW), General Commercial (CG and CG2) and
Firdale Village Mixed-Use (FVMU). MMVs would be allowed in the BN, BC, BP, BD2, BD3, CW, CG, CG2 and
FVMU zones.
Board Member Johnson recalled that several Board Members expressed concern about allowing MMVs in the BD1 zone
because it is the City’s primary downtown core. However, she has talked with business owners in the BD1 zone who are
enthusiastic and felt that MMVs would help draw customers to their stores. She said she understands why it would not
be desirable to allow MMVs within close proximity to restaurants because it is important to avoid competition with front
door operations. However, there is also a reason to encourage MMVs because they provide additional dining
opportunities, which is one of the focuses of the BD1 zone. The PCC and QFC attract different clientele and serve
different purposes, and the same would be true from established restaurants and MMVs in the BD1 zone. She felt that
allowing MMVs in the BD1 zone would also create a concentration of dining opportunities that would actually draw
people towards downtown Edmonds. She asked staff to seek additional feedback regarding this option from the
Downtown Edmonds Merchant’s Association (DEMA). Until they have more information, she suggested the draft
language should allow MMVs in the BD1 zone for discussion purposes.
Vice Chair Stewart agreed with Board Member Johnson in principle. However, many of the downtown business owners
she has talked to have indicated concern about competition and the reduction of available parking space. She agreed it
would be appropriate to seek feedback from the public about whether or not MMVs should be allowed in the BD1 zone,
and the Downtown Edmonds Merchant’s Association should be particularly invited to provide feedback.
Chair Lovell suggested that if the Board decides to include the BD1 zone as a possible location for MMVs for public
hearing purposes, perhaps they should also include the BD4 and BD5 zones. He said he is not so concerned about
creating competition for established dining businesses, but he is concerned that MMVs could displace parking.
However, he acknowledged this would be true in any of the BD zones, and the proposed code language includes a
provision that would prohibit an MMV from displacing parking spaces.
Mr. Lien said that, as per the Board’s direction, the draft language does not allow MMVs in the BD1 zone. Parking in
the BD1 zone is already tight, and allowing MMVs to park on the street would further exacerbate the problem. He noted
that the BD4 zone is primarily residential, with very few places for MMV’s to locate. There are some larger parking
areas in both the BD2 and BD3 zones that could accommodate MMVs. There are also places in the remaining
commercial zones where MMVs could be easily accommodated off street.
Vice Chair Stewart expressed concern that implementing the proposed code provisions could require a lot of staff time if
Edmonds becomes a popular destination in the future and more vendors express interest in operating within Edmonds.
Rather than a process that requires staff to review each request on a case-by-case basis, she suggested a better approach
might be to designate specific locations where MMVs could locate. Vendors could contact the City to reserve a location.
Mr. Lien pointed out that there is little to no City right-of-way that could be designated as specific locations for MMVs.
They will most likely be located on private property, and it would be up to individual property owners to decide if they
want to allow the use or not.
Board Member Johnson pointed out that there is ample room for an MMV to locate within the private parking lot located
at 6th and Main, which is within the BD1 zone. She noted that this parking area is rarely used. Board Member Reed
pointed out that the parking lot is posted as “no parking,” except for individuals who are going into the adjacent building
to conduct business. Board Member Johnson acknowledged that approval from the property owner would be required
for an MMV to locate in this space, but it is possible. Mr. Lien said this parking area is probably the only location in the
BD1 zone that could accommodate an MMV.
Board Member Johnson said she believes it is extreme to prohibit street vendors from locating on City streets and rights-
of-way. Chair Lovell reminded the Board that the goal of the proposed amendment is to identify where MMVs can
safely locate without impacting traffic and pedestrian safety and access. The City Engineer has indicated there are few,
if any, public streets and rights-of-way within the commercial zones where MMVs could be safely accommodated. Mr.
Packet Page 107 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
March 28, 2012 Page 5
Lien said the City of Seattle has designated specific areas where MMVs can locate on streets and in public rights-of-way,
but parking is already a significant issue in the Edmonds downtown. Available parking could be further limited if
MMVs are allowed to park on the street. Board Member Johnson challenged the Board and staff to consider places
throughout all commercial zones in the City where it may be appropriate to allow MMVs within the right-of-way. For
example, it may be appropriate to allow MMVs within the right-of-way adjacent to a public gathering place. Vice Chair
Stewart said it might also be appropriate to allow MMVs to park on the street if a street is closed off to accommodate a
festival or community event. Mr. Lien pointed out that this type of use would require a special festival permit.
Mr. Lien observed that there may be adequate space to accommodate MMVs within the public right-of-way along
Admiral Way and near the ferry, both of which are located in the CW zone. In these locations, it may be possible for an
MMV to park on the street and serve people from the sidewalk. However, there is no street parking along Highway 99,
at Westgate or at Firdale Village. Board Member Johnson observed that there is some street parking available on
Bowdoin Way in the Five Corners commercial area.
• ECC 4.12.055.J. Mr. Lien explained that this section prohibits street vendors in parks unless the vendor has a
concession agreement with the City of Edmonds to operate on a specific park property.
• ECC 4.12.055.H. Mr. Lien said this provision would prohibit street vendors from locating within the portion of the
street right-of-way designed for vehicular traffic or parking. It would also require a street vendor to obtain approval
from the traffic engineer to locate within a right-of-way. He explained that the City Engineer has determined that there
are very few streets in the commercial zones that can safely accommodate MMVs.
• ECC 4.12.055.G. Board Member Reed pointed out that ECC 4.12.955.H would allow street vendors to locate on
sidewalks. Because sidewalks in the commercial areas of Edmonds are typically narrow, allowing street vendors on the
sidewalks could restrict pedestrian access. He suggested that perhaps it would be appropriate to be more restrictive by
identifying specific locations where MMVs and NMVs could locate in the commercial zones. Chair Lovell commented
that, as per the proposed language, only NMVs would be allowed to locate on sidewalks. If located on the sidewalk,
ECC 4.12.055.G would require that a minimum clearance of five feet be maintained at all times.
• ECC 4.12.065.C. Board Member Reed asked if there would be a tendency for MMV operators to show up early to set
up when people are still sleeping. He asked how the City would regulate this issue. Chair Lovell referred to ECC
4.12.065.C, which sets forth time constraints for when vendors can operate. He also noted that ECC 4.12.055.E
prohibits a vendor from leaving any structure or equipment overnight.
Vice Chair Stewart asked the rationale for prohibiting MMVs from staying in a location overnight. Mr. Lien explained
that MMVs are intended to be temporary. If they are allowed to stay overnight, operators tend to build stuff around them
and they can become permanent homes. He said the provision is intended to address aesthetic issues. Vice Chair
Stewart expressed concern that requiring the vendors to leave the City every night does not support the City’s goal of
reducing their carbon footprint, particularly if the units come from longer distances. Mr. Lien noted that MMVs tend to
move around to different locations each day. The idea is that they are temporary rather than permanent.
Vice Chair Stewart suggested that the operating hours identified in ECC 4.12.065.C may be too restrictive, particularly
during the summer months. She reminded the Board of the City’s goal to make the downtown more vibrant, and it
would be desirable for the downtown to still be active at 8:00 p.m. on a summer evening. She suggested the hours of
operation for MMVs and NMVs should be consistent with the operating hours recently approved for outdoor dining.
The remainder of the Board concurred.
• ECC 4.12.065.A. Chair Lovell questioned why language related to fireworks displays is necessary in this section of the
code since fireworks are illegal in Edmonds. Mr. Lien agreed that this provision could be deleted.
• ECDC 16. Mr. Lien explained that the operating restrictions in some commercial zones require that all sales be carried
out entirely within completely enclosed buildings. This section will need to be amended to be consistent with the
proposed changes to ECC 4.12. Staff will propose draft language that adds MMVs as a specific exception to this
requirement in the applicable zones.
Packet Page 108 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
March 28, 2012 Page 6
• ECC 4.12.055.F. Board Member Johnson said this provision allows the Development Services Director to determine
the allowable number of street vendors. It also allows him to exercise discretion based upon the needs of the public,
diversity of products offered for sale, the smooth flow of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and other considerations. Vice
Chair Stewart asked if this provision would allow the Development Services Director to deny a request for an MMV that
is operated by individuals who are skimpily clad. Mr. Chave answered that this issue is addressed by another section of
the code.
• ECC 4.12.055.C. Vice Chair Stewart asked about the cost of a street use permit. Mr. Lien said fees are outlined in the
fee schedule and are not specifically identified in the code language. Vice Chair Stewart suggested it would be
appropriate to identify the associated fee for the street use permit in the code language. Mr. Chave explained that the
City usually identifies permit fees in the public information materials that are available to members of the public.
Including specific numbers for permit fees throughout the code would require the City to amend the code every time the
fee schedule is adjusted. He reminded the Board that the fee schedule is adopted by the City Council by resolution, and
it is up to the City Administration to make this information available to members of the public who need to know. This
is typically done via the City’s website and informational handouts. Vice Chair Stewart suggested the code should be
more user friendly. Perhaps the code should reference the fee schedule so that citizens know exactly where to look for
information about permit fees. The Board agreed it would be appropriate to scan the code language and add a reference
to the fee schedule wherever a permit that requires a fee is discussed.
• ECC 4.12.055.N. Mr. Lien said this is a new section that outlines the criteria for locating within a parking lot of a
private location. As proposed, an applicant would be required to provide a circulation plan that would be reviewed and
approved by the City Traffic Engineer to ensure the MMV will not interfere in any way with vehicular or pedestrian
traffic or safety. The applicant would also be required to demonstrate that the site meets the parking requirements of
ECDC 17.50. He recalled that Board Member Clarke previously suggested that MMVs should orient towards the
sidewalk, but most of the parking stalls are head on to the sidewalk, and parking sideways would require several parking
spaces.
• ECC 4.12.055. Mr. Lien advised that this proposed amendment would eliminate the requirement for a street vendor to
obtain Architectural Design Board (ADB) approval. He pointed out that there are currently no standards for ADB
review of MMVs. Instead, ECC 4.12.055.B was added to address aesthetic issues. As proposed, MMVs must be
commercially manufactured vehicles as defined in ECC 4.12.010.E. This means that the vehicles must be specifically
designed to be MMVs. He provided illustrations of different types of MMVs and noted that most of them would meet
this qualification. Board Member Johnson suggested that perhaps it would be appropriate to require a photograph of the
MMV as part of the application.
• ECC 4.12.055.D. Mr. Lien said that, as currently proposed, sign area on NMVs and MMVs would be limited to 10
square feet. Another option would be limit the sign size based on the size of the vehicle, which would be similar to how
the City regulates signs for businesses. Board Member Tibbott questioned the appropriateness of limiting signs on
MMVs to a specific size, since they typically operate in multiple locations. He suggested that limiting the sign size
would make it difficult to accommodate the creativity that is inherent with MMVs. The remainder of the Board
concurred. They discussed the concept of limiting MMV sign area to the surface are of the vehicle, without allowing
signs on top or protruding out of the vehicle. Board Member Johnson pointed out that MMVs are temporary, and she
would not be opposed to allowing more signage, in addition to the vehicle space, so MMVs can attract passersby. The
Board agreed it would be appropriate to maintain the 10 square foot sign limitation for NMVs, but signage for MMVs
should not be limited to a specific size.
• ECC 4.12.010.C. Mr. Lien said the proposed definition for MMV came from an ordinance drafted by the City Attorney.
Since that time, the City has received a request from someone who wants to operate a mobile boutique, which would not
be allowed as per the proposed definition. He suggested that the definition should be changed to be more in line with the
definition for “street vendor,” which does not limit the sales to food items. The Board concurred.
• ECC 4.12.055.P. Mr. Lien explained that this new provision would prohibit MMVs from operating within any of the
BD zones during special events where food providers are required to pay a fee to participate. He said the purpose of this
Packet Page 109 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
March 28, 2012 Page 7
provision is to avoid situations where MMVs park just outside of a special event such as the Edmonds Arts Festival or
Taste of Edmonds to sell food items, creating competition for the vendors who pay to participate in the event. Board
Member Reed suggested that perhaps the provision should be more general to include all special events that take place in
Edmonds, including events in the CW zone. Mr. Lien suggested that rather than identifying specific zones, they could
prohibit MMVs from locating within a certain distance from any festival in Edmonds. The Board agreed that the
language should be changed to prohibit MMVs from operating within ¼ mile of any festival in Edmonds where food
providers are required to pay a fee to participate.
• ECC 4.12.030.A and ECC 4.12.050. Vice Chair Stewart said she understands that a background check would be done
for each vendor. However, she felt the term “investigation” was a bit off putting. She asked how other jurisdictions
refer to the background check requirement. Board Member Reed suggested that “investigation” may be a commonly
used police term. Changing the term may go beyond the Board’s purview. Mr. Lien agreed to contact the City Clerk for
feedback. Vice Chair Stewart suggested that, if determined appropriate, the term should be changed to the more friendly
term “background check” throughout the document. The Board agreed.
• ECC 4.12.055.J. Vice Chair Stewart suggested that the language in this section could be more positive. She
recommended it be amended to read, “Street vendors may operate in parks if they have a concession agreement with the
City of Edmonds to operate on a specific park property.” The Board agreed the change would be appropriate.
• ECC 4.12.055.M.1. Board Member Johnson questioned the appropriateness of requiring City Council review and
approval for requests for sites abutting public land owned by the City. She suggested that this requirement would be
excessive, particularly given that the Development Services Director has the authority to use discretionary judgment.
Mr. Lien said this is existing code language. He agreed to review the language further and provide additional feedback
to the Board.
• ECC 4.12.055.O. Board Member Johnson requested clarification about the size limitation contained in this section. Mr.
Lien pointed out that the size limitation refers to NMVs and not MMVs, and is based on existing code language. Board
Member Johnson asked if the proposed language identifies size limits for MMVs. Mr. Lien answered that none have
been proposed. However, the code does require that MMVs be commercially manufactured vehicles. To make the
language clearer, Mr. Lien agreed to renumber ECC 4.12.055.O to be ECC 4.12.055.N.3.
The Board agreed that the draft language, as updated per the Board’s comments, and prepare to move forward to a public
hearing.
THE BOARD RECESSED THE MEETING AT 8:57 P.M. THE MEETING WAS RECONVENED AT 9:06 P.M.
DISCUSSION OF CURRENT BED AND BREAKFAST REGULATIONS AND OPTIONS FOR CLARIFYING
THEM (FILE NUMBER AMD20120001)
Mr. Clugston said the City recently received a request from someone who wants to operate a bed and breakfast (B&B) in a
residential zone. He explained that while the current code allows B&Bs within single-family residential zones, the use is not
defined and there are only limited standards and criteria for how they should be reviewed and approved. He referred to the
flow chart in Attachment 1, which attempts to visually outline the current regulations. He explained that in some cases (more
than one room), a business license would be required. In other cases (one room), an applicant would be required to register
as a transient accommodation. Attachment 2 was created by the Fire Department in 1986 to identify what should be included
as part of a transient accommodation review. He said that the current Fire Marshall pointed out that when the transient
accommodations language was approved in 1995, there were 10 B&Bs operating in the City, and now there is only one. He
said the purpose of tonight’s discussion is for the Board to review what currently exists and provide direction to staff on how
to move forward. Possible outcomes include:
• No Change. Although the current regulations are difficult to follow, there is a process in place whereby a resident can
establish a B&B based on existing code. Producing a handout for applicants that includes the definitions and describes
the relationship between the disparate parts of the code would help an applicant. However, there would still be no
review criteria and standards.
Packet Page 110 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
May 9, 2012 Page 4
Mr. Reidy inquired regarding the process for getting his proposed amendments on the Planning Board’s agenda for
consideration. Mr. Lien answered that any citizen can propose an amendment to the ECDC, but there is an associated fee
($1,000 to $2,000). The other option is for citizens to approach the City Council with a request for them to direct the staff
and Planning Board to pursue a code amendment. He noted that Mr. Reidy’s comments would be included in the Board’s
minutes, which are forwarded to the City Council.
Chair Lovell suggested it would be appropriate for the Board to forward a recommendation to the City Council regarding the
proposed amendment that was advertised for public hearing. The issues raised by Mr. Reidy could be addressed as a separate
item. Board Member Johnson asked if Mr. Reidy is in support of the proposed amendment. Mr. Reidy answered
affirmatively. He added that he intends to approach City Council with a request to sponsor his proposed amendments.
Board Member Cloutier suggested that, as per RCW 35.79.030, the correct term to use in ECDC 20.70.140.A.3 is “owners of
property abutting upon the street or alleyway or part thereof so vacated.” Mr. Reidy explained that, typically, the underlying
fee titles for rights-of-way are owned by adjacent property owners. However, this ownership is subordinate to the public’s
right for ingress and egress over the property. When streets and alleys are vacated, they go back to the owner of the
underlying fee title. He agreed that the term used in RCW 35.79.030 would be more appropriate than “applicant.”
THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Board Member Cloutier suggested the Board forward a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed
amendment that was advertised for public hearing, as well as the two amendments brought forward by Mr. Reidy. Chair
Lovell questioned the Board’s ability to amend the language above and beyond what was outlined in the public notice. Mr.
Lien read the public notice, which was specifically related to the proposed amendment. Chair Lovell noted that the City
Council’s memorandum was also specific to just the proposed amendment.
CHAIR LOVELL MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT (ECDC
20.70.090.A) TO PROVIDE EXPANDED NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR STREET VACATIONS (FILE
NUMBER AMD20120003) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS
PRESENTED BY STAFF. BOARD MEMBER REED SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
After discussing the best approach for moving the amendments proposed by Mr. Reidy forward, the Board agreed to
recommend that the City Council task the Board to hold a public hearing on the following two changes, which are consistent
with RCW 35.79.030:
1. In ECDC 20.70.030 add “construction, repair and maintenance of” prior to “public utilities and services.”
2. In ECDC 20.70.140.A.3 change “applicant” to “owners of property abutting upon the street or alley or part thereof so
vacated.”
PUBLIC HEARING ON UPDATING THE CITY OF EDMONDS CITY CODE (ECC) 4.12 AND PORTIONS OF
EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) TITLE 16 TO ALLOW MOTORIZED MOBILE
VENDORS (FILE NUMBER AMD20100012
Mr. Lien recalled that the Board previously reviewed the proposed amendments (Attachments 1 and 2) on February 8th and
March 28th. He explained that, at this time, there is conflicting and confusing language with the Edmonds City Code (ECC)
and the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) as to whether motorized mobile vending (MMV) units are an
allowed activity in Edmonds. He explained that ECC 4.12 allows peddlers, but the language was directed more towards non-
motorized mobile vending (NMMV) units. There were also conflicts in ECDC 16, which restricts uses to those that are
carried on entirely within a completely enclosed building. As directed by the City Council, the intent of the proposed
amendments is to make it clear that MMV units are permitted within the City of Edmonds. He reviewed the changes that
were made to ECC 4.12 and ECDC 16 as directed by the Board on March 28th:
Separate definitions were provided for MMV and NMMV units. The definition for MMV unit was broadened to allow
MMV units to sell other items besides food and beverages. He referred to a memorandum from Board Member Johnson
Attachment 5Packet Page 111 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
May 9, 2012 Page 5
expressing the concern of some downtown merchants about the proposal to allow MMV units to sell a variety of
merchandise that could end up competing against existing businesses. He said he forwarded the proposed changes to
both the Downtown Edmonds Merchant’s Association (DEMA) and the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, but he has not
received a response for either group.
Staff recommended and the Board agreed that the design review requirement for MMV units (ECC 4.12.055.A) should
be eliminated because no design standards are in place for which to base design review. However, in order to ensure that
MMV units are of a certain quality and appearance, staff proposed additional language (ECC 4.12.055.B) that required
all MMV units to be commercially manufactured vehicles. A definition for “commercially manufactured vehicle” was
also added to ECC 4.12.010.E. However, staff is now recommending that this requirement be eliminated because it
would be very difficult to enforce and may end up discouraging the use.
Mr. Lien explained that the goal of the proposed language was to prevent old recreational vehicles from being converted
into food trucks, since some conversions can be unattractive. He provided pictures of several different MMV units to
illustrate the wide variety of vehicles the City can anticipate; some were commercially manufactured and others were
conversions. He requested feedback from the Board as to whether the code should include some language to prohibit old
recreational vehicles that are converted into MMV units.
Board Member Tibbott suggested that one option would be to require that MMVs be street legal. He suggested this
could help prohibit ill constructed and/or poorly designed vehicles. Mr. Lien pointed out that all MMVs must be street
legal in order to use public streets to relocate from place to place. Vice Chair Stewart asked how the City could ensure
that an MMV unit is safe if it is not required to be commercially manufactured. Board Member Johnson suggested that
one approach to address the issue would be to add a separate definition (ECC 4.12.010.F) for “converted or retrofitted
MMV units.” Mr. Lien cautioned that the Board should first determine whether or not it is appropriate to allow
converted or retrofitted MMV units to operate in the City.
Board Member Cloutier said it is more important to ensure that MMV units are street safe and meet Snohomish County
health standards. The appearance of the vehicle is the owner’s responsibility, and the City should not be in the business
of regulating what vehicles look like. He noted that the City does not regulate the appearance of any other type of
vehicle or even single-family homes. The Board agreed to delete ECC 4.12.010.E and ECC 4.12.055.B.
Mr. Lien said he spoke to the City Clerk about the Board’s recommendation to change the language contained in ECC
4.12.050 related to “investigation of applicants.” She indicated that the term “investigation” has been used without issue
for numerous years and should not be changed. She also recommended that language protecting vendors who are invited
to park next to the fireworks display should also be maintained.
Mr. Lien said the Board had a lot of discussion about the different zones where MMV and NMMV units should be
allowed. The Board agreed they wanted to allow them in most commercial zones, so all BD zones were added to ECC
4.12.055.A.1 and ECC 4.12.055.A.2. The Board also previously agreed that MMV units should not be allowed to locate
in spaces identified for public parking. He said he forwarded the proposed language to both DEMA and the Edmonds
Chamber of Commerce, but he did not receive a response.
Mr. Lien said that, as per the Board’s direction, the language in ECC 4.12.055.J was softened. As proposed, street
vendors would be allowed to operate in parks if they have a concession agreement with the City of Edmonds.
Mr. Lien advised that ECC 4.12.055.P was amended at the Board’s request to prohibit MMV units from operating within
one-quarter mile of a special event where food providers are required to pay a fee to participate (i.e. Taste of Edmonds,
Edmonds Arts Festival). Board Member Ellis asked if there are defined boundaries for each of the special events. Mr.
Lien said the special event permits specify the boundaries for each event.
Mr. Lien said that ECC 4.12.065.D was added to identify hours of operation for MMV and NMMV units. As proposed
MMV and NMMV units that are located directly adjacent to residentially-zoned property may not operate between the
hours of 9 p.m. and 8 a.m. NMMV and MMV units that are not located directly adjacent to residentially-zoned property
Packet Page 112 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
May 9, 2012 Page 6
may not operate between the hours of 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. He noted that, as recommended by the Board, this language is
consistent with the hours of operation for outdoor dining.
Board Member Reed requested clarification about the intent of ECC 4.12.055.K. Mr. Lien said this provision prohibits street
vendors in residentially-zoned areas or unzoned properties or rights-of-way adjacent to or abutting residentially-zoned areas.
He explained that there are commercially-zoned properties directly adjacent to residentially-zoned properties, and MMV
units would have to be located on commercially-zoned properties and not within the right-of-way.
Vice Chair Stewart referred to ECC 4.12.065.C, which identifies hours of operation for peddlers and solicitors. She asked if
MMV and NMMV units would also be considered peddlers. If so, the hours of operation identified in ECC 4.12.065.C are
inconsistent with the hours of operation identified in ECC 4.12.065.D. Board Member Ellis pointed out that the definition for
peddler and solicitor requires them to go from place to place to sell items, and this is different than MMV and NMMV units.
Board Member Johnson pointed out that the word “downtown’ is misspelled in ECC 4.12.055.A.1.
Vice Chair Stewart suggested that ECC 4.12.055.E should be further amended by adding “and/or recycle” before the word
“container.” Board Member Cloutier questioned if the City can require an MMV unit to provide a recycling container. He
also expressed concern that using the word “or” could imply that an MMV unit can provide either a recycling or a refuse
container. The Board asked staff to further amend the language to “encourage recycle containers.”
Ronnie Morgan, Sumner, said he owns a 1976 GMC that runs on propane, as does the refrigerator and the generator. He
explained that the vehicle was not originally designed to be an MMV unit, but it has been modified by a professional
company that is certified by the state. He said he is thinking about doing business in Edmonds, and he supports the proposed
changes. He said he particularly supports the Board’s decision to eliminate language that would require all MMV units to be
commercially manufactured.
Mr. Morgan referred to ECC 4.12.055.M, which requires a vendor to obtain approval from abutting property owners in order
to locate an MMV or an NMMV. He questioned what would happen if a MMV operator obtains a permit to operate on a
private commercial property, but then an adjacent property owner decides he doesn’t want the unit located next to his/her
property. Would the license be revoked by the City; and if so, would the City refund the permit fee? Board Member Cloutier
pointed out that this language is intended to apply to street vendors and NMMV units only. MMV operators would be
required to obtain permission from the owner of property where the unit is located but would not have to obtain approval
from adjacent property owners. Mr. Lien agreed and said he would rework the language to make it clearer.
Mr. Morgan noted that the proposed language requires a fee for a one-year permit. He asked if there is a different and less
costly permit for MMV operators who want to locate in Edmonds for just a few days per year. Mr. Lien said that only one-
year permits would be available.
Ken Reidy, Edmonds, said he recently visited Portland, Oregon, where they have identified an area for MMV units to all
locate in one place. Because the units are clustered together, there is a lot of activity. He suggested the City also consider
opportunities to cluster the units together into one area or one zone.
Don Hall, Edmonds, reported that at the last DEMA meeting, concern was expressed about allowing MMV units to sell
items that are not food related. Allowing these types of units could compete directly with existing businesses such as dress
shops, jewelry stores, etc. They are concerned that an existing retailer could close shop and set up an MMV unit to avoid
having to pay overhead costs such as rent and utilities. He said his garden store already has competition from vendors who
participate in the local Saturday Farmer’s Market because they are allowed to sell other items in addition to produce. He said
he does not want the City to encourage more competition than what already exists. He agreed to ask DEMA to provide an
official response to the proposed amendments.
Mr. Hall said he is not opposed to allowing MMV units that sell food to locate on City streets in visible locations since this
will encourage more people to come to Edmonds and make the BD zones more vibrant and exciting. Downtown Edmonds
needs to provide more reasons for people to come out of their homes and visit the various businesses. He said he has
operated a business in Edmonds for the past 13 years; and at certain times each year, he loses nearly all his parking.
Packet Page 113 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
May 9, 2012 Page 7
However, his customers do not complain. He suggested that customers are willing to walk to a business that provides good
customer service and the right prices. Again, he said he would support allowing MMV units to locate on City streets rather
than limiting them to private parking areas.
Mr. Lien recalled that, at their last meeting, the Commission discussed allowing MMV units to sell more than just food and
beverages. As a result, the definition of MMV was expanded to include other items. Chair Lovell agreed that the Board
expanded the language to include the possibility for vending other than food, but they left it open for the City Council to
decide if they want to restrict certain types of MMV and NMMV units based upon zoning. For example, MMV units that sell
items other than food could be restricted from certain zones to avoid competition with existing retailers.
Board Member Reed noted that the “e” should be removed from the word “therefore” in ECC 4.12.040.A. He also noted that
the word “on” should be deleted from ECC 4.12.055.A. Lastly, he suggested that ECC 4.12.055.A.1 and ECC 4.12.055.A.2
could be combined since NMMV and MMV units are allowed in the same zones. The Board concurred.
Mr. Lien summarized that the Board is requesting that the document be updated for further review with the following
changes:
Eliminate ECC 4.12.010.E and ECC 4.12.055.B.
Remove “e” from “therefore” in ECC 4.12.040.A.
Eliminate the word “on” from ECC 4.12.055.A.
Combine ECC 4.12.055.A.1 and ECC 4.12.055.A.2.
Change “design” to “designed” in ECC 4.12.010.C.
Add language to “encourage recycling” in ECC 4.12.055.E.
Correct the spelling of “Downtown” in ECC 4.12.055.A.1.
Modify ECC 4.12.055.M to make it clear that MMV operators do not need to obtain permission from adjacent property
owners.
Mr. Morgan referred to previous language that would limit the amount of advertising an MMV unit would be allowed to
have. Mr. Lien pointed out that ECC 4.12.055.D limits the amount of advertising that NMMV units are allowed to have, but
there would be no specific restriction for signage on MMV units.
Mr. Morgan said one of the advantages of having an MMV business is he is not tied to one location. He can locate in a busy
area of town for the morning, and then move to another location or perhaps deliver coffee to businesses. However, he
expressed concern that the City’s current code would not allow him to deliver coffee to offices throughout Edmonds. He
suggested the Board take into consideration that MMV units move around to provide a service to people. For example, they
could consider allowing a lunch truck to go into a residential neighborhood to serve construction worker during the lunch
hour.
Board Member Ellis asked how the City regulates ice cream trucks. Chair Lovell recalled that this issue was raised at a
previous meeting, and Mr. Chave responded that ice cream trucks would not be regulated by the subject ordinance. Mr. Lien
agreed to research the issue further and report back to the Board.
Board Member Johnson said she subscribes to the Seattle Met Newsletter, which contains articles each week about food
trucks. She also provided pictures of food trucks she has collected for informational purposes. She announced that the May
2012 edition of the Seattle Met Magazine features the food truck industry. She agreed to share the magazine with interested
Board Members. She said she has researched the food truck industry and found there are four different types:
Food trucks located in parking lots.
Food trucks that pay for the privilege of occupying parking space on the street.
Food trucks that are clustered together in a designated area.
Food trucks that are operated during special events that are intended just for food trucks.
Packet Page 114 of 129
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
May 9, 2012 Page 8
Board Member Johnson reported that she sent an email to former members of the CEDC regarding this issue, but she has not
received a response yet. She agreed it would be appropriate to continue the hearing to allow for additional discussion.
BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER MOVED THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CONTINUED TO JUNE 13, 2012.
BOARD MEMBER JOHNSON SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
THE BOARD TOOK A BREAK FROM 8:50 TO 9:02 PM.
CITY OF EDMONDS SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM (SMP) UPDATE
Mr. Lien referred the Board to the most current draft of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP) dated April, 2012 (Attachment
1). He specifically referred to the definition section and advised that a definition was added for “shore setback,” and the
definition for buffer was modified. He explained that the old definition for “buffer” was taken from the City’s Critical Area
Ordinance (CAO), and the new definition is more appropriate in the shoreline context and draws the distinction between
“buffer’ and “setback.” He reminded the Board that they also suggested that a definition be added for “high-intensity.” He
said he electronically searched the draft SMP and found that the term is only used once to differentiate between the Aquatic I
and Aquatic II Environments. Because it is not used elsewhere in the SMP, staff did not feel it was necessary to add a
definition. He said he also electronically searched the draft SMP for the term “buffer” and found there was only once
instance where “buffer” was used incorrectly. He explained that the term “buffer” is used in two different ways in the SMP:
when referring to landscape requirements to “buffer” a use from an adjacent property and when referring to the more visual
critical area buffer. The term is used correctly throughout the document.
Mr. Lien provided visuals depicting proposed shoreline jurisdictions, shore setbacks and buffers conceptually and actual
locations within the City’s shoreline areas. Chair Lovell said it would be helpful for staff to provide a legend for the
drawings so that each of various buffer requirements can be easily identified. Mr. Lien reviewed each of the drawings,
explaining how the SMP and CAO requirements would be applied in each situation as follows:
1. Shoreline area near Water Street. Within this 200-foot shoreline jurisdiction, a 50-foot setback from the top of the bluff
would be required. An additional 15-foot building setback would also be required. While the current SMP allows
development to occur within the buffer, a geotechnical report would be required. The proposed SMP would also allow
development to occur closer than 50 feet, but a shoreline variance would be required. He explained that, initially, the
DOE wanted to prohibit development closer than 50 feet from the top of the bluff, but they later added a variance
process.
Board Member Tibbott questioned what the proposed SMP would accomplish because the shoreline is already developed
to a great extent. Mr. Lien explained that the Department of Ecology (DOE) envisions an environment that is natural.
Along the City’s shoreline there are railroad tracks, a bluff and houses built right on top of the bluff. Because the
environment along the shoreline has already been altered, the ideal situation is to limit future
development/redevelopment so there is “no net loss.”
2. Lake Ballinger. The shore setback from Lake Ballinger is 35 feet, and it is also fringed with Category III Wetlands that
require a 50-foot buffer. Although shore setback requirements allow development to occur closer to 50 feet, the CAO
does not allow development to occur within a wetland buffer. The CAO also requires a 15-foot building setback.
3. Edmonds Marsh and Harbor Square. While the CAO is associated with the Growth Management Act (GMA) and the
SMP, they do not always mix. The State has made it clear that GMA rules apply to wetlands outside of the shoreline
jurisdictions, and the CAO requires a 200-foot buffer for a Type I Wetland. The SMP’s wetland buffer for the marsh is
based on best available science for small jurisdictions, which identifies a 150-foot buffer for estuarine wetlands. He
explained that, previously, the marsh was identified as an associated wetland, but the proposed SMP now identifies a
portion of the marsh as shoreline. That means the SMP would prevail to create different buffers for the areas within the
shoreline jurisdiction. Currently, the SMP identifies a 25-foot shore setback. Activities are allowed within the
developed portion of the buffer as long as the footprint does not expand. No structures would be allowed within the
undeveloped buffer areas.
Packet Page 115 of 129
DRAFT
Planning Board Minutes
June 13, 2012 Page 3
Vice Chair Stewart asked if adjacent property owners would have any recourse if ECDC 20.23.040.D is eliminated and
parking associated with a B&B becomes a problem. Mr. Clugston pointed out that, depending on the location, B&Bs could
utilize on-street parking to meet their parking requirement. If off-street parking is required, the code would not prohibit a
property owner from creating a large parking area to accommodate numerous cars. The parking provisions do not specify the
maximum number of parking spaces allowed. He expressed his belief that parking problems would be very unlikely give the
size of typical B&Bs. If parking becomes a problem, the provisions could be updated at a later time to address the concerns.
The Board concurred that the number of non-resident employees should not be limited. However, they agreed to retain
ECDC 20.23.040.D to call the City Council’s attention to the change. They recommended that the language be changed to
read, “A bed and breakfast may employ non-resident employees.”
Board Member Clarke questioned the need to define “private residence” (ECC 4.72.010.D) and “rental unit” (ECC
4.72.010.C). He specifically asked how the definitions are applicable to B&Bs. Mr. Clugston pointed out that these two
definitions are already in place in the Edmonds City Code, and staff is not proposing any substantive changes. The intent
was to make just the minor changes necessary to allow the new B&B regulations to exist. Board Member Ellis suggested that
it is not within the Board’s purview to rewrite the definition section of the Edmonds City Code as part of their review of the
B&B regulations. He explained that the definitions would not be included in the actual B&B code language. They were
included them in the Staff Report to illustrate the changes necessary to implement the proposed new B&B language.
VICE CHAIR STEWART MOVED THAT THE BOARD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED NEW
LANGUAGE IN ECDC 20.23 (BED AND BREAKFASTS) (FILE NUMBER AMD20120001) AS PRESENTED BY
STAFF AND AMENDED BY THE BOARD AS FOLLOWS:
1. CHANGE ECDC 20.23.040.D TO READ, “A BED AND BREAKFAST MAY EMPLOY NON-RESIDENT
EMPLOYEES.”
2. CHANGE ECDC 20.23.040.I BY ELIMINATING THE WORDS, “AT A TIME.”
BOARD MEMBER ELLIS SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PUBLIC HEARING ON UPDATING THE CITY OF EDMONDS CITY CODE (ECC) 4.12 AND PORTIONS OF
EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) TITLE 16 TO ALLOW MOTORIZED MOBILE
VENDORS (FILE NUMBER AMD20100012
Mr. Lien reviewed that the Board began discussions about Motorized Mobile Vendors (MMV) on February 8th, and they
directed staff to evaluate appropriate zones and areas for MMVs and revise ECC 4.12 accordingly. Staff presented the
proposed updates to the Board on March 28th, and a public hearing was held on May 9th. After the hearing, the Board
identified additional changes. He referred the Commission to the draft amendments to ECC 4.12 (Attachment 1) and the
draft amendments to ECDC 16 (Attachment 2), which incorporate the following changes requested by the Commission:
Mr. Lien summarized that the Board is requesting that the document be updated for further review with the following
changes:
ECC 4.12.010.E and ECC 4.12.055.B were eliminated
The “e” was removed from “therefore” in ECC 4.12.040.A.
The word “on” was eliminated from ECC 4.12.055.A.
ECC 4.12.055.A.1 and ECC 4.12.055.A.2 were combined because MMVs and Non-Motorized mobile Vendors
(NMMVs) would be permitted in the same zones.
The word “design” was changed to “designed” in ECC 4.12.010.C.
Language was added in ECC 4.12.55.D to encourage recycling. The first sentence of this provision was changed to read,
“. . . and vendor must provide a refuse container and is encouraged to provide containers for recycling.”
The spelling of word “downtown” was corrected in ECC 4.12.055.A.1.
ECC 4.12.055.L was modified to make it clear that MMV operators do not need to obtain permission from adjacent
property owners when locating on private property, but permission from abutting property owners would be required
Attachment 6Packet Page 116 of 129
DRAFT
Planning Board Minutes
June 13, 2012 Page 4
when locating on a sidewalk within the right-of-way. To clarify concerns raised by Ronnie Morgan at the public
hearing, this provision was changed to read, “The applicant shall submit with his application a copy of the written
approval for the vending site from the property owner when locating on private property. When locating on a sidewalk
within the right-of-way, the applicant shall have written approval for the vending site from the abutting property owner
and/or tenant.”
Board Member Clarke asked if the language would allow MMVs to locate on public properties. Mr. Lien pointed out that
ECC 4.12.055.I would allow street vendors to operate in parks if they have a concession agreement with City of Edmonds.
Board Member Clarke pointed out that there are other public-owned properties that are not “parks” where MMVs could be an
appropriate use such as the Port of Edmonds, the Public Safety Complex, the hospital, schools, etc. He questioned why
MMVs should be prohibited from these locations. He said he would be in favor of expanding the envelope of where MMVs
would be allowed to locate. Mr. Lien responded that it would not be appropriate to allow MMVs to locate in the Public
Safety Complex parking lot on weekdays because the parking area is very busy during when court is in session. However,
MMVs could locate in this parking lot as part of the Saturday Summer Market or some other organized special event.
Mr. Lien explained that ECC 4.12.055.A.1 lists the zones where MMVs would be allowed. The Port property is currently
zoned General Commercial (CG), which is one of the zones where MMVs would be allowed to locate. If the Board wants to
allow MMVS on hospital and other publicly-owned properties, they could do so by amending ECC 4.12.055.A.1 to add
Medical Use (MU) and Public (P) zoning. However, he acknowledged the issue could be more difficult to address for school
properties that are located in residential zones. Board Member Clarke reminded the Board that the Port of Edmonds is in the
process of developing a new Harbor Square Master Plan, and it is likely the master plan will be followed by a request to
rezone the property to some type of mixed-use zoning so that allows residential development. He also reminded the Board
that MMVs would not be allowed to locate in residential zones. Mr. Lien cautioned against creating code language to
address a future potential rezone application. If the Port’s property is rezoned at some point in the future, the Board could
consider amending ECC 4.12 to allow MMVs to locate in the newly created zone.
Board Member Clarke specifically referred to the old Woodway High School site, which has split zoning of residential and
open space. Mr. Lien said that, as currently proposed, MMVs would not be allowed to locate on this property because it is
located in a residential zone. However, the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department is working on plans to
develop the property as a recreational site that would be classified as a park. If this redevelopment occurs, MMVs would be
allowed to operate on the site through a concession agreement.
Mr. Lien explained that the proposed language greatly expands the potential for MMVs to locate in Edmonds, but he
cautioned that adding language to capture each and every possible situation could make the code difficult to interpret and
have a negative impact on the City’s ability to encourage the use in desirable areas. Board Member Clarke expressed his
belief that the code language should be written now to accommodate all potential uses the market will support. Rather than
limiting the use by zone, they could limit the use based on ownership. Regardless of zoning, each public agency could have
the ability to decide whether or not they want to allow MMVs on their property. Mr. Lien reminded the Board that the
original intent was to limit MMVs to business zones. Expanding the use to residential zones has never been part of the
discussion. Again, he said it is impossible to capture each situation, but the proposed language would cover the majority of
MMV requests.
Board Member Clarke asked if MMVs would be allowed on the Sewer Treatment Plan property and the old Public Works
property that is located near the Wade James Theater. Mr. Lien answered that these two properties would be addressed by
ECC 4.12.055.L.1 because they are both owned by the City.
Board Member Ellis asked if the school district determines what uses can occur on their properties. Mr. Lien answered
affirmatively, but added that the uses must still comply with adopted City codes. The same is true for the Port of Edmonds.
Board Member Ellis asked who would be responsible for issuing approval of an MMV to locate on Port property. Mr. Lien
answered that the Port would be treated as a private property owner, and permission from the Port would be required. Once
again, he said a concession agreement from the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department would be required in
order for an MMV to locate on park property.
Packet Page 117 of 129
DRAFT
Planning Board Minutes
June 13, 2012 Page 5
Board Member Reed suggested that, rather than trying to “cherry pick” each zone that could be a problem, a new section
could be added similar to ECC 4.12.055.L.1 that talks about other public-owned properties. This new language could make it
clear that permission from the public entity that owns the property would be required prior to permit approval by the City.
The remainder of the Board concurred. To make the language clearer, Mr. Lien suggested that the first sentence of ECC
4.12.055.L.1 should be changed by adding “is on or” between the words “site” and “abuts.” The Board concurred. They also
agreed that the Medical Use (MU) and Public (P) zones should be added to ECC 4.12.055.A.1.
Board Member Tibbott asked if the proposed language would require an MMV that moves to various locations throughout
the City to obtain a permit for each location. Mr. Lien answered affirmatively and explained that ice cream trucks and other
MMVs that are continually moving would require a peddler’s license from the City. Board Member Tibbott asked if
NMMVs would be allowed to move from location to location without getting a separate permit for each location. Mr. Lien
answered that a permit would be required for each location in which the NMMV remains for more than two hours. He
emphasized no changes have been proposed to the NMMV provisions.
Board Member Ellis referred to ECC 4.12.010.C and asked if there is a provision that outlines what “other goods and
services” would be allowed. He asked if an MMV would be allowed to sell clothing. Mr. Lien recalled that this additional
language was added by the Board at a previous meeting to allow MMVs to sell items other than food. Board Member Ellis
said he is not opposed to allowing MMVs to sell items other than food, but it is important to understand that the proposed
language would allow MMV’s to sell just about anything. Mr. Lien noted that the proposed language does prohibit the sale
of alcoholic beverages. However, he acknowledged there is no language elsewhere in the code that would further limit what
an MMV could sell.
Board Member Ellis said the appeal procedure outlined in ECC 4.12.085 was set up before the language was rewritten to
require approval from the entity that owns a public property. He asked if an MMV operator could appeal a public entity’s
decision to decline their request. Mr. Lien said this provision pertains to business licenses and outlines the process for
solicitor and peddler’s licenses regardless of who owns the property. There would be no appeal process if a property owner
(public or private) and/or tenant denies an MMV operator’s request. The property owner or tenant’s decision would be final.
Board Member Ellis suggested that ECC 4.12.055.J should be amended to make it clear that street vendors are prohibited in
three specific areas: residentially-zoned properties, unzoned properties abutting the residentially zoned areas, and right-of-
way adjacent to or abutting the residentially zoned areas. The Board agreed to change the provision to read,” Street vendors
are prohibited in residentially zoned areas, and unzoned property or right-of-way adjacent to or abutting the residentially
zoned areas.” They agreed to amend ECC 4.12.055.L by deleting the word “within’ after “locating” and by deleting the
words “from the” after “vending site.” They further agreed to amend ECC 4.12.055.A.1 by replacing “CC” with “CG.”
AS THERE WAS NO ONE IN THE AUDIENCE, THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
BOARD MEMBER REED MOVED THAT THE BOARD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF FILE NUMBER AMD
20100012, PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO PORTIONS OF ECDC TITLE 16 TO ALLOW MOTORIZED
MOBILE VENDORS AS PRESENTED BY STAFF AND PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ECC 4.12 AS
PRESENTED BY STAFF AND AMENDED BY THE BOARD AS FOLLOWS:
1. ADD A NEW PROVISION SIMILAR TO ECC 4.12.055.L.1 THAT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESSES OTHER
PUBLIC-OWNED PROPERTIES.
2. CHANGE ECC 4.12.055.L.1 BY ADDING “IS ON OR” BETWEEN THE WORDS “SITE” AND “ABUTS.”
3. CHANGE ECC 4.12.055.A.1 TO ADD THE MEDICAL USE (MU) AND PUBLIC (P) ZONES.
4. CHANGE ECC 4.12.055.J TO READ, “STREET VENDORS ARE PROHIBITED IN RESIDENTIALLY
ZONED AREAS, AND UNZONED PROPERTY OR RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT TO OR ABUTTING THE
RESIDENTIALLY ZONED AREAS.”
5. CHANGE ECC 4.12.055.l BY DELETING THE WORD “WITHIN” AFTER “LOCATING” AND BE
DELETING THE WORDS “FROM THE” AFTER “VENDING SITE.”
6. CHANGE ECC 4.121.055.A.1 BY REPLACING “CC” WITH “CG.”
CHAIR LOVELL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Packet Page 118 of 129
June 26, 2012 – COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT ECC 4.12 Page 1 of 8
CHAPTER 4.12 PEDDLERS, SOLICITORS AND STREET VENDORS
4.12.010 Definitions.
A. “Solicitor” or “peddler” means any person who shall sell, offer for or expose for sale, or who
shall trade, deal or traffic in any goods or services in the city by going from house to house or
from place to place or by indiscriminately approaching individuals.
1. Sales by sample or for future delivery, and executory contracts of sale by solicitors or peddlers
are included; provided, however, that this section shall not be deemed applicable to any salesman
or canvasser who solicits trade from wholesale or retail dealers in the city.
2. Any person who, while selling or offering for sale any goods, services or anything of value,
stands in a doorway, any unenclosed vacant lot, parcel of land, or in any other place not used by
such person as a permanent place of business shall be deemed a solicitor or peddler within the
meaning of this chapter, except as noted in subsection B of this section.
B. “Street vendor” means any person who shall sell food, flowers, nonalcoholic beverages only,
and/or other goods or services from either a motorized or nonmotorized mobile vending unit. , in
the commercially zoned areas of the city of Edmonds, including unzoned property or right-of-
way adjacent to or abutting on commercially zoned areas, shall be deemed a street vendor subject
to the regulations contained in this chapter. The commercially zoned areas are those zoned
Neighborhood Business (BN), Community Business (BC), Planned Business (BP), Commercial
Waterfront (CW); and General Commercial (CC, CG2).
C. “Motorized mobile vending unit” means a truck, van or other motorized vehicle that: 1)
incorporates a kitchen or other food preparation area from which prepared or prepackaged food
may be sold, or 2) is otherwise designed to sell food, flowers, nonalcoholic beverages, and/or
other goods and services allowed by this chapter.
D. “Nonmotorized Mmobile vending unit” means a cart, kiosk or other device capable of being
pushed by one person, with at least two functional wheels and positive wheel-locking devices.
[Ord. 3513 § 1, 2004; Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord. 830 § 1, 1960].
4.12.020 License required.
A. It shall be unlawful for any person to act as solicitor, peddler or street vendor within the
meaning and application of this chapter unless that person or his/her employer shall have first
secured a license in the manner provided in this chapter.
1. Any person who shall sell, deliver or peddle any dairy product, meat, poultry, eel, fish,
mollusk, or shellfish must first obtain a license pursuant to this chapter.
2. No licenses shall be issued or maintained for the sale of poultry or poultry products or meat or
meat products which are adulterated or distributed under unsanitary conditions.
3. No licenses shall be issued for the sale of shellfish unless the vendor can produce a certificate
of compliance as required by RCW 69.30.020.
Attachment 7Packet Page 119 of 129
June 26, 2012 – COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT ECC 4.12 Page 2 of 8
B. All persons acting as a solicitor, peddler or street vendor shall comply with all laws,
ordinances and regulations, including all Snohomish County health department requirements.
[Ord. 3513 § 2, 2004; Ord. 2990 § 1, 1994; Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord. 830 § 2, 1960].
4.12.030 License fees.
The license fees for solicitors, peddlers or street vendors shall be as follows:
A. Investigation Fee. New applications for a solicitor, peddler or street vendor license shall be
accompanied by a nonrefundable investigation fee of $10.00. Except as provided in section B
hereof, this investigation fee shall be tendered only with the initial application of any individual.
B. Annual Fee. On January 1st of each year all solicitor, peddler and street vendor licenses shall
automatically expire and be null and void unless an annual fee of $25.00 is paid to the city clerk;
provided, however, for licenses issued after June 30th of any year, only one-half of the annual
fee shall be required. Any license renewed after June 30th of any year shall be treated as a new
application and subject to the investigation fee. For each mobile vending unit, there shall also be
an annual fee of $200.00. Associated solicitor, peddlers and street vendors, and mobile vending
units operated as an adjunct to an existing licensed business shall pay any fee(s) set forth in
subsection C of this section.
C. Associated Solicitor, Peddler and Street Vendor, and Associated Mobile Vendor Fee. An
annual fee of $8.00 per year per person or unit shall be paid by the following person or unit(s)
licensed:
1. For each additional person soliciting, peddling or vending under a principal applicant's license
issued pursuant to subsection B of this section; and/or
2. For each mobile vending unit operated as an adjunct to an existing licensed business on a site
immediately adjacent to the business and authorized for use pursuant to a street use permit.
The fees provided for by this section shall not be reduced after June 30th as provided for annual
fees in subsection B of this section.
D. Exemptions. The following persons shall be exempt from license fees and applications
required under this chapter:
1. Newspaper carriers;
2. Charitable, religious or nonprofit organizations or corporations which have received tax
exempt status under 26 USC Section 501(c)(3) or other similar civic, charitable or nonprofit
organizations;
3. Peddlers of fruits, vegetables, berries, eggs or any farm produce edibles raised, gathered,
produced or manufactured by such person;
4. A person who, after having been specifically requested by another to do so, calls upon that
other person for the purpose of displaying goods, literature or giving information about any
article, thing, product or service;
5. Notwithstanding the exemptions provided herein, all exempt persons must provide proof of
their exempt status along with photo identification upon request by a prospective customer or
law enforcement officer;
Packet Page 120 of 129
June 26, 2012 – COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT ECC 4.12 Page 3 of 8
6. Exempt persons are exempt only from city business licensing requirements and must comply
with all provisions of law, ordinance and regulations and all applicable Snohomish County health
district requirements. [Ord. 3096 § 1, 1996; Ord. 2990 § 2, 1994; Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord. 2435
§ 4, 1984; Ord. 1619 § 1, 1972; Ord. 830 § 3, 1960].
4.12.040 License application – Information required.
A. Any person, firm or other organization desiring to secure a solicitor's, peddler's or street
vendor's license shall apply therefor in writing to the city clerk, on forms provided by the city,
and such application shall set forth as to each solicitor, peddler or street vendor as the principal
applicant as follows:
1. The name, address and telephone number of the principal applicant, firm or other
organization;
2. In the event the name or address of the applicant has changed within the last two years, each
name and address over the last two-year period preceding the most recent;
3. The nature or character of the goods, wares, merchandise or services to be offered by each
principal applicant;
4. A list of the persons originally contemplating solicitation, peddling or street vending within
the city of Edmonds, and the information required in subsection B of this section as to each;
5. The name, address and telephone number (business and home) of the individual acting as
manager of the principal applicant;
6. Written approval for the vending site from the abutting property owner and/or tenant in
accordance with ECC 4.12.055(L); and
7. Such other information as reasonably required by city officials.
B. For each person soliciting, peddling or street vending within the city of Edmonds pursuant to
a principal applicant and license as required herein, whether acting as an employee, independent
contractor, or otherwise, the following information shall be provided to the city clerk on forms
provided by the city and shall set forth as to each such person the following:
1. His or her name, address and home telephone number;
2. The name, address and telephone number of the person, firm or other organization holding the
principal license;
3. His or her age and general personal description as required by the city;
4. Any and all facts relating to any conviction of crimes as such information may be required by
the city in the application form; and
5. Such other information as reasonably required by city officials.
C. The city clerk shall refer the application to the chief of police, who shall make a criminal
history background investigation of the applicant. Upon completion, the chief of police shall
forward the results of the investigation to the city clerk.
D. If, as a result of the investigation, the applicant is not found to have committed any of the acts
requiring denial as listed below, the city clerk shall, upon payment of the prescribed fee, issue
Packet Page 121 of 129
June 26, 2012 – COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT ECC 4.12 Page 4 of 8
the license to the applicant. The city clerk shall deny the applicant the license if the applicant
has:
1. Committed any act consisting of fraud or misrepresentation;
2. Committed any act which, if committed by a licensee, would be grounds for suspension or
revocation of a license;
3. Within the previous 10 years, been convicted of a misdemeanor or felony directly relating to
his or her fitness to engage in the occupation of peddler, solicitor or street vendor and including,
but not limited to, those misdemeanors and felonies involving moral turpitude, fraud or
misrepresentation;
4. Been charged with a misdemeanor or felony of the type defined in subsection (D)(3) of this
section, and disposition of that charge is still pending;
5. Been refused a license under the provisions of this chapter; provided, however, that any
applicant denied a license under the provisions of this chapter may reapply if and when the
reasons for denial no longer exist; and
6. Made any false or misleading statements in the application.
E. Every peddler shall be required to carry the peddler's license and display it along with photo
identification upon request by a prospective customer or law enforcement officer.
F. The city clerk is authorized to promulgate rules regarding the manner and method of payment,
including a prohibition or regulation of payment by check, and the form of the application. [Ord.
3513 § 3, 2004; Ord. 2990 § 3, 1994; Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord. 1619 § 2, 1972; Ord. 830 § 4,
1960].
4.12.050 Investigation of applicants.
It shall be the duty of the chief of police to investigate each applicant made under ECC 4.12.040,
in which investigation the chief of police shall determine:
A. The genuineness of all credentials presented by the applicant and/or the individual solicitor,
peddler or street vendor and the reliability of the product or services;
B. If the applicant and/or its solicitor, peddler or street vendor has a criminal record;
C. The truth of the facts set forth in the application; and
D. If the applicant or solicitor, peddler or street vendor proposes to engage in a lawful and
legitimate commercial or professional enterprise.
Such investigation must be completed within a reasonable time. [Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord. 830 §
5, 1960].
4.12.055 Street vendor requirements.
Any person seeking a permit for a street vendor license under the definition of this chapter shall
comply with the following requirements:
A. Prior to issuance of any street vendor permit, the applicant shall submit and receive approval
by the architectural design board for the design of the mobile vending cart and any signage.
Packet Page 122 of 129
June 26, 2012 – COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT ECC 4.12 Page 5 of 8
BA. Mobile vending units may be allowed to operate within the following commercially zoned
areas including unzoned property or right-of-way adjacent to or abutting commercially zoned
areas:
1. Motorized and Nonmotorized mobile vending units: Neighborhood Business (BN),
Community Business (BC), Planned Business (BP), Downtown Business Zones (BD1, BD2,
BD3, BD4 and BD5), Commercial Waterfront (CW), General Commercial (CG, CG2), Firdale
Village Mixed-Use (FVMU), Medical Use (MU) and Public Use (P).
B. In addition to the licensing requirements of this chapter, any street vendor shall be required to
obtain a street use permit. Application fees for street use permits are those established by the
city council by resolution in its sole legislative discretion. Application fees shall be paid to city
prior to issuance of any permit.
C. All advertising shall be placed on the nonmotorized mobile vending unit and will not be
allowed on the street or sidewalk. Maximum sign area allowed shall be 10 square feet.
D. The vending site shall be kept clean and orderly at all times, and the vendor must provide a
refuse container and is encouraged to provide containers for recycling. No portion of a vendor's
inventory, sales equipment, or any other structure or equipment used in the sales or solicitation
process shall be left overnight upon any unenclosed portion of any lot or site within the city, nor
upon any public street or right-of-way. without the issuance of a street use permit for a mobile
vending unit issued pursuant to ECC 4.12.030(B) and (C).
E. The city reserves the right to limit the number of vending permit sites in any given area of the
downtown. The development services director shall determine the allowable number of street
vendors and shall exercise this discretion based upon the needs of the public, diversity of
products offered for sale, the smooth flow of pedestrian and vehicular traffic and other similar
considerations.
F. If located on a sidewalk, a minimum clearance of five feet shall be maintained by any street
vendor.
G. Street vendors shall not locate within that portion of improved street right-of-way designed
for vehicular traffic or parking. Street vendors seeking to locate in improved street rights-of-way
or on sidewalks shall be oriented toward pedestrian traffic movement or safety. Any application
to locate a street vendor in the street right-of-way shall require approval by the city traffic
engineer and shall not interfere in any way with vehicular or pedestrian traffic or safety.
H. No mechanical audio or noise making devices and no hawking is allowed. Hawking is the
loud, repeated oral solicitation of business by the vendor or an assistant.
I. Street vendors are prohibited in parksStreet vendors may operate in parks if they have a
concession agreement with the City of Edmonds to operate on a specific park property.
J. Street vendors are prohibited and in residentially zoned areas, and unzoned property or right-
of-way adjacent to or abutting the residentially zoned areas.
J. Street vendors are prohibited from occupying parking spaces on city property or in improved
city rights-of-way reserved for vehicular traffic, parking or other transportation.
Packet Page 123 of 129
June 26, 2012 – COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT ECC 4.12 Page 6 of 8
K. All street vendors shall comply with all applicable Snohomish County health district
requirements.
L. The applicant shall submit with his application a copy of the written approval for the vending
site from the abutting property owner and/or tenant property owner when locating on private
property. When locating on a sidewalk within the right-of-way, the applicant shall have written
approval for the vending site from the abutting property owner and/or tenant. In the event that
the property owner or tenant shall disagree, the property owner's decision shall be final.
1. In the event that the proposed site is on or abuts property owned by the city of Edmonds, the
applicant shall be required to obtain the city's approval. Approvals relating to park property shall
be handled as a request to let a concession under the terms of this chapter. Request for sites
abutting all other public land owned by the city shall be forwarded to the city council for their
review and approval.
2. In the event that the proposed site is on or abuts publically owned property not owned by the
City of Edmonds, the applicant shall be required to obtain approval from the public entity that
owns the property.
23. In the event that the site for which approval is sought abuts vacant land, the applicant shall
make reasonable written attempts to secure the approval of the property owner. If the applicant is
unable to do so, the city may accept written proof of such attempts and issue a conditional
permit. If a complaint is later received from the owner of the land, the license shall be revoked.
The granting of such a conditional license shall vest no right in the applicant.
M. When locating within a parking lot of a private location, the applicant shall:
1. Identify the location the mobile vending unit will be located and provide a circulation plan.
The location and circulation plan shall require approval by the city traffic engineer to ensure the
vending unit will not interfere in any way with vehicular or pedestrian traffic or safety.
2. Demonstrate that the site will meet the parking requirements of ECDC 17.50 excluding the
parking space(s) occupied by the mobile vending unit.
N. The maximum permissible size for any nonmotorized mobile vending unit shall be:
1. Thirty square feet for sidewalk locations; and
2. Fifty square feet for locations within the street or other public right-of-way or when located on
private property.
3. In no event shall any nonmotorized mobile vending unit exceed 10 feet in length. [Ord. 3513
§ 4, 2004; Ord. 3270 § 1, 1999; Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985].
O. During special events held within the City where food providers are required to pay a fee to
participate (Such as the Edmonds Art Festival and Taste of Edmonds), no mobile vending units
may be allowed to operate within one-quarter (¼) mile of the special event.
4.12.060 Issuance of license – Expiration.
The chief of police shall determine, within a reasonable time, from his investigation, that the
facts set forth in the application are true, that the purpose of the applicant and its solicitors,
Packet Page 124 of 129
June 26, 2012 – COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT ECC 4.12 Page 7 of 8
peddlers or street vendors is to engage in a lawful and legitimate commercial or professional
enterprise.
Having determined these facts, he shall then approve the application and the city clerk may issue
the license applied for. Such license shall expire on the 31st day of December of the year in
which such license has been issued. Except as hereinafter provided, no license shall be issued
until the conclusion of the aforesaid investigation. [Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord. 830 § 6, 1960].
4.12.065 Soliciting and peddling restrictions.
All licenses issued pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to the following time and location
restrictions:
A. Fourth of July Fireworks Display. For the purpose of crowd and traffic control on the Fourth
of July, all soliciting after 6:00 p.m. within one mile of the official fireworks display shall take
place only within the confines of the fireworks viewing area as designated by the chief of police
on the Civic Center playfield.
B. No peddler or solicitor shall engage or attempt to engage in the business of peddling at any
home, residence, apartment complex or business that prominently displays a “No Peddlers” or
“No Solicitors” sign or any other similar sign that communicates the occupants' desire to not be
contacted by peddlers.
C. No peddler or solicitor shall engage in the business of peddling between the hours of 8:00
p.m. and 9:00 a.m. [Ord. 3513 § 5, 2004; Ord. 2990 § 4, 1994; Ord. 2370 § 1, 1983].
D. Motorized and nonmotorized mobile vending units which are located directly adjacent to
residentially-zoned property may not operate between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.
Motorized and nonmotorized mobile vending units not located directly adjacent to residentially-
zoned property may not operate between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6 a.m.
4.12.070 Carrying of license required.
Such license shall be carried at all times by each solicitor, peddler or street vendor for whom
issued, when soliciting, canvassing or street vending in the city of Edmonds, and shall be
exhibited by any such solicitor, peddler or street vendor whenever and wherever he or she shall
be requested to do so by any police officer or any person solicited. [Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord.
830 § 7, 1960].
4.12.080 Revocation of license.
Such license may be revoked by the city of Edmonds for the violation by either the employer or
the solicitor, peddler or street vendor of any of the ordinances of the city of Edmonds. The city of
Edmonds may also revoke a license for a street vendor under the following conditions:
A. Failure to comply with the terms of this chapter;
B. Misrepresentation of facts in the licensee's application for the necessary permits;
C. Failure to comply with the terms of a valid street use permit;
D. Creation of a hazard to the public health or safety; or
E. As otherwise provided herein. [Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord. 830 § 8, 1960].
4.12.085 Appeal procedure.
Packet Page 125 of 129
June 26, 2012 – COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT ECC 4.12 Page 8 of 8
A. Whenever the city clerk determines that there is cause for denying any license application or
revoking any license issued pursuant to this chapter, the clerk shall notify the person holding the
license using at least one of the following methods: 1) registered or 2) certified mail, return
receipt requested or 3) personal service on the licensee. Notice mailed to the address on the
license shall be deemed received three days after mailing. The notice shall specify the grounds
for the denial or revocation of a license.
B. The applicant or licensee may appeal the decision of the city clerk to deny or revoke a license
by filing a written notice of appeal to the city council within 48 hours of the city clerk's decision.
C. Upon timely receipt of the notice of appeal, the city clerk shall set a date for hearing the
appeal, which shall occur within 10 days of receipt of the appeal. The city clerk shall mail notice
of the date of the hearing to the applicant or licensee at least five days prior to the hearing date.
D. The hearing shall be de novo. The city council may affirm, reverse or modify the city clerk's
decision.
E. The decision of the city council shall be final. Any person desiring to appeal must file an
appropriate action in Snohomish County Superior Court within 14 days of the city council's
decision. [Ord. 2990 § 5, 1994].
4.12.090 Purchase orders – Form and content.
All orders taken by license solicitors, peddlers or street vendors shall be in writing, in duplicate,
stating the name as it appears on the license, the address of both the solicitor, peddler or street
vendor and his employer, the terms thereof, and the amount paid in advance, and one copy shall
be given to the purchaser. [Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord. 830 § 9, 1960].
4.12.100 Penalties.
Any person or persons who violate or fail to comply with any of the provisions of this chapter
shall upon conviction of said violation be punished as provided in ECC 5.50.020. [Ord. 2536 § 1,
1985; Ord. 1619 § 3, 1972; Ord. 830 § 10, 1960].
4.12.110 Severability.
Should any section, clause or provision of this chapter be declared by the courts to be invalid, the
same shall not affect the validity of the chapter as a whole, or any part thereof, other than the part
declared to be invalid. [Ord. 2536 § 1, 1985; Ord. 830 § 11, 1960].
Packet Page 126 of 129
City Council June 26, 2012 Work Session Draft Page 1 of 2
Commercial and Business Zones Operating Restrictions
Chapter 16.43 BD – Downtown Business
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;
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.
9. Motorized and Nonmotorized Mobile vending units meeting the criteria of Chapter 4.12
ECC.
B. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Performance Standards. [Ord.
3700 § 1, 2008].
Chapter 16.50 BC – Community Business
16.50.030 Operating restrictions.
A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed
building, except:
1. Public 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. Motorized and Nonmotorized Mobile vending units meeting the criteria of Chapter 4.12
ECC.
B. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Performance Standards. [Ord.
3627 § 2, 2007; Ord. 3320 § 3, 2000; Ord. 3147 § 1, 1997].
Attachment 8Packet Page 127 of 129
City Council June 26, 2012 Work Session Draft Page 2 of 2
Chapter 16.55 CW – Commercial Waterfront
16.55.030 Operating restrictions.
A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed
building except for:
1. Petroleum products storage and distribution;
2. Sales, storage, repair and limited building of boats;
3. Public parks;
4. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC.
5. Motorized and Nonmotorized Mobile vending units meeting the criteria of Chapter 4.12
ECC.
B. Nuisances. All uses shall comply with Chapter 17.60 ECDC, Performance Standards. [Ord.
3320 § 4, 2000].
Chapter 16.60 CG – General Commercial
16.60.040 Operating restrictions.
A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely enclosed
building, except the following:
1. Public utilities;
2. Off-street parking and loading areas;
3. Drive-in business;
4. Secondary uses permitted under ECDC 16.60.010(B);
5. Limited outdoor display of merchandise meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.65 ECDC;
6. Community-oriented open air markets or seasonal farmers markets;
7. Outdoor dining meeting the criteria of Chapter 17.75 ECDC. [Ord. 3635 § 1, 2007].
8. Motorized and Nonmotorized Mobile vending units meeting the criteria of Chapter 4.12
ECC.
Packet Page 128 of 129
1
Lien, Kernen
From:Brooke Baker [bbandrb@gmail.com]
Sent:Wednesday, June 13, 2012 3:42 PM
To:Lien, Kernen
Subject:MOBILE VENDING TRUCKS HEARING TONIGHT
To: Whom it may Concern re Food Trucks in the Downtown Core
From: Randy and Brooke Baker
It has come to our attention, rather inadvertently, that tonight is the public hearing re mobile vendors in
Edmonds' downtown core. We heard about this several weeks ago, and are dismayed to learn about it. We are
of the opinion that most business owners do not know this is happening.
How many places are there to eat in the downtown core? We don't know the exact number, but we do know
there are more and more each year. In spite of the economic realities of our times, entrepeneurs continue to
gamble that this is a good place to open a place to sell food and drink. There are all kinds of options on each
and every block in spite of the high rents in this area.
Each of us restaurateurs is faced with rising food costs, rising payrolls (we have the highest minimum wage in
the country after all), and heavy competition for diners from all the options. Happy hours, early birds, coupons,
groupons, frequent dining clubs, are all discounts to lure the cost conscious, which is almost everyone these
days. To add nomadic entrepeneurs who have no high rents, or substantial staffs, or large utility bills, or
commitments to this community as the rest of us do is simply unfair competition. And how about the
compounding of parking issues that are already stretched thin in the core? And have you thought about what
these trucks may look like? Some nice, others not so nice, but how would you regulate that, and their various
signage too. We in the Edmonds' brick and mortar eateries are governed by very specific rules on signage
heighths, size, etc. There is no way that the monies gained from permitting these nomadic vending trucks would
offset the inevitable negative consequences.
Understand also that there are many employees that are dependent on the survival of the local restaurants, it is
already difficult enough to to keep full time employees. Food trucks will unquestionably have an impact on the
survivability of our employees as well as our core business.
We have a commitment to this city, we are here here for the long haul. During dufficuly times we cannot
simply drive away and relocate. Food trucks have no commitment, and are here to grab whatever they can for
as long as it lasts and then they will disappear.
Thanks in advance for carefully considering whether this is truly for the benefit of the community at large.
Sincerely yours,
Randy and Brooke Baker
Chanterelle
Attachment 9Packet Page 129 of 129