2021-05-11 City Council - Full Agenda-28641.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
o Agenda
Edmonds City Council
V,j Hv REGULAR MEETING - VIRTUAL/ONLINE
VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS WEB PAGE,
HTTP://EDMONDSWA.IQM2.COM/CITIZENS/DEFAULT.ASPX, EDMONDS, WA
98020
MAY 11, 2021, 7:00 PM
DUE TO THE CORONAVIRUS, MEETINGS ARE HELD VIRTUALLY USING THE ZOOM MEETING
PLATFORM. TO JOIN, COMMENT, VIEW, OR LISTEN TO THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN
ITS ENTIRETY, PASTE THE FOLLOWING INTO A WEB BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART
PHONE:
HTTPS://ZOOM. US/J/95798484261
OR JOIN BY PHONE: US: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261
PERSONS WISHING TO PROVIDE AUDIENCE COMMENTS USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE
ARE INSTRUCTED TO RAISE A VIRTUAL HAND TO BE RECOGNIZED. PERSONS WISHING TO PROVIDE
AUDIENCE COMMENTS BY DIAL -UP PHONE ARE INSTRUCTED TO PRESS *9 TO RAISE A HAND.
WHEN PROMPTED, PRESS *6 TO UNMUTE.
IN ADDITION TO ZOOM, REGULAR COUNCIL MEETINGS BEGINNING AT 7:00 PM ARE STREAMED
LIVE ON THE COUNCIL MEETING WEBPAGE, COMCAST CHANNEL 21, AND ZIPLY CHANNEL 39.
"WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE ORIGINAL INHABITANTS OF THIS PLACE, THE SDOHOBSH (SNOHOMISH)
PEOPLE AND THEIR SUCCESSORS THE TULALIP TRIBES, WHO SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL HAVE
HUNTED, FISHED, GATHERED, AND TAKEN CARE OF THESE LANDS. WE RESPECT THEIR
SOVEREIGNTY, THEIR RIGHT TO SELF-DETERMINATION, AND WE HONOR THEIR SACRED SPIRITUAL
CONNECTION WITH THE LAND AND WATER. - CITY COUNCIL LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ROLL CALL
PRESENTATION
1. 2020 Public Defender's Office Annual Report (30 min)
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
Edmonds City Council Agenda
May 11, 2021
Page 1
1. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of April 27, 2021
2. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2021
3. Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
4. Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Lynnwood Honda
5. Approve Settlement Agreement for Dayton Street Pump Station Project
8. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. Update on Development Activities (25 min)
2. Comprehensive Plan Performance Review - Presentation (20 min)
3. Process for Reviewing Housing Commission Recommendations (40 min)
9. COUNCIL COMMENTS
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
ADJOURN
Edmonds City Council Agenda
May 11, 2021
Page 2
4.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/11/2021
2020 Public Defender's Office Annual Report
Staff Lead: Emily Wagener, for Kathleen Kyle, SCPDA
Department: Human Resources
Preparer: Emily Wagener
Background/History
The City contracts for public defender services with Snohomish County Public Defender Association
(SCPDA). Each year, the public defender's office provides a presentation and an annual report to Council.
Staff Recommendation
None.
Narrative
SCPDA is providing a presentation along with a report for 2020 services. The 2020 report is attached.
Attachments:
2020 Edmonds Year in Review ppt
SCPDA Annual Report to Edmonds 2020
Packet Pg. 3
320
F
DefE
n
r
PUBLIC pFqN4)FR
4.1.a
Packet Pg. 4
Fa
Agenda
COVID year in review
Review insights
Criminal law updates
44
all the rig that an accused person has, the right to
be re sented by co el is by far the most pervasive for
it affects hi bility to asse ny other rights he may
have."
United States a Cronic, 466 U.S.
654 (1981
4.1.a
�'�mtsTiKKOI1IlI
R
c
c
Q
a�
O
L
d
d
IL
0
N
O
N
N
C
•L
i
C0
G
W
0
N
O
N
C
0
E
t
U
fC
Q
Packet Pg. 7
Use of the Snohomish County Jail
0
.(i
MI-W-
ket Pg. 8
1% . W Am
k.
14
1 F 1' 1 ''7 M-P I
ORRECT )N
Social Media Campaign for PIPE for people in jail
Access to PPE
Edmonds Municipal Court led local judicial efforts
Effective May 13, 2020, the Edmonds Municipal
Court will be using ZOOM video conferencing
for all court hearings.
PUBLIC OBSERVE LIVESTREAM OF COURT HEARINGS
https://www.y utube.com/channel/UCA6 B5adYD56g56AMnUxYzw
'Aq
I
L
0
M
CL
o
C.4
rift Q
"9697
W%w4j,
W- PW F
w
O
O
CN
Packet Pg. 11
if
2020 Public
Defenders
Colin Patrick &
Daniel Snyder
700
600
61iI0,
400
300
200
MI
El
Cases Assigned By Year
621
2017 2018 2019 2020
Packet Pg. 14
200
I :1
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Q I
2020 Assignments by Quarter
Q2
2020 Cases
r• �
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Comparing 2019 to 2020 by Quarter
Ql Q2 Q3 Q4
2019 Cases i2020 Cases
Top Six Case Types by Quarter
DUI
Theft
DWLS 3
DV
Order Violation
■ Q 1 2020 ■ Q2 2020 Q3 2020 ■ Q4 2020�7
50
all
30
Of
10
n
Comparing 2019 to 2020 by Case
Type by Quarter
Q 12019 Q2 2019 Q3 2019 Q4 2019 Q 12020 Q2 2020 Q3 2020 Q4 2020
DWLS 3 Theft PDP DUI DV .a Court Order Violation
Packet Pg. 19
30
25
20
15
10
Ql
Investigation Requests by Quarter
QZ
Data trends related to COVID Operations
Increased workloads
Trial suspensions -April to July 2020, November
2020 to May 2021
Fewer bench warrants
Re -visiting cases in bench warrant status
Operational izing E-File and other process changes
Ability to meet with client confidentially
Packet Pg. 21
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
Impact of COVID & DWLS 3 Resolution
Reduced number of DWLS 3 cases
DWLS 3 Cases by Year
2019
2020
Other workload measures
330
320
310
300
290
280
270
260
600
500
400
300
200
100
111
Comparing 2019 to 2020 Probation
Compliance Review Hearings
318
285
Comparing 2019 to 2020
Bench Warrants
535
394
2019
2020
Packet Pg. 23
4.1.a
z
Packet Pg. 24
Em-
1. Trial Skills — Theory of a Case 1.9.20
2. Interacting with Mentally III Clients 1.10.20
3. Trial Skills — Deselecting Your Jury
4. Trial Skills — Deselecting Your Jury (Practice) 1.30.20
11. Trial Skills — Impeachment (Practice) 6.4.20
12. Trial Skills — Closing Argument 6.12.20
13. Trial Skills — Closing Argument (Practice) 6.18.20
18 Continuing Legal
cation Classes
5. Trial Skills— Opening Statement 1.31.20 14.-NA3BI Post -Adjudication Representation 6.25.20
6. What You Need to Know about SVP 2.11.20
15. An Appell to Perspective on Litigating in Courts
7. Trial Skills — Opening Statement (Practice) 2.27.20 of Limited Ju ' diction 7.10.20
8. Trial Skills — Cross Examination: Advancing the Defense
Theory 2.28.20
9. Trial Skills — Cross Examination: Advancing the Defense
Theory (Practice) 3.12.20
10. Trial Skills — Impeachment 3.13.20
16-.--E hics Basics for New-Erlploye
17. Seconds Trauma 11.13.20
18. VRAG-R in NGRI Cases 12.7.20
11.2.20
I
ket Pg. 25
1. April 24 - COVID Operations
2. May 8 — Question & Answer with Human Resources
3. May 15 — Question & Answer with the Director
4. May 29 — Presentation from 403(b) provider, Principal Financial Group
5. June 18 — Question & Answer with Rotation Lead Peggie McCarthie
6. July 9 — Presentation from Snohomish County Legal Services Director Chris Graves
7. August 24 — Homelessiness in' Snohomish County
16 S..CPDA Coffee Breaks
8. August 13 —Discussion with Appellate Counsel Nancy Collins -and the decision in State v. Jackson
9. August 27 - Farewell to Valued Attorney
10. September 24 — Presentation from Collective Justices Restorative Justice-kactices
11. October 8 — Discussion about Bail Bonds Practices with SC Investigator Ty Cigit`�
12. October 15 — Presentation from Public Health Professional Cora NaIN on Infectious Disea
13. October 22 — Overview of Court Systems
14. November 13 - Farewell to Valued Attorney
15. November 19 - Presentation from 403(b) provider, Principal Financial Group, Retirement' Wellness PI i
16. December 30 — Overview of Case Assignment Management Packet Pg. 26
Criminal Law Updates
State v. Jackson
July 16, 2020
Mandatory shackling /restraints of people appearing in -custody
during court proceedings
Right to appear and defend in person includes the " right to
use not only his mental but his physical faculties unfettered,
unless some impelling necessity demands restraint."
State. Gelinas
15 Wn.App. 484 (2020)
"You must appear at all scheduled hearings or a warrant will be issued for your arrest."
Blanket mandate is inconsistent with state rules and therefore invalid.
Revised Clear Direction about Mandatory Appearances:
I understand that I cannot waive my client's appearance for:
•Arraignments or plea hearings for the following charges
(defendant must appear in person): DUI/Physical Control,
Minor Driving After Consuming Alcohol, Stalking,
Domestic -Violence -related charges, and any charges with
sexual motivation
•Compliance review hearings
•Trial confirmations and trials
•When otherwise ordered by the court
Packet Pg. 30
4.1.a
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that based upon the agreement of the parties, the warrant is recalled and
quashed.
The Court finds good cause to require the defendant's presence at a pretrial reset hearing on May 26,
2021 at 9:00 a.m. The Court will send a summons to the defendant once the City files an address
certification. The defendant may appear in person, remotely, or through counsel.
Signed on: 51312021
1 14e `.Kry i -ta
o:
•L
0
E
w
0
N
O
N
+.i
C
d
E
t
t�
a
Packet Pg. 31
State v. Blake
Fe
Simple drug posse
ry 25, 2021
April 20--,-2021
scion laws ar
constitutional.
I
ket Pg. 32
Pierce et al. v. DOL, April 80, 2021: RCW 46:20.289 is
unconstitutional as applied to individuals who are indigent.
ESSB 5226: "Failure to pay a traffic infraction will no longer resul
in the suspension or revocation of a person's driver's license
I
ket Pg. 33
'0411 pLJAI 1( 01)I%,'
� v
o
r00'.10to 0. 41
PREPARED BY
KATHLEEN KYLE, DIRECTOR
SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER
ASSOCIATION
2722 COLBY AVE, SUITE 200
EVERETT, WA 98201
(425) 339-6300, EXT. 210
KKYLE@SNOCOPDA.ORG IPacket Pg. 34
c
m
E
u
a
Q
4.1.b
SCPDA's mission is to provide the highest quality of representation for
people facing loss of liberty pursuant to civil and criminal laws and who
cannot afford to hire an attorney. We serve an indigent population. In
Edmonds, the services provided are solely criminal defense services.
Edmonds Municipal Court conducts the financial screening to determine
eligibility to be appointed a SCPDA public defender.
In 2020, the attorneys assigned to Edmonds Municipal Court were Daniel
Snyder and Colin Patrick.
Currently, the attorneys assigned to Edmonds Municipal Court are Sonya
Daisley-Harrison, Tamara Comeau, and Maya Titova. Christine Olson
has been the Edmonds Municipal Court Attorney Supervisor in 2020 and
2021.
SCPDA mission is guided by Indigent Defense Standards adopted by the
Washington State Bar Association (WSBA). Other resources that guide
quality public defense include the Performance Guidelines for Criminal
Defense Performance, Washington statutes, case law, court rules, WSBA
Rules of Professional Conduct, and American Bar Association
publications.
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020
Packet Pg. 35
4.1.b
SCPDA produces monthly reports for the City of Edmonds
Public Defender Assessor, Bob Boruchowitz.
Mr. Boruchowitz conducts an independent assessment of
SCPDA services based on the monthly reports and conference
calls, his own court observations, interviewing judge Coburn
and now judge Rivera, as well as listening to audio recordings
of court hearings.
SCPDA staff includes attorneys, administrative professionals,
IT professionals, investigators, and social workers.
F
W
r
VN
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020 Packet Pg. 36
4.1.b
2020
In 2020, Edmonds Municipal
Court appointed SCPDA as
counsel in 557 pre-trial cases,
2 appeals to Snohomish
County Superior Court, and 4
probation -only cases. This
reflects a modest reduction in
cases from prior years, likely
an impact of COVID-19.
237
DISMISSALS
During the year, SCPDA attorneys initiated 74 defense
investigation requests, referred 8 cases for immigration
consultation services, and submitted 10 social worker requests.
These services help improve outcomes and demonstrate quality
services. Included in these outcomes were 237 Dismissals.
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020 Packet Pg. 37
4.1.b
r
Q
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020 Packet Pg. 38
4.1.b
r
Q
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020 Packet Pg. 39
4.1.b
Current Criminal justice Issues
In prior years, the top three case types, compromising more than
50% of the referrals, were driving while license suspended third
degree, third degree theft, and possession of drug paraphernalia.
In 2020, the top three case types shifted to third degree theft
(20%), driving while license suspended third degree (17%) and
Domestic Violence (12%). One contributing factor was the City's
resolution to divert criminal cases by issuing driving infractions
in lieu of driving while license suspended charges. This policy
change reduced the number of cases from 165 in 2019 to 94 in
2020. COVID was another factor.
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020 Packet Pg. 40
4.1.b
Current Criminal justice Issues
There was an increase in the number of Domestic Violence cases,
from 49 to 2019 to 65 in 2020. This led to a greater increase in
percentage of the caseload due to the modest reduction in total
cases assigned, from 7% to 12% of the total cases.
There is also a notable reduction in DUI cases from 76 cases in
2019 to 57 in 2020. This reduction may be attributable, partially,
to the Governor's Stay Home orders. More generally, DUI
prosecutions are directly tied to DUI enforcement patrols.
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020 Packet Pg. 41
4.1.b
Current Criminal justice Issues
DWLS III
The Washington Legislature delivered ESSB 5226, concerning
driving while license suspended third degree, to the Governor
for signature.
Currently, driving while license suspended third degree is most
charged crime in Washington. Having a valid driver's license is
a necessity of life to many people to work and to transport their
families.
Implementation of ESSB 5226 will make an estimated one
hundred thousand people become eligible to get their driver's
licenses back if they pay a $75 fee. If signed, full
implementation is an 18-month plan.
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020 Packet Pg. 42
4.1.b
Current Criminal justice Issues
DWLS III
The bill permits the Department of Licensing to suspend a
driver's license if a person does not appear for a court hearing
on a traffic infraction. This is often referred to as "failure to
appear." Reform advocates oppose the non-appearance
provision. Fragile social -economic status is at the root of many
reasons for non -appearances in court just as fragile social -
economic status is the reason for the inability to pay fines.
While ESSB 5226 will likely increase the number of licensed
drivers, estimates of the non-appearance provision will cause
20,000 people per year to lose their license due to a
nonappearance in court.
There was a recent summary judgment ruling in the class action
lawsuit against the Washington State Department of Licensing,
Pierce et al, v. DOL. The lawsuit challenged the law that
permitted the Department of Licensing to suspend a driver's
license for failure to pay a traffic infraction without an
individualized inquiry on the person's ability to the infraction
costs. The court held that RCW 46.20.289 is unconstitutional as
applied to individuals who are indigent. The ruling was
announced on April 30, 2021 and the order permits further
relief upon motion of either party. The impact of this decision is
yet to be determined. Advocates hope that it will expedite
providing opportunities for people to get re -licensed.
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020 Packet Pg. 43
4.1.b
2020
SCPDA is a Learning Organization
In 2020, SCPDA hosted 18 in-house/virtual Continuing Legal
Education (CLE) courses.
These included CLE's on Trial Skills (Case Theory, jury
Deselection, Opening Statements, Cross Examination,
Impeachment, Closing Arguments), as well as CLE's on Ethical
Issues, Working with Mentally Ill Clients, Secondary Trauma, and
Appellate Issues.
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020 Packet Pg. 44
4.1.b
2020
A Data -Informed Organization
SCPDA is also a data -informed organization and we transitioned
our client file database system in October 2020. This was a feat in
remote operations. SCPDA adopted the case types utilized by the
Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC.) AOC
was established in 1957 to support Washington's non -unified
courts to "promote the efficient administration of justice." AOC
complies statewide statistics annually. This alignment in data
collection will permit future comparisons and may reveal further
insights.
so
40 34
29 3039
29.......................i6........................
33
10 -
p.................
IXJI Other Traffic
■ AOC ■ SCPDA
No Traffic
Snohomish County Public Defender
Association Annual Report 2020
Packet Pg. 45
7.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/11/2021
Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of April 27, 2021
Staff Lead: Scott Passey
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
N/A
Attachments:
04-27-2021 Draft Council Meeting Minutes
Packet Pg. 46
7.1.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
April 27, 2021
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Susan Paine, Council President
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Laura Johnson, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Serv. Dir
Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Mgr.
Dave Turley, Finance Director
Emily Wagener, Human Resources Analyst
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst
The Edmonds City Council virtual online meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. The
meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Distelhorst read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement: "We acknowledge
the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip
Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect
their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the
land and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present, participating remotely.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
PAINE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
ADD COUNCILMEMBER OLSON'S REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST AS ITEM 7.8. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
MOVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 6.4, CIVIC FIELD - REJECT ALL BIDS, TO THE MAIN
AGENDA AS ITEM 7.0.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 1
Packet Pg. 47
7.1.a
Council President Paine raised a point of order, stating the Council had not reached the Consent Agenda
yet. City Clerk Scott Passey stated a change to the Consent Agenda was appropriate under Approval of the
Agenda.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED TO HAVE ITEM 6.4 FOLLOW THE CONSENT
AGENDA TO MAINTAIN THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA, AND IF THAT WAS NOT POSSIBLE,
PLACE IT ON THE AGENDA AS ITEM 7.9
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested to avoid confusion, a motion to remove Item 6.4 from the
Consent Agenda and a second motion regarding where to put it in Agenda Item 7. Council President Paine
agreed.
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
FRALEY-MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Councilmember Olson relayed her understanding any Councilmember could remove something from the
Consent Agenda and it was not subject to a vote. City Attorney Jeff Taraday agreed, explaining this is the
problem with mixing the pulling of an item with the placement of it somewhere else on the agenda. Pulling
an item from the Consent Agenda is unilateral, the placement on the agenda is subject to Council vote.
Mayor Nelson suggested a motion to place it on the agenda as Item 7.0
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas raised a point of personal privilege. Councilmember K. Johnson said a
personal privilege is related to comfort items like the heat in the room. Mr. Passey said Councilmember
Fraley-Monillas may be referring to a point of information which is a question or request for information.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if a vote superseded pulling an item off Consent because according
to Robert's Rules of Order, a motion of the body is always appropriate. She asked if the vote would stand.
Mr. Passey said a Councilmember has an absolute right to remove something from the Consent Agenda and
any change to the agenda whether to the Consent Agenda or the regular agenda, should be done under
Approval of the Agenda. Typically if there are no objections, the Mayor takes items removed from the
Consent Agenda following approval of the Consent Agenda and if there is an objection to that process, the
Council votes.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled former -Mayor Earling would state if there is no objection; clearly
in this case there was an objection because there was a vote and no one said anything prior to the vote.
Procedurally it seems if the body votes, the decision should reflect the vote, not what has been done
historically.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED TO PULL ITEM 6.4 FROM THE CONSENT
AGENDA AND MOVE IT TO ITEM 7.9. AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments.
Linda Ferkingstad, Edmonds, explained they purchased a densely treed acre in 2017 because they like
trees. They met with the City to divide the property into three lots for them and their then-81 year old
parents. At the advice of City planning, they gave a portion of the property away to a critical area, which
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 2
Packet Pg. 48
7.1.a
extended the process two years. They attended a preapplication meeting in February 2019 and as required
obtained architects, surveyors, geotechs, and arborists at a cost of $100,000 to date. The only buildable
areas are where 24" and larger trees are concentrated and will have to be removed to build their homes, just
as trees were removed to build other homes in Edmonds. They had intended to retain close to 50% of the
over 100 trees, exceeding the 30% retention requirements. Edmonds will still fine them $200,000 to
$400,000 for the value of the trees, almost as much as they paid for the property. Potential buyers will factor
the new tree ordinance into offers for properties in Edmonds, lowering property values by the value of the
trees. Edmonds City Council has devalued their property by $200,000 to $400,000 for the supposed value
of their own trees.
Ms. Ferkingstad continued, the taking of property value without compensation is against the 5th and 14th
amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The ordinance raises the cost of housing for existing property owners
with tees in Edmonds, a high density area. The likelihood of selling their property and covering the costs
they have already incurred is low. With this fine, it will cost at least $500,000 in professional fees and fines
in addition to what they paid for the property before they can begin building their homes. Edmonds City
Council also delayed building with moratoriums on applications and tree cutting during a housing crisis
while building costs are soaring. Since the application moratorium, the cost of a standard 8' 2x4 has gone
up from $3 to $12, a sheet of plywood has increased from $18 to $60. Building a home for their now 86-
year old parents without far exceeding market value is nearly impossible. Due to high fines, the ordinance
will force more people to build outside Edmonds; that may be the goal but it will also encourage urban
sprawl and raise the potential of global warming. After all we've lost during the pandemic, the loss of our
time invested, property value and potential earnings is devastating.
Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig, Edmonds, the appointment schedule for the Planning Board, per City
code, has served the City well for 40 years. She encouraged the Council to retain the code and not accept
any misrepresentation of it. Historical records of the Planning Board's roster match the integrity of the code
in the sample years of 1995, 1996, 1997 and 2011. Each roster states December 3 1 ' as the last day of the
term and cites the authority of EMC 10.40. The informal roster of the Planning Department should be put
back on course with the code appointment schedule because it is not broken. Alarm was raised last fall
when four members were up for reappointment at the same time, Positions 1, 5, 6 and the alternate, the
result of a clerical mistake in the Planning Department's informal roster. Position 1 had fallen out of
compliance with the code appointment schedule; Positions 5 and 6 were administered correctly and the
alternate situation remedied at a January Council meeting. The typical appointment to the Planning Board
is initially as an alternate and the stated date is the City Council confirmation. Its four-year term ends on
December 315t
Ms. Nordling Rubenkonig continued, the alternate is usually the only position that the Mayor and City
Council appoint and confirm due to the alternate progressing into a vacated position such as when Roger
Pence moved into her vacated Position #5 when her service to the board was terminated on December 31,
2020. She requested the Council stay with the code and not accept the proposal that the function of the
alternate needs to be in line with other groups. The City would benefit if other groups matched the approach
of the alternate position on the Planning Board. The needed course of action is administrative, not an
amendment to the code rearranging the schedule of board appointments. She suggested Positions 1, 2, 3
and/or 4 be extended to a 5th year, legislated as an interim year of service for one time only. She summarized
the Council should immediately remedy the situation by resuming the official schedule for Positions 1
through 4 board appointments which would be consistent with EMC 10.40 as put forth in the December 16,
1980 Council meeting.
Beth Fleming, Edmonds, a 13+ year Edmonds resident, shared her thoughts regarding the tree code, the
emergency tree ordinance and her semi -personal quest to save two landmark trees on a development in her
neighborhood, comments she had intended to share at last week's public hearing but she was not called on.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 3
Packet Pg. 49
7.1.a
With regard to her personal quest, when she realized a permitted development sub -plat that has been
dormant for nearly 15 months could result in a significant tree loss, she looked up the permit, and when she
was unable to find the unapproved site plan on the Edmonds website, she called and spoke with Kernen
Lien who was able to provide her the tree removal plans. She learned 10 trees including 2 very well establish
likely over 100 year old trees, a red western cedar and a Douglas fir, would be removed. The cedar was on
the corner of the lot away from the houses being built and nowhere near the easement on the opposite site
of the property. After speaking with several people at the City, the developer and the developer's engineer,
reached a consensus that the cedar might not need to be removed. Upon further review, the City's
Engineering Department determined the cedar and the Douglas fir and a few other fir trees were to be
considered protected for now and a public hearing would be scheduled. She remains vigilant and hopeful.
Ms. Fleming said during this process, she learned there is a City development code that regulates the height
allowed for construction and because of the restrictions imposed on them, developers grade the property
lower to meet the height requirement. As a result of the grading, trees that may not need to be removed end
up having to be removed because the grading jeopardizes their root structure thereby making them unsafe.
The code regarding height restrictions is primarily geared toward the bowl which made her wonder whether
less trees might be lost if this code were tailored to address the interest in saving trees, particularly in areas
outside the bowl. She requested this be considered further by the Tree Board and City Council. With regard
to the emergency tree ordinance, if it does not apply to developers with permits, it is ridiculous and unfair
given the code restrictions that are basically driving tree removal. She was particularly disappointed by the
fact that two Councilmembers who have voted multiple times against amending this ordinance to apply to
developers, Councilmembers L. Johnson and Fraley-Monillas, share on their webpages that they enjoy the
endorsement of the Sierra Club and the Washington State Chapter of the Sierra Club respectively. When
trees are removed on development projects, the microecosystem is destroyed in the process and cannot be
bought back, and wildlife are displaced. She requested the Council review and reconsider the amendments.
Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, referred to the Findings of Fact related to the tree ordinance, stating that until
March 2nd, a subset of property owners have willingly subjected themselves to higher homeowner insurance
premiums, maintenance costs associated with trees and damage caused to their homes by roots and potential
hazards associated with large trees. The City's actions later tonight will make those costs and hazards
mandatory for the next four months and likely in perpetuity. The ordinance states additional regulation for
the City Council's consideration may apply to all private properties in the City when it clearly doesn't. The
strict regulations will be required for some properties and optional for others, properties that have already
removed trees. The purpose of the GMA is to regulate growth and development, not existing property and
structures. The appellate court in several cases has held that reasons need to be provided for an emergency.
The City's actions are not consistent with the values of public process by removing the right to referendum
and property rights when more restrictive regulations are put in place.
Ms. Seitz pointed out the City's actions are not consistent with the public outreach necessary for this process
because the City has only provided a single notice, notice of the emergency ordinance, since July 2019 and
the City's Urban Forest Management Plan completed in that month and year identified the City recognizes
it has a limited capacity in the care of private trees; now the City is trying to take action contrary to those
statements. The City's actions set forth a negative relationship with property owners, the same property
owners who have through their individual environmental ethics led them to plant and maintain trees on their
property at great cost and potential hazard. Every tree in the City today is secondary growth which means
successive landowners either planted or chose to maintain it as a chosen structure on the landscape. Creating
regulations around this beneficial activity will only create additional burden on property owners and if
planted, incentivize maintenance of trees at earlier growth stages. The actions the Council is taking tonight
seem environmental on their face, but in her experience in a maintenance context, the Council will not be
successful in promoting trees by regulating property owners who choose to grow them.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 4
Packet Pg. 50
7.1.a
Pam Stuller, Edmonds, owner of Walnut Street Coffee and President of the Edmonds Downtown Alliance,
invited everyone to their annual member meeting tomorrow at 9 a.m. The Zoom link is available at
EdmdondsDowntown.org website. The meeting will include a review of 2020 accomplishments and plans
for 2021. She is one of the founders of Edmonds Localvore Group that includes Boutique Rogue, Refinery
Salon, Scratch Distillery and others. They have a fun event planned this Thursday -Sunday, Edmonds
Localvore Passport to Local. Twenty-eight businesses are participating and working hard to create a great
event for the community.
Augustus Bukowski, Edmonds, referred to the unit lot subdivision proposal and wanted to ensure
everyone knew the proposal did not increase density or change what could be built. Unit lot subdivision
will allow ownership interest in the property to be fee simple instead of condo. Allowing homeowners to
own property fee simple gives them more affordable access to homes in the downtown area versus condo
ownership. Construction costs for condos are much higher and setting up the HOA is more expensive. Not
having an HOA due is a benefit to a unit lot subdivision versus condo ownership. Contrary to comments
that unit lot subdivision will increase density, the BD zoning downtown is the densest zoning in the City
and no increase in density will be caused by the unit lot subdivision amendment which is allowed in
surrounding neighborhoods such as RM 1.5 or RM 2.5. Unit lot subdivision provides Edmonds owners
access to more affordable housing in the bowl.
(Written comments submitted to PublicComment@Edmondswa.gov are attached.)
6. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE,
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 13, 2021
2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND
WIRE PAYMENTS
3. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM CADENCE
CLYBORNE AND FRANK CELLI
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. PAID FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE (PFML) POLICY CHANGES
Human Resources Analyst Emily Wagener explained PFML was a voter approved initiative approved last
January in Washington. She reviewed:
• Current PFML Policy
o Employees can supplement their state PFML payments by using their eligible paid leave
balances.
o Total payments to employees are capped at 100% of gross weekly wages including state and
supplemental payments.
• Supplemental Pay Example 1
100% FTE based on 100% max
Gross Weekly Pa
$1,214.00
PFML Weekly Benefit
873.00
Max Weekly Supplement
341.00
Weekly Leave Hrs. Used
11.24
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 5
Packet Pg. 51
Weekly Benefit Cost* $56.92
*Based on family coverage for Med/Den/Vis on the Regence plan.
o Employee's weekly supplement amount covers their weekly benefit cost.
o Employee may have other deductions and/or pre-tax benefits, such as the Flexible Spending
Account (FSA) that would also be covered
PFML Policy Issues
o The 100% cap on total wages negatively impacts part-time and lower wage-earning employees
as follows:
■ These employees receive far less in supplemental leave payments from the City.
■ They are unable to continue to pay their benefit premiums while on leave.
■ They will need to pay their benefit premiums while on leave by sending payment into the
City or by catching them up when they return to work.
■ They may miss out on the tax benefit of having premiums deducted from their pay.
o City staff must track and collect any unpaid employee premiums.
o Part-time employees pay a higher cost -share for their benefits than full-time employees.
Supplemental Pay Example 2
62.5% FTE based on 100% max
Gross Weekly Pa
$758.75
PFML Weekly Benefit
643.00
Max Weekly Supplement
115.75
Weekly Leave Hrs. Used
3.81
Weekly Benefit Cost*
$249.01
*Based on family coverage for Med/Den/Vis on the Regence plan.
o Employee's weekly supplement amount does not cover their weekly benefit cost.
o Employee may have other deductions and/or pre-tax benefits, such as the Flexible Spending
Account (FSA) that would also not be covered.
PFML Policy Changes Proposed
o Increase the cap on total wages to 150% for those employees who are unable to continue to pay
their benefit payments at the 100% level.
o Other minor verbiage changes include:
■ Clarifying that supplemental wages (as defined in policy) are not subject to PFML
premiums.
■ Reference to the state's annual max benefit recalculation. This will avoid an annual policy
change.
■ Reference to how HR calculates the Supplemental leave benefit and what employees can
do if they disagree with the calculation.
Supplemental Pay Example 3
62.5% FTE based on 150% max
Gross Weekly Pa
$758.75
PFML Weekly Benefit
643.00
Max Weekly Supplement
495.13
Weekly Leave Hrs. Used
16.31
Weekly Benefit Cost*
$249.01
*Based on family coverage for Med/Den/Vis on the Regence plan.
o Employee's weekly supplement amount covers their weekly benefit cost.
o Employee may have other deductions and/or pre-tax benefits, such as the Flexible Spending
Account (FSA) that would also be covered.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 6
Packet Pg. 52
7.1.a
Important Notes
o Proposed policy changes will have a significant, positive impact on part-time and lower wage-
earning employees with the City.
o Supplemental payments reduce the employee's accrued leave balances. This is not an
additional cost to the City.
o Increasing the cap for this group of employees may encourage supplemental leave use.
o Proposed policy changes are expected to reduce the City's obligation to track and collect unpaid
employee benefit premiums for those on PFML.
Staff recommendation: approve proposed policy changes on the included redline document.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the intent was to level out part-time staff with full-time staff. Ms.
Wagener answered yes.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON, TO
APPROVE THE PAID FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE POLICY CHANGES AS PROPOSED.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. 2021 APRIL BUDGET AMENDMENT
Finance Director Dave Turley reviewed:
• We have 6 requests tonight; more detailed Decision Packages are found in the Council.
• These requests were discussed during Finance Committee meeting on April 13.
• If passed, this budget amendment would have no impact to forecast revenues and would add
$636,400 in expenditures to the annual budget
Fund
Increases to
Revenues
Increases to
Expenses
Projected
Ending Fund
Balance
General Fund 001
$ -
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
Marsh Fund 017
-
20,000
20,000
Fleet Management 511
-
80,000
80,000
Utility Funds 421, 422, 423
-
90,000
90,000
Various AFSCME & Teamsters Contracts
-
227,400
227,400
Street Construction 112, REET 125
-
169,000
169,000
Totals
$ -
$ 636,400
$ 636,400
Mr. Turley introduced the proposed budget amendments:
• Request for $50,000 in professional services to support additional project workload in Parks
Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not support this amendment, recalling it was discussed in detail at
the Finance Committee meeting. The additional $50,000 is due to Mayor Nelson moving the Human
Services program into Parks and Recreation including transferring the $564,000 in funding. Had that
program not been moved, this request would not be necessary. In her opinion, the $50,000 should be taken
from the Human Services budget. Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Director Angie Feser commented
after being with the City for a year and as a licensed landscape architect able to study the workload of the
Parks Maintenance division and the small capital projects and major maintenance projects in the Parks
division, she reached the conclusion that there is a backlog of over 25 significant projects that haven't been
completed in the last 4-5 years.
Ms. Feser explained she had planned to include this in the 2022 budget process to provide staff resources
to work through that backlog of maintenance projects. With the large projects coming up such as the PROS
Plan, Civic Park and Salmon Safe as well as Human Services moving into Parks, she decided to bring it
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 7
Packet Pg. 53
7.1.a
forward sooner than the budget process and ask for assistance to manage the workload. The 2021 workload
she shared with Council two weeks ago illustrated the backlog in parks maintenance projects in addition to
regular maintenance activities. This funding will assist with getting some of those projects done. There are
beginning to be safety and environmental issues that need to be addressed.
Councilmember Olson said she had a similar thought about this but for different reasons. For example, with
Civic Park there is an ebb and flow. Many of these are contract things and with the onboarding of a contract
there is extra work from a management standpoint, but some capital projects could be put off. From overall
economic approach for the City and looking for ways to be fiscally conservative, if this is an overwhelming
time with onboarding of contracts, some of the contracts that are being onboarded are management
contracts. For example, once Civic Park is in process, there will be management for that project instead of
the Parks Department managing construction. She suggested there be different expectations about when
these capital projects get done versus contracting out the management of them to avoid spending the extra
$50,000.
Councilmember K. Johnson said the item description lists a number of individual projects including the
PROS Plan, the Salmon Safe Certification, and Civic Park; each of those are individual projects with
consultants and do not require an additional contract to manage the consultant. For example, Civic Park is
managed internally by the Engineering Department, the Salmon Safe Certification is a policy based analysis
that shouldn't require contract management and the PROS Plan is an extensive project that incudes City
staff and consultants that do not require an outside contract. That leaves 25 small projects which have been
mostly managed by Rich Lindsay internally. She was uncertain what the 25 projects were, but there are not
individual contracts for them. She was open to learning more, but it did not seem like what was listed
required a $50,000 contract employee to manage contracts already in process.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented the $50,000 is less than part-time status. She did not envision
these projects as ones that should be sent to other departments. There have been many projects added in the
Parks Department and it has been many years since staffing has been considered. A professional service
contract with a part-time employee is probably smarter than hiring a staff person which requires paying
benefits. She suggested considering it again in six months or at the end of the year to see if it was still
warranted. She encouraged Councilmembers to support the Parks Department.
Council President Paine said she had some familiarity with capital projects and knew there needs to be
departmental oversight of the contracts.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR $50,000 IN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO
SUPPORT ADDITIONAL PROJECT WORKLOAD IN PARKS.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked Ms. Feser to comment on what the COVID guidelines have meant for
the Parks Department timewise. Ms. Feser said the impacts of COVID last year continue into 2021,
especially if Snohomish County reverts to Phase 2 in a couple weeks; it is a constantly moving target. Every
facility rental, every picnic shelter rental, every program the department offers, etc. has to comply with
COVID guidelines and every time there is a shift in the guidelines, programs and rentals have to be
reconfigured. In addition, Parks maintenance has completely changed the way they do business. They still
have two split shifts, employees work on projects independently and do not ride in trucks together and there
is very limited volunteer hours due to group sizes. For example, in the past volunteers planted the flower
baskets, but the limitations do not allow that. COVID has impacted Parks maintenance crews and with more
people outside downtown and at the beach, there is more garbage and litter; litter and garbage service and
maintenance on the beachfront this winter were at summer levels. As a result, maintenance staff are not
able to do capital projects.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 8
Packet Pg. 54
7.1.a
Ms. Feser explained the capital projects in the description now require permitting. For example, the
installation of a new greenhouse requires a permitting process and selection of the greenhouse; there is no
one else on staff to do that work and as a director, she still manages the PROS Plan, Salmon Safe and Civic
Park, land acquisition as well as overseeing the small capital project. She is asking for a project manager to
help Parks maintenance to implement the small capital projects, to do the paperwork, etc. Rich Lindsay
does not have time to draw the footprint of a greenhouse for a permit. This resource will help get through
those capital projects that have been deferred for quite some time. Councilmember L. Johnson found Ms.
Feser's response very helpful and said it strengthened her support for the amendment.
Councilmember Distelhorst expressed concern about ongoing underfunding and the inability to do projects
in a timely manner and keep parks open and safe for residents. He did not want to see a maintenance backlog
which makes it more expensive and potentially creates hazardous conditions or conditions that aren't up
residents' expectations of the Parks & Recreation Department.. Having experience managing consultants
and projects, it is a lot of work; just because there is an external consultant does not mean you don't
participate in or manage the contract or the project. He appreciated Ms. Feser proposing this amendment
and said he would definitely support the Parks & Recreation Department.
Councilmember Olson said her question was about the specificity of the capital projects and whether there
were any where the deferred maintenance would cause a hazard or safety issue. These conversations are
similar to those held during the last budget regarding building facilities and many of those were deferred
and not included in the budget. To the extent there is money for deferred maintenance, she suggested
analyzing Parks projects against building maintenance projects to determine which are more pressing.
Councilmember Buckshnis said bravo for all the work Ms. Feser is doing. Her issue is the amendment
indicates this position will allow department administration to better focus on Human Services
implementation. There was $500,000 included in the budget for Human Services which has been moved
into Parks & Recreation.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS CALLED THE QUESTION. UPON ROLL CALL,
CALL THE QUESTION FAILED (4-3) DUE TO A LACK OF A SUPER MAJORITY,
COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING NO.
Councilmember L. Johnson pointed out the item description says to allow the administration to better focus
on Human Services implementation and park maintenance. Parks is already doing a number of things that
qualify as Human Services during COVID. This a fair analysis and includes park maintenance in the
description.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked if the intent was for this consultant to work on the PROS Plan, Salmon
Safe Certification and Civic Park projects. Ms. Feser answered no, she was asking for assistance in in the
Parks major maintenance capital projects, assisting Rich Lindsay with the permitting process for projects,
managing contracts if contractors are hired to do the work, ordering materials for Parks maintenance,
organizing volunteer work parties, and lessening some of the Parks maintenance workload related to small
capital projects.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked if there was a list of the 25 small projects. Ms. Feser said she emailed
Councilmembers the work plan to Council 2 weeks ago and offered to email it again. Councilmember K.
Johnson asked the total cost of those capital projects. Ms. Feser said she did not have that broken out, it
was usually included in the Parks maintenance budget.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 9
Packet Pg. 55
7.1.a
Councilmember K. Johnson asked if this was a one-time item. Ms. Feser said this is a good opportunity to
evaluate the value of assistance in a project management position for the Parks Department. Councilmember
K. Johnson asked if there was work the Engineering Department could do such as project design. Ms. Feser
answered she had not had that discussion with Public Works Director Phil Williams; the one individual
from Public Works that Parks uses, Henry Schroeder, will be busy with Civic Park and the fishing pier
project. She would still have to spend time conveying information for someone in Engineering to do the
CAD drawings and permits. She preferred to have someone who can do the project from tip to tail rather
than her still managing all the details for the project and using someone in Public Works to do the work.
She doubted Public Works would have a project manager available to allocate 400 hours to Parks this year.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-
MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES; AND
COUNCILMEMBERS K JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING NO.
Due to the amount of time the previous discussion took, Mayor Nelson suggested doing questions in a round
robin format.
Mr. Turley pointed out the Council could vote on these individually, particularly the more controversial
ones, but typically the Council votes on them together.
• Request for $20,000 in Professional Services from the Marsh Fund for permitting to access the
Edmonds Marsh to do restoration work.
Councilmember K. Johnson commented volunteers have been used for restoration in both the locations that
are identified. She asked why the wetland needed to be delineated at this time. Ms. Feser clarified the City
has had limited access to the marsh to do this work. A critical area permit is required to have full access to
the entire area which requires a wetland delineation. This project will delineate the wetland for the permit
and then the City will have full access around the perimeter of the marsh for volunteer efforts.
Councilmember K. Johnson observed the City will not have access to the Unocal property. Ms. Feser agreed
that was private property and the City did not have access. Councilmember K. Johnson asked if the wetland
delineation was necessary to do restoration work. Ms. Feser answered yes, it is a requirement of the permit
to have access into the wetland to do work.
• Request for $80,000 in the Equipment Rental Fund to provide funds for a mini excavator.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the cost of a mini excavator. Mr. Williams said the proposed
amendment is $80,000 for the excavator and trailer. It is a small, compact piece of equipment and can get
into much smaller places. Public Works has two full-size backhoes but they are difficult to use when
working in alleys and other small spaces. The biggest need for the mini excavator is the sidewalk crew on
sidewalks and ramp projects. When replacing existing sidewalks, a few panels or a long stretch, the
sidewalk has to be jackhammered up and often the crew pick up the concrete pieces and load them in the
truck before placing forms and pouring the new sidewalk. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she did not
dispute the need, but wondered how much a new one would cost. Mr. Williams said this is for a new mini
excavator and trailer, not a rental.
Councilmember K. Johnson pointed out the legislative intent of the sidewalk crew was to work on first the
small and then the long missing sidewalks; it wasn't to do bulbs, replace curbs or jackhammer anything and
she felt it was a misappropriation of the sidewalk crew to do other projects. She anticipated an excavator
could be rented and delivered for thousands of dollars per job site instead of purchasing a new one. For
those economic reasons, she did not support this request at this time.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 10
Packet Pg. 56
7.1.a
Councilmember Distelhorst asked Mr. Williams the intended life cycle of a mini excavator. Mr. Williams
anticipated it would last 15 years or more, envisioning the City would get a lot of use out of it. It is the kind
of tool that you may not realize how much you need it until one is available. The concrete crew would have
first call on the equipment, and to the extent Streets is not using it, other departments such as Parks can use
it. It is a very adaptable and efficient piece of equipment and will help the efficiency of flat work. In addition
to new sidewalks, the crew does a lot of repairs. The City has more liability associated with bad sidewalks
than no sidewalks; the City doesn't get sued for people tripping where there are no sidewalks but does get
sued where sidewalks are not properly maintained.
Mr. Williams explained there is also a huge backlog of ADA curb ramps; some of them are done as part of
pavement projects. Any time a project touches the curb, the ramps have to be upgraded. The City was
spending $20,000428,000 per ramp to have contractors install them; many of them are done inhouse for
much less. Some of the missing sidewalk segments have been done; of the top five number one rated short
sidewalk segments, the sidewalk crew did two of them, one was done with a capital project, a private
developer is working on a fourth and the fifth is in design. He summarized reasonable progress has been
made on the short sidewalks segments in the time the crew has been working. Councilmember Distelhorst
summarized it sounded like a good investment that would be well used.
Council President Paine said she has seen mini excavators used on private development projects. There is
also the cost of implementing traffic control plans and flaggers; this sounds like a fairly safe way because
traffic won't be impeded and sidewalks can be closed while they are being repaired and reopened when the
repair is completed. She liked that the mini excavator did not require the use of flaggers or implementing
traffic control and expressed support for this request.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked if it would be fair to say the rental cost combined with the procurement
time as well as traffic control, flaggers, etc. would exceed $5300/year, renting versus purchasing the
equipment. Mr. Williams answered there is an inertia factor, without the equipment, likely the crew would
figure out a way to do something without renting equipment which is less efficient. He acknowledged
equipment could be rented as long as it was done far enough in advance; often in the summer months
equipment is already rented out. In the long run it was not cost effective to rent equipment. Councilmember
L. Johnson said that was her point, that the rental would exceed the purchase price. Mr. Williams pointed
out moving full sized backhoes around the City is a pain; sometimes they are driven on City streets which
is much faster, but it is large equipment and it does not go very fast. The mini excavator will be on a trailer
that can be towed behind any of the work trucks.
Request for $90,000 $30,000 each from the Water, Storm, and Sewer Funds to provide funds to
develop formal reserve policies.
$227,400 for the increased Salaries and Benefits that resulted from the ASCFME and Teamsters
contract settlements. These contracts were approved after the 2021 budget was completed, so we
were unable to include actual numbers in the budget.
Request for $169,000 to allow for changes to Citywide Pedestrian Safety projects.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. , AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4216 AS A
RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND
FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-1-2), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-
MONILLAS, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES;
COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON VOTING NO, AND COUNCILMEMBERS BUCKSHNIS AND
OLSON ABSTAINING.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 11
Packet Pg. 57
7.1.a
During the roll call vote, Councilmember K. Johnson asked if the Council could vote on the items
individually rather than as a group. Mayor Nelson said the Council had already voted.
3. CODE AMENDMENT TO REALIGN PLANNING BOARD APPOINTMENT SCHEDULE
City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained there are two ordinances in the packet to provide two different
approaches to realigning/fixing the problem with Planning Board terms. When the Planning Board was
initially established in 1980, 7 numbered positions and an alternative position were created. The ideas was
after the initial terms were satisfied, two positions would come up for appointment and confirmation each
year. Somewhere along the way that stopped happening exactly as intended and now there is a situation
where the positions are not synched up with what was originally contemplated. Both versions of the
ordinance would get the Planning Board back to the two/year schedule, but they have differences. The
second version would more closely align the positions with the original schedule for each position. The net
effect of the second option is that each position would ultimately get back on the schedule it was intended
to be on in 1980. The first option does not do that but still gets back to the two/year schedule but a different
two/year schedule.
Mr. Taraday explained the first version of ordinance removes the language that has the alternate
automatically filling vacancies for the unexpired terms. The second version of the ordinance does not
propose that change. It was thought at one point that it might be slightly easier to keep track of the positions
and the terms if that language were to be removed but he felt it was a very minor point and did not have a
recommendation whether that language should be included or not. The Council could also mix and match;
for example, if the Council liked the terms in the second version, but liked the language regarding the
alternate in the first version, amendments could be made to combine those.
Mr. Taraday observed several people have asked why anything legislatively needed to be done and whether
it could be addressed via an administrative fix. For example, it has been suggested that only the roster needs
to be changed. The roster is not merely an administrative cataloging; it reflects the dates that Planning
Board members were appointed and confirmed. For example, the roster indicate the date of appointment or
Position 2 is January 2018. All Planning Board members are supposed to serve a 4 year term so that term
would expire at the end of 2021. It was his understanding that the people who have suggested an
administrative fix are really suggesting extending Positions 2, 3, and 4 an additional year and everything
will be back to normal. He was uncertain that would be true because there was also a reappointment of
Position 1 that needed to be fixed. Even if that were the case with Positions 2, 3, and 4, there is still a
conflict because the code specifically states Planning Board terms are 4 years which means every 4 years,
Planning Board members are subject to appointment or reappointment and confirmation and if that doesn't
happen, the code is being violated and the City cannot just administratively pretend that a 5-year term is a
4-year term.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she liked the idea of combining the two versions. She suggested the Council
discuss at a future retreat having Planning Board members selected by Councilmembers which she recalled
had been discussed when she and Councilmember Fraley-Monillas first joined the Council. She liked the
second option which is more aligned with the current code, but also liked having the alternate fill any
vacancy as the alternate has been attending meetings.
Councilmember Olson said the overriding principles behind the original code have served the City well and
include the idea of continuity; the alternate automatically filling a vacancy helps provide that continuity.
The two per year is also important so there are no large fluxes in membership, similar to the process for
Councilmembers where all positions are not up for election at the same time. The idea in the second version
of a one year term and then a four year term does not support the concept of continuity. It is not uncommon
for Planning Board members to be offered and to accept the opportunity for a second or third term so it is
not unreasonable to extend to five years to avoid confusion. She preferred that option compared to changing
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 12
Packet Pg. 58
7.1.a
the code. To those who say that five year terms violated the code, she pointed out the violation already
happened and changing the code to avoid violating the law is exactly what the City did not want to do
regarding the number of people who needed to be interviewed for a chief or director position. She preferred
not to change the code and either by resolution or other means maintain the dates in the original ordinance
and make them 5-year terms.
Council President Paine expressed appreciation for Mr. Taraday's comments to her earlier today. She
recalled during public comments, a person saying the best thing would be to put the Planning Board
positions back in order quickly. Some of the Planning Board positions have gotten out of order and it cannot
be fixed administratively. She suggested the quickest way would be the second version of the ordinance.
She did not have a strong opinion regarding the alternate language.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said in her I I1/2 years on the City Council she did not find continuity on
the Planning Board beneficial. Some Planning Board members have been on the board for about the same
amount of time she has been on Council and getting a fresh look at things is a good thing. In her experience
serving on many boards including the Senior Center Board, positions term out so fresh blood can join and
look at things in a different light. If someone remains on a board like the Planning Board that long, it
becomes political. She has served with four Mayors and believed each Mayor had opportunity to change
Planning Board membership to those who most agree with their opinion about regulations. The Planning
Board is a very important board; they assist in educating the Council what is appropriate with regard to
development, zoning, etc. She was interested in whatever method allows turnover, noting it was very
common for board terms to vary. For example, on the Senior Center Board, 4 of the 16 members termed
out last year and in 2 years, another 4 will term out.
Councilmember L. Johnson said this allows for two appointments per year by the current Mayor which
would allow a Mayor during their term to make appointments for each position. She asked what
appointments were made in 2020 and 2021 and what would be the effect of 5 year terms beyond what this
mayoral term would be afforded the opportunity to appoint versus what the next mayoral term would be
afforded the opportunity to appoint. Mr. Taraday answered Positions 1 and 6 were reappointed in 2021, and
Position 5, which is currently vacant, will be reappointed in 2021. No positions were appointed in 2020
which obviously was not what was supposed to happen.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked how allowing 5-year terms would affect the appointments for this
mayoral term versus the next mayoral term. Mr. Taraday answered a new person or a reappointment for
Position 2, depending on whether it was a 4 or a 5-year term, would happen at the beginning of 2022 or
2023. For Positions 3 and 4, depending on whether it was a 4 or a 5-year term, it would happen at the
beginning pf 2023 or 2024. Those are the only positions with the possibility of a 5-year term.
Councilmember Distelhorst preferred to keep the alternate language to allow a person who is volunteering
and serving in that position to rotate in. He supported the second version and a cleaner solution on the dates.
Councilmember K. Johnson recalled Mr. Taraday said Position 5 is vacant, however, the language states in
the event a regular position becomes vacant, the alternate shall be deemed to fill that vacancy for the
remainder of the unexpired term. She asked if that language also applied when there was a vacancy on the
Planning Board. Mr. Taraday answered it depends on the nature of the vacancy. Councilmember K. Johnson
said in Position 5, the person was not reappointed so the position became vacant. It was her understanding
that past practice has moved the alternate into that position. Mr. Taraday answered the alternate moves in
to fill vacancies when there is an unexpired term, that is the key language in the code.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked what happened if the term was not unexpired. Mr. Taraday answered
then the alternate remains the alternate. Councilmember K. Johnson said it has been the custom and past
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 13
Packet Pg. 59
7.1.a
practice whenever there is an opening, the alternate moves up. She was appointed as an alternate to the
Planning Board many years ago and she moved up when there was an opening when someone left the board.
One of reason there is an alternate is to prepare them to fill a vacancy when it comes up. However, in this
case, Mr. Taraday has said the alternate does not move into Position 5. Mr. Taraday agreed, pointing out
that was because there is no unexpired term. The term for Position 5 ended at the end of 2020 so the Mayor
can now make appointment to that position for Council confirmation. If the alternate moved into a vacancy
created by the end of a term, that makes the alternate a de facto appointee without ever being appointed
which is clearly not what the code intended.
Councilmember K. Johnson said the code is ambiguous regarding that as it does not say one way or the
other and historically the alternative has always moved up when there was a vacancy. Mr. Taraday said he
could not speak to the history of every time an alternate moved into a numbered position, but the code
specifically uses the phrase, "remainder of the unexpired term," which clearly indicates there needs to be
an unexpired term for the alternate to move into in order for the alternate to move into a numbered position.
Without an unexpired term, the term ends and is awaiting appointment of a new Planning Board member
to fill Position 5.
Councilmember K. Johnson referred to the terms under A and B; under A, 4 positions, 1, 2, 7 and alternate
are proposed to end in 2022 which is definitely contrary to the code where 2 positions expire every year. In
the second option, Positions 2, 7 and the alternate expire in 2021 and position 1, 3 and 4 expire in 2022
which is also contrary to the code. She preferred to leave the code alone and do something administratively
to make sure the positions line up. The proposal in an email from Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig was
Position 1 and 2 end of term would be 2022, Positions 3 and 4 end term would be 2023, Positions 5 and 6
end of term would be 2024 and Position 7 and the alternate end of term would be 2021 which would allow
two positions to end every year. She summarized it was not necessary to make a code amendment.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested not making any changes to the code, but adopt a resolution to make
whatever changes are need to maintain continuity which may require five year terms as Positions 1, 2, 3,
and 4 are out of code alignment.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
MAKE NO CHANGES TO CODE 10.40.010 AND INSTEAD ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO MAKE
WHATEVER CHANGES NEED TO BE MADE ADMINISTRATIVELY.
Councilmember K. Johnson said the code is perfect and has worked for 40 years; what is imperfect is the
way the code has been administered.
Councilmember L. Johnson raised a point of order, asking if doing nothing was appropriate or did the
Council need to select one of the options. City Clerk Scott Passey said affirmative action is usually not
required to do nothing. If the Council is satisfied with the status quo, a motion is unnecessary.
When something is brought to Council for action, Councilmember Olson assumed having a conversation
about potential non -action was appropriate. Mr. Passey agreed that was one way to look at it. Another way
would be to speak against a potential motion regarding one of the ordinances in the packet.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the point Councilmember K. Johnson brought up is about the ambiguity in
code regarding the alternate position. She agreed in the past the alternate stepped into a numbered position
and never stepped back to the alternate position. The Council needs to determine when there is a vacancy
or a Planning Board member leaves, does the alternate move into that position automatically. She recalled
there was the same issue with the Tree Board where appointments got out of synch. She preferred not to
make a decision tonight to allow time to clarify ambiguity regarding alternate.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 14
Packet Pg. 60
7.1.a
Councilmember L. Johnson asked for a ruling on her point of order. Mayor Nelson said based on the
parliamentarian's advice that it could be done either way, he would allow discussion to continue.
Councilmember Distelhorst said it did not seem ambiguous to him; 10.40.020.4 states, "in the event that a
regular position on the board shall be declared vacant, the alternate shall be deemed to fill such vacancy for
the remainder of the unexpired term." He clarified it would not apply to a term that had expired and therefore
has no term left. If that has been a past practice, it was inconsistent with the code. The dates that
Councilmember read regarding 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 all match to the second version with the 1 year
extension to synch them up. It is cleaner and more accurate to have a record of action that documents the
process.
Councilmember Olson said she originally wanted to go the resolution route and not make a change to the
code, but things brought up in today's conversation could be good changes to the second version. She found
the second version preferable because it more closely aligned with the original. She commented what makes
the alternate situation ambiguous is precedent. In public comment by Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig, she
identified three circumstances where the alternate moved into a numbered position. That seems to have
been the past practice, and the Mayor makes a reappointment to the alternate position. She saw value in
that practice to provide continuity and supported changing the wording to reflect it.
Councilmember Olson expressed support for a two term limit, viewing eight years as a good stint. That
would still provide continuity and allow for fresh blood and ideas. She preferred to eliminate the one year
terms as that would be in violation with the code the same as 5-year terms are in conflict with the code. If
the Council reaches consensus about the changes, she suggested getting input from the Planning Board.
Council President Paine suggested delaying this until next week.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING YES;
AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND
L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE,
APPROVE THE SECOND ORDINANCE, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 10.40 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE RELATED TO
THE CITY'S PLANNING BOARD.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, pointing out Council President Paine indicated it could
be moved to next week. Mayor Nelson said he understood that was an opinion but it was not a motion.
Councilmember K. Johnson said her concern with the second version was there were too many terms
expiring in one year. For example, Position 1, 2, 3 and 4 all expire in 2022, and Positions 2, 7 and the
alternate expire in 2021 which is contrary to the original notion that only 2 expire per year. Mr. Taraday
pointed out the only way to get back on a two per year schedule was to have something happen in the
intervening years and he provided two different options although there were likely other options. There is
no way to get back on schedule without doing some kind of intervening unusual appointments because the
positions are off schedule and that cannot be fixed by doing nothing. While the code states two per year,
there are several provisos so it is not in conflict with the code. A proviso is not a conflict, it is an exception
and those exceptions get the appointments back on track.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON, TO
AMEND TO DROP "2021 AND" IN POSITION 2, "2022 AND" IN POSITION 3 AND "2022 AND"
IN POSITION 4.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 15
Packet Pg. 61
Councilmember Olson said one could say the 5-year term is the problem or having more than 2 terms
expiring at the same time is the problem. The amendment better supports the concept of continuity and
having two terms expire each year and is more tantamount to the original code.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reminded that Planning Board members terms can be extended. When a
Planning Board member's term ends, they can be reappointed to another term. She encouraged Council not
to support the amendment, noting straightening things out will never be perfect. She was confident Planning
Board members would be reappointed if they were doing a good job
Councilmember K. Johnson expressed support for the amendment, commenting it was as closely aligned
with the original code as possible and reduced the number of positions that expire each year. The cleanest
approach is to have Positions 1 and 2 expire at the end of 2022, Positions 3 and 4 expire in 2023, Positions
5 and 6 expire in 2024 and Position 7 and the alternate expire in 2021.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked if the inconsistency with four years in the code created a legal issue. Mr.
Taraday answered it did not as it was also in proviso language. Councilmember Distelhorst observed the
amendment would approve 5-year terms instead of 4 + 1 terms. Mr. Taraday said because it was in the
proviso, it was an exception to the four-year term rule. He did not have any concern with that legally if that
was the direction the Council wanted to go.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if Planning Board members would have one 5-year term and no
extension of the first 4-year term followed by a second 4-year term. Mr. Taraday referred to the packet
version where Positions 2, 3 and 4 will have 2 back-to-back appointment cycles where the Mayor would
have the opportunity in both back-to-back years to either reappoint the incumbent or appoint a new person.
If the amendment is approved, that first opportunity would go away and only the second opportunity would
remain.
For Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, Mr. Taraday explained Councilmember L. Johnson moved the second
version of the ordinance and Councilmember Olson made an amendment to change the language regarding
Positions 2, 3 and 4 by extending the terms to 5 year terms.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS
FRALEY-MONILLAS AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO AMEND TO ALLOW THE ALTERNATE TO MOVE INTO EITHER AN UNEXPIRED TERM
OR A VACANT TERM.
Councilmember K. Johnson referred to testimony from Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig that this has
happened at least three times. The benefit of having an alternate is they are learning the job, listening to
history, and are ready to participate if a voting member is absent. Codifying this would be endorsing what
has happened in the past and allowing it to happen again in the future.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what happened if the alternate moved up automatically, but they
were not doing their job adequately. Mr. Taraday said he understood the intent of the motion to be that the
alternate would move into any vacant position regardless of whether the vacancy was a regular vacancy
created by the end of a term or whether it was a mid -cycle vacancy. If Council adopt this, it would take
away the Mayor's ability to make an appointment to the position. For example, currently the Mayor can
make an appointment to Position 5 because that position is vacant; the amendment would take that ability
away.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 16
Packet Pg. 62
7.1.a
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas assumed the alternative automatically moving into a position could cause
issues if the alternate was not doing satisfactory work versus an appointment process. She did not support
allowing the alternate to automatically move into a numbered position unless they could show they were
able to do the job and did not think that was the best way to appoint someone to a position as important as
the Planning Board. Mr. Taraday said he had not studied which appointments were alleged to have been
filled in this manner, but it is entirely possible that in the past the alternate was actually appointed by the
Mayor to fill a vacant numbered position and the Council confirmed that appointment. He did not know
that that was the case and confirming it would require reviewing past minutes. Simply because the alternate
moved into a numbered position did not mean they were not actually appointed by the Mayor to fill the
numbered position. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she knew of one alternate that was appointed by
the Mayor that did not go through Council.
Council President Paine asked if the Council adopted Exhibit 2, would Position 5 expire in 2021 or in 2024.
Mr. Taraday answered Position 5 is current vacant; if the amendment is approved, it would be filled by the
alternate and expire at the end of 2024.
Councilmember Olson said everything that applies to numbered Planning Board positions applied to the
alternate. In her experience and in documentation, everybody on the Planning Board is quite committed.
As soon as the alternate moves into a numbered position, the Mayor appoints the next alternate. She viewed
the amendment as a good change.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4) COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS
AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS,
AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Mr. Taraday pointed out there are some whereas clauses that refer to the desire not to have 5-year terms.
Because the Council approved 5-year terms, he requested that either he be given permission to remove
those whereas clauses after the vote on the motion, or the Council do it by vote now. It was the consensus
of the Council to allow Mr. Taraday to remove those whereas clauses.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked for clarification; whether approval of the amendment meant during this
mayoral term the Mayor would not have an opportunity to appoint Position 3. Mr. Taraday said Positions
3 and 4 end at the end of 2023. The original appointments were made in December, contemplating they
would take office the next year. He assumed an outgoing Mayor would still be able to make those
appointments in December 2023 even though they would not be seated until 2024. That would be consistent
with the way the original appointments were done.
UPON ROLL CALL, MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS K.
JOHNSON, DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON AND L. JOHNSON
VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING NO.
Mayor Nelson declared a 10-minute recess to so he and Council President Paine could confer regarding the
time allotted for the remaining agenda items. When the meeting reconvened, Mayor Nelson advised the
Council would postpone Item 7.4 to a future meeting, and reorder the agenda as follows: PROS Plan, Civic
Field Bids, and Finding of Fact to Support Adoption of Ordinance 4217 regarding Prohibition of Removal
of Landmark Trees. The remaining items will be postponed to a future City Council meeting.
4. MARINA BEACH PARK RENOVATION GRANT MATCH CERTIFICATION
This item was postponed to a future meeting.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 17
Packet Pg. 63
5. PARKS, RECREATION & OPEN SPACE (PROS) PLAN UPDATE CONSULTANT
AGREEMENT
Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services Director Angie Feser explained at the April 20t1i Council meeting,
she presented the purpose, components, history and upcoming process including the diversity, equity and
inclusion Public Involvement Plan and consultant selection process for the PROS Plan. Q&A on the project
ended prematurely at the conclusion of last week's meeting. She is bringing this back to Council for a
second touch and requesting Council consider authorizing the Mayor to enter into a professional services
agreement with Conservation Technix for $143,396 to provide consultant services to update the City's
PROS Plan. She requested Council approval tonight as there is some time sensitivity related to the project.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE PROS PLAN CONSULTANT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
CONTRACT WITH CONSERVATION TECHNIX IN THE AMOUNT OF $143,396 TO PROVIDE
CONSULTANT SERVICES TO UPDATE THE CITY'S 2022 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN
SPACE PLAN.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-0-2), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
FRALEY-MONILLAS, OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE
VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON AND BUCKSHNIS ABSTAINING.
During the roll call vote, Councilmember K. Johnson stated she still had questions so she would abstain.
During the roll call, Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, commenting this was moving very
fast and asked if Councilmember K. Johnson could be allowed to ask her questions. Mayor Nelson said the
Council had already voted, and was now doing roll call. The Council spent an hour on the last item and he
was trying to get the meeting back on track as there were a lot of agenda items left. If exceptions keep being
made, the Council will never get its business done. The Council is running out of time and although he
appreciated the concern, if there is no response when he asked for discussion, he moved forward with the
vote.
9. CIVIC FIELD - REJECT ALL BIDS (Previously Consent Agenda Item 4)
Councilmember Buckshnis commented this was on the Consent agenda. Many people are following the
Civic Field project and she wanted to go on record that she did not support the two proposals and wanted
to reject the bids.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON,
TO REJECT THE BIDS FOR CIVIC FIELD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
6. FINDINGS OF FACT TO SUPPORT ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE 4217 REGARDING
PROHIBITION OF REMOVAL OF LANDMARK TREES
Environmental Program Manager Kernen Lien explained the City Council held a public hearing last week
on Ordinance 4217 which prohibits the removal of landmark trees, trees with a diameter of 24" or greater.
The ordinance requires the City Council adopt findings to either continue or repeal the ordinance at the first
regular meeting following the public hearing. Exhibit 1 is the proposed finding of fact to continue the
ordinance per the direction provided by the Council at last week's meeting.
Mayor Nelson advised Council questions would be taken in a round robin format with Councilmembers
asking one question during their turn.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 18
Packet Pg. 64
7.1.a
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the proposed findings of fact on packet page 176, relaying her
impression that there would be two different findings of fact. City Attorney Jeff Taraday did not recall
being asked to prepare alternative findings, but it is not too late for the Council to go in different direction.
If the Council does not want to adopt these findings, he suggested the Council direct him to prepare an
ordinance to repeal the landmark tree protections. The Council's choices are to adopt the findings, amend
the findings, or go in a completely different direction and repeal the landmark tree ordinance.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she thought the findings would include the fact that she made a motion to
remove one sentence in Section 2, "the ordinance shall not apply to any tree removal associated with and
permitted through a building permit, subdivision or other land use approval." She asked whether the
findings were intended to summarize the meeting. Mr. Taraday explained the purpose of the findings is to
justify the continued imposition and applicability of an interim ordinance. This is an interim ordinance that
was adopted without a public hearing; the Council has now had a public hearing and has to decide whether
or not to continue the interim ordinance. He recalled Councilmember Buckshnis expressed interest in
amending the ordinance which would require another ordinance but he did not recall the Council directing
him to prepare an ordinance to that effect.
Councilmember Olson commented since there had already been a public hearing, any amendments could
not be materially different than the original ordinance. Mr. Taraday answered depending on the scope of
the amendment, there were two ways to proceed, one possibility would be to say the interim ordinance is
fine for the next four months but provide feedback to the Planning Board or whoever else is working on the
permanent to incorporate the amendment into the permanent regulations. If that was not acceptable and if
the amendment needed to occur sooner than four months from now, the Council could direct him to prepare
an ordinance to that effect which would likely require another interim ordinance and another public hearing.
He wanted to hear the amendment before voicing a final opinion about it. Councilmember Olson said she
did not have a specific amendment.
Councilmember Buckshnis said if the Council adopts the findings, the Council is continuing the landmark
emergency ordinance. If some Councilmembers do not agree to the findings, she asked if that would be
done via a motion to repeal. Mr. Taraday said to adopt the findings in the packet, a Councilmember would
move the resolution in packet. If the Council wanted to go in a different direction and direct staff to repeal
Ordinance 4217, that could be done.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Section 1.0 which states, "Careful thought and deliberation should
be given to crafting of those permanent landmark tree regulations to ensure that any future removal..." and
said she was unsure the Council had careful and thoughtful deliberation on March 2nd. Mr. Taraday advised
paragraphs A, B, C, D of Section 1 and the whereas clauses were his attempt to put in writing what he
believed to be the Council's justification for adopting Ordinance 4217 and for continuing to leave it in
effect for the next 4 months. Paragraph C says because time is needed for careful thought and deliberation
for the upcoming round of regulations, the Council is keeping landmark trees standing so they are not cut
down in the meantime.
Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out landmark trees are being cut down and there is no enforcement. The
ordinance was passed very quickly on March 2nd and she did not know that the Council really had careful
deliberation. She was unsure how to vote since the Council had never talked about enforcement related to
the emergency ordinance. Citizens have commented how this emergency ordinance is not helping them and
pictures have been provided of trees that have been cut. If the Council adopts this finding, she could not
say the Council had had careful and thoughtful deliberation on March 2" d. Mr. Taraday reiterated that is not
what the finding says; the finding is that the City needs more time to consider and adopt permanent
regulations and because it needs more time to work on the permanent regulations, interim regulations are
being adopted in the meantime.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 19
Packet Pg. 65
7.1.a
Councilmember Distelhorst suggested Councilmembers read packet page 176; the language is quite clear
regarding what is referred to in the findings.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ACCEPT THE FINDINGS AS PRESENTED, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT TO
SUPPORT THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE 4217, WHICH ESTABLISHED INTERIM
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT PREVENT THE REMOVAL OF CERTAIN
LANDMARK TREES.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
DISTELHORST, FRALEY-MONILLAS, OLSON, AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS VOTING NO.
7. INTRODUCTION REGARDING PRIVATE CODE AMENDMENT TO ECDC SECTION
20.75.045.B, ENTITLED UNIT LOT SUBDIVISION -APPLICABILITY
This item was postponed to a future meeting.
8. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON'S REIMBURSEMENT REQUEST
This item was postponed to a future meeting.
8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES
2. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEES REPORTS
9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson reported COVID cases are up to the point where there are more COVID cases per 100,000
in Snohomish County than there were in the first wave. According to Dr. Spitters, Governor Inslee and
State health officials, Snohomish County is in a fourth wave. This is affecting people in their 20s, 30s, 40s
and 50s, and they are being hospitalized. Because hospitalizations and the number of COVID cases are
increasing and meeting certain thresholds, if behaviors do not change, it is likely Snohomish County will
go back to Phase 2 when the next evaluation is done by the State Department of Health. The CDC issued
new guidelines regarding wearing masks outside and vaccines, but not enough people are currently
vaccinated. Vaccinations are available through the Department of Emergency Management including drive -
through vaccination sites. He encouraged people to get vaccinated, wear masks, and to avoid large
gatherings particularly indoors unless properly masked and socially distanced.
i [1�40111e[6i 11[KI]u IU 104eI V
Councilmember Buckshnis thanked the volunteers who showed up for the Earth Day celebration at Marina
Beach where she saw several Youth Commission members, Students Saving Salmon planted trees at Yost
Park and Tree Board members and volunteers removed blackberries at the marsh. She expressed her
appreciation for all the volunteers, especially the youth, commenting volunteering is a wonderful gift to the
City. She encouraged everyone to wear a mask and get vaccinated. She got her first vaccination after waiting
in line at the Arlington Airport for 3 hours..
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 20
Packet Pg. 66
7.1.a
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked the Tree Board, Sound Solutions and others who organized the
planting of 120 western red cedars, hemlocks and big leaf maples at Yost Park in the rain. There are many
vaccination appointments available that do not require waiting three hours. His vaccination took nine
minutes from pulling up to shot in arm. They are very efficient and professionally operated. Edmonds
College Ash Way Park & Ride also have a walk-up, bike -up, roll -up option so people can take transit, get
a vaccination and get back on transit. He urged the public to make a vaccination appointment and get their
shots.
Councilmember Distelhorst reported a recent study found Snohomish County residents spend the third most
amount of time commuting alone in their cars compared to all of Washington State. As transportation is the
largest greenhouse gas emitter, he urged people to consider how they travel around the region and the
impact they are having. May is Bike Everywhere Month; be careful and watch for more cyclists on the
roads. He noted with the nice weather recently, the bike lanes in front of his family's house have been very
busy.
Councilmember K. Johnson relayed her understanding there was another survey for Walkable Main Street
and one of the issues was whether to close Main on Saturday or Sunday. Careful consideration should be
given to the fourth wave of the pandemic and she was uncertain gathering should be encouraged even
outside at this point. The Save our Saturdays for retailers is a good compromise. Regardless, people should
avoid gathering as much as possible and there should not be buskers and entertainment to draw more people.
The point of Walkable Main is to make it safe, not to encourage people to come and not to create a street
fair atmosphere.
Councilmember K. Johnson relay a neighbor of hers, Shirley Johnson passed away recently. It was her hope
to live out her life in her home and then donate her property to the City of Edmonds for a community
garden. That process will take about four months. It will be located off Bowdoin Way next to Yost Park
and will be a wonderful asset to the community and a tribute to what she wanted to do for the community.
Councilmember K. Johnson was sad that Ms. Johnson had passed away but happy that she got her wish.
In response to Councilmember K. Johnson's comments, Council President Paine expressed her sorrow at
the passing of her neighbor and said that was a wonderful gift to the City.
Council President Paine reported Student Representative Roberts is absent tonight because he is helping
family. He has contacted her when he has to be absent and his absences have been excused. She has been
invited to join several other South Snohomish County Council Presidents in May to talk about shared
interests and goals. She thanked the Lynnwood Council President George Hurst for organizing this. Other
cities include Mukilteo, Mountlake Terrace and possibly Brier. She will provide updates if/when they meet.
Even though many are feeling confident and getting tired, Council President Paine encouraged people to
hang in there a little longer, wear masks, stay socially distanced particularly indoors, and to get vaccinated
as soon as possible.
Councilmember Olson said the City's park system has been on her mind as there have been various park -
related items on the Council's agenda. One of the optional items in the outreach for the PROS Plan is
translation services and she suggested Edmonds bilingual citizens interested in making translation services
available to the City reach out to the administration or to her. Instead of exercising that option on that
contract, she would prefer to offer that opportunity to a local company.
Councilmember Olson said it was hard for her to think about the City's park system without also thinking
about Esperance Park. The location of Esperance Park is ideal for serving south Edmonds; the park is
already fabulous but could be even more fabulous if doing more in that location were included in the PROS
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 21
Packet Pg. 67
7.1.a
Plan. She recalled the Council's discussions a few weeks ago about the 4th Street Arts Corridor and
expressed interest in a more internationally inspired arts corridor in that area such as on 224th that connects
Esperance Park to Highway 99. This begs the perennial question, is the separation of Esperance and
Edmonds still serving the citizens of both areas well and what are the actual and perceived pros and cons
of the separation and of coming together. She questioned whether that should be discussed before Edmonds
proceeds with other less ideal park focuses for this area of the City. She encouraged citizens to reach out to
Councilmembers and/or the administration and she was hopeful an outreach program could be developed
to discuss this more directly. She looked forward to discussing this with the Council and Mayor.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said Esperance Park is not in Edmonds, it is in Esperance. The people
who pay property taxes to support Esperance probably want their park to remain theirs. She agreed it would
be beneficial for Edmonds to have a park in south Edmonds.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported it took her 40 minutes on a Saturday morning to get to Capitol
Hill, get her vaccination, wait 15 minutes and get back home. It is not necessary to wait in three hour lines
to get vaccinated; there are ways to do it much more quickly. She asked Councilmembers to indicate if they
want her to continue sending them public health documents.
As Mayor Nelson reported, Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said Snohomish County may be faced with
returning to Phase 2 as the County is above the hospitalization and COVID thresholds; she expected an
announcement by the end of the week. She was at the Health District this morning wearing a mask and
remaining socially distanced, the first time she has been inside the building in at least a year. She and all
the others in the room are fully vaccinated. It was nice to see her peers and coworkers at the Health District.
The CDC announced today that masks are not necessary outside as long as you are not in large crowds.
There are a lot of opinions and she suggested erring on the side of safety and responsibly by wearing a
mask.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she has heard comments lately about the 3-4 votes on Council. Before
this Council, she was often on the 3 and sometimes the 2 side in a 4-3 or 5-2 vote. It happens with every
Council she has served on; there are always differences of opinion and Councilmembers have different
backgrounds and views of the world.
Councilmember L. Johnson expressed appreciation for all the comments regarding COVID safety. She
implore the public to do whatever they can to help reduce the rising numbers and to help protect those like
her son who is under 16, high risk and not eligible to get vaccinated. He has voluntarily done everything he
can to protect public health, already giving up a lot and likely giving up a lot in the future. She encouraged
the public to get vaccinated when they are eligible which is everyone over the age of 16, wear masks inside
and outside when near others, stay socially distanced and avoid large gatherings.
11. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:58 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 22
Packet Pg. 68
7.1.a
Public Comment for 4/27/21 City Council Meeting:
From: cdfarmen
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 4:01 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Tree code
Dear City Council Members,
There are many city residents who share my viewpoint that the most important issue is
amending the tree code to protect Perrinville Creek and its watershed.
Perrinville Creek has long been known to have serious problems caused by stormwater runoff.
Fixing this problem has been nothing less than a "money pit".
Prior and current financial impact on city funds.
Since 2014 the city has spent, including grants, $388K for a Perrinville Creek study, nearly
$100K installing a 60' long bioswale on 192nd St near 76th Ave W, 6 rain gardens on Sierra
Drive, $ amount unknown, other rain gardens by Sierra Park, again $ amount unknown, another
approximately $1.4-1.6M for the two-phase stormwater control project in Seaview Park, an
unknown $$ amount for repairing Olympic View Drive when stormwater washed out part of the
roadway and sidewalk, and the latest to be very costly, is fixing the problems where Perrinville
Creek overflowed on neighboring properties due to a blockage caused by sedimentation
flowing downstream to that area.
Is the majority of the city council willing to keep pouring good money after bad with a band -aid
approach to the problem?
Unless something is done to fix the tree code to protect the trees and Perrinville watershed, the
problems will continue to soak up city funds that are largely taxpayer money.
Short of acquiring the property and preserving it as a conservation site, the one important thing
that can be done to alleviate future problems is to make the Flexible Conservation Subdivision
Design plan the required option if the 30% tree retention cannot be met.
For those of you who are more in support of housing than tree retention, it is important to
know that using this plan does not reduce the number of home sites, it merely requires
placement of the lots in a way to limit the number of trees removed and to reduce the amount
of grading to accommodate the subdivision. And, in reality, it can be less expensive for the
developer. Also, with the conservation plan there is normally less impervious surface coverage
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 23
Packet Pg. 69
7.1.a
than with a conventional subdivision, more open space as a result, more protection for wildlife,
and in this case, less damage to the watershed.
I am hopeful that in tonight's tree code deliberation, there can be at least a simple majority
willing to take the necessary action to protect the Perrinville watershed.
Thank you,
Duane Farmen
Seaview resident
From: Sue Hoekstra
Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 8:47 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Walkable Main Street Survey
To Esteemed Members of Edmonds City Council,
These are my heartfelt comments which I included in the comment section in the recent
Walkable Main Street Survey. It is shared simply for your information and for record.
"I believe Main Street, Edmonds, WA with its unique approach to our beautiful ferry landing
and waterfront should never be closed to local or visitor traffic. Our lovely old buildings are
hidden from sight.
Retailers have shown financial losses as a result of last year's experience. We just can't hurt
them more.
Parking is already hindered by "streateries". We can't ask people like myself to walk farther to
shop.
We are in a pandemic. All events and activities have been cancelled world-wide. How can
Edmonds ever justify opening one now, especially every weekend this summer and fall? Tome,
it is completely irresponsible and should be unthinkable. Please do not pursue this idea
further."
Susan Hoekstra
From: Carreen Rubenkonig carreennrubenkonig
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 24
Packet Pg. 70
7.1.a
Public Comment of Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig for City Council Meeting April 27th, 2021 on
Planning Board Appointment Schedule and the Role of the Alternate
Comparison of City of Edmonds Citizen Planning Board Appointment Schedule
Showing EMC Code 10.40.02 (per City Council Vote in 1980)
and the Planning Department Informal Roster
Board
Position #
Current
Member
Inaugural End
of Term
End of Current Term
by EMC 10.40.02
End of Current Term by
Planning Department Roster
Match
1
Rosen
1982
2022
2024
No
2
Robles
1982
2022
2021
No
3
Cheung
1983
2023
2022
No
4
Monroe
1983
2023
2022
No
5
Pence
1984
2024
2024
6
1 Crank
1 1984
1 2024
1 2024
7
1 Cloutier
1 1985
1 2021
1 2021
Alternate
I Vacant
1 1985
1 2021
1 2021
This Appointment Schedule for the Planning Board — per EMC 10.40.02—has served the City well for
forty years. I encourage you to stay with the Code and not accept any misrepresentation of it. Historical
records of the Planning Board's Roster match the integrity of the Code in the sample years of 1995,
19%, 1997, and 2001. They demonstrate proper administration of the Code. You can consult the
records found at the end of the comments. To confirm the facts —Each roster states December 31It as
the last day of the term and cites the authority of EMC 10.40. The informal roster must be put back on
course with the Code Appointment Schedule.
The Code's Appointment Schedule is not broken. Alarm was raised this past Fall when four
members were up for re -appointment at the same time; Position 1, 5, 6, and the Alternate. This was the
result of a clerical mistake in the Planning Department's Informal Roster. Position #1 had fallen out of
compliance to the Code appointment schedule. So had the Alternate— but that specific clerical mistake
was remedied in the City Council January meeting. Positions #5 and #6 were administered correctly.
As to the facts of the Alternate position; The typical Appointment to the Planning Board is initially as an
Alternate and the start date with the board is the date of the city council confirmation. However, its four-
year term ends, as prescripted by EMC 10.40.02, on a December 31It. The Alternate position is often the
only open position the Mayor and City Council recruits, appoints, and confirms —due to the Alternate
progressing into a vacated numbered position. This occurred when Roger Pence, Alternate moved into
my vacated Position #5 when my service to the Board was terminated on December 315t, 2020.
The Alternate position was set up in The Planning Board to seamlessly support board proceedings. This
establishes the principle and pattern for all succeeding committees, commissions, and boards. Stay with
the Code and do not accept the unnecessary proposal that the function of the Alternate of the Edmonds
Citizen Planning Board needs to be in line with other groups. The City would benefit if other groups
matched the approach of how well the Alternate position serves the organization of the Planning Board.
The needed course correction is an administrative action— not an amendment to the Code
rearranging the schedule of board appointments. EMC 10.40 remains in effect. If a board member in
Positions #1. #2. #3. and/or #4 extends to a fifth vear. leeislate it as an interim vear of service for one
time only. The impacted board members should be informed of the formal (Code) end of term date for
their position. This is straightforward. Consider sending them notice through a formal letter, an email, a
memorandum, or a singing telegram.
As with most medicines, if a dosage is missed, one is advised to take it as soon as possible. Then resume
the directions as provided. Clearly medicine was missed for each of the four positions. So let us
immediately remedy the situation by resuming the official schedule for Positions #1 through #4 of Board
Appointments —to be consistent with EMC 10.40. as put forth from the December 16, 1980 meeting of
the City Council.
Public Comment of Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig, 04-27-2021
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 25
Packet Pg. 71
7.1.a
F E b`,O
EX.: PLANNING BOARD
6195
1890 . 11a
POSITION DATE OF TERM
NO. NAME APPOINTMENT EXP.
1
Rob Morrison
(M. Strauch resigned 7194)
ee
(A$ Schweppe resigned 417194)
(R. Jones resigned 2120194)
07119194 12131/94
01101195 12131/98
2
Phyllis Becker
(M. Cooper resigned 12131/94)
(alt)
07119194 12131194
01/01195 12131198
3
Ga Gra son
(B. Lancaster resigned 12131193)
01111194 12131/95
4
KEN MATTSON, CHAIR
01121192 12131/95
5
Melody Tereski
(L. Foreman resigned 12131/93)
(alt)
01/11/94 02/15/94
02/16194 12131 /96
6
Chris Keuss
(alt)
08104)92 12/31192
01101)93 12/31/96
7
Bruce Witenber
(P. Marmion resigned 03/20195)
06106195 12131197
Alternate
Vacant
(W. LaFon resigned 418195)
-
12/31197
STAFF LIAISON: Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor - 771-0223
AUTHORITY: Edmonds City Code, Chapter 10.40
NOTE: Members shall be appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation
by the City Council. Terms are for four years. Members are limited
to two consecutive terms.
MEETINGS: 2nd & 4th Wednesday of each month, 7 p.m., Plaza Meeting Room
dm WinwordZdsComms\Plan0d
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 26
Packet Pg. 72
Q
7.1.a
G{of �n�a�w
PLANNING BOARD
1 eras
�890 . 19
POSITION DATE OF TERM
NO. NAME APPOINlramcm EXP.
1 Rob
2 James Pidduck
3 GARY GRAYSON VICE CHAIR
4 Lynn Lacy
5 Mela
(M. Strauch resigned 7194)
(Al Schweppe resigned 4/7194)
(R. Janes resigned 2120194)
07M 9194 12131194
01/01195 12/31198
(M. Cooper resigned 12131194)
(P. Becker resigned 5196)
06196 12/31198
(B. Lancaster resigned 12/31193)
01/11194 12/31/95
01/01196 12/31/99
(K. Mattson resigned 01MW96)
01/20/96 12/31 /99
(L. Foreman resigned 12131193)
(alt) 01111194 02/15/94
02/15194 12/31196
6 CHRIS KEUSS CHAIR {alt) 06104192 12131192
01101/93 12/31196
7 Bruce Witenber (P. Marmlon resigned 03120195)
06106/95 12131197
Alternate John Dewhirst (W. LaFon reslgned416196)
(L. Laoy moved to Pos. 41 /20196)
(J. Pidduck moved to Pos. 2 6196
8196 12131 /9 T
STAFF LIAISON: Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor - 771-0223
AUTHORITY: Edmonds City Code, Chapter 10.40
NOTE: Members shall be appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation
by the City Council. Terms are for four years. Members are Ilmited
to two consecutive terms.
MEETINGS: 2nd & 4th Wednesday of each month, 7 p.m., Plaza Meeting Room
dm W1nword%8dn0amrn&V4snBd
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 27
Packet Pg. 73
7.1.a
OF E 040
fl ° PLANNING BOARD
1197
POSITION DATE OF TERM
NO. NAME APPOINTMENT EXP.
1 Rob Morrison
(M. Strauch resigned 7194)
(Al Schweppe resigned 41V94)
(R. Jones resigned 2120194)
07/19194 12/31194
01101195 12/31/98
2 JAMES PIDOUCK, VICE CHAIR (M. Cooper resigned 12131f94)
(P. Becker resigned 5196)
06196 12131/98
3
CyARY GRAYSON Y (e. Lancaster resigned 12131193)
01 /11194 12/31 /95
01/01/96 12131/99
4
LYNN LACY, CHAIR (K. Mattson resigned 01119196)
01120196 12131199
5
Melody Tereski (L. Foreman resigned 12l31193)
(alt) 01111/94 02115194
02/15/94 12/31/96
6
John Dewhirst (C.Keuss retired 12106)
(alt) 08196 12131/96
01101197 12/31100
7
Bruce Witenberg (P. Marmion resigned 03120196)
06106195 12131197
Alternate
Mario Massie (W. LaFon resigned 418195)
(L. Lacy moved to Pos. 4 1120196)
(J. P#dduck moved to Pos. 2 6196)
(J.Dewhirst moved to Pos. 6 1197)
12131197
STAFF LIAISON:
Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor - 771-0223
AUTHORITY.
Edmonds City Code, Chapter 10.40
NOTE:
Members shall be appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation
by the City Council. Terms are for four years. Members are limited
to two consecutive terms.
MEETINGS:
2nd $ 4th Wednesday of each month, 7 p.m., Plaza Meeting Room
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 28
Packet Pg. 74
7.1.a
y a
Planning Board
'67 121 V' Avenue North
771-0220, 771-0221 fax
NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
POSITION
DATE OF
TERM
NO.
NAME
APPOINTMENT
EXPIRATION
1
James Jim A. Crim
1/1/99
12/31/02
2
Virginia Cassutt
2/24/98 (Alt.)
12/31/01
7/99 (Position 2)
12/31/02
3
Stanton Monlux
10/26/99
12/31/99
1/1/00
12/31/03
4
Joanne Lan endorFer
4/98
12/31/99
(
1/1/00
12/31/03
5
Bever Llndh We Chair
2/24/98
12/31/00
1/01/01
12/31/U4
6
John Dewhlrst„ Chalr
8/96 (Alt.)
12/31/96
1/1/97 (Position 6)
12/31/00
1/01/01
12/31/04
7
Bruce Witenbe
616/95
12/31/97
1/1/98
12/31/01
Alternate
Ca Guenther
2/01
12/31/04
STAFF LIAISON: Rob Chaee, Planning Manager 425.771.0223
AUTHORITY: Edmonds City Code, Chapter 10.40
NOTE: Members shall be appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation by the City Council. Terms are
four years. Members are limited to two consecutive terms. An appointment to fill a portion of an
unexpired term less than two years in length shall not be considered a full term.
MEETINGS: 2"d & 4" Wednesdays of each month, 7 p.m., Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 5cn
Ave. N.
Updated 05/10/01
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 29
Packet Pg. 75
7.1.a
From: Carreen Rubenkonig
Sent: Saturday, April 24, 20219:20 AM
To: Ken Reidy <kenreidy@hotmail.com>
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson @edmondswa.gov>;
Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>;
Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Re: Public Comment for April 27, 2021 City Council Meeting
Thank you!
Carreen
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2021 7:03 AM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Hope, Shane
<Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>; Council
<Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for April 27, 2021 City Council Meeting
City Council should immediately repeal flawed Ordinance 4217 and start over from the
beginning.
Ordinance 4217 makes the following false Declaration of Emergency:
The City Council hereby declares that an emergency exists necessitating that this Ordinance
take effect immediately upon passage by a majority vote plus one of the whole membership of
the Council, and that the same is not subject to a referendum.
Majority vote plus one has not applied to Edmonds since Edmonds City Council adopted the
powers of Initiative and Referendum in 1985.
Council voted on March 2, 2021 under the false representation that a super majority was
required. There is no way to know how Council would have voted had Council been properly
informed that only one vote was needed for the vote on an Emergency Ordinance to fail. This
concept also applies to many other Emergency Ordinance votes in the past. How many of those
votes would have been different? There is no way to know. What a mess.
Ordinance 4217 claims it was effective March 2, 2021. Is this true? Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas abstained from voting on Ordinance 4217. As all 7 Councilmembers voted the night of
March 2, 2021, did not all 7 have to vote yes for the Emergency Ordinance vote to be
unanimous? Does an abstaining vote count as opposition to the Motion if there is no declared
"conflict of interest" claimed prior to the Motion?
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 30
Packet Pg. 76
7.1.a
Nobody made a Motion to pass Ordinance 4217 as a regular Ordinance. No vote was taken on
anything other than the Motion that declared an Emergency. The Ordinance Title for
Ordinance 4217 declares an Emergency even though Councilmember Fraley-Monillas
abstained.
Are all Ordinances put forth as an Emergency Ordinance subject to Referendum if they do not
receive a unanimous vote? Please explain the answer and provide legal support for the answer
Ordinance 4217 states in Section 1. that "The purpose of this interim regulation is to
temporarily protect certain landmark trees from tree removal as that term is defined in ECDC
23.10.020.5." This is an error. The reference should be to ECDC 23.10.020.T.
Ordinance 4217 has another error in Section 3. Nuisance Tree is defined in 23.10.0201, not
23.10.020. K.
Please stop passing new laws that contain errors. We already have plenty of errors in our city
code, a code that has needed to be rewritten since at least 2000.
Please figure out how to properly pass Emergency Ordinances and what is and isn't subject to
Referendum.
Please go back and address all Ordinances voted on in the past under the false
representation take they could take effect immediately upon passage by a majority vote plus
one of the whole membership of the Council, including Ordinance 4189.
From: joe scordino
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2021 9:41 PM
To: Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; My
Edmonds News <teresa@myedmondsnews.com>; Planning <Planning@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: State legislature passes E2SHB 1216 Concerning urban and community forestry
The WA State legislature passed E2SHB 1216 and it is on its way to Governor Inslee for
implementation.
Shouldn't Edmonds be heeding the State's intent in E2SHB 1216 (copy attached) concerning
urban forest management?
(Web link in lieu of whole bill: http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2021-
22/Pdf/Bills/House%20Passed%20Legislature/1216-S2.PL.pdf?q=20210427144336 )
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 31
Packet Pg. 77
7.1.a
Section 1 of the bill should be informative to the City's current effort to hopefully implement a
viable and effective Tree Code in Edmonds. It says:
"The legislature finds that preservation and enhancement of city trees and urban forests
contributes multiple benefits, including stormwater management, carbon sequestration, local
air and water quality enhancements, and fish and wildlife habitat, and is a cost-effective way to
meet these objectives. The legislature further finds that climate change is impacting our state in
numerous ways, including summer heat waves, heavier winter rains, and lower air quality, all of
which can be improved by increased tree canopy. The legislature further finds that modern and
well -crafted urban forestry programs can have significant additional benefits related to human
health, especially when delivered in highly impacted communities with higher health disparities
and that also have lower existing tree canopy. Significant research exists demonstrating health
benefits of trees and green spaces, including air and water quality improvements, positive
emotional responses to being in nature, physical activity, and social cohesion through
interacting in public green spaces. Furthermore, the legislature finds that Washington state
faces continued urgency in adequately protecting essential salmon habitat, which is necessary
to promote salmon recovery and thus help protect our endangered southern resident killer
whale population. It is the intent of the legislature to enhance urban forestry programs that
maximize cobenefits related to human health and salmon recovery."
The necessity of adequately protecting essential salmon habitat is very pertinent to the disaster
the City has created in the Perrinville Creek watershed.
From: cdfarmen
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2021 7:39 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Hoy permit at 8051 184th St SW
-- Original Message ----------
From: cdfarmen
To: "Lien, Kernen" <Kernen.Lien @edmondswa.gov>
Date: 04/23/2021 5:22 PM
Subject: Hoy permit at 8051 184th St SW
Hi Kernen,
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 32
Packet Pg. 78
7.1.a
Today when the contractor was back filling the foundation, they also back filled against my
fence. There was supposed to be a 30" high concrete block wall installed 6" off my fence and
then back filled up to the block wall.
It is not acceptable to have any backfill against my fence. It's bad enough that their lot will be
24" above the grade of my property. I thought they should also have weeping tile installed
along the base of the block wall so there is no drainage onto my property. I was told there
would not be weeping tile installed.
I ask that this problem be corrected before they do any more work on the job.
Thank you,
Duane Farmen
From: Bonnie Piest
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2021 4:37 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Emergency Ordinance 4217 Comments
I was unable to attend the full City Council meeting held on Tuesday April 20, 2021 and the
public Hearing section on the Emergency Tree Ordinance 4217. 1 did listen to the recorded
meeting on Wednesday and there were quite a few positive comments reinforcing
Edmonds direction with tree protection and specifically on trees on private properties.
As the July 2019 UFMP identifies that 83% of the tree canopy in Edmonds is controlled by
Private property owners. The Cities ability to have a long term impact on preservation of
the tree canopy can not be successful without including regulations on private properties
with a focus on preservation of Landmark and Heritage trees.
I have reviewed the Chapter 23.10 ECDC that was adopted by the City Council on March
2nd. I have been advised that this is specific to development properties and not private
properties and that the development of the Phase 2 will be focused on the Private
property regulations. My understanding is that is expected to occur and be completed by
the before the end of the Ordinance 4217.
My recommendations are the following:
1. That the Emergency Tree Ordinance 4217 be modified to include the definition of "Tree
Removal". This would provide further clarification on what is considered "tree removal"
and protection against any potential severe pruning of heritage/ landmark trees during the
ordinance period. I propose modifying the ordinance to include the following language
contained in the Chapter 23.10 ECDC Definitions in section 23.10.020
23.10.020 Definitions
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 33
Packet Pg. 79
7.1.a
T. Tree removal — means the direct or indirect removal of a tree(s) or vegetation through
actions including, but not limited to: clearing, cutting, girdling, topping, or causing irreversible
damage to roots or stems; destroying the structural integrity of trees through improper
pruning, unless pruning back to the point where the tree has been previously topped;
poisoning; filling, excavating, grading, or trenching within the dripline that results in the loss of
more than 20 percent of the tree's root system; or the removal through any of these processes
of greater than 50 percent of the live crown of the tree.
2. The Emergency Tree ordinance 4217 that is for a 6 month period ending September 2,
be considered for extension until such time that the city has fully completed and adopted
the Phase 2 private property regulations.
3. That the final Phase 2 private Property regulations include the Definition of Tree
Removal as state in section 23.10.020 as well as many of the additional definitions
contained in 23.10.020.
There are many King and Snohomish County cities that have adopted tree preservation
regulations for multiple years at this point, I am specifically aware of the City of Seattle,
City of Woodinville and Lake Forest Park. In my opinion, the city of Edmonds is behind in
these efforts and needs to make a concerted effort to prioritize completing and
implementing these tree preservation regulations for all properties including development,
private and city owned properties.
I appreciate your consideration of my recommendations.
Thanks
Bonnie Piest
From: cdfarmen
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2021 8:27 AM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Misstatement of email information
Good morning to all of you,
I have had a good conversation with Council member Buckshnis and the issue has been
favorably resolved. I do accept her explanation that it was an honest mistake on her part.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 34
Packet Pg. 80
7.1.a
Having accepted her apology, I would like to point out that whether it was 31 or 57 trees clear-
cut, is not the real issue at hand. It is the fact too many significant trees are being removed at
an unprecedented and uncontrolled pace from the city's tree canopy. Therein lies the need for
a good tree code that works for all citizens of Edmonds.
Please continue with due diligence in developing a good tree code that can stand the test of
time. Our natural environment, whether it be trees, wildlife, or a local watershed, is as much
important as the Edmonds marsh, the Edmonds waterfront, and I will also include housing as
well. What would our city be like without trees?
Thank you,
Duane Farmen
Seaview resident
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
April 27, 2021
Page 35
Packet Pg. 81
7.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/11/2021
Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of May 4, 2021
Staff Lead: Scott Passey
Department: City Clerk's Office
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda.
Narrative
N/A
Attachments:
05-04-2021 Draft Council Meeting Minutes
Packet Pg. 82
7.2.a
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING
DRAFT MINUTES
May 4, 2021
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Susan Paine, Council President
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Laura Johnson, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Brook Roberts, Student Representative
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec. & Cultural Serv. Dir
Rob English, City Engineer
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Ryan Hague, Project Manager
Mike Clugston, Senior Planner
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Dave Rohde, GIS Analyst
The Edmonds City Council virtual online meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. The
meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement: "We
acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors
the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands.
We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual
connection with the land and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present, participating remotely.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
OLSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 1
Packet Pg. 83
Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments.
Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, provided comments on technical studies and public outreach she felt was
necessary to undertake thoughtful deliberations for the upcoming tree regulations. First a technical study to
quantify the costs of private tree maintenance as well as context costs for the different types of damage
caused to private property by trees is required. The City spent public funds to quantify in dollar value the
benefits of trees in both the Urban Forest Management Plan and the tree canopy assessment. It is only fair
that the City spend public funds to explore both sides of the issue before undertaking this process. Those
costs are necessary in creating effective incentives which the City has identified in Action B of the UFMP
Goal 3. Second, a technical study to evaluate the City's public investment versus private priorities in relation
to environmental justice and specifically the Washington State Environmental Health Disparities Mapping
is required. A review of the 2017 Urban Tree Canopy Assessment as well as the UFMP found no
consideration of environmental justice. Had that consideration be given, it would have found overburdened
communities are located around the SR 99 corridor and focusing public dollar investment in street trees,
parks in the areas identified in the tree canopy assessment, concentrates public funds away from the areas
that need them the most while simultaneously creating private requirement to maintain trees in these
overburden communities. Finally, the City needs to undertake public outreach. The City undertook
significant outreach including surveys to develop the UFMP which found the public is generally satisfied
with the City's activities on public property and prefers the City only provide guidance and education as
opposed to regulation when it comes to stewardship of trees on private property. For private land, the UFMP
guides education and incentives toward tree management. It is clear from the emergency ordinance that the
City will be evaluating actions that deviate from the UFMP. Conducting outreach to gauge community
support and interest in this effort is absolutely needed. All these studies and efforts would have the added
benefit of properly supporting the finding of the State Environment Policy Act assessment.
Janelle Cass, Edmonds, a resident, veteran and local business owner, commented on the Walkable Main
Street concept. It has been the hard work of the downtown businesses and their associations and
organizations in promoting the charm of Edmonds and encouraging shoppers and diners to come to this
lovely City, not necessarily the Mayor and the Administration. The Save our Saturday's effort was an outcry
by the retailers to firmly indicate they do not want unsolicited help and in fact the Walkable Main Street
help is harmful to them. Many businesses have suffered tremendous loss in revenue due to the pandemic
and instead of letting businesses take a breather to recuperate, the Walkable Main Street concept is like
force-feeding them an ineffective antidote. Citizens deserve leadership that uses a fair and systematic
process for making decisions, one that starts by identifying the problem to be solved and then answering
basic questions. For example, citizens have yet to hear the cost of Walkable Main Street to taxpayers for
staffing and logistics. Citizens expect honest and impartial analysis when citizens and stakeholders provide
input and want it considered. Despite the slanted and biased nature of the surveys, the data from the second
survey clearly indicates the majority (52% of participants) prefer Walkable Main Street for one day or less
while only 48% requested more than one day per week. This policy must be reconsidered and a compromise
struck with the retailers to ensure true equity in this decision -making process.
Alan Mearns, Edmonds, a long time Edmonds resident, recently retired marine ecologist and member of
Save Our Marsh, spoke regarding one aspect of the Marina Park grant that are being discussed later on the
agenda, the marsh outlet. The key to restoring salmon and wildlife in the Edmonds Marsh estuary is a
comprehensive, holistic plan, one that provides salmon access to the entrance, tidally carved and
meandering channels within the marsh and fish access to health urban creeks. The grants the Council will
be voting on are components of an overall marsh estuary restoration vision or project, however, an overall
vision does not exist and remains stalled due to the Unocal property issues. He was eager to see this project
move forward and supported beginning some aspects of the park work, but leaving maximum flexibility
for stream outlet design as what happens at the mouth is critically important to the rest of the system. The
final outlet design should wait until there is resolution to the Unocal property so the whole marsh system
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 2
Packet Pg. 84
can be considered holistically. The Council should ask, can the landscaping and structure placements move
ahead under these two grants without knowing the final specification of the entire tidal channel? There are
big picture benefits if holistically restored; the education and tourist benefits the salmon bearing estuary
would bring to Edmonds could be incredibly significant if it is done right and now is a once in a lifetime
opportunity to do so.
Willie Russell commented none of what he had to say had anything to do with Student Representative
Roberts. He warned Councilmembers that actions have consequences. This past weekend he was notified
by some dangerous people who have his address thanks to the Council and the Police Department because
he was listed as a gang member by Council President Paine and the Edmonds Police Department in case
number 19-22704. He contacted Captain Greg Wineberry yesterday to inform him what he was told; there
is now a contract on a Snohomish County police officer because gang members do not like to be listed in a
police document that they know nothing about. His family went through some very dangerous moments
due to the Edmonds Police Department document and he encouraged the Council to look at it. As an elected
official in the 2l't LDPCO of the Cascade Precinct, he presents 987 people; 215 signed a document and
have talked to a lawyer about suing the City for putting their lives in jeopardy due to gang activity for no
reason. At this point they have no choice but to protect themselves by contacting a lawyer. They have
attempted to contact the City's attorneys but they do not want to talk and neither does the district attorney
or the sheriff. The Edmonds Police Department was at their residence illegally at 10:30 p.m. and lied in
their patrol log, committing a felony. He summarized the Council's actions very important and urged them
to be careful in what they say and write because it puts peoples' lives in jeopardy. He requested the Police
Chief contact them and urged the Council to be safe because what has been said and done is dangerous.
John Hoag, Edmonds, a member of the Economic Development Commission but speaking as a private
citizen, said as a member of the EDC subcommittee on neighborhood districts of which Firdale Village is
one, the recent unit lot subdivision expansion plan got his attention. He was opposed to the unit lot
subdivision expansion to the BD, OR and the Firdale Village mixed use zones. This expansion will further
erode existing commercial space set aside for businesses, business expansion or new business for the City
of Edmonds, thus stifling job creation and business recruitment. If there is a truly a desire for live/work in
Edmonds, the City should stop prioritizing housing at the expensive of commercial space. At the March
24th Planning Board meeting, Mike Clugston stated that unit lot subdivision has worked out very well in
the Westgate mixed use area. This is highly debatable as the two commercial spaces are still vacant two
years after Westgate Village opened. The housing above restricts the type of businesses that can use the
commercial space below and because the housing is maximized while the commercial is minimized, it
further restricts the footprint of potential business. The commercial spaces at Westgate Village are small;
the lack of tenants is not due to COVID, it is due to incentivizing housing. In his opinion Westgate Village
mixed use has not worked out well and he feared the same would happen in the BD zone and Firdale Village
mixed use area if housing is de facto incentivized by making it easier in these zones with disastrous results.
Housing is allowed in the business zoning and the Council will hear this is not a big change, but the change
is housing is a small H and commercial is a big C in these zones and turning that on its head will result in
much more housing than commercial space and any commercial space will not fit an expanding business
or enable a business to move into the space.
Kate Guthrie, Edmonds, owner of Glazed and Amazed, voiced her strong opposition to the Walkable
Main Street program that will close off Main Street right in front of her studio all summer from June 19th
to September 5, a 12 week period. Although she did not support any program that closed Main Street, a
good compromise would have been to close the streets on Sunday only. She heard at previous Council
meetings that having data from retailers would be helpful to assess the effects on retailers of closing the
streets. Data from her studio shows that the 12 weekends of road closure in front of her store will cause
significant revenue loss. As a retail business she depends on a large volume of sales to occur on weekends
make up for slow sales during the week while most people are working. She depends on Main Street to be
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 3
Packet Pg. 85
7.2.a
open to customers who drive by and find parking close to her store. In comparing the weekend sales for the
weekends that Edmonds closed Main Street last summer compared to the same weekends in 2019, sales at
her studio were 40-80% lower in 2020 compared to 2019. She realized this was probably due to COVID
business restrictions placed on her business, but the closure of the street does not allow customers to shop
at her store. Having Walkable Main Streets and tables in front of her studio, her customers are not painting
outside or coming inside to buy pottery while the streets are closed. Her customers are staying away from
her studio on the weekends because there is no parking close to her store. She asked that Walkable Main
Street only be allowed on Saturdays as a way to support retailers like her who are struggling to stay open.
In 2020 Glazed and Amazed lost over $5000 and was only able to stay open due to PPP loans and the grants
and help provided. She hoped the City would give retail some support and only have Main Street closed on
Sundays.
Linda Ferkingstad, Edmonds, spoke regarding the tree ordinance. The City is taking property value away
from owners of undeveloped property just because there are large trees on the property. The same has been
done to many indigenous tribes across the USA. Halting development on Edmonds property to honor the
land in the name of the Snohomish people, the City will be pushing urban sprawl close to tribal lands
allotted to them in the Treaty of 1855. Those actions will ultimately have a negative effect on the Snohomish
Tribes. Edmonds citizens and property owners will lose millions of dollars, the City will lose property tax
revenue due to the Council's decisions. Most if not all of the undeveloped land in Edmonds has challenges
such as dense trees, steep terrain, difficult access, all liabilities and expensive to overcome. It takes
determined and driven people willing to take on these challenges and build homes on the properties, homes
that are needed and allowed in a city zoned for high density. At least three people who are now in the
process of development are immigrants; she was unsure if that was a coincidence or maybe it was because
they are more determined and willing to take on challenges. The trees are not the challenge when they
bought the property; they were a bonus because they like trees and wanted to build around them. Laying
the financial burden to achieve the goal of funding the tree fund only on undeveloped property owners is
discriminatory. Owners of undeveloped property cannot be expected to fund the entire tree fund. To build
three homes on their property, they will retain more than 55% of the trees, but will be required to pay
$250,000 in fees. Not only does that take away any profit they hoped to make, it makes building almost
impossible. Potential buyers will factor the City fines into their purchase price. She suggested if the trees
that are being cut are valued, also valuing the trees that remain on the property and subtracting the trees
that are being cut from the value of the trees that remain.
Michelle Dotsch, Edmonds, referred to the agenda item regarding bicycle improvements, expressing her
appreciation for the work put into this project. At the listening session on February 241", citizens asked for
another public meeting via Zoom to review any new plans since the original rough designs have now been
altered and new information is being presented to Council tonight. She was hopeful the team will allow for
an update directly to interested citizens to gather new input to better assimilate the concerns and
opportunities offered by the public. One important piece missing in tonight's presentation is the location of
critical turn lanes from 9t" and Bowdoin at heavily traveled cross streets allowing for ease of traffic and
bike flow. Heading north on 9t", the recommended locations to consider would be left turns at 15th Street
SW north of the cemetery as well as a left turn at Pine Street. Heading west on Bowdoin, she recommended
including a left turn lane at 92°d Ave W. She requested the design not squeeze parking and driveways on
Bowdoin to fit a dedicated bike lane downhill that is not necessary and would be more dangerous as bikes
could easily travel faster than cars causing potential accidents when cars turn right into driveways. Sharrows
are the perfect solution on the downhill side of Bowdoin and Walnut as they travel with the traffic and the
same speeds and allows for normal parking and drive lanes. If 76t", 220t" and 212t" are all examples of great
results, then there is no need to add the unnecessary 3-4 foot buffers that will only squeeze out the
Community Transit buses, trucks and delivery and work vehicles.
(Written comments submitted to PublicComment@Edmondswa.gov are attached.)
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 4
Packet Pg. 86
7.2.a
6. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
7.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
OLSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The
agenda items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 20, 2021
2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS
3. EPOA LAW SUPPORT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT 1/1/20-12/31/22
1. MARINA BEACH PARK RENOVATION GRANT MATCH CERTIFICATION
Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Director Angie Feser said this agenda item is related to the
certification of grant match funding for the Marina Beach Park project. She requested Council's
consideration to authorize the Mayor to sign documentation that identifies the funding source for two
$500,000 grants that are eligible to match each other therefore, not requiring any City funding to match the
grants totally $1M. If Council chooses not to authorize the match certifications, the City will not be eligible
to accept the grant funds once they are available from the state. This is simply a requirement of the grant
program used to commit jurisdictions to supply the grant match. Edmonds is in the fortunate position to
having qualified for both grants and they can and will be used to match each other. This is not the step of
accepting grant money, only identifying the sources of match for the two grants.
Ms. Feser explained the Marina Beach Park improvements have been identified in the Parks CIP and CFP
since 2014 and this $5M project provides improved parking, vehicular circulation, two new permanent
restrooms, a playground, renovation of the dog park area, ADA accessibility throughout the site including
a handful of view areas and many educational opportunities. Part of the project is a new tidal channel which
daylights Willow Creek, currently in an 1100 linear foot pipe underneath the park. This provides access for
salmon into the Edmonds Marsh estuary area at the only access point where this channel can currently cross
the railroad, an existing bridge. This crossing is a fixed point for both the park project and the marsh
restoration project on the other side of the tracks.
In March 2020, the Council approved the grant applications for RCO. This project has had public process
in a Master Plan adopted in 2015 and this project was added to the 2016 PROS Plan as an addendum in
order to qualify for grant applications. The Council adopted the 2021 Parks CIP which identifies current
funding allocation and timing of this project using REET funds for $750,000 and the Parks Capital Budget
Fund for the balance of the $4.25M. This project is scheduled for design and development from 2022 to
2025. Traditionally the Council likes to look at agenda items twice before voting, but unfortunately
documents are due to the State RCO next Monday. This agenda item was on last week's agenda but was
bumped. Staff respectfully requests Council approval of this item tonight in order to submit by Monday's
deadline.
Council President Paine commented there had been lively emails earlier today about this funding. She
clarified this item was only authorizing the Mayor to sign the grant and the Council could address accepting
it later. Ms. Feser agreed.
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Ms. Feser for the answers she provided via email. He clarified this did
not tie the City into any design or channelization, that is all still open and part of the larger, holistic
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 5
Packet Pg. 87
7.2.a
approach. Ms. Feser answered absolutely, this is a step in the grant process where jurisdictions identify
their match source. Most cities and counties have to put up their own money as match. Edmonds is in the
great position that both grants can match each other. This step does not commit the City to the grants; the
Council will accept that during another process. The current design, the adopted Master Plan, is at the 30%
design level which identifies the location of the tidal channel and general footprint, but the details of that
channel along with every other component of the renovation will be developed and refined over the next
couple of years as the project approaches 100% design and construction documents. The key point where
the channel ties into and crosses the railroad is an existing bridge and is a definite and hard point in the
design, but the details associated with the channel shape and form, cut on the sides, etc. will be worked out
through the design process and refinement of the project.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented she was unsure the emails were lively, the goal was factual
information. She recalled when former Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite left, the Marina Beach
project was separated and marsh restoration was put into the storm utility paid by utility ratepayers. It is not
a holistic approach, she has seen many grants; if this was approached from a salmon recovery standpoint,
a 100% match would not be required. She said 100% is not often seen, a 10-15% match is more typical, as
evidenced by WRIA 8 grants she has seen. If the grants offset each other, she questioned what happened if
the City got one grant and not the other. She expressed concern with the lack of information in the proposal.
Citizen do not realize the City is committing to pay for the Marina Beach renovation when in fact there are
plenty of state and federal funds available via salmon recovery which begins at Puget Sound. If Marina
Beach were treated as a nearshore estuary which it is, just like Meadowdale Beach Park is part of the
Meadowdale nearshore estuary, all the grant funds could be consolidate and realized as a holistic approach
for salmon recovery. The City also needs to change its Comprehensive Plan; this is incongruent with the
Comprehensive Plan. She did not support the requested action. These grants are always available and there
are plenty of them. She preferred to step back and look at the CIP/CFP and take a holistic approach.
Councilmember L. Johnson congratulated staff for qualifying for two grants totaling $1M.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, THAT COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON RECREATION AND CONSERVATION OFFICE CERTIFICATION OF
APPLICANT MATCH FORMS FOR TWO GRANTS OF $500,000 EACH FOR THE MARINA
BEACH RENOVATION PROJECT.
Councilmember Olson asked for clarification what this commits the City to. In the past, there have been
instances where certain steps were taken and it looks bad or it's a political gaffe to walk away and she
wanted assurance that the Council was not going down that path. She understood the grants offset each
other; her concern was the obligation to the other $4M which the City could be on the hook for as other
grants are not lined up. Ms. Feser explained this authorization is only saying the City is identifying what
would be used for the match for the grants. It is not signing a contract to accept the grants; that will come
later this year and will require Council approval. The Mayor can sign this document, submit it to RCO, and
when it comes time to sign the contract for the grant, the Council can turn that down if they wish. This does
not commit the City to the grants or the project, it only identifies the matching source of the grants.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked for clarification from the Public Works Director regarding funding
from stormwater. Mr. Williams said there has been a great deal of discussion about the park project, the
channel through the park, the work on the open channel and the marsh itself, how all that can be/should be
coordinated. He acknowledged it is a very complex space to operate in. Like any good capital project, all
the grants will not come in at the same time and there is always the question of getting across the goal line.
This is a good thing to be able to start funding the park project. The one known is where it goes through the
Sound Transit bridge on the BNSF railroad tracks. From there to the beach will be designed as part of the
open channel when the time comes to do that. He believed Ecology would come forth in 2021 with an
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 6
Packet Pg. 88
7.2.a
interim action plan and a draft final consent decree and what happens with the Unocal property will be
known sometime this year. Ecology has been in the process of writing that for several months; it will go
out for public comment and he expected clarity regarding the property transfer by the third quarter. This
may then turn into one large project. Both sides of the railroad tracks have to match up to that one point, all
the hydrologics have to work, etc. The issues mentioned by the public such as tidally cut channels,
appropriate natural geometry of the channels, etc. will be addressed in design when the project reaches that
point.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she has heard it said that WRIA 8 has grants for salmon recovery.
She asked how much money Edmonds as gotten from WRIA 8 for salmon recovery. Mr. Williams said he
did not have the exact number, but they have provided a significant amount of funding to get the concept
of marsh restoration to this point.
Councilmember K. Johnson commented this is a very brief agenda memo, only one page with three pages
of attachments. She had to read it six times to comprehend the nuances and is still confused. If staff wanted
the Council to move through an agenda in ten days' time, she recommended providing a complete packet
with all information for the Council to make an important value judgment. She expressed concern that the
individual grants were listed in different amounts, Prism 20-1296 listed the project as $5,203,000 and Prism
project 20-1320 listed it as $4,615,549. That raises the question whether these are two projects that would
be added together for over $9M or whether the project amounts listed are incongruous to each other. She
asked the total cost of the project. Ms. Feser answered there are two applications for same project estimated
to cost $5M to complete. The first grant application was for WWRP local parks category with a grant
request for $500,000 which is the maximum. The $4.5M remaining was the City's contribution regardless
of whether those are City funds or other grant funding. That is the total amount of the project.
Ms. Feser explained in the second grant application to Aquatics Land Enhancement Account (ALEA), the
project cost was submitted for $4.6M because the balance of the $5M were elements that are not eligible in
that program. ALEA is an aquatic's land program tailored toward salmon habitat and supporting it and
things like playgrounds are not eligible costs. Therefore any elements that were not eligible to be covered
by the grant program were removed which left $4.6M In that category, the project was listed for eligible
expenses for $4.6M minus the $500,000 grant ask for the City's match for $4.1M. She explained this would
be like going to RCO for a grant for $500,000 for a $5M project and then requesting $1M from the Hazel
Miller Foundation. It is wo different grant applications for the same project, using different grants as
different sources of funding. The fact that they are side -by -side in the Prism account is confusing but that
is how they are submitted. They are two different grants, two different programs, and two different
eligibility costs related to those programs.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked if the Council accepts the grants now, do the funds have to be spent
within a specific amount of time. She asked the City's obligation in the future. Ms. Feser clarified tonight's
request is not to accept the grants. Councilmember K. Johnson said it was a step toward accepting the grants
so she was interested in the City's liability. Ms. Feser said she wanted to be clear, the Council was not
committing to the grants tonight. If the Council decides to accept the grants at a later date, there is usually
a two or four year window for the grants to be used and applied toward the project. This project is identified
in the CIP to go through 2025. This is a stepping stone into the project to move into design development as
well.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked if the intent was to proceed to 30% design with these grants or wait until
more is known about the entire project. Ms. Feser answered the Master Plan is 30% design and that design
was used to apply for the grants. Councilmember K. Johnson said she was trying to figure out what the
grants obligate the City to perform, construct, build, design, etc. and what that timeframe was. Ms. Feser
said if the Council decides to accept the grants at a later date, they are committing to building the project
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 7
Packet Pg. 89
7.2.a
which would require finishing the design process and construction. The RCO grants allow 20-25% of the
grant funding to be used for architecture and engineering so a portion of the grant funds could be used for
those design services before the project gets to construction.
Councilmember K. Johnson relayed her understanding that the grant funds will be finalized next month on
June 29th. Her concern, as was raised earlier, was there was not a comprehensive approach to restoring the
Edmonds Marsh and doing it piecemeal like this, she wanted to know what kind of stranglehold that would
place on the overall design. The overall design for Willow Creek is unknown because it depends on the
land ownership. If the City is constrained by the land it owns, it will be a very narrow passage way along
the existing pipe. However, if the City can attain ownership of all the land, there could be a braided channel
that it is hoped will go into the underpass that Sound Transit built. It is very hard to construct Marina Beach
without knowing what will happen in the marsh. She feared by allowing the Mayor to sign the grants by
May loth will lead to accepting the grants by June 29th and not knowing exactly what that means. If the
Council was expected to accept the grants on June 29t1i, the City's obligations need to be laid out, both
financially and construction, otherwise she would not be able to accept the grants on June 29th.
Ms. Feser clarified the June 29t1i deadline was for the RCO funding board recommendation to fund all the
grant programs. That goes to the state legislature and when the budget passes in July, the grant funds are
eligible and notification is provided to the City that the grants have been funded and asking for authorization
to accept the grants. It would be after July before she was before Council again. Councilmember K. Johnson
commented that was not clear in the memo; the memo was abbreviated with almost too little information
to make a decision. Councilmember K. Johnson relayed her understanding that one grant will match the
other and the City has no immediate responsibility. However, if the City accepts the grant in July, the City
does have a responsibility for over $4M. Ms. Feser agreed. Councilmember K. Johnson asked the timeframe
for spending that $4M. Ms. Feser answered RCO usually funds 2-4 years out and extensions can be provided
if progress is being made on the project. That will be presented to Council later this year during
consideration to accept the grants.
Councilmember L. Johnson asked if any consideration had been given to going to the Salmon Recovery
Council to request a large grant for the whole project rather than a small one for Marina Beach and then
another for the marsh. Ms. Feser answered the entire suite of grants available from RCO run the gamut.
That process was done before she hired and Marina Beach fit into two categories, local park and ALEA.
Staff applied for this project in those categories and was successful. She has not studied how this project
would fare in the other programs. This a park project with a daylighted tidal channel in it, a lot of park and
some salmon recovery. Not every piece of the project was eligible for ALEA. A limiting factor for this
piece of the entire marsh estuary restoration is that Marina Beach is a park.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested it was possible to do just the salmon component and keep Marina
Beach as is. Ms. Feser answered that would cut off dog park. Councilmember K. Johnson said the dog park
and Willow Creek daylighting could be done and still have the remainder of the existing Marina Beach
Park. Ms. Feser said there are a lot of options, but this is what the community approved in the Master Plan
in 2015. Councilmember K. Johnson said she was on that committee and there were many vocal groups,
and everyone wanted as much as possible. To Ms. Feser's comment that it is a park with a salmon beach,
Councilmember K. Johnson said it could be just the salmon recovery portion and not the park.
Councilmember K. Johnson commented RCO awards grants every two years. She asked if the City was
eligible for additional grants for Civic Park in this cycle. Mayor Nelson requested Councilmembers'
questions stick to the topic. This agenda item was scheduled for five minutes and has turned into a 30
minute debate.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 8
Packet Pg. 90
7.2.a
Councilmember Buckshnis offered to send Ms. Feser information on Meadowdale Beach which is also a
park, commenting that is being worked on now and includes WRIA 8 grant funding. She recalled the City
applied for and received NOAA grant funding for further design and NOAA ended up pulling the grant due
to the property issue. She asked if the ALEA grant could be pulled due to the Unocal property being in flux
and not knowing the salmon recovery portion. Ms. Feser answered for the ALEA grant, the project was the
Marina Beach Park footprint and has nothing to do with what is on the other side of the tracks. This project
ranked #1 in the ALEA program and has been used as an example because it is both restoration and
education due to its location in a park setting. It was a very strong application and went in under both
categories in ALEA and fared very well. It is not tied to the Unocal property whatsoever.
Councilmember Buckshnis said ALEA is for salmon recovery and the grant is #1 because it has a 100%
march. Salmon recovery starts at Puget Sound and goes into the marsh restoration. Last year NOAA pulled
their grant due to salmon recovery standards. The complete channel under the railroad tracks into the
nearshore estuary restoration has not been designed. She asked for clarification, that ALEA does not care
that the design not continuous. Ms. Feser answered that was correct.
Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern with the statement that the City will be committed to
providing the remaining funds for the project cost of $4M. She referred to examples she has provided in
the past, Wayne Golf Course received $14.5M via grants, Rainbow Bridge and several other projects.
Meadowdale is another example of a project that received a lot of grant funds.
Councilmember L. Johnson referred to the steps to get to his point including an amendment to the PROS
Plan and stakeholder outreach. She asked about stakeholder support for the grant applications. Ms. Feser
answered one of the big requirements of RCO is community support and showing that community support.
For this project, support is shown via the Master Plan, identification of the project in the CIP and PROS
Plan, and letters of support and funding match. Seven letters of support were provided by community
organizations including Students Saving Salmon, Sound Salmon Solutions, the South County Marine
Resources Committee, Port of Edmonds. Off Leash Area Edmonds, and Save Our Marsh. Those letter were
submitted with the grant application showing community support for the project. There is a tremendous
amount of community engagement and support for this project.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON CALLED THE QUESTION. VOTE ON CALL FOR
QUESTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-1-1); COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST,
FRALEY-MONILLAS, OLSON AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE VOTING
YES; COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS VOTING NO; AND COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON
ABSTAINING.
Council President Paine requested Item 5 be moved up as the previous 5 minute item had taken 30 minutes
and there were consultants waiting to present regarding Item 5.
5. PROJECT UPDATE ON CITYWIDE BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
Mr. Williams introduced Ken Lauzen and Grace Garwin, Blueline. He commented there has been a great
deal of public outreach and a lot of input into the design. The alternatives that were presented previously
have been modified as a result of comments.
Ken Lauzen, Blueline, reviewed:
• Project Overview: Project Summary
o Citywide project to add bike facilities on both sides of multiple area streets
o Funded by a $1.85 million Sound Transit Access grant
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 9
Packet Pg. 91
7.2.a
o Adds over 6 miles of bike facilities, bringing Citywide total to 17 miles - an increase
0 of approximately 50%
o Project corridors:
100th Ave W/9th Ave S: 244th St SW to Walnut St
Walnut StBowdoin Way: 9th Ave S to 84th Ave W
228th St SW: 78th Ave W to 80th Ave W
80th Ave W: 228th St SW to 220th St SW
Project Overview Map (green only used for identification on map)
Project Overview: Timeline
o Efforts to Date
■ 2009-2019 Citywide Bike Plan/TIP/Sound Transit Grant Pursuit
■ July 2020 Public hearing with City Council
■ August 2020 City Council approved accepting funds
■ Oct/Nov 2020 Blueline selected to assist City with outreach and design
■ Nov/Dec 2020 Survey, parking study, traffic analysis completed
■ Dec 2020 Listening sessions held with the community
■ Jan 2021 Preliminary design alternatives submitted to City for review
■ Feb 2021 Public outreach - website, survey, Zoom meeting
■ May 2021 Project update to Council
Project Overview: Design Timeline
o October 2020 Notice to Proceed
o Dec 2020 Community listening sessions
o Jan 2021 Preliminary design submittal and public meeting
o May 2021 60% design submittal
o July 2021 90% design submittal
o Aug 2021 Public meeting
o Oct 2021 Final design submittal
o Mar 2022 Construction begins
Project Overview: Data Collection
o Efforts to Date:
■ Mapping/Field Survey
■ Parking Analysis
■ Traffic Analysis
■ Methodology for Alternatives
■ Preliminary Design
■ Public Involvement
- Listening sessions
- Public open house
- Public survey
■ Alternatives Analysis
Grace Garwin, Blueline, reviewed:
• Data Analysis: Parking
o Data Collection
■ Data was collected over 3 days in Nov 2020
- Wednesday
- Friday
- Sunday
■ Number of cars parked was recorded every hour from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM
o What does data show?
■ Total of 518 spaces along project
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 10
Packet Pg. 92
7.2.a
- 310 on Bowdoin Way/Walnut St
- 208 on 9th Ave S
■ Average of 7% of stalls are used at any time throughout project
- 481 parking stalls available
■ COVID correction factor
- Use rate is similar to results collected in 2018, pre-COVID
- No correction factor applied
Data Analysis: Traffic
o Data Collection
■ Road tube counts were collected
- Nov 17th, 2020 -Nov 23rd, 2020 (1 week)
■ Turning movement counts were collected
- Wednesday Nov 18th, 2020
- Turning movements counts indicate how traffic volumes are split at the intersection
■ COVID-19 correction factor applied
- Based on change in volumes at 238th St SW and Hwy 99 between Aug 2019 and Aug
2020
- Morning:1.7x
- Afternoon:l.3x
Dedicated Left Turn Lanes
o Northbound and southbound left turn lanes will be added at 9th Ave S and Pine St
o Data collected in April 2021 during afternoon peak hours meet WSDOT Design Manual
requirements to add lanes
Public Outreach
o Efforts to Date:
■ Listening sessions - 12/10/2020
- 90 residents who previously showed interest in project were contacted by email to
attend, 21 attended
■ Public open house - 2/24/2021
- 90 residents contacted by email to attend
- 150 door hangers distributed
- Message board announcing meeting placed along project
- Postings in Edmonds Beacon, My Edmonds New and City Facebook page
- 60 attendees
■ Public survey - Closed on 3/1/2021
Public Outreach Results
o Key Issues
■ Parking at Yost Park
■ Improved pedestrian crossings throughout project areas
■ Speeding vehicles
o Survey results
■ 91 responses
■ 100th Ave W/9th Ave S - Alternative 2A
■ Bowdoin Way/Walnut St - Alternative 3
Mr. Lauzen reviewed:
• Public Outreach: Parking at Yost (Bowdoin Way & 96th Ave W)
o Schematic diagram of ideas
• Public Outreach: Pedestrian improvements
o Bowdoin Way & Pioneer Way/90th Ave W
■ Flashing beacons
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 11
Packet Pg. 93
7.2.a
■ Crosswalk markings
■ Bulb-out(s)
0 9th Ave S & Pine St
■ Flashing beacons
0 9th Ave S & 224th St SW/14th St SW
■ Flashing beacons
■ Crosswalk markings
■ Bulb-out(s)
Ms. Garwin reviewed:
Public Outreach: Speeding Vehicles
o Bowdoin Way/Walnut St speed study
■ Completed in March 2021
■ 33 mph for 85th percentile (current speed limit 30 mph)
0 9th Ave S/100th Ave W speed study
■ Completed in 2017
■ 36 mph for 85th percentile (current speed limit 30 mph)
o Vehicle speeds are expected to decrease
■ Pedestrian bulb outs, flashing beacons and marked crosswalks at select locations
■ Lane width reduction shown to reduce driving speed
Mr. Lauzen reviewed:
• Bowdoin Way/Walnut St (From Five Corners to 9th Ave S)
o Recommended Alternative
■ Retain parking on north side
■ Bike lane in both directions
■ Slightly reduced travel lanes
■ Geometry should contribute to traffic calming
■ There is greater usage of parking on the north side of the street
■ Sharrows are typically used in downhill sections; Bowdoin has both uphill and downhill
sections making sharrows less effective
• 9th Ave S/100th Ave W (North of SR 104)
o Recommended Alternative
■ Parking on west side
■ 6' bike lane on west side
■ 5' bike lane on east side
■ Buffers between bike lanes
■ One travel lane in each direction
■ Public survey results indicated alternative 2A was most desired
■ Homes on the west side tend to have shorter and steeper driveways, while homes on the
east side tend to have more off-street parking
■ The current 4-lane configuration at Walnut St will remain as is to maintain PM peak hour
Level of Service
■ A greater number of cars park on the west side
■ There are fewer driveways and streets on the west side, allowing for a greater number of
parking stalls to be retained
9th Ave S/100th Ave W & 220th St SW Intersection
o Recommended Configuration
■ The northeast corner of the intersection will be widened in order to provide bike lanes
through the intersection along the curb
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 12
Packet Pg. 94
7.2.a
■ The northbound right turn lane has been removed; however free right turn movements are
not currently allowed at the intersection
■ Left turn movements on 9th Ave S/ 100th Ave W will get a green arrow followed by a
flashing yellow; This will improve safety and level of service at this intersection
SR 104 & 100th Ave W Intersection
o Recommended Configuration
■ Provides a single northbound bike lane
■ Addition of bike lane has little effect on wait time at the intersection
■ Provides two through lanes with a left turn lane (same as existing configuration)
■ Adds sharrows for southbound travel
■ Balances the needs of bicyclists and vehicles
■ A future phase could include a southbound bike lane
o Alternatives Considered
■ Alternative 1
- Provides bike lane in each direction
- Significantly increases wait time for motorists on all 4 legs
■ Alternative 2 (recommended)
- Provides one bike lane in northbound direction and sharrow lane with bike ramps in
southbound direction
- Provides two through lanes in each direction
- This configuration narrows the lane width from 13' to I I' to provide two through lanes
- This configuration has very little impact on wait time for motorists
■ Alternative 3
- Provides sharrows to the outside lane for bike users who are comfortable enough to
pass through the intersection with vehicle traffic and will add bike on/off ramps to the
sidewalk for a shared walkway
- In this configuration, it is expected that curb line adjustments will need to be made in
order to provide enough room on sidewalks to allow pedestrian and bicycles to
comfortably share
- Bike users who are using the sidewalks will be asked to move through the intersection
in the same manner as a pedestrian, sharing a narrow sidewalk
- This configuration has no impact on wait time for motorists
100th Ave W (South of SR 104)
o Recommended Alternative
■ Road diet
■ No parking
■ Travel lane in each direction with center turn lane
■ Bike lane in each direction
100th Ave W and Woodway Campus Intersection
o Recommended configuration
■ This configuration has the shortest southbound queue length during extreme traffic
conditions (school peak period)
■ This configuration provides a dedicated left turn lane for school traffic from the northbound
direction
■ Relocation of crosswalk to south side of the intersection
Firdale Ave (100th Ave W) and 238th St SW Intersection
o Recommended configuration
■ This configuration has little to no lane offset and has a relatively short queue length in the
southbound right turn lane
■ This keeps the bike lane along the sidewalk through the intersection in the northbound
direction and following the right turn lane in the southbound direction
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 13
Packet Pg. 95
7.2.a
• Firdale Ave (South of SR 104)
o Recommended alternative
■ Road diet
■ No parking
■ Travel lane in each direction with center turn lane
■ Bike lane in each direction
• 228th St SW (from 80th Ave W to 78th Ave W)
o Recommended alternative
■ Roadway will be widened to add a bike lane in each direction
■ Connects into existing bike lanes on 228th St SW near Hwy 99
■ Wider bike lane will be provided on the western end of street where existing widths allow
• 80th Ave W (from 228th St SW to 220th St SW) — Snohomish County portion
o Recommended alternative
■ Sharrows will be added in each direction
• Public resources
o Public Contact Information:
■ Email: bikelanes@edmondswa.org
■ Project Contact: Ryan Hague, Capital Projects Manager
■ Phone: (425) 771-0220
o Project Website:
■ City Project Website
■ Description, Status, Timeline
■ Outreach Efforts
Mr. Williams said Project Manager Ryan Hague, City Engineer Rob English, and Transportation Engineer
Bertrand House were present to answer questions.
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Mr. Lauzen, Ms. Garwin, Mr. Williams, Mr. Hague, Mr. English and
Mr. Hauss for their participation. He was able to attend the open house earlier this year and appreciated the
team providing that forum, recognizing their plans to do public outreach again after 90% design. He referred
to the significant delay at the 100th/SR 104 intersection and asked the length of the delay. Mr. Williams
commented most of delay associated with the entire project from 244th to Walnut occurs at the SR 104 &
9th Ave/ 100th intersection. Councilmember Distelhorst commented there is a lump sum delay at that location
versus a delay metered out throughout the project. Mr. Lauzen said they looked at travel time in the entire
9th Ave/ 100th corridor; for the alternative with one lane through the intersection southbound in the morning,
the delay is 24 seconds; with the other alternatives, the delay is about 14 seconds. Councilmember
Distelhorst summarized there is a 10 second difference between the alternatives throughout the entire
corridor. Mr. Lauzen agreed and explained northbound during the PM peak, the time is almost unchanged
in Alternatives 2 and 3 and adds 28 seconds in Alternative 1 which has one lane through the intersection
Councilmember Distelhorst said he appreciated having those numbers because the windshield bias was very
strong. He recalled Mr. Lauzen saying the safest option for cyclists going through the intersection would
be dedicated bike lanes in both directions. With delays of 10 seconds and 28 seconds over a multi -mile
corridor, to him safety should be paramount and it also provides a safety benefit for drivers. During his
lunch break today, he rode the entire corridor along Bowdoin and Walnut and 9th Ave/l00th Ave to Firdale;
going through that intersection without no bike lanes is not ideal and would be the same with this project.
If this is an opportunity to have bike lanes and the added delay is only 10 seconds and 28 seconds over a
mile plus long corridor, he would love to see safety be paramount for that intersection. He appreciated the
alignment on all the other streets, commenting that is a very rough intersection to bike through, crossing
five lanes in five lanes of bi-directional traffic.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 14
Packet Pg. 96
7.2.a
Councilmember Distelhorst commented there are two intersections on the south side of Bowdoin between
Pioneer Valley and 92"d that do not have cut cuts on either side and asked if there were any plans for
installing those. He recognized that was probably not possible within the Sound Transit grant and asked if
it could be done with other funds. Project Manager Ryan Hague assumed Councilmember Distelhorst was
referring to adding ADA ramps, explaining there is definitely interest in providing ramps to cross the side
streets where many of them are currently vertical curb. It was unlikely ADA ramps would be installed
crossing Bowdoin because there are not any significant pedestrian generators there and there are a lot of
blind corners both vertical and horizontal. Quite a lot of effort was put into identifying the two potential
crossings of Bowdoin. Those crossing are definitely on staff s radar and were identified in the ADA
transition plan a few years ago. Councilmember Distelhorst said he was interested in east -west crossing of
the side street, not crossing Bowdoin.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed concerns from the public about left turn lanes and the potential for
turning conflicts with the addition of bike lanes. She asked if the left turn lanes had changed from the
original configuration. Mr. Lauzen answered the original idea was not to have left turn lanes on 9th/100tn,
but after hearing concerns and with Mr. Hauss' knowledge of the area and previous traffic counts, traffic
counts were done at a couple intersections. The intersection at Pine warranted left turn lanes in both
directions, 224th did not. There are no left turn pockets now; one will be added at the one intersection that
appears to have significant left turns. He agreed there will be bicyclists and people need to be aware. There
will be signage and striping and hopeful cars will be going a little slower.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed another question from the public was a lot of the sharrows had been
eliminated in the original plans and replaced with bike lanes which take up space and parking. She asked
why that was done. Mr. Lauzen answered sharrows are not quite as safe as dedicated bike lanes. Various
alternatives were explored; sharrows tend to work a little better in downhill areas and the southbound
intersection on 100th/SR 104 is slightly more downhill. On Walnut and Bowdoin, it was about I short for
one of the initial alternatives with I I' lanes and 7' parking, etc. Instead, they looked at how close they were
and it turns out there are places that have adequate width and other where reductions of 1' will be necessary
to provide bike lanes in both directions. The proposal is 10.5' minimum lane widths instead of 11'. The
sharrow was eliminated westbound on Bowdoin because there is an uphill section in addition to the
downhill sections.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked in the areas where the street will be widened, does any property have to
be condemned and if so, who would pay for that. Mr. Lauzen answered there is sufficient right-of-way.
Councilmember Buckshnis expressed her appreciation for the very complete packet.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she is a longtime resident and lives in the area of Walnut to Bowdoin Way.
She stressed her concern with safety in this segment. She has walked it many times and over the years lights
have been removed to make them more cost efficient but it has made it very difficult to see. She questioned
whether there was adequate lighting in this segment for walkers and bicyclists. She observed the proposal
was to have parking on the north side of Bowdoin Way but bicycles go fastest on the north side. She
questioned whether it would be safer to have parking on the south side where bicyclists would be going
slower uphill and suggested that be considered. She also cautioned against having parking too close to the
intersections to allow for sight distance. Bicycles move quickly and drivers need to be alert. She
summarized her number one concern in this area was safety.
Councilmember K. Johnson referred to the segment on 80th between 228th and 220th, commenting it did not
seem to be connected to the Five Corners roundabout. She asked if that was because there was already good
bicycle access there. She referred to that section as an orphan and not connected to anything. Mr. Hauss
answered the existing bike lanes on 220th will be extended. A bicyclist on 220th that wants to go to Five
Corners would go westbound on 220th and turn right on 84th. The intent is to connect the existing bike lane
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 15
Packet Pg. 97
7.2.a
on 220th to a proposed bike lane extension on 228th. That north -south route was in the Transportation Plan
Councilmember K. Johnson referred to north of 80th. Mr. Hauss answered the intent is a bike lane corridor
that connects bike lanes. Wayfinding signs were added on that route 3-4 years ago as part of the Bike2Health
project.
Councilmember K. Johnson said what is lacking is the segment north along 80'. Although there are bike
route signs, the two segments are not connected.. Mr. Hauss commented the 84' Avenue overlay done last
year included bike lanes on the north end as well as sharrows. Sharrows would be simple to add in the
future but not as part of this project as the project boundaries have already been established in the Sound
Transit grant. Mr. Hague assured there are sharrows on 80th from Five Corners to 220th and 80th to 228th
Council President Paine thanked the team for including input from the community and from the Council
during the previous presentation. As a bike rider who dreads crossing SR 104 at 100th, she was pleased to
see the recommended configuration and safety improvements. She hoped there would be a lot of signage
so people understand there are bike lanes for bicyclists and hopefully it would slow vehicles. Once an
alternative is chosen, she recommended reviewing it to ensure the right level of safety. There are a lot of
accidents at that intersection, people get careless while driving, making bicyclists even more vulnerable.
She supported the concept of slowing traffic with bulb outs. She recalled two years ago a neighborhood on
Pine Street requested speed mitigation on Pine Street due to the hill off 9th and drivers using that street as a
shortcut to the ferry lanes. She wanted to ensure that was addressed with the proposed left turn lane on 9th
She summarized this was nice work and she looked forward to the next round.
With regard to the option for a southbound sharrow at the Westgate intersection, Mr. Williams said
consideration is also being given to adding bike off ramps to provide bicyclists the option of taking the off
ramp, getting off their bike, walking through the intersection like a pedestrian and then getting back on their
bicycle. He noted the serious bicyclists won't make that choice and will remain in the sharrow or the
dedicated bike lane. The off ramps offer additional safety to cross the street as a pedestrian. Council
President Paine commented she has done both and it is nice to have that as an option during rush hour traffic
or during ferry offloading which tends to be a dangerous time for bicyclists.
Councilmember L. Johnson requested the team keep in mind that Pine Street is a spur between SR 524 and
SR 104 and residents have expressed their concerns regarding vehicle speeds. As someone who walks in
that area frequently, she can attest to the issue of speeding.
Councilmember Olson appreciated the amount of information in the packet since there is a lot of citizen
interest in this project. She learned more today about bulb outs and why they are used. It had been her
perception that more space was safer for everyone, but evidentially bulb outs slow the traffic somewhat and
also provide less distance for pedestrians to traverse which makes it safer for them. She suggested the
engineers to keep a balance in mind, instead of the bulb out being 7', maybe it could be 5' so it is the best
of both worlds, more room for bicyclists to stay out of a vehicle's way as well as stay out of the way of the
curb.
Councilmember Olson said she had a different take than Councilmember Distelhorst on the SR 104 & 100th
intersection and suggested that may be an area for citizen input. Some windshield bias is appropriate and
the solution that was developed may be the right balance for the community. However, she hoped before
the project proceeds, there could be a one week pause to wait for citizen insight and input in terms of how
the bike lanes will affect their residences and their life as well as from bicyclists. She recalled the indication
in the presentation that the green color was only to identify the location of bike lanes. When/if there is a
discussion about painting the bike lanes, she suggested that be brought to the Council and the public due to
the effect on the beauty, vibe and feel of the street.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 16
Packet Pg. 98
7.2.a
Mr. Williams asked for clarification regarding how to proceed. In response to the request to wait a week,
he asked if staff could wait a week for further input and then return for approval of the general concept for
all the sections.
Councilmember L. Johnson suggested putting it on the Consent Agenda in two weeks. Mr. Williams agreed
it could be scheduled on the Consent Agenda in two weeks and if anything needed to be brought to Council
in the meantime as a result of further input, that could be done.
Councilmember Buckshnis said some citizens wanted to know if there would be a public hearing; she did
not think a public hearing was needed and the public could contact staff. Citizens have told her that there
were significant changes between this and the original proposal. She asked how citizens would contact staff
or if staff preferred to schedule a public hearing. Mr. Williams did not see a need for a public hearing. The
last slide in the presentation includes a number of ways to contact staff including emailing Mr. Hague, Mr.
English, Mr. Hauss or him and citizens can include the Council if they wish.
Councilmember K. Johnson requested the feedback received tonight be incorporated and any questions be
answered because she did not want to see the same document on Consent. She recommended the team
digest the comments from the public and the feedback from the Council and make the appropriate
modifications. Mr. Williams acknowledged there were a lot of comments, but was uncertain any rose to the
level of Council direction.
Councilmember Olson suggested if the Council supported decreasing the size of the bulb outs on Bowdoin,
that would be a good change. Mr. Hague assured the bulb outs on Bowdoin would not be exceptionally
large.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented everybody has their own opinion and have been lobbied by
various people, groups and organizations. She suggested the team come back with a project based on
information and the background of employees and consultants. If some things can be added that make
Councilmembers feel better, fine and if not, she was fine with the proposal. She was concerned with telling
staff what they need to do when they are the professionals.
Councilmember K. Johnson recalled she raised three safety concerns in her neighborhood along Bowdoin
Way, 1) lighting, 2) proximity of parking to intersections where right turns occur, and 3) whether it would
be better to have parking on the south side of the street instead of the north because bicyclists will be going
faster downhill and may need more visual distance. She commented it was easier to stop if someone opens
a car door on the uphill side than it is on the downhill side. She requested the team take a closer look at the
three safety concerns she has noticed while walking and riding a bike in the neighborhood. Mr. Williams
explained the north side is better for parking because Bowdoin is not all downhill westbound. The parking
study showed higher parking usage on the north side which is why it was proposed to be retained on that
side. Homes on the south take their access in different ways. Those three things added up to it made sense
to leave the parking on the north side. Staff can look at the lighting and provide a response as well as
consider the proximity of parking where right turns occur. Councilmember K. Johnson agreed there is an
uphill section from Five Corners on Bowdoin Way on the north side and the multi -family properties rely
on Bowdoin Way for parking. Once the top of the hill is reached, it is primarily downhill the rest of the way
to 9ffi Avenue. Due to bicyclists' speed, she requested the team reevaluate whether to have parking on the
south side.
2. INTRODUCTION REGARDING PRIVATE CODE AMENDMENT TO ECDC SECTION
20.75.045.B, ENTITLED UNIT LOT SUBDIVISION - APPLICABILITY
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 17
Packet Pg. 99
Development Services Director Shane Hope explained the intent is not to decide anything tonight, but to
brief the Council on the basic idea. A public hearing will be held in the future as well as any other follow-
up meetings that are necessary.
Senior Planner Mike Clugston explained a private code amendment has been proposed to change where the
unit lot subdivision (ULS) process would be allowed. ULS are currently only allowed in the General
Commercial, Multiple Residential, and Westgate Mixed Use zones. This applicant would also like to allow
it in the Downtown Business (BD) zones, and specifically at the site of their proposed 14-unit townhome
project at 614/616 5th Avenue South, which is currently under review by the Architectural Design Board
(ADB). He displayed a map of existing subdivision zoning, General Commercial primarily along Highway
99, Multi -Family zones primarily along arterials such as 212th, 196th and Edmonds Way and an area
downtown. The applicant would like to use the process in the BD zones. When this application was
submitted, staff felt it reasonable to add two more zones where ground floor multi -residential is an option,
the Firdale Village Mixed Use Zone and a few parcels in the Office Residential (OR) zone on Sunset.
The ULS process was adopted in 2017 to provide opportunities for dividing fee simple ownership of land
to create townhouses, rowhouses and similar fee -owned dwelling units as an alternative to both
condominium ownership and traditional single-family detached subdivision. A ULS does not permit uses
or densities that are not otherwise allowed in the zoning district in which the subdivision is proposed. Each
project where a unit lot subdivision is used is first reviewed and approved to verify compliance with all
applicable building, fire, public works, and zoning codes. The ULS then follows and inserts property lines
between dwelling units, typically along shared walls and enclosing a small private yard.
Mr. Clugston identified five locations that have used the ULS process, one in a CG zone on 212th east of
the high school and four others in the multi -family zones (one in the bowl, two near the high school and
one in the south end of the City). There have not been any applications in the WMU; multi -family is allowed
on the ground floor in some subdistricts and some zones allow townhouse type development as proposed
at 614/616 5th Ave S. The project at 614/615 5th Ave is currently under review by the ADB and could be
approved without allowing the ULS process by creating condominiums but they would prefer to use the
ULS process. The packet includes the current ULS code with brief markup in the applicability section that
would identify the BD zone as an additional zone to allow use of the ULS process.
Mr. Clugston relayed the Planning Board considered the BD, Firdale Village Mixed Use and OR zones and
initially supported broadening the applicability but in the end recommended the BD zones. The owner of
the site provided testimony last week during audience comments, but he was unsure if they were available
on tonight's meeting. Ms. Hope advised there would be an opportunity at the public hearing for the applicant
to speak to the code amendment they have applied for.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the applicant was Pine Park 614, File Number PLN2020-0053. Mr.
Clugston answered that is the application for design review. This amendment is File Number AMD2020-
0003. Councilmember Buckshnis observed there is one applicant, but the intent is to expand use of ULS
into other zones. The applicant is only applying for 614 and 616 5th Avenue South. Mr. Clugston said that
is the applicant's design review project; the applicant would like to use it on their project at 614/616, but it
apply throughout BD zones if approved. Ms. Hope reminded this type of zoning approach must be applied
to an entire zone, not just one parcel. Councilmember Buckshnis commented unless it was a variance. Ms.
Hope said it would be difficult to qualify for a variance. The ULS process does not change the building, it
simply allows instead of a condo or rental units in one complex, it could be divided up for single ownership.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented the developer of this one parcel wants to expand the applicability
to Firdale and all the BD zones. Mr. Clugston explained the applicant's request was for the BD zones.
During staff s review of their request, it seemed reasonable to extend it to other zones where ground floor
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 18
Packet Pg. 100
multifamily residential is allowed such as Firdale Village and OR. Ms. Hope pointed out the Planning Board
only recommended the BD zones.
Councilmember Buckshnis said with individual units rather than a condo, if a townhouse that used the ULS
provision, it must be sold as a ULS with a business on the first floor. Mr. Clugston agreed. Councilmember
Buckshnis said she has a lot of concerns, commenting she was unsure who has ever lived with the terrible
neighbor next door and there are so many things that can go on downtown and although downtown is great
now, she found it difficult to comprehend allowing ULS in all the BD zones. She said she would keep the
rest of her questions for the public hearing.
Councilmember Olson offered to provide her comments via email to Ms. Hope and Mr. Clugston so they
could be addressed during the public hearing.
Council President Paine said it sounds like the proposal is to add ULS to what can be allowed. Currently
there could be building with condominium or apartments on the ground floor, but this would require
commercial or office on the ground floor. These other ownership or rental properties are still allowed
through the BD zones, but for a ULS, the ground floor use would be different. Mr. Clugston explained a
commercial use is required on the ground floor in any event. Rather than an apartment or condo, this would
be a fee simple where someone could buy one unit; in this developer's project, they are proposing 14 units,
3 in each of 2 buildings facing 51h and another 8-unit building behind. For example, in the 3 unit buildings
on 5th, each would be required to have commercial on the ground floor as part of a live/work unit and 2
levels of residential above. If the ULS process is approved, they could put property lines on those walls
between the units and the units could be purchased separately. That is all the ULS does. Without ULS they
could still create a condominium.
Councilmember K. Johnson relayed her understanding a fee simple arrangement provided vertical
ownership. What is different about this proposal is commercial on the ground floor. If it were a
condominium, the responsibility would be the developer's, but with a fee simple arrangement, each
individual townhome facing 5th Avenue would become a commercial landlord and have to find renters, etc.
Mr. Clugston relayed the assumption by the developer is this live/work unit concept exists in other parts of
the country and they see some demand for it here. They are proposing those units in the project that is
undergoing design review and plan to build them regardless of whether they can do ULS. Without ULS,
they have indicated they will do condominiums. Assuming the units are design reviewed and approved and
they get building permits, they plan to construct them with the units facing 5th each having ground level
commercial space as part of the live/work concept and owners will live above, essentially commuting
downstairs to the commercial use. The range of uses in the downtown area is vast; it could be a small shop,
an office, etc. The intent of the live/work concept is to have people live above their business.
Councilmember K. Johnson commented that would be a challenge in that area of 5th Avenue because there
are no live/work units to the south and none between there and the fountain. This a new concept and she
wondered who would take the risk, whether it would be the developer or the homeowner. In the case of
Westgate, there are still vacant spaces because some uses cannot be accommodated such as restaurants
because of the fumes. She anticipated it would be a challenge to sell those units with the expectation
someone living above will want to work downstairs or it will be the homeowner's responsibility to rent out
the space. If it were a condominium, that would be the developer's responsibility, but with a ULS, it will
be the homeowner's responsibility. That issue was not discussed by the Planning Board and is a key
consideration.
Mr. Clugston pointed out that is the risk this developer is taking on with this project; selling live/work units
whether they are owned through a condominium or ULS. The developer believes they can sell these units.
It is a unique setup for Edmonds, there are no other live/work units, but that is not to say it won't work.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 19
Packet Pg. 101
7.2.a
Providing the ULS process would be one more tool they would have to create ownership of these rather
than a condominium ownership model. Councilmember K. Johnson recalled when the post office site was
developed, a couple units were live/work because there was access from the street but in fact no shops have
located there. Mr. Clugston agreed several units on the north end of the building were identified as live/work
but were not required to be live/work units. Ms. Hope advised staff will provide more information and there
will be opportunity for further discussion.
Councilmember Distelhorst requested staff not use red lines and shading on maps. He requested
Councilmember when talking about housing not to call these terrible things. There are ULS in the city;
those are residents and neighbors and fellow Councilmembers who live in multifamily ULS. They are not
terrible things, they are housing options where people live. He asked if there was a date planned for the
public hearing. Ms. Hope said staff will work with the Council President Paine on a date in the next month.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER L.
JOHNSON, THAT DIRECTOR HOPE AND THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT SET A DATE FOR THE
PUBLIC HEARING FOR UNIT LOT SUBDIVISION CODE AMENDMENT.
Councilmember L. Johnson said in the interest of time, she will contact Ms. Hope with her questions.
Councilmember Buckshnis questioned whether a motion was necessary. Ms. Hope said a motion is not
needed. A public hearing is required because it is an application.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-0-3); COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, OLSON
AND L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PAINE; COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
FRALEY-MONILLAS AND BUCKSHNIS ABSTAINING.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the art non-profit building was live/work. Ms. Hope recalled
there was some discussion about that; she did not think it ever happened but offered to double check.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed Firdale Village has one owner and there was some type of Master Plan
done for Firdale Village in 2010. She asked if this would be an addition to the Firdale Master Plan. Ms.
Hope explained this would simply allow, if the owner chose to use ULS, to sell units separately; it does not
change the Master Plan.
Councilmember Buckshnis apologized to Councilmember Distelhorst, stating comments are comments and
she knew he did not like her vocabulary. The issue that many people have relayed to her is the fact that
condominiums are a lot different than ULS and that is something to be concerned about.
Council President Paine raised a point of order. Mayor Nelson requested Councilmembers refrain from
making personal remarks about other Councilmembers.
3. UPDATE ON DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
This item was postponed to a future meeting.
4. INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF SNOHOMISH
COUNTY (HASCO)
Ms. Hope recalled there were presentations regarding HASCO at the April 20th Council meeting, one from
HASCO's executive director and another presentation about a potential ILA with HASCO should an
opportunity arise that would allow them to move forward with purchasing property consistent with all City
zoning requirements for households that qualify as low income. HASCO currently owns three properties in
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 20
Packet Pg. 102
7.2.a
the City and it is possible other properties may be suitable in the future. Having the ability to move forward
with a purchase relatively quickly would be helpful if an opportunity arose. There would still be
communication from HASCO if such an opportunity arose. The Citizen Housing Commission (CHC)
recommended the City enter into an ILA with HASCO. The packet includes the ILA as well as a resolution;
the resolution could be adopted tonight or on next week's Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to an email asking about the property HASCO owns where rents are
not low income and requested staff respond to the questions in the email. She asked if the ILA is approved
and HASCO becomes the City's housing authority, will they provide Edmonds -only data instead of
comingling data with Snohomish County. Ms. Hope answered there would be data focused on Edmonds as
well as some regional information.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled HASCO Director Duane Leonard saying they will bring information
to the City Council and asked if that needed to be included in the ILA or was this a standard ILA. Ms. Hope
answered it is a standard agreement; it is also very standard for HASCO to come to City Councils. She said
Mr. Leonard was present and could answer questions.
Councilmember Distelhorst said the ILAs that HASCO has with other cities were used as the basis for this
ILA. Those were about 25 years old so this ILA is more robust and up-to-date than the ILAs HASCO has
with other cities. He worked with Sharon Cates, Mr. Taraday, Mr. Leonard, Councilmember Olson and Ms.
Hope to ensure the document was updated. Councilmember Olson worked with Ms. Cates on the resolution.
It was a good group effort with a lot of input from the parties.
Councilmember Olson referred to packet page 222, the slide in the earlier presentation about what the draft
ILA does not do, there are no code or density changes, which basically means HASCO will comply with
Edmonds code, zoning, density, etc. in any of their purchases. One citizen pointed out that express detail
was not in the ILA. Ms. Hope said it is mentioned in the ILA and even if it was not, that is the law.
Councilmember Olson referred to a comment in an My Edmonds News thread about the ILA that Mr.
Leonard would be happy to talk with citizens and to write to Councilmembers to get his contact information.
She pointed out the word "market rate" is a title HASCO will likely end up changing, it describes a funding
source and way of buying; it is market rate at the time it is purchased, not that they are market rate rentals.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said when she has talked with citizens, there seems to be a lot of confusion
between the CHC and the HASCO agreement. The only crossover between these is the CHC did not address
low income housing beyond recommending the City reach out to a housing organization to provide that
level of housing. People see this as coming out of the CHC, but it really has nothing to do with the CHC
who acknowledged they were not planning to address low income, disabled, veteran and senior housing.
The agreement with HASCO is a win -win the funding for this comes from a tax rebate that has been in
place since Dave Earling was Mayor, close to $100,000/year that can be used in combination with other
cities or for Edmonds to use for housing purposes.
Councilmember L. Johnson referred to Point 5 in the ILA, Planning, Zoning and Building Ordinances,
which clearly states all housing projects of HASCO shall be subject to all planning, zoning, sanitary and
building laws, ordinances and regulations of the City unless otherwise waived in whole or part by
resolution.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF THE
HASCO INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 21
Packet Pg. 103
7.2.a
Councilmember K. Johnson said she did not support this for the simple reason that it was considered low
hanging fruit from the CHC recommendations that could be easily implemented. However, the Council has
not discussed how to address the CHC's 15 recommendations. It is imperative that the Council decide how
to handle the recommendations before going through them one at a time. The Council needs to set its own
priorities and understanding of the process. For those reasons she will vote no and urged Council President
Paine and Ms. Hope to set aside time to discuss that more thoroughly. Ms. Hope answered there are plans
to do that.
Councilmember Distelhorst clarified there is actually no funding associated with this agreement. The sales
tax rebate or other things like that are possible, but would be handled separately. This ILA only forms the
partnership and establishes HASCO as the City's housing authority. The CHC made a similar
recommendation about partnering on the implementation of the sales tax rebate or other future funding
sources, but that is not part of this agreement.
Councilmember Olson expressed support for the ILA. This was something that easily could have come up
even without the CHC's recommendation. She supported Councilmember K. Johnson's comments about
the Council discussing and prioritizing the CHC's other recommendations and looked forward to that
conversation.
Councilmember Buckshnis echoed Councilmember Olson's comments. She relayed a citizen's comment
that there were many non -profits that the City could partner with. Ms. Hope agreed there are other non-
profit organizations and the idea is to look at multiple possibilities. This agreement allows HASCO to move
forward with securing property and avoid lengthy delays to get Council approval. HASCO was created long
ago via statute and is required to get permission from cities; other non -profits can come in without getting
permission from a city. Councilmember summarized other non -profits can come into the City even if the
City has an ILA with HASCO.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out the City already had agreement with either HASCO or another
organization when the City got the tax rebate. She asked whether that was something the City had to renew.
Ms. Hope answered that is a portion of state sales tax, it does not have to be renewed. That was a decision
that was made and the money is in a fund; staff plans to seek Council direction regarding how to spend it.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if it increased every year. Ms. Hope answered yes, but it is not a lot
of money. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented it was better than nothing. She thanked Mr.
Leonard for his patience listening to Council and expressed her appreciation for HASCO.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, FRALEY-
MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, AND COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON AND COUNCIL
PRESIDENT PAINE; COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
8. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. COUNCIL COMMITTEE MINUTES
9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson reported due to encouraging signs over the weekend that the 4th wave is plateauing, the
Governor decided to wait 2 weeks to evaluate whether to go back to Phase 2 or stay in Phase 3. It is up to
everyone in the community to determine what happens. He urged everyone to wear masks, get vaccinated,
and to seek advice from their doctor regarding questions about the vaccine, its safety and any health
concerns.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 22
Packet Pg. 104
7.2.a
Councilmember L. Johnson said hate has no place in Edmonds and when it does appear, it should not be
ignored. She applauded the concerned citizen who documented and bought attention to the issue of
swastikas, symbols of hate painted on trees in Southwest County Park. It must have been shocking to see
and she appreciated the resident's calmness and making sure the person could be located. She applauded
the City's Park & Rec staff and the Police Department for working with and bringing this to the attention
of Snohomish County so they could remove the symbols of hate. She also applauded Mayor Nelson for his
strong statement on this and actions he will be taking to address this and numerous other acts that have
happened in the last few years. She reiterated hate has no place in Edmonds and when it does rear its ugly
head, it should not be ignored. She thanked all who were not ignoring it.
Councilmember Olson echoed Councilmember L. Johnson's comments. She wished all a Happy Mother's
Day, commenting this pandemic year has disproportionately impacted women, many of whom are
caregivers. In recognition of the many additional demands and difficulties of this year, she saluted all the
moms especially those with school age children. She gave a shout out to her daughters Oliva and Paige for
the honor of being their mom.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported she has been meeting with Dr. Spitters on a weekly basis and it
appears Snohomish County got a two week stay to continue to plateau or go down. That requires social
distancing, wearing masks, and get vaccinated when you can. Unfortunately, she is seeing a lot of people
at events without masks. She thanked Councilmember L. Johnson for her comments, agreeing hate has no
place in Edmonds and being quiet makes it more accepted. She also appreciated the citizen who came
forward and Mayor Nelson for taking a stand. She wished a Happy Mother's Day to all the mothers, noting
her mother is gone and she wished she could do more than put flowers at the cemetery.
Councilmember Buckshnis wished everyone a Happy Mother's Day. She will be traveling to Tillamook,
Oregon, to see her only remaining aunt and participating in the budget retreat via phone. She may not be at
next week's Council meeting depending on her aunt's internet. She commented it has been a tough two
years and everyone should celebrate moms because they have done a lot and shouldered a lot of anxiety,
depression and health issues over the past I1/z years.
Councilmember Buckshnis agreed hate has no place in Edmonds or in the world. She recalled Hutt Park
was assaulted five years ago but there were not symbols and now there are no symbols, making it obvious
what has happened in five years. She encouraged everyone to calm down, be kind, meet in middle and wear
masks.
Councilmember K. Johnson wish everyone a Happy Mother's Day, commenting mothers who have passed
away are remembered in our hearts. She expressed concern about the announcement that Main Street will
be closed on Saturdays and Sundays, and that the concerns of the business owners on that street were not
considered. A compromise was suggested for Sundays only and she hoped Mayor Nelson would reconsider
his decision and consider a compromise, fearing the two day closure could cause local business to go out
of business. It is difficult for older people to access those stores and restaurants.
Council President Paine reminded of the Council budget retreat this Saturday, 1-5 p.m. She and Ms. Hope
are talking about the CHC's recommendations and it will be on a future meeting agenda. She thanked
Councilmember L. Johnson for mentioning the vigilant residents in parks and agreed hate has no place in
Edmonds at all.
Council President Paine referred to COVID tests being offered on tabletops in the streets. She cautioned
against handing one's DNA to strangers and to go to a proper site to get tested. The violations to one's
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 23
Packet Pg. 105
7.2.a
personal information from one of the tabletop testing sites could be devastating. She wished a Happy
Mother's Day to all.
Councilmember Distelhorst echoed all the sentiments that Councilmember L. Johnson voiced and expressed
his appreciation for the quick action by residents, and quick response from Mayor Nelson, city staff,
Snohomish County Councilmember Wright and Snohomish County Parks staff. Hate has no place in
Edmonds and it will be addressed.
Councilmember Distelhorst reported this month is Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month;
the Edmonds School District, Sno-Isle Library and many other organizations are marking that and he
encouraged people to take time to learn more. It is also Mental Health Awareness Month, commenting the
need for mental health support is just the same as an injury to a muscle, finger, etc. It is also Teacher
Appreciation Week; he expressed appreciation to all the teachers who are adapting to the myriad issues
they have experienced last year and this year through the pandemic. He encouraged everyone to get
vaccinated and to wear masks and wished all a Happy Mother's Day.
Student Rep Roberts reminded everyone to take time for themselves and check in with their loved ones.
This and 2020 have been difficult years and we are all in this together and will not get out of it unless we
work together. We need to come out of this stronger together and he was certain we will. Take time, even
five minutes to talk to someone, get vaccinated when you can and wear a mask. People continue to die from
this deadly virus; it's unacceptable that that continues to happen. He wished all a Happy Mother's Day,
commenting moms are super heroes who do so much for us and he was very appreciative of his mom.
11. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:51 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 24
Packet Pg. 106
7.2.a
Public Comment for 5/4/21 City Council Meeting:
From: ACE President
Sent: Tuesday, May 4, 2021 6:20 PM
To: Council <Council@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Hope, Shane <Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: RE: New Business Item 7.4: Interlocal Agreement with the Housing Authority of
Snohomish County (HASCO)
Re: New Business Item 7.4: Interlocal Agreement with the Housing Authority of Snohomish
County (HASCO)
There was an important post on My Edmonds News by an actual resident of the HASCO
Edmonds Highlands Property that perfectly illustrates the concerns we had expressed in a
previous email referenced below:
Christine Koch posted May 3, 2021 at 11:31 am "HASCO owns the Edmonds Highlands Apts on
Edmonds Way (232nd-236th) and it is Section 8; HOWEVER, many seniors have been on Sec 8
waitlist for 5-6 yrs and no response. 2018 rents increased $100/mo = $1,200 yr
2019 rent increase $250/mo=$3,000 yr. There is no way that the taxes on a 720sq 1-bdrm
increased $3,000/yr.
HASCO and Coast Mgmt are being obscenely greedy and concern that 2022 rent increases will
put many residents into Nomadland. Our elected representatives need to ACT IMMEDIATELY
for a 5% rent increase cap!! I am 120% rent compromised."
Who is looking out for these residents and how will HASCO be using our gift of public funds to
its best use by enacting this agreement with no local oversight and no ending date? There is
also no language in the ILA that clarifies what authority HASCO will have over future housing
and housing policy in Edmonds if this agreement is enacted.
Another insightful piece of information is from the HART Funding Workgroup Memo from
September 9, 2019. HART was a housing regional task force that had our Director Shane Hope
as well as Duane Leonard of HASCO and Chris Collier of AHA as members.
A section from that memo reads (can provide this document if desired):
F07, Make Surplus and Under -Utilized Property Available for Affordable Housing
Land typically accounts for 10 to 20 percent of the total cost of developing new affordable
housing.
Furthermore, affordable housing developers are often unable to move as quickly as the private
market toidentify and close on the most desirable sites, such as sites near rapid transit or job
centers.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 25
Packet Pg. 107
7.2.a
Does Edmonds, with some of the highest Snohomish County real estate prices, taxes and lack of
light -rail rapid transit and job centers, even fit their own recommendations of the best use of
public funds and local tax dollars for HASCO to achieve their goals?
We urge you not to take action on the HASCO ILA this evening for the following reasons:
• Not enough notice was given to citizens that might be interested in
commenting on this issue. Director Hope's Housing News Update on April 14 referenced
the ILA would be on Council agenda on April 20.
Citizens responding to the online CHC open house and survey strongly opposed
an ILA with HASCO by a margin of almost 2 to 1.
• Although public funds were spent on public engagement, NO data about public
input to the CHC regarding the HASCO ILA was included in Council's packet when it was
discussed on April 20. Insufficient notice for that discussion was given to
the public on Friday, April 16 .
• In Council's agenda for tonight, there is again no information about public
comments regarding a HASCO ILA. Notice for this agenda for Council was again given
just four days in advance of tonight's meeting, on Friday, April 30.
• Despite no information about prior public input and insufficient notice to the
public, Staff recommendation is to approve the Resolution authorizing execution of the
HASCO Interlocal Agreement.
We also have concerns about information that is being provided to Council about the
affordability of HASCO properties. In a reply to email questions from an ACE board member,
Duane Leonard said the following:
"the affordability restrictions that apply [to the Edmonds Highlands property] come from the
housing authorities law codified in Chapter 35.82, specifically RCW 35.82.070 (5). The
requirement here is that 50% of the units be rented to persons below 80% of the area median
income."
• Please note that 80% of the AMI for Snohomish County is $66,700/1 person,
$76,200/2 person, $85,000/3 persons, $95,250/4 person. (NOTE: taken from SnoCo
Home rent and income information)
Given that there are 100 seniors on the Section 8 waiting list for the other two
Edmonds HASCO properties, why is Edmonds Highlands not also ALL section 8 housing
to accommodate demand?
• The Edmonds Highlands property has been operated property tax free for 20
years and is currently valued at 19.716 Million dollars. For the amount of taxes that are
thus being shifted to the un-exempt taxpayers, shouldn't we be getting more for
our money? (see comment from Christine Koch above)
Finally, we are concerned that approval of the HASCO ILA will lead directly to another
recommendation by the CHC which is the 0.1% sales tax increase to go to "affordable and
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 26
Packet Pg. 108
7.2.a
supportive housing for low-income households". Council member Luke Distelhorst has already
demonstrated his support of this sales tax increase by lobbying the Citizens Housing
Commission on January 14, 2021, just prior to their final votes on January 28. Here is an excerpt
from the agenda for the 1-14-21 meeting:
"Council Member Distelhorst will speak to the AHA letter at the Housing Commission's January
14 meeting."
Quote from the "letter he had supported":
"AHA would like to draw attention to three perspectives that we believe makes clear the need
to support adoption of a 0.1% sales tax for affordable housing."
Again, we urge you, do NOT take action on the HASCO ILA tonight. There are a number of non-
profit organizations that provide supportive and affordable housing in Snohomish County.
There is no language in the ILA that clarifies what authority HASCO will have over future
housing and housing policy in Edmonds if this agreement is enacted.
Respectfully,
Dr. Michelle Dotsch, ACE President
Joan Bloom, At -Large ACE Board Member and former Edmonds City Councilmember
From: Ken Reidy
Sent: Tuesday, May 4, 2021 1:09 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>; Public Comment (Council)
<publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Cc: Nelson, Michael <Michael.Nelson@edmondswa.gov>; Hope, Shane
<Shane.Hope@edmondswa.gov>; Taraday, Jeff <jeff@lighthouselawgroup.com>; Council
<Council@edmondswa.gov>; Judge, Maureen <Maureen.Judge@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Public Comment for May 4, 2021 City Council Meeting
The following Public Comments are taken directly from an email sent to the 2013 Mayor and
the 2013 City Council on October 23, 2013:
Please prioritize the Code Rewrite! Please make sure that the proper amount is budgeted
to complete the Code rewrite, and I mean the entire City CODE!
When discussing the City CODE, it is very important to distinguish between the two parts of the
CODE, the Edmonds City Code (ECC) - (sometimes called Edmonds Municipal Code - EMC) 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.
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 27
Packet Pg. 109
7.2.a
Both parts of the CODE require updating!
The City of Edmonds 2007-08 Budget stated that "A complete rewrite of ECDC over a two year
period is proposed for completion in 2007."
The complete rewrite of the ECDC was never completed. Plus, we need to fix the ECC/EMC!
City Attorney Taraday stated it well during his EXCELLENT Annual Report (Thank you Mr.
Taraday!): There is no end to the tremendous backlog of code fixes needed.
Please consider the challenges related to updating just Chapter 2.10. 1 believe I myself have
well over 100 hours of research into just this section of Chapter 2. The CODE rewrite is a
complicated, huge project. Please make sure it is properly budgeted for.
Former City Attorney Snyder stated that: "The biggest issue at the start of 2007 was the code
rewrite."
As a citizen, I would argue that the Code Rewrite is still the "biggest issue" and that we need to
resolve it. Establishing a comprehensive, accurate, consistent and easy to administer City CODE
is critical to the City's efforts to provide a high level of government service which INVITES
economic and other beneficial activities to our Citv.
Thank you.
Ken Reidy
From: Eric Forney
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2021 5:11 PM
To: Public Comment (Council) <publiccomments@edmondswa.gov>
Subject: Tree removal ordinance
Good afternoon,
I was wondering what the city policy is regarding large trees on private property that are
causing damage to parking areas and structures on the property? Thank you.
Eric Forney
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
May 4, 2021
Page 28
Packet Pg. 110
7.3
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/11/2021
Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
Staff Lead: Dave Turley
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Nori Jacobson
Background/History
Approval of claim checks#247203 through #247293 dated May 6, 2021 for $223,457.68 (re -issued
checks #247208 $2,444.19 & #247287 $10,803.29).
Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #64666 through #64668 for $603,485.99, benefit checks
#64669 through #64673 and wire payments of $592,553.45 for the pay period April 16, 2021 through
April 30, 2021.
Staff Recommendation
Approval of claim, payroll and benefit checks, direct deposit and wire payments.
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance
#2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or
non -approval of expenditures.
Attachments:
claims 05-06-21
FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 05-06-21
payroll summary 05-05-21
payroll benefits 05-05-21
Packet Pg. 111
7.3.a
vchlist
Voucher List
Page: 1
05/06/2021
7:36:02AM
City of Edmonds
L
3
Bank code :
usbank
Voucher
Date Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
.y
Amoun o
a
a)
247203
5/6/2021 065052 AARD PEST CONTROL
44330
WWTP: 4/28/21 PEST CONTROL SE
4/28/21 Pest Control Service
U
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
m
73.0(
10.4% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
ui
7.5�
Total:
80.55
247204
5/6/2021 064088 ADT COMMERCIAL
2010551
ALARM MONITORING MEADOWDAI
FIRE INSPECTION AND MONITORII`
001.000.66.518.30.41.00
63.1.E
Monitoring - 6801 N Meadowdale Rd
001.000.66.518.30.42.00
188.8E sa
10.4% Sales Tax
o
001.000.66.518.30.42.00
19.6,
Total:
271.6E a
247205 5/6/2021 065568 ALLWATER INC 041421002 PARKS & RECREATION DEPT WATE
E
PARKS & RECREATION DEPT WATE
U
001.000.64.571.21.31.00
28.8E o
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.64.571.21.31.00
3.0( o
Total:
L
31.8E a
Q
247206 5/6/2021 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 6560000035041 WWTP: 4/28/21 UNIFORMSJOWEL
Mats/Towels
N
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
51.4f c
Uniforms: 3 Lab Coats $0.17 each
423.000.76.535.80.24.00
0.5E N
10.4% Sales Tax
E
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
5.3E R
10.4% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.24.00
0.0E
656000035062 PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE
E
PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE
U
001.000.64.576.80.24.00
61.1(
Q
Page: 1
Packet Pg. 112
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7.3.a
Page: 2
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #
Description/Account
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
247206 5/6/2021 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued)
0
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.24.00
6.31 U
656000035064
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
L
FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS
001.000.66.518.30.24.00
29.5E
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.24.00
3.0 � v
656000037185
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
001.000.65.518.20.41.00
1.6'
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
111.000.68.542.90.41.00
6.1'
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
0
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
6.1' `>+
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
a
422.000.72.531.90.41.00
6.1
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS
ca
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
6.1- u
10.4% Sales Tax
0
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
0.6z >
10.4% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
0.6' a
PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE
Q
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
6.Of
10.4% Sales Tax
N
001.000.65.518.20.41.00
0.1; c
10.4% Sales Tax
o
111.000.68.542.90.41.00
0.6z E
10.4% Sales Tax
M
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
0.6z
10.4% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.41.00
0.6z 0
656000037186
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT
FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS
Q
Page: 2
Packet Pg. 113
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247206 5/6/2021 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES
247207 5/6/2021 001777 AURORA PLUMBING & ELECTRIC
247208 5/6/2021 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
511.000.77.548.68.24.00
FLEET DIVISION MATS
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
10.4% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.24.00
10.4% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.41.00
Total ;
INV346586 CITY HALL - WATER PRESSURE G1
CITY HALL - WATER PRESSURE G/
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
10.25% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
Total
117254 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS
UB Outsourcing area Printing 2283
422.000.72.531.90.49.00
UB Outsourcing area Printing 2283
421.000.74.534.80.49.00
UB Outsourcing area Printing 2283
423.000.75.535.80.49.00
UB Outsourcing area Postage 2283
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
UB Outsourcing area Postage 2283
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.49.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.49.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.49.00
117389 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS
UB Outsourcing area Printing 1760
7.3.a
Page: 3
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
a
aD
9.2� 'D
r
U
d
19.8,
0.91 Y
m
2.0E v
225.1 ,
(D
c
a�
11.9E �
0
1.2,
113.111, a
E
U
146.9' c
Ta
146.9' c
L
a
151.3, Q
445.7, cv
0
445.7' LO
0
V)
14.8, E
14.8z };
c
aD
15.2E E
t
U
�a
Q
Page: 3
Packet Pg. 114
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247208 5/6/2021 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER
247209
247210
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
5/6/2021 076930 BLACKFIN TECHNOLOGIES NW INC 200106
5/6/2021 067947 BROWNELLS INC
20822784
PO # Description/Account
422.000.72.531.90.49.00
UB Outsourcing area Printing 1760
421.000.74.534.80.49.00
UB Outsourcing area Printing 1760
423.000.75.535.80.49.00
UB Outsourcing area Postage 1760
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
UB Outsourcing area Postage 1760
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.90.49.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.49.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.49.00
Total
WATER/ SEWER - NEW TELEMETR
WATER/ SEWER - NEW TELEMETR
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
WATER/ SEWER - NEW TELEMETR
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
FEES
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
FEES
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
10.4% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
10.4% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
Total
INV 20822784 - EDMONDS PD
4 OZ GUN LUBE
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
7.3.a
Page: 4
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
aD
113.2E 'D
r
U
d
113.2E
13
116.6E
m
t
342.3E u
342.3,' c
a�
11.4z
�a
11.4z o
L
�a
11.7E
2,444.1 S
U
4-
0
712.5(
0
L
712.5( a
Q
106.8E
N
106.8, o
0
74.1(
2
74.1( U
1,786.9:
aD
z
10.4E
Q
Page: 4
Packet Pg. 115
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
247210 5/6/2021 067947 BROWNELLS INC (Continued)
247211 5/6/2021 076240 CADMAN MATERIALS INC 5754264
5756932
247212 5/6/2021 070088 CASCADIA CONSULTING GROUP 7926
PO # Description/Account
#1 ROLL PIN PUNCH 1/16
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
1/16 GRAVE BRASS PUNCH
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
PIN PUNCH 1/16
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
PISTOL BRONZE BRUSH 12/PK
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
BLACK REAR FOLDING SIGHT
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
AEROSOL SYN GUN SCRUBBER
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
Freight
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
LEO ADJUSTABLE STOCK-DISCOU
001.000.41.521.40.31.00
Total
ROADWAY - ASPHALT & ASPHALT E
ROADWAY - ASPHALT & ASPHALT I
111.000.68.542.31.31.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.31.31.00
ROADWAY - ASPHALT & ASPHALT I
ROADWAY - ASPHALT & ASPHALT I
111.000.68.542.31.31.00
10.1 % Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.31.31.00
Total
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - DEV
Edmonds CAP Engagement 2020-
001.000.62.524.10.41.00
7.3.a
Page: 5
aD
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
9.1(
5.4�
N
6.7�
v
17.5�
m
c
118.7� m
c
8.9c ca
0
L
9.9f
a
33.6( E
135.9< ,-
356.71
�a
0
L
Q
a
180.8' Q
18.2E N
0
0
0
242.3"
24.4
465.8 i +:
c
aD
t
U
5,255.0(
Q
Page: 5
Packet Pg. 116
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #
247212 5/6/2021 070088 070088 CASCADIA CONSULTING GROUP (Continued)
247213 5/6/2021 069813 CDW GOVERNMENT INC B36191
247214 5/6/2021 063902 CITY OF EVERETT
247215 5/6/2021 077126 CLIFTONLARSONALLEN LLP
247216 5/6/2021 076321 CM HEATING INC
B636076
B697755
C208278
121002347
2842113
BLD2021-0587
Description/Account
Total
HPE SMART MEMORY KIT
HPE Smart Memory Kit
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
SERVER COMPONENTS
HPE 500W External Power adapters
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
10.4% Sales Tax
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
HPE SMART MEMORY KIT
HPE Smart Memory Kit
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
10.4% Sales Tax
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
VEEAM BACKUP MS OFFICE 365
VEEAM Backup software Microsoft O
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
10.4% Sales Tax
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
Total
WATER QUALITY LAB ANALYSIS
WATER QUALITY LAB ANALYSIS
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
Total
GASB 68 & 75 REPORTING ASSIST)
GASB 68 & 75 reporting assistance
001.000.39.519.90.41.00
Total
REFUND - DEV SVCS PERMIT FEE
BLD2021-0587 Refund (80%) of pern
001.000.257.620
Total
7.3.a
Page: 6
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
5,255.0( 0
U
d
L_
-270.2E
N
m
-469.8(
-48.8E c
336.1E
0
34.9E
�a
a
6,300.0(
655.2( o
6,537.%
0
a
a
Q
1,092.6( N
to
0
LO
0
1,306.2( E
1,306.2( 'M
c
52.0(
52.0(
Q
Page: 6
Packet Pg. 117
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
247217
5/6/2021
070323 COMCAST BUSINESS
8498310301175175
CEMETERY INTERNET 820 15TH Sl
CEMETERY INTERNET 820 15TH S�
130.000.64.536.20.42.00
8498310301175191
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL INTEF
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL INTEF
001.000.64.571.29.42.00
Tota I :
247218
5/6/2021
065683 CORRY'S FINE DRY CLEANING
APRIL 2021
APRIL 2021- DRY CLEANING - EDM,
APRIL 2021 DRY CLEANING CHARC
001.000.41.521.22.24.00
Tota I :
247219
5/6/2021
005965 CUES INC
585729
SEWER - POLE ASSEMBLY
SEWER - POLE ASSEMBLY
423.000.75.535.80.31.00
Freight
423.000.75.535.80.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
423.000.75.535.80.31.00
Tota I :
247220
5/6/2021
006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE
3367408
FAC MAINT - REQUEST FOR PROPi
FAC MAINT - REQUEST FOR PROPi
001.000.66.518.30.49.00
Total
247221
5/6/2021
006626 DEPTOF ECOLOGY
LJ8793-3
WWTP: LJOHNSON WW OPERATO
LJOHNSON WW OPERATOR 3 CEF
423.000.76.535.80.49.00
Total
247222
5/6/2021
047610 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
RE41 JA9525L004
STREET - SNOW & ICE PRODUCTS
STREET - SNOW & ICE PRODUCTS
111.000.68.542.66.31.00
10.3% Sales Tax
7.3.a
Page: 7
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
140.21 u
=a
140.2 ,
280.5' d
m
c
385.8(
385.8(
c
�a
0
485.9z a
19.9E •�
U
52.6' c
558.5( 0
0
a
a
589.1( Q
589.1( N
0
LO
0
67.0(
67.0(
c
aD
5,650.3E E
U
�a
Q
Page: 7
Packet Pg. 118
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7.3.a
Page: 8
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date
Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
247222
5/6/2021
047610
DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
(Continued)
111.000.68.542.66.31.00
581.9�
Total:
6,232.3'
247223
5/6/2021
075160
DIMENSIONAL COMMUNICATIONS
41517
PUBLIC SAFETY - SERVICE CALL T
PUBLIC SAFETY - SERVICE CALL T
001.000.66.518.30.48.00
330.0(
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.48.00
34.3,
Total :
364.%
247224
5/6/2021
064531
DINES, JEANNIE
21-4081
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MIN 4/20,
city council and special finance
001.000.25.514.30.41.00
550.8(
Total :
550.8(
247225
5/6/2021
076172
DK SYSTEMS
27867
YOST POOL BOILER SERVICE
YOST POOL BOILER SERVICE
001.000.64.576.80.41.00
562.5(
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.41.00
58.5(
Total:
621.0(
247226
5/6/2021
007253
DUNN LUMBER
7923821
FIRE STATION 20 - SUPPLIES/ WO(
FIRE STATION 20 - SUPPLIES/ WO(
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
81.3z
10.5% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
8.5z
Tota I :
89.8f
247227
5/6/2021
076610
EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE
2260
UNIT 91 - PARTS
UNIT 91 - PARTS
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
16.9,
10.4% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
1.7E
2261
PM SUPPLIES: SPRAY PAINT
Page: 8
Packet Pg. 119
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247227 5/6/2021 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE
247228 5/6/2021 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
PM SUPPLIES: SPRAY PAINT
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
2262
CITY HALL - SILICONE
CITY HALL - SILICONE
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
2267
PM SUPPLIES: KNIFE BLADE, MINI
PM SUPPLIES: KNIFE BLADE, MINI
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
2268
CITY HALL - SUPPLIES
CITY HALL - SUPPLIES
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
Total
2-25150
WEST PLANTER IRRIGATION 870 C
WEST PLANTER IRRIGATION 870 C
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
2-25175
EAST PLANTER IRRIGATION 875 C)
EAST PLANTER IRRIGATION 875 Cj
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
2-28275
PLANTER IRRIGATION 1400 9TH AV
PLANTER IRRIGATION 1400 9TH AV
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
2-37180
SAM STAMM OVERLOOK / METER f
SAM STAMM OVERLOOK / METER f
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
7-05276
CEMETERY SEWER & STORM 820
CEMETERY SEWER & STORM 820
7.3.a
Page: 9
aD
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
11.9f U
L
1.2E
N
m
z
19.9E U
2.0£ c
c
57.4,
0
5.9, `5%
M
a
E
36.1E 1i
3.7E 0
157.3: >
0
L
a
a
Q
53.9z
N
0
53.9z c
w
E
53.9z 19
c
aD
77.0E E
t
U
�a
Q
Page: 9
Packet Pg. 120
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
247228 5/6/2021 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION (Continued)
247229 5/6/2021 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES AR191224
247230
247231
5/6/2021 008975 ENTENMANN ROVIN CO
0158108-IN
158035-IN
5/6/2021 075136 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOC 163209
PO # Description/Account
130.000.64.536.50.47.00
Total :
ACCT#MK5648 CONTRACT 2600-02
Maintenance MM/DD/21 - MM/DD/21
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
Color copies for A11617-
001.000.31.514.20.48.00
10.4% Sales Tax
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.31.514.20.48.00
Total
INV 0158108-IN EDMONDS PD
OFFICER OF THE YEAR BADGE
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR BADGE
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
INSURANCE, PACKAGING, HANDLII
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
Freight
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
INV 158035-IN EDMONDS PD
SGT. RETIRED FLAT BADGE
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
PLAIN WALLET FOR FLAT BADGE
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
INSURANCE, PACKAGING, HANDLII
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
Freight
001.000.41.521.10.31.00
Total
PROF SVCS - DEV SVCS
7.3.a
Page: 10
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
a
aD
231.6� -0
470.5E m
L_
N
307.2(
z
U
7.1E
m
c
31.9E
0.7z
347.0z o
0
�a
a
105.0( •�
U
105.0( c
Ta
9.5( c
L
a
16.0( Q
N
108.0( c
LO
30.0( N
E
8.2E R
U
16.0( y
397.7E E
t
U
�a
Q
Page: 10
Packet Pg. 121
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7.3.a
Page: 11
Bank code :
usbank
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
247231
5/6/2021
075136
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOC
(Continued)
Climate Action Plan Update-
001.000.62.524.10.41.00
1,650.0(
Total:
1,650.0(
247232
5/6/2021
009350
EVERETT DAILY HERALD
EDH924814
FAC MAINT - RFP JOB CONTRACT ;
FAC MAINT - RFP JOB CONTRACT ;
001.000.66.518.30.49.00
193.2(
EDH925782
PLANNING -LEGAL AD
AMD2020-0003-
001.000.62.558.60.41.40
35.0(
Total:
228.2(
247233
5/6/2021
009410
EVERETT STEEL INC
326048
PM SUPPLIES: SQ TUBE
PM SUPPLIES: SQ TUBE
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
78.8E
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
8.2(
326049
PM SUPPLIES: SQ TUBE
PM SUPPLIES: SQ TUBE
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
78.8E
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
8.2(
Tota I :
174.1(
247234
5/6/2021
073133
EVERGREEN RURAL WATER OF WA
42977
WATER DISTRIBUTION MANAGER I
WATER DISTRIBUTION MANAGER 1
421.000.74.534.80.49.00
300.0(
Tota I :
300.0(
247235
5/6/2021
009815
FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC
0977137
WATER - INVENTORY
WATER - INVENTORY
421.000.74.534.80.34.30
6,420.8E
10.4% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.34.30
667.7
Tota I :
7.088.6,
Page: 11
Packet Pg. 122
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7.3.a
Page: 12
a�
L
3
Bank code :
usbank
c
�a
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun N
247236
5/6/2021
012199 GRAINGER
9876105413
WATER - STEEL SAW BLADE & REF
0
m
WATER - STEEL SAW BLADE & REF
421.000.74.534.80.31.00
159.91 U
10.4% Sales Tax
L
421.000.74.534.80.31.00
16.6z
Total:
176.61
m
247237
5/6/2021
078346 GUTERSON, DORI
BLD2021-0556
REFUND-DEV SVCS PERMIT FEE
v
Dori Guterson-
001.000.257.620
80.0(
Total :
80.0(
247238
5/6/2021
012845 HARBOR SQUARE ATHLETIC CLUB
2021 MEMBERSHIP
PRORATED 2021 HARBOR SQUARE
2021 PD MEMBERSHIP --
—
001.000.41.521.40.41.00
2,625.0(
10.4% Sales Tax
a
001.000.41.521.40.41.00
273.0(
Total :
2,898.0( •�
247239
5/6/2021
010900 HD FOWLER CO INC
157572804
STORM - 18" 45DEGREE TRASH RP
STORM - 18" 45DEGREE TRASH RP
0
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
Ta
201.0( o
9.0% Sales Tax
a
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
18.1( Q
Total :
219.1(
247240
5/6/2021
067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
1025407
PM SUPPLIES: COMP SLEEVE BRA
10.3% Sales Tax
c
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
1.9" c
PM SUPPLIES: COMP SLEEVE BRA
E
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
M
22278
PM SUPPLIES: HOSES, NOZZLES,
PM SUPPLIES: HOSES, NOZZLES,
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
294.4( E
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
30.3,
Q
Page: 12
Packet Pg. 123
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247240 5/6/2021 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
3020708
PM SUPPLIES: PLYWOOD, STRAP
PM SUPPLIES: PLYWOOD, STRAP
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
3521309
PM SUPPLIES: GATE VALVE, ABRX
PM SUPPLIES: GATE VALVE, ABRX
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
513339
PM SUPPLIES: TAPE MEASURE, Mf
PM SUPPLIES: TAPE MEASURE, M�
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
5527195
PM SUPPLIES: COMP NUTS, COMP
PM SUPPLIES: COMP NUTS, COMP
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
5615499
PM SUPPLIES: MIRACLE-GRO, RUE
PM SUPPLIES: MIRACLE-GRO, RUE
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
6021599
PM SUPPLIES: TOWELS, SAFETY S
PM SUPPLIES: TOWELS, SAFETY E
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
7012005
PM SUPPLIES: POSTS, CLEANERS
PM SUPPLIES: POSTS, CLEANERS
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.3% Sales Tax
7.3.a
Page: 13
aD
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
U
m
206.9,
21.3-
m
33.0,
m
c
3.4(
c
�a
14.9- o
L
1.5z a
E
21.7, u
4-
0
2.2z >
0
L
Q
a
10.4< Q
0
LO
0
52.8E E
2
5.4z U
c
a�
56.5E E
U
�a
Q
Page: 13
Packet Pg. 124
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7.3.a
Page: 14
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date
Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
a�
L
3
c
(a
Amoun y
247240
5/6/2021
067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
(Continued)
0
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
as
5.8( -0
8510408
PM SUPPLIES: TOWELS, RUBBING
PM SUPPLIES: TOWELS, RUBBING
L
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
24.8,
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
2.5E
8520390
PM SUPPLIES: BRAID FC SUP, BAT
PM SUPPLIES: BRAID FC SUP, BAT
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
84.5E
10.3% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
8.7-
Total:
903.1E (a
247241
5/6/2021
067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
3511264
WWTP: PO 487 KNIVES, FLASHLIG
0
PO 487 KNIVES, FLASHLIGHTS - pi(
a
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
26.9-
10.3% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
2.7E U
7095169
WWTP: PO 487 PAINT MARKER
o
PO 487 PAINT MARKER- picked up
'70
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
4.9, o
10.3% Sales Tax
L
a
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
a
0.5" Q
9072777
WWTP: PO 535 RAID, PAPER FILTE
.r
PO 535 RAID, PAPER FILTER, ANT I
N
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
31.9, c
10.3% Sales Tax
LO
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
0
3.2E
Total :
70.3E .E
(a
247242
5/6/2021
073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED
3461203
DEV SERVICES OFFICE SUPPLIES
U
5 Reams 11 x17 copy paper
001.000.62.524.10.31.00
104.3( E
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.62.524.10.31.00
10.8E
Q
Page: 14
Packet Pg. 125
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247242 5/6/2021 073548 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED
247243 5/6/2021 072627 INTRADO LIFE & SAFETY INC
247244
247245
247246
247247
5/6/2021 075062 JAMESTOWN NETWORKS
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
7013527
6433
5/6/2021 068816 JOHNSON CONTROLS FIRE PROT LP 22236442
5/6/2021 078353 KOLBERG, KRISTIAN
5/6/2021 067568 KPG INC
MAY REIMBURSEMENT
3-1421 REV2
PO # Description/Account
Total
MONTHLY 911 DATABASE MAINT
Monthly 911 database maint
512.000.31.518.88.48.00
Total
FIBER OPTICS INTERNET CONNEC
May-2021 Fiber Optics Internet
512.000.31.518.87.42.00
10.4% Sales Tax
512.000.31.518.87.42.00
Total
WWTP: 5/2021 ANNUAL WET SPRIT
/xx annual wet sprinkler inspection
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
Total
REIMBURSEMENT FOR CDL PERMI
REIMBURSEMENT FOR CDL PHYSI
421.000.74.534.80.49.00
REIMBURSEMENT FOR CDL PERMI
421.000.74.534.80.49.00
REIMBURSEMENT FOR CDL LICEN
421.000.74.534.80.49.00
Total
E7DC SERVICES THRU 3/25/21
E7DC SERVICES THRU 3/25/21
112.000.68.595.61.41.00
E7DC SERVICES THRU 3/25/21
125.000.68.595.61.41.00
E7DC SERVICES THRU 3/25/21
126.000.68.595.61.41.00
E7DC SERVICES THRU 3/25/21
7.3.a
Page: 15
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
115.1; 0
U
d
L_
200.0( T3
200.0(
m
590.0( m
c
61.3E -a
651.3E
0
L
�a
605.0( a
605.0( E
U
4-
0
109.0( >
0
40.0( a
Q
95.0(
244.0(
0
L0
0
V)
567.6£ .
R
70.0(
aD
190.3, E
U
�a
Q
Page: 15
Packet Pg. 126
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7.3.a
Page: 16
Bank code :
Voucher
usbank
Date
Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
Amoun
247247
5/6/2021
067568 KPG INC
(Continued)
422.000.72.594.31.41.00
25.6-
Tota I :
853.6E
247248
5/6/2021
067725 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER
80500325933
UNITS 69 & 11 - TUBE & TUBELESS
UNITS 69 & 11 - TUBE & TUBELESS
511.000.77.548.68.34.30
661.1 E
TIRE TAX
511.000.77.548.68.34.30
1.0(
10.4% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.34.30
68.7E
Tota I :
730.9,
247249
5/6/2021
074848 LONG BAY ENTERPRISES INC
2021-1030
REAL ESTATE CONSULTING SERVI
REAL ESTATE CONSULTING SERVI
001.000.64.571.21.41.00
6,282.5(
Total :
6,282.5(
247250
5/6/2021
066728 LOOKOUT PORTABLE SECURITY
42375
INV 42375 - EDMONDS PD
RADIO CABLE KIT - MEHL
001.000.41.521.22.48.00
295.0(
Freight
001.000.41.521.22.48.00
20.0(
Total :
315.0(
247251
5/6/2021
068489 MCLOUGHLIN & EARDLEY GROUP INC
0255693
UNIT 904 - PARTS/ SPEAKER
UNIT 904 - PARTS/ SPEAKER
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
208.3,
10.4% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
21.6E
Total :
229.91
247252
5/6/2021
020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC
348445
WWTP: PO 482 PROPANE
PO 482 PROPANE
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
33.3E
10.4% Sales Tax
Page: 16
Packet Pg. 127
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7.3.a
Page: 17
Bank code :
usbank
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
Amoun
247252
5/6/2021
020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENT ALL INC
(Continued)
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
3.4,
Total:
36.8°
247253
5/6/2021
075590 MOBILE GUARD
INV00657473
NETGUARD ANNUAL SERVICE - AD
NetGuard Annual Service - Qty 153 le
512.000.31.518.88.42.00
34.8E
Total :
34.8E
247254
5/6/2021
074798 NATIONAL BUSINESS FURNITURE
MK557167-TDQ
PUBLIC WORKS - L DESK SUITE F(
PUBLIC WORKS - L DESK SUITE F(
001.000.65.518.20.35.00
4,315.2(
Freight
001.000.65.518.20.35.00
668.5"
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.65.518.20.35.00
518.3-
Total :
5,502.0:
247255
5/6/2021
024001 NC MACHINERY
SECS0709491
UNIT 57 - PARTS/ ADAPTER
UNIT 57 - PARTS/ ADAPTER
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
70.5z
Freight
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
15.0(
10.4% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
8.9(
Total :
94.4z
247256
5/6/2021
074148 OLSON, VIVIAN
4302021
REIMBURSEMENT TO CM OLSON F
Reimbursement for research
001.000.11.511.60.49.00
337.9(
Total :
337.9(
247257
5/6/2021
026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT
0000130
PLANTER IRRIGATION 220TH ST S1
PLANTER IRRIGATION 220TH ST S\
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
20.0E
0001520
CEMETERY 820 15TH ST SW
Page: 17
Packet Pg. 128
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
247257 5/6/2021 026200 OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT (Continued)
0001530
0002930
0021400
0026390
247258 5/6/2021 072739 O'REILLYAUTO PARTS 3685-130835
247259 5/6/2021 008475 PETTY CASH 1/26/21 - 3/10/21
PO # Description/Account
CEMETERY 820 15TH ST SW
130.000.64.536.50.47.00
CEMETERY SPRINKLER 820 15TH
CEMETERY SPRINKLER 820 15TH
130.000.64.536.50.47.00
SPRINKLER @ 5TH AVE S & SR104
SPRINKLER @ 5TH AVE S & SR104
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
FIRE STATION #20 88TH AVE W / MI
FIRE STATION #20 88TH AVE W / MI
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
PLANTER IRRIGATION 10415 226TF
PLANTER IRRIGATION 10415 226TF
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
Total
PM SUPPLIES: TRAILER LENS
PM SUPPLIES: TRAILER LENS
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.64.576.80.31.00
Total
WATER - JEFF KOBYLK CASES OF
WATER - JEFF KOBYLK CASES OF
421.000.74.534.80.31.00
ADMIN - CHELSEA STAMPS
001.000.65.518.20.42.00
FAC MAINT - CEMETARY - PATRICK
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
STORM - MIKE JOHNSON CREW MI
422.000.72.531.90.31.00
STORM - BRYAN CLEMENS CDL LI(
422.000.72.531.90.49.00
7.3.a
Page: 18
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
47.9E u
49.9(
m
22.1 E
m
c
d
313.3(
�a
0
22.1 E `5%
475.6, a
E
U
9.5£ o
Ta
1.0- o
L
10.55 a
Q
N
33.0z c
LO
55.0( N
E
67.1 £ R
U
66.1(
E
156.0( U
Q
Page: 18
Packet Pg. 129
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247259 5/6/2021 008475 008475 PETTY CASH
247260 5/6/2021 078351 PFLAUMER, AARON
247261 5/6/2021 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY
247262 5/6/2021 062807 PLOEGER, KENNETH
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
(Continued)
C RA2021-0050
1 M60179
1 N55633
IM48976
Z873104
PLOEGER 4/21 EXP CL
PO #
Description/Account
REFUND OF PERMIT FEE
CRA2021-0050-
001.000.257.620
Total
Total ;
CITYWIDE PED CROSSING WIRES
CITYWIDE PED CROSSING WIRES
126.000.68.595.33.65.00
10.4% Sales Tax
126.000.68.595.33.65.00
W WTP: PO 558 ELECTRICAL TRM L
PO 558 ELECTRICAL TRM LB
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
Freight
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
10.4% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
STREET -PARTS
STREET -PARTS
111.000.68.542.63.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
111.000.68.542.63.31.00
WWTP: PO 552 KBIC SI-5, KBIC-12f
PO 552 KBIC SI-5, KBIC-125, RESIT,
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
10.4% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.48.00
Total
PLOEGER 4/21 EXPENSE CLAIM - I
PER DIEM (MEALS) IDAHO TRAININ
001.000.41.521.40.43.00
TIPS & INCIDENTALS - IDAHO
001.000.41.521.40.43.00
7.3.a
Page: 19
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
377.3: as
U
d
L_
55.0( T3
55.0(
m
48.3, m
c
5.0<
c
�a
208.2
�a
a
55.7(
27.4E
0
Ta
318.6, c
L
a
33.1 , Q
N
194.8( c
LO
20.2E N
911.5° E
2
U
c
198.0( E
t
U
22.5(
Q
Page: 19
Packet Pg. 130
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account
247262 5/6/2021 062807 062807 PLOEGER, KENNETH (Continued) Total
247263 5/6/2021 073231 POLYDYNE INC 1539155 WWTP: PO 266 POLYMER (CLARIFI
PO 266 POLYMER (CLARIFLOC)
423.000.76.535.80.31.51
10.4% Sales Tax
423.000.76.535.80.31.51
Total
247264
5/6/2021
078352
POOL, SHAYNA
604742367
POOL, SHAYNA BL REFUND
bl refund for shayna pool
001.000.257.620
Total:
247265
5/6/2021
046900
PUGET SOUND ENERGY
200009595790
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST ;
FIRE STATION #16 8429 196TH ST
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
200019375639
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
Total
247266
5/6/2021
078261
R ALEXANDER ASSOCIATES INC
6336
WWTP: 4/2021 PROF. SERVICES
4/2021 PROF. SERVICES
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
MILEAGE, MEALS, LODGING AND F
423.000.76.535.80.41.00
Total:
247267
5/6/2021
071702
RAILROAD MGMT CO III LLC
436065
ANNUAL LEASE FOR LIC AGREEME
ANNUAL LEASE FOR LIC AGREEME
423.000.75.535.80.45.00
Total:
247268
5/6/2021
078312
RO, HYUK
112000622114
WWTP: HYUK RO - PRESCRIPTION
HYUK RO - PRESCRIPTION SAFET`
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
7.3.a
Page: 20
W
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
220.5( 0
U
d
L_
11,040.0(
N
1,148.1E y
12,188.1(
m
c
a�
100.0E -a
100.0(
0
L
�a
561.4- a
E
U
223.7( %-
785.11 c
M
0
L
Q
a
10,062.5( Q
431.1-
10,493.61 c
LO
0
E
1,044.3, u
1,044.3, };
c
a�
E
t
U
184.0(
Q
Page: 20
Packet Pg. 131
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
247268
5/6/2021
078312 078312 RO, HYUK
(Continued)
Total
247269
5/6/2021
064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC
5-031487
UNIT 284 - BATTERY
UNIT 284 - BATTERY
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
10.4% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
5-031550
UNIT 227 - BATTERY
UNIT 227 - BATTERY
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
10.4% Sales Tax
511.000.77.548.68.31.10
Total:
247270
5/6/2021
075601 RUSHWORKS
Edmon042721
ASAP PLAN RENEWAL FOR MAY 2(
PLAN RENEWAL FOR MAY 2021
001.000.25.514.30.48.00
Total
247271
5/6/2021
070115 SHANNON & WILSON INC
121003
EDMONDS MARSH DELINEATION A
EDMONDS MARSH DELINEATION A
017.000.64.576.80.41.00
121501
EDMONDS MARSH DELINEATION A
EDMONDS MARSH DELINEATION A
017.000.64.576.80.41.00
122064
EDMONDS MARSH DELINEATION A
EDMONDS MARSH DELINEATION A
017.000.64.576.80.41.00
Total:
247272
5/6/2021
037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
200124873
TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W
TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
200260271
YOST POOL
YOST POOL
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
7.3.a
Page: 21
aD
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
184.0(
U
d
L_
159.6<
N
16.6(
184.1z c
19.1E
379.5,
0
�a
a
1,040.0(
1,040.0( .�
0
5,469.4E c
a
a
8,477.5( Q
N
2,202.3E 9
16,149.3E c
0
E
2
U
33.0,
aD
E
z
740.8"
Q
Page: 21
Packet Pg. 132
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247272 5/6/2021 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
200348233
TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W
TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
200386456
CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE
CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
200422418
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70(
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70(
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
200468593
LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD /
LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD /
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
200493146
MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION M
MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION M
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
200714038
SEAVIEW PARK
SEAVIEW PARK
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
200865202
LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE
LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
201197084
SEAVIEW PARK
SEAVIEW PARK
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
201236825
FISHING PIER RESTROOMS
FISHING PIER RESTROOMS
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
201265980
LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL �
LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL �
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
201327111
PINE ST PARK
PINE ST PARK
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
201374964
LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH P
LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH P
7.3.a
Page: 22
aD
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
U
m
78.7z
N
56.9E
578.2E
a�
240.9E
0
L
16.6( a
E
20.7; u
0
7a
67.4< o
a
a
Q
25.2 ,
N
0
522.3f c
V)
E
166.5z u
c
a�
18.8� E
t
U
�a
Q
Page: 22
Packet Pg. 133
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247272 5/6/2021 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
201557303
CEMETERY BUILDING
CEMETERY BUILDING
130.000.64.536.50.47.00
201563434
TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WA
TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WA
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
201582152
TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W
TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W
111.000.68.542.63.47.00
201594488
LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL S
LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL S
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
201610276
OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT i
OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT
130.000.64.536.50.47.00
201611951
TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W
TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH AVE W
111.000.68.542.63.47.00
201656907
DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN!
DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN!
111.000.68.542.63.47.00
201703758
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 10(
PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 10(
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
201751476
TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW
TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
201762101
415 5TH AVE S
415 5TH AVE S
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
201782646
TRAFFIC LIGHT 901 WALNUT ST /
TRAFFIC LIGHT 901 WALNUT ST / l\
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
201907862
TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW
7.3.a
Page: 23
aD
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
a
aD
18.6E 'D
U
d
107.2E
N
Y
U
m
28.1 , v
m
c
31.0'
c
�a
20.6( p
0
�a
a
8.3(
U
45 44.6E 0
7a
0
L
108.1< a
Q
28.0' N
0
0
0
36.3E
19.6�
c
aD
E
16.0' U
�a
Q
Page: 23
Packet Pg. 134
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247272 5/6/2021 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH ST SW
111.000.68.542.63.47.00
202087870
LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl
LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl
423.000.75.535.80.47.10
202161535
CEMETERY WELL PUMP
CEMETERY WELL PUMP
130.000.64.536.50.47.00
202289120
TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99 / ME
TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99 / ME
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
202421582
LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI
LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
202579520
WWTP: 4/1-4/30/21 ENERGY MGMT
4/1-4/30/21 ENERGY MANAGEMEI
423.000.76.535.80.47.61
202620415
MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGA
MATHAY BALLINGER PARK IRRIGA
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
202807632
TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW
TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
204292213
CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST
CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST
111.000.68.542.64.47.00
204467435
HAZEL MILLER PLAZA
HAZEL MILLER PLAZA
001.000.64.576.80.47.00
222704264
WWTP:3/31-4/28/21 FLOWMETER
3/31-4/28/21 FLOW METER 23219 7.
423.000.76.535.80.47.62
Total:
247273 5/6/2021 075292 SNOHOMISH CO AUDITOR'S OFFICE Release of Liens
RELEASE OF LIENS (39) FOR FINAI
7.3.a
Page: 24
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
31.8( u
154.8z
m
78.7'
m
c
a�
57.6E
�a
0
66.1', `5%
M
a
E
9.4£
0
16.6(
0
L
Q
a
17.9� Q
N
100.5 0
0
22.2£ .
�a
U
16.6( y
3,606.1 < E
U
�a
Q
Page: 24
Packet Pg. 135
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
247273 5/6/2021 075292 SNOHOMISH CO AUDITOR'S OFFICE (Continued)
247274
247275
247276
247277
247278
247279
5/6/2021 075292 SNOHOMISH CO AUDITOR'S OFFICE Ashwood Court
5/6/2021 075292 SNOHOMISH CO AUDITOR'S OFFICE Clark, Randy
5/6/2021 075292 SNOHOMISH CO AUDITOR'S OFFICE short plat
5/6/2021 072776 SNOHOMISH CONSERVATION DIST 5304
5/6/2021 076433 SNOHOMISH COUNTY 911 3532
5/6/2021 037303 SO SNOHOMISH CO FIRE & RESCUE 21-014
PO # Description/Account
releases of lien for finance
421.000.74.534.80.49.00
release of lien for finance
423.000.75.535.80.49.00
Total :
FINAL PLAT & CCR'S: ASHWOOD C
final plat & ccr: Ashwood court for
001.000.25.514.30.49.00
Total
SHORT PLAT: RANDY CLARK - SEL
short plat: randy clark for planning
001.000.25.514.30.49.00
Total
SHORT PLAT: REAL PROPERTY FU
short plat: real property funding group
001.000.25.514.30.49.00
Total
E7FG SERVICES THRU 03/2021
E7FG SERVICES THRU 03/2021
422.000.72.531.90.41.20
Total
MAY-2021 COMMUNICATION DISPA
MAY-2021 COMMUNICATION DISPA
001.000.39.528.00.41.50
MAY-2021 COMMUNICATION DISPA
421.000.74.534.80.41.50
MAY-2021 COMMUNICATION DISPA
423.000.75.535.80.41.50
Total
01-21 EMS BILLING, POSTAGE & R
7.3.a
Page: 25
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
780.0( u
L
780.0(
1,560.0(
m
v
319.5(
319.5(
c
�a
192.0(
192.0( a
E
U
191.0( o
191.0(
0
a
a
510.8E Q
510.8f
N
0
LO
0
70,384.0E E
1,852.2- 2
11852.2- a0i
74,088.5( E
U
co
Q
Page: 25
Packet Pg. 136
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
247279
5/6/2021
037303 SO SNOHOMISH CO FIRE & RESCUE
(Continued)
Q1-21 Ambulance billings, postage &
001.000.39.522.70.41.00
Tota I :
247280
5/6/2021
038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO
103583
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N
CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
103584
WWTP:4/30/21 RECYCLING
Recycling + taxes
423.000.76.535.80.47.66
103585
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70(
FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70(
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
103586
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST
SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
103588
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N
CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N
001.000.66.518.30.47.00
Tota I :
247281
5/6/2021
038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS
102863/4
WATER - WORK WEAR K. KOLBERi
WATER - WORK WEAR K. KOLBERI
421.000.74.534.80.24.00
10.4% Sales Tax
421.000.74.534.80.24.00
Total
247282
5/6/2021
067148 STERNBERG LANTERNS INC
59109
STREET - POLE MOUNTED FIXTUR
STREET - POLE MOUNTED FIXTUR
111.000.68.542.61.31.00
Total
247283
5/6/2021
040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC
18307794
STORM - HIGH SPEED CUT OFF WI
STORM - HIGH SPEED CUT OFF WI
7.3.a
Page: 26
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
a
m
14,318.3E u
14,318.3E
N
m
626.0( r
m
c
38.7. �
c
�a
671.9< o
�a
a
605.1 f
U
455.2� o
2,397.1 ° >
0
a
a
Q
N
22.2E c
236.11 LO
0
V)
E
3,679.0(
3,679.0(
aD
E
t
U
�a
Q
Page: 26
Packet Pg. 137
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247283 5/6/2021 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC
247284
247285
247286
5/6/2021 040916 TC SPAN AMERICA
5/6/2021 073310 UNISAFE INC
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
422.000.72.531.40.31.00
18308196
YOST PARK - SUPPLIES/ WIRE ROI
YOST PARK - SUPPLIES/ WIRE ROI
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
18308197
YOST PARK - SUPPLIES/ CROSS PI
YOST PARK - SUPPLIES/ CROSS PI
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.31.00
Tota I :
93972
FAC MAINT - WORK SHIRTS
FAC MAINT - WORK SHIRTS
001.000.66.518.30.24.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.66.518.30.24.00
711280
5/6/2021 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 1030143
Total :
WWTP: PO 557 NITRILE GLOVES
PO 557 NITRILE GLOVES
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
Freight
423.000.76.535.80.31.00
Total
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI
421.000.74.534.80.41.00
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI
422.000.72.531.90.41.00
UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI
7.3.a
Page: 27
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
a
aD
384.4E 'D
r
U
d
39.9E
N
40.0(
4.1 E
m
c
a�
28.91
�a
3.0- o
500.5f `>,
M
a
E
905. A u
4-
0
94.1E
999.8< 0
L
Q
Q
Q
764.7(
0
29.9 1 ui
794.6 i N
E
141.2E
aD
E
141.2E
�a
Q
Page: 27
Packet Pg. 138
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
247286 5/6/2021 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR (Continued)
247287 5/6/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
PO # Description/Account
423.000.75.535.80.41.00
Total
9867590300 C/A 571242650-0001
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Bldg
001.000.62.524.20.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service City Clerk
001.000.25.514.30.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Comm Svc
001.000.61.557.20.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Council
001.000.11.511.60.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Court
001.000.23.512.50.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Dev Svcs
001.000.62.524.10.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Engineering
001.000.67.518.21.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Facilities
001.000.66.518.30.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Finance
001.000.31.514.23.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service HR
001.000.22.518.10.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service IS
512.000.31.518.88.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Mayor
001.000.21.513.10.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Park Admin
001.000.64.571.21.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Maint
001.000.64.576.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Rec
001.000.64.571.22.42.00
7.3.a
Page: 28
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
a
m
145.5, -0
428.0: m
L_
T3
N
639.6,
U
36.1.
(D
c
199.2 -
721.81
0
256.6, j,
M
a
320.9"
1,394.0' u
0
226.8,
0
L
72.3( a
Q
100.4z
N
362.7E o
LO
0
100.4z E
2
50.2, U
320.9" a0i
E
t
140.4E L)
Q
Page: 28
Packet Pg. 139
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247287 5/6/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PD
001.000.41.521.10.42.00
Air cards PD
001.000.41.521.10.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Planning
001.000.62.558.60.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
001.000.65.518.20.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
423.000.76.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Street
111.000.68.542.90.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Fleet
511.000.77.548.68.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water/SeWe
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water/Sewe
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Sewer
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Storm
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Street/Storn
111.000.68.542.90.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Street/Storn
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
7.3.a
Page: 29
aD
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
1,784.2E u
L
1,160.2� N
120.0:
v
26.6E -
c
7.6, m
c
26.6E f°
0
L
7.6,
a
7.6( E
217.T ,l-
0
50.2, >
0
L
95.3z a
Q
95.3' N
C6
336.6z 9
0
436.4, E
M
156.1E
c
240.0E
t
240.0(
Q
Page: 29
Packet Pg. 140
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247287 5/6/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
247288 5/6/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
iPhone/iPad Cell Service WWTP
423.000.76.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Disco
001.000.64.571.23.42.00
9867724400 C/A 772540262-00001
Cradlepoint 1 - Court/IT
512.000.31.518.88.42.00
Trimble 2 - Engineering Storm
421.000.74.534.80.49.20
Trimble 2 - Engineering Storm
422.000.72.531.90.49.20
Trimble 2 - Engineering Storm
423.000.75.535.80.49.20
Trimble 1 - Storm
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
Lake Ballinger monitor
422.000.72.531.90.49.20
Total
9878215903 C/A 571242650-0001
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Bldg
001.000.62.524.20.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service City Clerk
001.000.25.514.30.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Comm Svc
001.000.61.557.20.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Council
001.000.11.511.60.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Court
001.000.23.512.50.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Dev Svcs
001.000.62.524.10.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Engineering
001.000.67.518.21.42.00
7.3.a
Page: 30
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
a
m
659.9E u
L_
40.0"
N
m
z
100.0" v
3.3- c
d
3.3-
�a
3.4( o
L
�a
10.01 a
E
31.7E .ii
10,803.25 ,-
0
Ta
0
L
639.9 1 a
Q
36.11
N
149.0E o
LO
0
772.6E E
2
307.0E U
321.1E a0i
E
t
1,474.9E um
Q
Page: 30
Packet Pg. 141
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247288 5/6/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Facilities
001.000.66.518.30.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Finance
001.000.31.514.20.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Finance
001.000.31.514.23.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service HR
001.000.22.518.10.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Human Sen
001.000.63.557.20.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service IS
512.000.31.518.88.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Mayor
001.000.21.513.10.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Park Admin
001.000.64.571.21.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Maint
001.000.64.576.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Rec
001.000.64.571.22.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PD
001.000.41.521.10.42.00
Air cards PD
001.000.41.521.10.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Planning
001.000.62.558.60.35.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Planning
001.000.62.558.60.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
001.000.65.518.20.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
7.3.a
Page: 31
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
227.0< u
L
36.1E
N
36.1E
v
150.8 ,
m
c
50.2E m
c
427.1( f°
0
L
100.5E
a
50.2E
321.1 � ,-
0
140.5� >
0
L
2,606.5E Q
1,160.2� N
275.9E 9
0
493.& E
M
26.6E
c
7.6,
t
26.6E
Q
Page: 31
Packet Pg. 142
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247288 5/6/2021 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin
423.000.76.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Street
111.000.68.542.90.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Fleet
511.000.77.548.68.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water/SeWe
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water/Sewe
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Sewer
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water
421.000.74.534.80.35.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Storm
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Street/Storn
111.000.68.542.90.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Street/Storn
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service WWTP
423.000.76.535.80.42.00
iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Disco
001.000.64.571.23.42.00
9878350418 C/A 772540262-00001
Cradlepoint 1 - Court/IT
512.000.31.518.88.42.00
Trimble 2 - Engineering Storm
421.000.74.534.80.49.20
Trimble 2 - Engineering Storm
7.3.a
Page: 32
aD
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
7.6, u
L
7.6(
N
166.4E
v
50.2�
m
c
95.4z m
c
95.4z f°
0
L
340.6z
a
1,589.7,
493.6, ,-
0
156.1E >
0
L
265.9, a
Q
265.9, N
660.4.E 9
0
40.0- E
100.0-
aD
3.3E t
U
co
Q
Page: 32
Packet Pg. 143
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Voucher
Date
Vendor
Invoice PO #
Description/Account
247288
5/6/2021
067865 VERIZON WIRELESS
(Continued)
422.000.72.531.90.49.20
Trimble 2 - Engineering Storm
423.000.75.535.80.49.20
Trimble 1 - Storm
422.000.72.531.90.42.00
Lake Ballinger monitor
422.000.72.531.90.49.20
Wonderwear Modem Water/Sewer Te
421.000.74.534.80.42.00
Wonderwear Modem Water/Sewer Te
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
Total
247289
5/6/2021
075283 WAVE
3201-1027483-01
FIBER HIGH SPEED INTERNET SEF
High Speed Internet service 05/01/21
512.000.31.518.87.42.00
Total
247290
5/6/2021
073552 WELCO SALES LLC
8000
ENGINEERING DOOR HANGARS
ENGINEERING DOOR HANGARS
001.000.67.518.21.49.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.67.518.21.49.00
Tota I :
247291
5/6/2021
065535 WESTERN FACILITIES SUPPLY
038086
INV 038086 - CUST 0701480 - EDMC
#68 BLACK LINER - 4MIL
001.000.41.521.80.31.00
FUEL SURCHARGE
001.000.41.521.80.31.00
10.4% Sales Tax
001.000.41.521.80.31.00
Total
247292
5/6/2021
063008 WSDOT
RE 41 JZ0186 L012
E20CE SERVICES THRU 03/2021
7.3.a
Page: 33
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun y
0
a
aD
3.3' 'D
U
d
3.4(
13
10.01
m
z
32.3, U
17.0z c
d
17.0(
14,260.6,
0
�a
a
816.0(
816.0(
0
7a
286.6E p
L
a
29.8- Q
316.4E
N
0
LO
190.3E
E
4.0( .M
20.2' c
214.5 i E
t
U
co
Q
Page: 33
Packet Pg. 144
vchlist
05/06/2021 7:36:02AM
Bank code : usbank
Voucher Date Vendor
247292 5/6/2021 063008 WSDOT
247293 5/6/2021 011900 ZIPLY FIBER
91 Vouchers for bank code : usbank
91 Vouchers in this report
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
Invoice
PO # Description/Account
(Continued)
E20CE SERVICES THRU 03/2021
112.000.68.595.33.41.00
Tota I :
253-003-6887
LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCI
LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCI
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
253-012-9189
WWTP: 4/25-5/24/21 AUTO DIALER
4/25-5/24/21 AUTO DIALER - 1 VOK
423.000.76.535.80.42.00
425-771-0158
FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FA}
FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FA}
001.000.66.518.30.42.00
425-771-5553
WWTP: 4/25=5/24/21 AUTO DIALER
4/25=5/24/21 AUTO DIALER - 1 BU;
423.000.76.535.80.42.00
425-776-6829
CITY HALL ALARM LINES 121 5TH P
CITY HALL FIRE AND INTRUSION A
001.000.66.518.30.42.00
509-022-0049
LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCI
LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCI
423.000.75.535.80.42.00
Tota I :
Bank total
Total vouchers
7.3.a
Page: 34
a�
L
3
c
�a
Amoun N
0
a
m
478.4E u
478.4f .L
N
m
42.1 f v
m
c
41.5E
c
�a
141.5" o
�a
a
132.8E
U
141.5" o
0
L
26.4, a
526.W Q
236,705.1 f N
236,705.1( 9
0
V)
E
2
U
c
a�
E
t
U
�a
Q
Page: 34
Packet Pg. 145
7.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Protect
Engineering
Accounting
Project
Funding
Project Title
Number
Number
174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements
c521
STM
175th St. SW Slope Stabilization
c560
E21 FB
STM
2018 Lorian Woods Stud
s018
W8FA
SWR
2019 Sewerline Replacement Project
c516
EBGA
STM
2019 Storm Maintenance Project
c525
EBFC
WTR
2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
c523
EBJA
�019
Traffic Calming
am
611sw
STIR
2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades
i045
E9AD
[UTILITIES
2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update
s020
WTR
2019 Waterline Overlay
i043
E9CB
�2019
Waterline Replacement
STIR
2020 Guardrail Installations
i046
EOAA
erlay Program
STIR
2020 Pedestrian Safety Program
i049
EODB
020 Pedestrian Task Force
STIR
2020 Traffic Calming
i048
EOAC
STIR
2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades
i047
EOAB
STIR
2020 Waterline Overlay
i053
EOCC
STIR
2021 Guardrail Installations
i057
E21AB
STIR
2021 Overlay Program
i051
E21CA
1h STIR
2021 Pedestrian Task Force
SWR
2021 Sewer Overlay Program
i060
E21CC
LSTM
2021 Stormwater Overlay Program
STIR
2021 Traffic Calming
i056
E21AA
�021
Waterline Overlay Program
i059
E21CB
STIR
220th Adaptive
i028
EBAB
228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
STIR
238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps
i037
EBDC
Moor
238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)
c423
VE73DB
STIR
238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
c485
E6DA
76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OV
i052
E20CB
STIR
76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements
i029
EBCA
STIR
76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improveme
V c368
E1 CA
STIR
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
i031
EBCC
STIR
89th PI W Retaining W-
i025
E7CD
STIR
ADA Curb Ramps
i033
EBDB
IFSTIR Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing � i040 E9D�
STIR
Audible Pedestrian Signals
i024
E7AB
LSTM
Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design
s022
STIR
Bikelink Project
c474
ESDA
Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project
i050
SWR
Citywide CI PIP Sewer Rehab Phase II
c488
E6GB
Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancement
i026
STIR
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
1015
E6AB
PRK
Civic Center Playfield (Construction)
NEENSIFOMA
Revised 5/5/2021 Packet Pg. 146
7.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title)
Protect
Engineering
Accounting
Project
Funding
Project Title
Number
Number
PRK
Civic Center Playfield (Design)
c536
EOMA
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
STM
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
c455
E4FE
FAC
Edmonds Fishing Pier Reh
STR
Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector
c478
ESDB
WTR
Elm St. Waterline Replacement
c561
STR
Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave
i058
E21 DA
LWTR
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
PM
Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
c282
EBMA
Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
STM
Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
c436
E4FD
SWR
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
SWR
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
c461
E4GC
Minor Sidewalk Program
STM
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
m013
E7FG
Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update
s025
EONA
STM
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
m105
E7FA
ville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements
STM
Perrinville Creek Recovery Study
s028
E21 FC
WTR
Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
WTR
Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
c558
E21JA
STM
Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project
c547
SWR
Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
c548
EOGA
Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
c559
FAC
PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South
c502
E9MA
SWR
Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services
c562
STM
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility
c479
ESFD
STM
_
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2
c546
WWTP
Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring
c446
E4HA
evitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal)
i055
UTILITIES
Standard Details Updates
solo
ESNA
torm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW
c495
STM
Stormwater Comp Plan Update
s017
E6FD
STR
Sunset Walkway Improvements J111111111111111hL
c354
E1 DA
STR
Trackside Warning System
c470
ESAA
STR
,ni��..u,,. av (3rd 4th
i044
E9DC
PRK
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction)
c544
E7MA
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design"
c496
E7MA J
§§MLRK
PRK Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design)
m103 E7MA
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
c435
WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
c481 ESHA
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment
s026
PRK Yost Park Infiltration Facility
c556 E21 FA
Revised 5/5/2021 Packet Pg. 147
7.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Engineering
Project
Project
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
Project Title
STR
EOAA
i046 11111PFZ020
Guardrail Installations
STR
EOAB
i047
2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades
STR
EOAC
i048
2020 Traffic Calming
STR
EOCA
i042
2020 Overlay Program
STR
EOCC
_ i053
2020 Waterline Overlay
STR
EODA
s024
2020 Pedestrian Task Force
2020 Pedestrian Safety Progra
STR
EODC
i050
Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project
c546_1
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2
STM
EOFB
c547
Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project
c54;K
Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
WTR
EOJA
c549
Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
s026
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment
PRK
EOMA
c551
Civic Center Playfield (Construction)
c536
layfield (Design)
GF
EONA
s025
Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update
c368
th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
STR
E1 DA
c354
Sunset Walkway Improvements
E20CB
i052
76th Ave"veT (196th St. to OVD)
STR
E20CE
i055
SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal)
E20FC
c552
Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvemen
STR E21AA i056 2021 Traffic Calming
2021 Guardrail Installations
STR E21 CA i051 2021 Overlay Program
2021 Waterline Overlay Program
SWR
E21 CC
i060
2021 Sewer Overlay Program
2021 Stormwater Overlay Program
STR
E21 DA
i058
Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave
i062
2021 Pedestrian Task Force
PRK
E21 FA
c556
Yost Park Infiltration Facility
56
ilization
STM
E21 FC
s028
Perrinville Creek Recovery Study
559
nnual Sewer Replacement Project
SWR
E21GB
c562
Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services
Wr
E�A
c558
Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Proj
WTR
E21JB
c561
Elm St. Waterline Replacement
STR
E3DB
c423
238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)
STM
E4FC
c435
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
E4FD
c436
Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
STM
E4FE
c455
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
c461
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
WWTP
E4HA
c446
Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring
4Mdmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
STR
ESAA
c470
Trackside Warning System
Revised 5/5/2021 Packet Pg. 148
7.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number)
Engineering
Project
Project
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
Project Title
STR
E5DB
c478
Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector
-
E5FD
c479
reaview Park Infiltration Facility
SWR
E5GB
so11
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
qWP
E5HA
c481
WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
WTR
E5J13
c482
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
WTR
E5KA
c473
Five Corners Reservoir Re-coatin
UTILITIES
E5NA
solo
Standard Details Updates
E6AA
d�
Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
STR
E6AB
i015
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
r"DA
;�
238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
STR
E6DD
i017
Minor Sidewalk Program
Stormwater Comp Plan Update AL
SWR
E6GB
c488
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II
7A
=
Audible Pedestrian Signals
STR
E7AC
i005
228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
E7CD
j025
STR
E7DC
i026
Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements
E7FA
m10
ope Repair & Stabilizatio
STM
E7FB
c495
Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW
STM
E7FG
m013
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
WTR
E7JA
c498
2019 Waterline Replacement
PRK
E7MA
c544
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction)
PRK
E7MA
c496
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design)
E7MA
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design)
STR
E8AB
i028
220th Adaptive
i
76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements
STR
E8CC
i031
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
i033V
ADA Curb Ramps
STR
E8DC
i037
238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps
s018
2018 Lorian Woods
STM
E8FB
c521
174th St. & 71 st Ave Storm Improvements
8FC
c525
2019 Storm Maintenance Project liv
SWR
E8GA
c516
2019 Sewerline Replacement Project
c523
019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
UTILITIES
E8J13
s020
2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update
PM
E8MA
c282
Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
STR
E9AA
i038
2019 Traffic Calming
STR
E9AD
i045
2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades
WTR
E9CB
i043
2019 Waterline Overlay
STR
i040
Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing
STR
E9DC
i044
Walnut St. Walkway (3rd-4th)
STM
E9FA
s022r
Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design
FAC
E9MA
c502
PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South
Revised 5/5/2021 Packet Pg. 149
7.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Engineerinq
Project
Project
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
Protect Title
PM
EBMA
c282
Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
STIR
E1DA
c354
Sunset Walkway Improvements
STIR
E1CA
c368
76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
STIR
E3DB
c423
238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)
STM
E4FC
c435
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
STM
E4FD
c436
Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
FAC
E4MB
c443
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
WWTP
E4HA
c446
Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring
STM
E4FE
c455
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
SWR
E4GC
c461
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
STIR
ESAA
c470
Trackside Warning System
WTR
ESKA
c473
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
STIR
ESDA
c474
Bikelink Project
STIR
ESDB
c478
Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector
STM
ESFD
c479
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility
WWTP
ESHA
c481
WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
WTR
ESJB
c482
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
STIR
E6DA
c485
238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
SWR
E6GB
c488
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II
STM
E7FB
c495
Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW
PRK
E7MA
c496
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design)
WTR
E7JA
c498
2019 Waterline Replacement
FAC
E9MA
c502
PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South
SWR
EBGA
c516
2019 Sewerline Replacement Project
STM
EBFB
c521
174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements
WTR
EBJA
c523
2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
STM
E8FC
c525
2019 Storm Maintenance Project
PRK
EOMA
c536
Civic Center Playfield (Design)
PRK
E7MA
c544
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction)
STM
EOFA
c546
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2
STM
EOFB
c547
Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project
SWR
EOGA
c548
Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
WTR
EOJA
c549
Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
PRK
EOMA
c551
Civic Center Playfield (Construction)
STM
E20FC
c552
Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements
PRK
E21 FA
c556
Yost Park Infiltration Facility
WTR
E21JA
c558
Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
SWR
E21 GA
c559
Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
STM
E21 FIB
c560
175th St. SW Slope Stabilization
WTR
E21JB
c561
Elm St. Waterline Replacement
SWR
E21GB
c562
Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services
STIR
E7AC
i005
228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
STIR
E6AB
i015
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
STIR
E6DD
i017
Minor Sidewalk Program
STIR
E7AB
i024
Audible Pedestrian Signals
Revised 5/5/2021 Packet Pg. 150
7.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number)
Engineering
Project
Project
Accounting
Funding
Number
Number
Project Title
STIR
E7CD
i025
89th PI W Retaining Wall
STIR
E7DC
i026
Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements
STIR
EBAB
i028
220th Adaptive
STIR
EBCA
i029
76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements
STIR
EBCC
i031
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
STIR
EBDB
i033
ADA Curb Ramps
STIR
EBDC
i037
238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps
STIR
E9AA
i038
2019 Traffic Calming
STIR
E9DA
i040
Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing
STIR
EOCA
i042
2020 Overlay Program
WTR
E9CB
i043
2019 Waterline Overlay
STIR
E9DC
i044
Walnut St. Walkway (3rd-4th)
STIR
E9AD
i045
2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades
STIR
EOAA
i046
2020 Guardrail Installations
STIR
EOAB
i047
2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades
STIR
EOAC
i048
2020 Traffic Calming
STIR
EODB
i049
2020 Pedestrian Safety Program
STIR
EODC
i050
Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project
STIR
E21 CA
i051
2021 Overlay Program
STIR
E20CB
i052
76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD)
STIR
EOCC
i053
2020 Waterline Overlay
STIR
E20CE
i055
SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal)
STIR
E21AA
i056
2021 Traffic Calming
STR
E21AB
i057
2021 Guardrail Installations
STIR
E21 DA
i058
Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave
WTR
E21 CB
i059
2021 Waterline Overlay Program
SWR
E21 CC
i06o
2021 Sewer Overlay Program
STM
E21CD
i061
2021 Stormwater Overlay Program
STIR
E21 DB
i062
2021 Pedestrian Task Force
STM
E7FG
m013
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
PRK
E7MA
m103
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design)
STM
E7FA
m105
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
UTILITIES
ESNA
solo
Standard Details Updates
SWR
ESGB
s0l l
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
STIR
E6AA
s014
Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
STM
E6FD
s017
Stormwater Comp Plan Update
STM
EBFA
s018
2018 Lorian Woods Study
UTILITIES
EBJB
s020
2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update
STM
E9FA
s022
Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design
STIR
EODA
s024
2020 Pedestrian Task Force
GF
EONA
s025
Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update
WTR
EOJB
s026
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment
STM
E21 FC
s028
Perrinville Creek Recovery Study
Revised 5/5/2021 Packet Pg. 151
7.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding)
Project
Engineering
Accounting
Project
Funding
Project Title
Number
Number
FAC
Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab
c443
E4MB
FAC
PW Concrete Regrade & Drainage South
c502
E9MA
GF
Official Street Map & Sidewalk Plan Update
s025
EONA
s
PM
Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor
c282
EBMA ,
PRK
Civic Center Playfield (Construction)
c551
EOMA t
s
PRK
Civic Center Playfield (Design)
c536
EOMA
PRK
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Construction)
c544
E7MA L
PRK
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Design)
c496
E7MA '!t
PRK
Waterfront Development & Restoration (Pre - Design)
m103
E7MA
PRK
Yost Park Infiltration Facility
c556
E21 FA z
STM
174th St. & 71 st Ave Storm Improvements
c521
EBFB
STM
175th St. SW Slope Stabilization
c560
E21 FB
S
STM
2018 Lorian Woods Study
s018
EBFA
STM
2019 Storm Maintenance Project
c525
EBFC
STM
2021 Stormwater Overlay Program
i061
E21 CD 1
STM
Ballinger Regional Facility Pre -Design
s022
E9FA 't
s
STM
Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
c455
E4FE
STM
Lake Ballinger Associated Projects
c436
E4FD i
STM
NPDES (Students Saving Salmon)
m013
E7FG
STM
OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization
m105
E7FA
STM
Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Improvements
c552
E20FC
!
STM
Perrinville Creek Recovery Study
s028
E21 FC
STM
Phase 2 Annual Storm Utility Replacement Project
c547
EOFB
STM
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility
c479
ESFD
!
STM
Seaview Park Infiltration Facility Phase 2
c546
EOFA s
STM
Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW
c495
E7FB
STM
Stormwater Comp Plan Update
s017
T
E6FD C,
u
STM
Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration
c435
E4FC C
u
STR
2019 Traffic Calming
i038
E9AA
t
STR
2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades
i045
E9AD
s
STR
2020 Guardrail Installations
i046
EOAA
STR
2020 Overlay Program
i042
EOCA e
STR
2020 Pedestrian Safety Program
i049
EODB
STR
2020 Pedestrian Task Force
s024
EODA i
c
!
STR
2020 Traffic Calming
i048
EOAC '
STR
2020 Traffic Signal Upgrades
i047
EOAB s
STR
2021 Guardrail Installations
i057
E21AB
!
STR
2021 Overlay Program
i051
E21 CA i
u
STR
2021 Traffic Calming
i056
E21AA
STR
228th St. SW Corridor Improvements
i005
E7AC
STR
238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps
i037
EBDC 1
c
STR
238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave)
c423
E3DB
STR
238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99)
c485
E6DA
STR
76th Ave Overlay (196th St. to OVD)
i052
E20CB
STR
76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements
i029
EBCA
Revised 5/5/2021
Packet Pg. 152
7.3.b
PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding)
Project
Engineering
Accounting
Project
Funding
Project Title
Number
Number
STR
76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements
c368
ElCA
STR
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th
031
EBCC
STR
89th PI W Retaining Wall
i025
E7CD
STR
ADA Curb Ramps
i033
EBDB
STR
Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing
i040
E9DA
STR
Audible Pedestrian Signals
i024
E7AB
STR
Bikelink Project
c474
ESDA
STR
Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project
i050
EODC
STR
Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements
i026
E7DC
STR
Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion
i015
E6AB
STR
Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector
c478
ESDB
STR
Elm Way Walkway from 8th Ave to 9th Ave
i058
E21 DA
STR
Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization
s014
E6AA
STR
Minor Sidewalk Program
017
E6DD
STR
SR Revitalization Stage 2 (Medians, Gateway Signage & Hawk Signal)
055
E20CE
STR
Sunset Walkway Improvements
c354
E1 DA
STR
Trackside Warning System
c470
ESAA
STR
Walnut St. Walkway (3rd-4th)
i044
E9DC
STR
2021 Pedestrian Task Force
061
E21 DB
STR
2020 Waterline Overlay
i053
EOCC
STR
220th Adaptive
i028
EBAB
SWR
2019 Sewerline Replacement Project
c516
EBGA
SWR
2021 Sewer Overlay Program
i06O
E21 CC
SWR
Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II
c488
E6GB
SWR
Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study
s0l l
ESGB
SWR
Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study
c461
E4GC
SWR
Phase 8 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
c548
EOGA
SWR
Phase 9 Annual Sewer Replacement Project
c559
E21 GA
SWR
Sanitary Sewer and Stormwater Pipe Rating Services
c562
E21GB
UTILITIES
2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update
s02O
EBJB
UTILITIES
Standard Details Updates
solo
ESNA
WTR
2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement
c523
EBJA
WTR
2019 Waterline Overlay
i043
E9CB
WTR
2019 Waterline Replacement
c498
E7JA
WTR
2021 Waterline Overlay Program
i059
E21CB
WTR
Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave)
c482
ESJB
WTR
Elm St. Waterline Replacement
c561
E21JB
WTR
Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating
c473
ESKA
WTR
Phase 11 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
c549
EOJA
WTR
Phase 12 Annual Water Utility Replacement Project
c558
E21JA
WTR
Yost & Seaview Reservoir Assessment
s026
EOJB
WWTP
Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring
c446
E4HA
WWTP
WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications
c481
ESHA
Revised 5i5i2021 Packet Pg. 153
7.3.c
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,005 (04/16/2021 to 04/30/2021)
Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount
111
ABSENT
NO PAY LEAVE
71.00
0.00
112
ABSENT
NO PAY NON HIRED
64.00
0.00
119
SICK
Donated Sick Leave -used
88.00
4,089.50
120
SICK
SICK LEAVE - L & 1
53.00
1,913.36
121
SICK
SICK LEAVE
761.75
30,401.49
122
VACATION
VACATION
834.25
37,532.50
123
HOLIDAY
HOLIDAY HOURS
120.00
5,564.50
124
HOLIDAY
FLOATER HOLIDAY
47.00
1,789.20
125
COMP HOURS
COMPENSATORY TIME
101.75
4,872.59
130
COMP HOURS
Holidav Compensation Used
8.00
337.45
131
MILITARY
MILITARY LEAVE
120.00
5,214.99
132
JURY DUTY
JURY DUTY
18.00
688.50
141
BEREAVEMENT
BEREAVEMENT
66.50
3,070.45
150
REGULAR HOURS
Kelly Dav Used
280.00
11,938.87
154
HOLIDAY
FLOATER HOLIDAY BUY BACK
8.00
232.15
155
COMP HOURS
COMPTIME AUTO PAY
185.92
9,401.03
157
SICK
SICK LEAVE PAYOFF
6.00
174.12
160
VACATION
MANAGEMENT LEAVE
71.00
5,714.81
170
REGULAR HOURS
COUNCIL BASE PAY
700.00
9,916.62
174
REGULAR HOURS
COUNCIL PRESIDENTS PAY
0.00
0.00
175
REGULAR HOURS
COUNCIL PAY FOR NO MEDICP
0.00
3,714.40
190
REGULAR HOURS
REGULAR HOURS
16,298.45
687,925.17
191
REGULAR HOURS
FIRE PENSION PAYMENTS
4.00
5,126.84
194
SICK
Emerciencv Sick Leave
203.00
7,358.03
205
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME .5
54.00
1,004.20
210
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME -STRAIGHT
8.00
258.75
215
OVERTIME HOURS
WATER WATCH STANDBY
12.00
791.93
216
MISCELLANEOUS
STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT
14.00
1,514.04
220
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME 1.5
229.50
17,521.02
225
OVERTIME HOURS
OVERTIME -DOUBLE
16.25
1,356.51
405
ACTING PAY
OUT OF CLASS - POLICE
0.00
546.03
410
MISCELLANEOUS
WORKING OUT OF CLASS
117.42
509.66
411
SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL
SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL
0.00
1,103.68
05/06/2021
Packet Pg. 154
7.3.c
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,005 (04/16/2021 to 04/30/2021)
Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount
602
COMP HOURS
ACCRUED COMP 1.0
74.25
0.00
604
COMP HOURS
ACCRUED COMP TIME 1.5
212.50
0.00
606
COMP HOURS
ACCRUED COMP 2.0
3.00
0.00
901
SICK
ACCRUED SICK LEAVE
16.18
0.00
acc
MISCELLANEOUS
ACCREDITATION PAY
0.00
67.01
acs
MISCELLANEOUS
ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT
0.00
177.41
boc
MISCELLANEOUS
BOC II Certification
0.00
96.39
colre
MISCELLANEOUS
Collision Reconstruction ist
0.00
89.56
cpl
MISCELLANEOUS
TRAINING CORPORAL
0.00
179.12
crt
MISCELLANEOUS
CERTIFICATION III PAY
0.00
410.04
ctr
MISCELLANEOUS
CTR INCENTIVES PROGRAM
0.00
1.00
deftat
MISCELLANEOUS
DEFENSE TATICS INSTRUCTOI
0.00
89.56
det
MISCELLANEOUS
DETECTIVE PAY
0.00
122.69
det4
MISCELLANEOUS
Detective 4%
0.00
1,084.60
ed1
EDUCATION PAY
EDUCATION PAY 2%
0.00
694.41
ed2
EDUCATION PAY
EDUCATION PAY 4%
0.00
552.86
ed3
EDUCATION PAY
EDUCATION PAY 6%
0.00
6,470.52
firear
MISCELLANEOUS
FIREARMS INSTRUCTOR
0.00
481.56
fmis
SICK
FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK
36.00
1,590.64
k9
MISCELLANEOUS
K-9 PAY
0.00
251.53
less
MISCELLANEOUS
LESS LETHAL INSTRUCTOR
0.00
85.68
Iq1
LONGEVITY
LONGEVITY PAY 2%
0.00
1,066.95
Ig11
LONGEVITY
LONGEVITY PAY 2.5%
0.00
599.74
Ig12
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 9%
0.00
4,451.51
Ig13
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 7%
0.00
1,050.71
Ig14
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 5%
0.00
1,298.43
Ig15
LONGEVITY
LONGEVITY 7.5%
0.00
583.73
Iq4
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 1 %
0.00
299.33
Iq5
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 3%
0.00
1,250.19
Iq6
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv .5%
0.00
364.42
Iq7
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 1.5%
0.00
328.38
Ig9
LONGEVITY
Lonqevitv 3.5%
0.00
193.99
mtc
MISCELLANEOUS
MOTORCYCLE PAY
0.00
122.69
05/06/2021
Packet Pg. 155
7.3.c
Payroll Earnings Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,005 (04/16/2021 to 04/30/2021)
Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount
ooc
MISCELLANEOUS
OUT OF CLASS
0.00
507.30
pds
MISCELLANEOUS
Public Disclosure Specialist
0.00
101.78
pfmp
ABSENT
Paid Familv Medical Unpaid/Sup
32.40
0.00
pfms
SICK
Paid FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK
27.60
1,219.49
nhv
MISCELLANEOUS
PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY
0.00
2,527.15
prof
MISCELLANEOUS
PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS ;
0.00
194.64
pto
MISCELLANEOUS
Training Officer
0.00
163.58
sdp
MISCELLANEOUS
SPECIAL DUTY PAY
0.00
301.49
sqt
MISCELLANEOUS
ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT
0.00
194.64
st
REGULAR HOURS
Serqeant Pav
0.00
145.98
str
MISCELLANEOUS
STREET CRIMES
0.00
521.80
traf
MISCELLANEOUS
TRAFFIC
0.00
122.69
20,962.72 $891,637.58
Total Net Pay: $603,485.99
05/06/2021
Packet Pg. 156
7.3.d
Benefit Checks Summary Report
City of Edmonds
Pay Period: 1,005 - 04/16/2021 to 04/30/2021
Bank: usbank - US Bank
Check #
Date
Payee #
Name
Check Amt
Direct Deposit
64669
05/05/2021
bpas
BPAS
4,914.15
0.00
64670
05/05/2021
jhan
JOHN HANCOCK
408.56
0.00
64671
05/05/2021
flex
NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS
3,525.94
0.00
64672
05/05/2021
icma
VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884
3,918.39
0.00
64673
05/05/2021
afscme
WSCCCE, AFSCME AFL-CIO
2,362.64
0.00
15,129.68 0.00
Bank: wire - US BANK
Check #
Date
Payee #
Name
Check Amt
Direct Deposit
3197
05/05/2021
pens
DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS
323,881.58
0.00
3199
05/05/2021
aflac
AFLAC
5,208.22
0.00
3201
05/05/2021
wadc
WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER
26,076.67
0.00
3202
05/05/2021
us
US BANK
108,210.87
0.00
3203
05/05/2021
mebt
WTRISC FBO #N3177131
107,795.74
0.00
3205
05/05/2021
pb
NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION
5,486.19
0.00
3206
05/05/2021
oe
OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
764.50
0.00
0.00
577,423.77
Grand Totals:
592,553.45
0.00
5/6/2021
Packet Pg. 157
7.4
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/11/2021
Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Lynnwood Honda
Staff Lead: NA
Department: Administrative Services
Preparer: Marissa Cain
Background/History
N/A
Staff Recommendation
Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Lynnwood Honda by minute entry.
Narrative
Lynnwood Honda
22020 Hwy 99
($1,255.36)
Attachments:
Lynnwood Honda claim - for council
Packet Pg. 158
7.4.a
CITY OF EDMONDS
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM
Date Claim Form
Received by City
Please take note that ,4 �/�_Tuvrently resides at AA:20&'nr s► •�� D -,mailing address
home phone #"13:r }'drk phone who resided at
at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is is claiming damages
against �' the sum of $ ^G,� arising out of the following circumstances listed below.
DATE OF OCCURRENCE: r !� TIME: 'ate
LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE:
DESCRIPTION:
Describe the conduct and circumstance that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the injury or damage.
"' r J / (attach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed)
3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair.
4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company?
If so, please provide the name of the insurance company:
and the policy #:
Yes - No
* * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY
License Plate # Driver License #
Type Auto:
(year) (make) __ - (model)
DRIVER: -OWNER:
Address: Address:
Phone#: Phone#:
Passengers:
Name: Name:
Address: Address:
Fonn Revised 05/06/14
Page 1 of 2
Packet Pg. 159
7.4.a
* * NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND NOTARIZED *
I, ' / ,being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the claimant for the above
described; that I have read the above claim, know the contents thereof and believe the same to be true. I further acknowledge that any
information I provide as part of this claim may be considered a public record and may be subject to disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56.
x�I
Signature of Claimant(s)
State of Washin on
County of
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that L'r I r . G.
�Q 50r is the person who appeared before me, and said
person acknowledged that (he/she) signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the uses and
purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: lSTLTil
o� ►~�*ti�l
Signature
Title 2 /• 'l'j
My appointment expires:fill
Please present the completed claim form to:
Fenn Revised 05/06/14
City Clerk's Office
City of Edmonds
121 5th Avenue North
Edmonds, WA, 98020
8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Page 2 of 2
N
d
a�
M
E
M
C
L
M
V
Packet Pg. 160
7.5
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/11/2021
Approve Settlement Agreement for Dayton Street Pump Station Project
Staff Lead: Rob English
Department: Engineering
Preparer: Sydney Hall
Background/History
On April 13, 2021, staff presented this item to the Parks and Public Works Committee and the
committee recommended the item be placed on a future consent agenda for approval.
Staff Recommendation
Approve the Settlement Agreement for Dayton Street Pump Station Project
Narrative
During the initial pump testing and start-up for the Dayton St. Pump Station project, it was discovered
that the pumps furnished by the contractor were using more electrical power than specified by the
construction contract. The cause of the increased power consumption was traced back to the motors
used in the pumps and their performance did not meet the pump specifications and documentation
provided prior to their installation. The pump manufacturer has acknowledged this issue and has
agreed, at no additional cost, to replace the motors in the three pumps that were provided for this
project. The settlement also requires the pump manufacturer to pay the City the extra power cost until
the motors are replaced.
Staff and the City Attorney have negotiated the attached settlement agreement with the pump
manufacturer (with approval of the contractor) to resolve the pump motor issue. Staff recommends
City Council approve the Settlement Agreement.
Attachments:
Settlement Agreement Final - Dayton St. Pump Station
Packet Pg. 161
7.5.a
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE
This Settlement Agreement and Release ("Agreement") is made and entered into by and
between the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation (hereafter "Edmonds"), and
Grundfos CBS, Inc. (hereafter "Grundfos") (individually, a "Party" and collectively the "Parties")
regarding the redesign and replacement of certain water pump motors.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Grundfos was the supplier of pumps for the Dayton Street Pump Station Project
(hereinafter "Project"), which took place in or around January through December of 2020, and
provided the City with three (3) pumps (two installed and one retained as a spare); and
WHEREAS, upon completion of the Project, the City asserts that the pumps provided used
significantly more electricity than had been represented by Grundfos; and
WHEREAS, without admitting any liability or legal obligation, Grundfos is willing to redesign
and furnish three new pump motors at no cost to the City to mutually agreeable specifications;
and
WHEREAS, in addition, Grundfos is willing to pay the City the difference in electricity costs
asserted by the City for the current pumps over the two-year period it anticipates will be needed
to redesign and replace the pump motors, which is estimated to be $430 per year; and
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that it is in the best interests of both to enter into this Agreement to
settle the dispute regarding the current pumps to avoid the necessity of pursuing a claim against
the Project's general contractor's bond or the Grundfos warranty;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the payments, covenants, and agreements hereinafter
mentioned, to be made and performed by the Parties hereto, the Parties covenant and agree as
follows:
Edmonds' Responsibilities. Edmonds will make the site of the work to be
performed under this Agreement reasonably accessible to Grundfos at all times necessary to
complete the work contemplated by this Agreement as provided for herein, and will work
cooperatively with Grundfos to accomplish the objectives set forth in this Agreement.
Packet Pg. 162
7.5.a
2. Grundfos' Responsibilities. Grundfos will be responsible for replacement of the
Project pump motors as follows:
a. Scope of Work. Grundfos will furnish all materials, equipment and labor to
complete the scope of work set forth in Attachment A, attached hereto and made
a part hereof by this reference and in accordance with the pump curves and testing
information set forth in Attachment B.
b. Compliance with Laws. Grundfos will comply with all applicable laws,
including but not limited to laws relating to prevailing wages, Chapter 39.12
RCW.
c. Warranties. Grundfos will provide new warranties, as noted in the scope of
work (Attachment A) upon completion of the work under this Agreement.
d. Performance and Payment Bond. Grundfos will provide Edmonds with a
Performance and Payment Bond for the work under this Agreement, to be in
substantially the form set forth in Attachment C, attached hereto and made a
part hereof by this reference.
e. Time for Completion. The estimated time of completion of the work under this
Agreement is two (2) years; however, all tasks in the scope of work
(Attachment A) will be completed no later than December 31, 2023, subject to
force majure set forth below. Failure to complete the work within this time
period will entitle Edmonds to collect on the Performance and Payment Bond.
f. Force Majure. Neither Party shall be in breach of the Agreement nor liable
for delay in performing or failure to perform any of its obligations when such
delay or failure is caused by an event or condition beyond the reasonable
control of either Party, including, but not limited to: acts of God, fire,
hurricane, flood, explosions, strike, boycott, labor disputes, pandemics, viral
emergencies or acts of Government Authority ("Force Majeure"). In the
event of a Force Majeure, the Parties agree to suspend the affected Party's
obligations until the Force Majeure situation ceases to exist.
g. Defective or Unauthorized Work. In the event Grundfos provides defective or
unauthorized work, which includes without limitation work and materials that
do not conform to the requirements of this Agreement, and extra work and
materials furnished without Edmonds' written approval, Edmonds can pursue
collection on the Performance and Payment Bond.
Packet Pg. 163
7.5.a
h. Hold Harmless. Grundfos will perform all work at its risk and expressly agrees
to hold harmless and indemnify Edmonds, its employees, officers, agents,
representative, successors and assigns from any and all claims, liability, loss, or
damage(s), including costs and reasonable attorneys' fees for defense of the same
that Edmonds may suffer as a result of claims, liability, loss, or damage(s) to any
and all persons or property, costs, or judgments against Edmonds which result
from, arise out of, or are in any way connected with the work to be performed by
Grundfos under this Agreement. This expressly includes any and all claims by
employees, subcontractors, and assignees of Grundfos for which Grundfos would
have immunity under the Workers Compensation Act for purposes of this
indemnification only. The foregoing waiver was mutually negotiated by the
Parties.
i. Insurance. Grundfos will procure and maintain at its expense during the
performance of the work under this Agreement general liability insurance in the
minimum amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate for
personal injury, bodily injury and property damage; automobile liability (bodily
injury and property insurance) in the minimum amount of $1,000,000; and
statutory industrial insurance (workers' compensation). Grundfos' workers'
compensation premium status will be current with the Washington State
Department of Labor and Industries prior to commencement of the work under
this Agreement and shall be maintained current for the duration of that work.
Grundfos will provide Edmonds with a Certificate of Insurance as proof of the
appropriate insurance coverage listed above prior to the commencement of any
work under this Agreement. Grundfos will provide Edmonds with additional
insured endorsements naming the City of Edmonds, its officers, agents and
employees as additional insured for all relevant policies called for herein.
j. Notice to Proceed. A fully executed copy of this Agreement will serve as the
Notice to Proceed (NTP).
3. Settlement and Release of Claims. For and in consideration of Grundfos'
agreement to redesign and furnish three new pump motors and replace the current pump motors at no
cost to Edmonds, and its payment to Edmonds of Four Hundred Thirty Dollars ($430.00) per year for
the cost of the additional electricity required to run the current pumps, Edmonds and its employees,
officers, agents, representatives, successors and assigns (hereinafter collectively the "Edmonds
Parties"), hereby release and forever discharge Grundfos and its employees, officers, agents,
Packet Pg. 164
7.5.a
representatives, successors and assigns (hereinafter collectively the "Grundfos Parties'), from any
and all claims, demands, damages, costs, expenses, losses, or causes of action (hereinafter referred to
as the "Claims"), in any way related to the replacement of the Project pump motors.
Notwithstanding anything stated herein to the contrary, including, but not limited to any obligations
set forth in Attachment A, Attachment B and/or Attachment C or any other ancillary contract that
may be entered into with any contractor or provider of services, Grundfos' maximum liability under
this Agreement shall not exceed $50,000.00. To resolve any potential doubts to the contrary, the
foregoing maximum liability is inclusive of the payments for electrical charges herein and any
collection of amounts provided for by any payment and performance bonds to the extent any
payments are made on any claims. Furthermore, Grundfos shall not be liable for any direct or
indirect consequential damages, loss of use, or claims of any nature whatsoever.
4. Payment. Grundfos will make the payments of Four Hundred Thirty Dollars
($430.00) per year as set forth in the scope of work (Attachment A).
5. No Admissions. This Agreement is entered into solely for the purpose of resolving
disputes without resort to litigation and is in no way to be construed, and is in fact not, an admission
of liability or responsibility of either Party hereto.
6. Law and Venue. This Agreement will be construed and enforced in accordance
with, and governed by, the laws of the State of Washington. In the event that either Party hereto
institutes proceedings to enforce any provision herein, venue will lie exclusively in Snohomish
County, Washington and the substantially prevailing party will be entitled to be reimbursed for all
reasonable costs, expenses, and attorneys' fees incurred.
7. Authority. The Parties acknowledge and represent that they are executing this
Agreement after having received full legal advice as to their rights from legal counsel, and hereby
warrant that they have the sole right and exclusive authority to execute this Agreement and receive
the benefits specified herein, and that no other person or entity has or has had any interest in the
Claims.
8. Entire Agreement. The Parties acknowledge that they have carefully read this
Agreement and know the contents thereof, including the fact that this Agreement is a release of all
claims, that no promise or agreement not expressed in this Agreement has been made, and that they
have signed this Agreement as a free act. This Agreement incorporates and supersedes any and all
prior understandings, contains the entire agreement between the Parties, and shall be binding upon
and inure to the benefit of the representatives, successors and assigns of each.
Packet Pg. 165
7.5.a
GRUNDFOS CBS, INC. CITY OF EDMONDS
[Name, Title]
Michael Nelson, Mayor
Date: Date:
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE:
Scott Passey, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Office of the City Attorney
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)ss
COUNTY OF )
On this day of 2021, before me, the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally
appeared [Name, Title] of Grundfos CBS, Inc., to me known to be the person who executed
the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and
voluntary act and deed of said entity, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on
oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC
My commission expires:
Packet Pg. 166
7.5.a
ATTACHMENT A
SCOPE OF WORK
Grundfos CBS, Inc., or its subcontractor(s), will provide all labor and materials necessary to accomplish the
following tasks:
1. Submit a payment of $430 within thirty (30) calendar days of the execution of this Agreement, and
thereafter annually, to the City of Edmonds Public Works Department prior to December 1 of each
calendar year until task #3, below, is completed.
2. Design and manufacture three (3) new 6-pole motors to be more optimized for 460 volt as to
match the previously approved pump curves as previously approved in writing by the City
Engineer. For reference, the previously approved pump curves are attached as Attachment B.
Deliver three (3) new 6-pole motors, as described in task 2 in this scope of work, to Edmonds
upon completion of the redesign noted above. Provide for the installation of two (2) of the 6-pole
motors into Edmonds' existing Dayton Pump Station system pumps at no cost to Edmonds and
provide for the delivery and installation of the third motor into the spare pump presently with the
City of Edmonds Public Works. Grundfos will arrange and pay for all labor, equipment, and
material needed for all deliveries, installation of the three (3) new 6-pole motors,testing, and
commissioning of the system, including removal and disposal of two of the existing motors,
adjustments to the control or power systems, and traffic control where needed to complete this
work. One of the existing pump motors will be retained by the City.
4. If contractor(s) or subcontractor(s) not directly employed by Grundfos, are utilized to provide
necessary labor to install the 6-pole motors as noted above, said contractor(s), subcontractor(s) or
worker(s) used by Grundfos must be approved in writing by the City Engineer. Edmonds retains
the right to request any reasonable documentation necessary to ensure compliance with all
applicable laws and regulations prior to approving any contractor(s) or subcontractor(s).
5. Complete testing of the installed pumps per Attachment B or other method approved in writing
by the City Engineer. The testing document included in Attachment B is taken from the approved
testing and start-up plan (Submittal #32) for Edmonds' Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station
Project (E4FE).
6. If testing determines that permanent changes in the operational controls or control panel are
necessary, such work shall be undertaken by Grundfos at no expense to Edmonds. Changes shall
be documented in writing and provided to Edmonds prior to completion of this Agreement.
7. Provide a minimum of one (1) calendar week notice prior to performing any on -site work to install
the pump motors on City of Edmonds property. Edmonds retains the right to require rescheduling
the work due to other capital improvement work or park programming which may conflict with
operations. Allowable work dates and times shall conform to all applicable City of Edmonds
Codes and Ordinances.
8. Upon completion of the installation and testing, submit updated user and maintenance manuals
and issue new 5-year warranty as set forth in Grundfos standard warranty attached hereto as
Exhibit 1, except for the duration as set forth in this paragraph.
Packet Pg. 167
7.5.a
ATTACHMENT B
PUMP CURVES AND TESTING INFORMATION
r
u
m
0
L-
a.
c
0
:r
m
U)
a
E
a
r
a�
a�
L
U)
r-
O
L
0
E
d
d
L
a
E
0
r
R
U)
a
E
(L
U)
c
0
c�
0
Q
Packet Pg. 168
7.5.a
ATTACHMENT C
PERFORMANCE AND PAYMENT BOND
KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That whereas the CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, has awarded Grundfos CBS, Inc., hereinafter designated as the "Principal", a contract for
the construction of the Grundfos Pump Replacement project, which consists of Scope of Work, Pump Curves
and Testing Information and Agreement, all as hereto attached and made a part hereof; and whereas, said
principal is required under the terms of said contract to furnish a bond for the faithful performance and
payment of said contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, we the principal and
a corporation, organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of ,
and duly authorized to do business in the State of Washington, as surety, are held and firmly bound unto the
CITY OF EDMONDS and the State of Washington, for and in behalf of Grundfos Pump Replacement in
the sum of Fifty Thousand Dollars and No Cents ($50,000.00) lawful money of the United States, for the
payment of which sum well and truly be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators,
successors and assigns, jointly, severally and firmly by those presents.
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the above bonded principal, his, her or its
heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and
truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and agreements of any and all duly authorized modifications
of said contract that may hereafter be made, at the time and in the manner therein specified, and shall pay all
laborers, mechanics, subcontractors and material men, and all persons who shall supply such person or
persons or subcontractors with provisions and supplies for the carrying on of such work, on his or their parts,
and shall indemnify and save harmless the CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, its officers and agents,
and shall further save harmless and indemnify said CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON from any
defect or defects in any of the workmanship or materials entering into any part of the work or designated
equipment covered by said contract, which shall develop or be discovered within one year after the physical
completion of such work, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain
in full force and effect, provided that the liability hereunder for defects in materials and workmanship for a
period of one year after the physical completion of such work.
THE SURETY, for value received, further stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration
or addition to the terms of the contract or to the work to be performed thereunder of the specifications
accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligation on this bond, and the Surety does hereby waive
notice of any change, extension of time, alterations or additions to the terms of the contract or the work or to
the specifications.
The Surety hereby agrees that modifications and changes may be made in the terms and provisions of the
aforesaid contract without notice to the Surety, and any such modifications or changes increasing the total
amount to be paid the Principal shall automatically increase the obligation of the Surety on this Performance
Bond in a like amount, such increase, however, not to exceed twenty-five percent of the original amount of
this bond without the consent of the Surety.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument is executed in three counterparts, each of which shall be
deemed an original, this day of , 20
Principal
By
Title
Packet Pg. 169
7.5.a
TWO WITNESSES
ATTEST (if corporation)
Surety
By
Title
Address of local office and agent of surety
company is
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Office of the City Attorney
Packet Pg. 170
7.5.a
EXHIBIT 1
GRUNDFOS WARRANTY
LIMITED WARRANTY. NEW EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURED BY
SELLER OR SERVICE SUPPLIED BY SELLER IS WARRANTED TO BE
FREE FROM DEFECTS IN MATERIAL AND WORKMANSHIP UNDER
NORMAL USE AND SERVICE FOR A MINIMUM OF SIXTY (60) MONTHS
FROM DATE OF INSTALLATION,. IN THE CASE OF SPARE OR
REPLACEMENT PARTS MANUFACTURED BY SELLER, THE WARRANTY
PERIOD SHALL BE FOR A PERIOD OF TWELVE MONTHS FROM
SHIPMENT. SELLER'S OBLIGATION UNDER THIS WARRANTY IS
LIMITED TO REPAIRING OR REPLACING, AT ITS OPTION, ANY PART
FOUND TO ITS SATISFACTION TO BE SO DEFECTIVE, PROVIDED THAT
SUCH PART IS, UPON REQUEST, RETURNED TO SELLER'S FACTORY
FROM WHICH IT WAS SHIPPED, TRANSPORTATION PREPAID. PARTS
REPLACED UNDER WARRANTY SHALL BE WARRANTED FOR TWELVE
MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE REPAIR, NOT TO EXCEED THE
ORIGINAL WARRANTY PERIOD. THIS WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER
PARTS DAMAGED BY DECOMPOSITION FROM CHEMICAL ACTION OR
WEAR CAUSED BY ABRASIVE MATERIALS, NOR DOES IT COVER
DAMAGE RESULTING FROM MISUSE, ACCIDENT, NEGLECT, OR FROM
IMPROPER OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, INSTALLATION,
MODIFICATION OR ADJUSTMENT. THIS WARRANTY DOES NOT COVER
PARTS REPAIRED OUTSIDE SELLER'S FACTORY WITHOUT PRIOR
WRITTEN APPROVAL. SELLER MAKES NO WARRANTY AS TO
STARTING EQUIPMENT, ELECTRICAL APPARATUS OR OTHER
MATERIAL NOT OF ITS MANUFACTURE. IF VENDEE OR OTHERS
REPAIR, REPLACE, OR ADJUST EQUIPMENT OR PARTS WITHOUT
SELLER'S PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL, SELLER IS RELIEVED OF ANY
FURTHER OBLIGATION TO VENDEE UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH WITH
RESPECT TO SUCH EQUIPMENT OR PARTS, UNLESS SUCH REPAIR,
REPLACEMENT, OR ADJUSTMENT WAS MADE AFTER SELLER FAILED
TO SATISFY WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME SELLER'S OBLIGATIONS
UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH. SELLER'S LIABILITY FOR BREACH OF
THESE WARRANTIES (OR FOR BREACH OF ANY OTHER WARRANTIES
FOUND BY A COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION TO HAVE BEEN
GIVEN BY SELLER) SHALL BE LIMITED TO: (A) ACCEPTING RETURN OF
SUCH EQUIPMENT EXW PLANT OF MANUFACTURE, AND (B)
REFUNDING ANY AMOUNT PAID THEREON BY VENDEE (LESS
DEPRECIATION AT THE RATE OF 15% PER YEAR IF VENDEE HAS USED
EQUIPMENT FOR MORE THAN THIRTY [30] DAYS), AND CANCELING
ANY BALANCE STILL OWING ON THE EQUIPMENT, or (C) IN THE CASE
OF SERVICE, AT SELLER'S OPTION, REDOING THE SERVICE, OR
REFUNDING THE PURCHASE ORDER AMOUNT OF THE SERVICE OR
PORTION THEREOF UPON WHICH SUCH LIABILITY IS BASED. THESE
Packet Pg. 171
7.5.a
WARRANTIES ARE EXPRESSLY IN LIEU OF ANY OTHER WARRANTIES,
EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AND SELLER SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY
IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE, AND IN LIEU OF ANY OTHER OBLIGATION OR
LIABILITY ON THE PART OF THE SELLER WHETHER A CLAIM IS BASED
UPON NEGLIGENCE, BREACH OF WARRANTY, OR ANY OTHER
THEORY OR CAUSE OF ACTION. IN NO EVENT SHALL SELLER BE
LIABLE FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL
OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES OF ANY KIND. FOR PURPOSES OF THIS
PARAGRAPH, THE EQUIPMENT WARRANTED SHALL NOT INCLUDE
EQUIPMENT, PARTS, AND WORK NOT MANUFACTURED OR
PERFORMED BY SELLER. WITH RESPECT TO SUCH EQUIPMENT,
PARTS, OR WORK, SELLER'S ONLY OBLIGATION SHALL BE TO ASSIGN
TO VENDEE THE WARRANTIES PROVIDED TO SELLER BY THE
MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER PROVIDING SUCH EQUIPMENT, PARTS
OR WORK. NO EQUIPMENT FURNISHED BY SELLER SHALL BE DEEMED
TO BE DEFECTIVE BY REASON OF NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR,
FAILURE TO RESIST EROSIVE OR CORROSIVE ACTION OF ANY FLUID
OR GAS, VENDEE'S FAILURE TO PROPERLY STORE, INSTALL,
OPERATE, OR MAINTAIN THE EQUIPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH
GOOD INDUSTRY PRACTICES OR SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS OF
SELLER, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO SELLER'S INSTALLATION
AND OPERATION MANUALS, OR VENDEE'S FAILURE TO PROVIDE
COMPLETE AND ACCURATE INFORMATION TO SELLER CONCERNING
THE OPERATIONAL APPLICATION OF THE EQUIPMENT.
Packet Pg. 172
8.1
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/11/2021
Update on Development Activities
Staff Lead: Shane Hope
Department: Development Services
Preparer: Scott Passey
Background/History
Every year, the Development Services Department brings the City Council an update on development
activities.
Staff Recommendation
Consider the information
Narrative
An update on development activities has been prepared for the City Council. (See attachment.)
It includes the following:
How the Development Services Department dealt with COVID impacts;
General information about permitting and revenues; and
Illustrations of development projects.
While COVID has added extra challenges, the work has not been dull! Going into 2021, development in
Edmonds continues at a healthy pace.
Attachments:
Dev_Serv_Pres_2021
Packet Pg. 173
8.1.a
SHANE HOPE
Development Services Director
LEIF BJORBACK
Building Official
DEVELOPMENT
ACTIVITIES
CITYOF EDM packet Pg. 174
Development S
nnnn
nnnn
nnnn
s
Counter service, pre -application
meetings, intake appointments.
a
CIWOF EDM
Development S Packet Pg. 175
8.1.a
jklt
9
tr
:j .ie�86 rX rHenr4� 2021 12. db-c-
I. Ems, ulFr.JdG'Tm rx -57.,
Fwf t 16K
SITE PLAN ok{sPNlnkurv.
k,rw",j W1, vocr+
Y..1 I e - +LK,GCry � rFVF.1eJiorls 9JRl3cG
/.a.J�rafT•TF'Jcc.4vandDl.
�arxrPl �lfAq rNR IP]vILtY@y17pY,
A&
STRUCTURAL NOTES SH
OEHER<•. ecaE Best awa
EDI I CDC£ AREA = L7CALJVW`AIGTgN. 1R
aEegN PRRAWVTERS
FFDLrpi.L WIND WEEDD-Ouk AesX ORTEOOBY II
ITTIIITETBNOSPEEO-110MPN IIARD x A.I.+a
D E.P U.E. N...+.av
695EEc:
E P%Rnr ErTr µTERµ FORCE PROOEOORE
roOrLTARCE. r- 1.v
BrrE CLA84.0 S.•OUP I{
sEBrNC DE9rOH UT..D 5,•r•m
ms`WII RCEFES. SYS.AaS. S..-HA
OESgH BASE 9tERR. PSPT /w F•0.a3
RAg1{OATEOORT II q.MS
WE LOCAL
RODF zs PSF I3NOWv
FLOOn w oECHsev w PSF
MMOSM ND WECIµ i4iWEG0,NS ARE REWIREB. NDVW BLWW DEPARTMENT MA NWWTIOHS SH
REM, ED BY LOCAL A1R188CTnM.
MUREPORrrED'T Pr MG M
EMMIIM E,muNip swrT TO �080M wS500 PSE 9 mG—uon•. BoT OF LOCIL
E—DR FOOTEp SMLL BE 1-V RWMRAF BETOw OUTSOE FansliE0 GRAM. AND
Mj8£-ET QgL SNWLO CCrrSIST P PREpCuwATEIV BELLaRACEU. ORArKA.AR SON. FREE W CBauAe
—ERI ANODEB03 Fa•L StpOLO as PLACED IN L IirM d LOOSE LETS ANO CCMPRCTEO TOA
ruNuMUM
M DF%PFACFNT OF THE-1011/u DERSrrc xT G !Jlod 1AD1s1rNRE CGMTEET DOERUNEO ev p1
ABTM D.1551 TEST PROLEWnES TIE
SPEC
C2MMM F..ri Par MINIMW 5:. SA JS OF CENEM PER CM IO vW OFp BETE AW AMAMON OF PER
600ALL�C—ERVE.M(BSA MCEI ENT MA]WWSLWP31' g€OR€pRTgN pF LUTERUIg
TD BE PREVENTED �
b BAAS AND UAGERSINLL BE CPNDEWOEFORrAED BARS. AyDgANOu BAR4 [a]
SMNABEi!uDEN.INACWRWNCEwmASmVAC,S LWSACESOt BWOrMETERS MALDED WRE
FABRICS LCGr M MTM ATMMD314AL BE Mg-M.-X n . OPpNE FULLNEMATVtICE& u.+
]�Egj$aE(�y-SNRLt REEr THE FaLWrlrq raPwyN 51�5:
4QtMAAOw5U, [IF Rl5 jgEATERt OF VY
CAMUEe uu—`rED J: RwPrSTyO
4WELAUEUTEOBEArag pleV >rF•va (yaF-vd ATCANT4EI+ERSI y
PAAALLAa BEw9lPSl1 2.OE rR+O rGrAAI
•^e_TRreER u.•iL BE KYI ORER ORAOES 9RLLL COHFORR TO TrAyPAORLOPNRMES FOR WESTERR c(DN
LlRA6ER•.IxTEST EOrTrOr+ ROOF TRIrSSES grIiMC eE OESS rrcO ErJ"� THE T.P t.ANp Tt� PIST
IBC ALL COtWEGTPINSPER IPOTAELEM.P•1 DR
AI6
ROOFvrTEDEaar EMDDC..rDrAllnl4 W ATNI'r00 pmTaFOR Trey 086 SRTST AWL ALL
SUPPORTENDT REB ANO BODHOARES Wnr1 Ea AT a' O C.+We rlrERrOR SUPPORTS HTrr1 N AT ar O.0 : 5Vi
`
etocRlNB NDT REcuRED sru
g y I WSTALL MUM 2iW T46 STUR0.IFLODH i2 7S&EATMRQ GM AND VIM (A
5UPPORTEDE0GEZMD8WND0E51 IWATE•O.C.: ANOINTERCR SIIPPORT3 YIlIM rM RT 1r QG. PER
BLC 14GNDT R€OWIED
M'!iNE COM1TRAClOR B•lAII VEWFY gMENS10N&AHD CCML nOF18 AT JCB RIFE 111E
COHiP,SCiDR S1aVZRFKINDETEMALtEl) OWT AS I)RAYA DUNTLEYLPEI ATEDIT USTOOEgNS
AHDSlANi ,G T&EBEEN INSTAIAED. REF107 SCALE DILLYANCId. PREfAgRICATED ITE4SPoBE
r.AH0.E0 Apo Ir/ iKLCD PER LWAaFALRkER'S REOCAMIEM}ATgN&.
pArsAcrulEP rAuea w rw.>«. re, •
W/. n.w y�iMro.�i FTW n.w
7 a } TYPICAL SHEAR FLCIW �' y 1 TYPICAL SHEAR FLOW
\,5Ij TRUSS PARALLEL TO SW HTS 51 SW TO SW THRU LO RP NTS
PLANNING DIVISION
Building Permit Submittal
Completeness Check
roc 1�r6
Prior tD Building Permit intalm a complezeneas check is
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
121 Sth A-- M
necessary
P: a2S.771A220
This che,clislist ouldinets the Planning Division
ww,r.Edmrinish gw
_
nrosrdmondsvugoP
Prc -::
T-_ - z
- e-:'noes in the permit appf€ation. The
a_DI=-t-i_=-tde zaa ea.I}teiYi_`iCf]]C-Ir=M1£C2aTidODIlCatlOM1a[C26taM10E-
OE
Incomplete
NIA
Height calculations
Ileight to k ulations_See handout E841 - Height Calculaim Lnfermarien ler
details pn how to or -id e he gh[mlcu lation,.
Datum Pu inr Please identify dawn point on the site plan and its eleyntion.
The datum puintshould be something permanent such asa xrater meterar
anhDle
Clevation Vie— Please- identity the lines of average original grade, mavYnuid
allowed height, and prepesed height of the building an one of the NeyaTien
4kws.
OE
Incomplete
MIA
SM Mira
--ol". Shew the required inning setbacks an tl.! ME& plea and pimwe
disMA alydm the property fines to all existing and proposed structures. Ca7eot
Anp ftAtprAa proposed to encroach into a required setback.
ieructu ral Lot €overage Calculations: Providle-rurtu ral lot mveragr ca kulations
As a percentage of net lot area Lenclusire uF an r access easement area). Cayerage
fneanx the total grou nd coverage Di all buildings or structures un a site m-su red
from the outside of external walls or wpportirLS members ur fmm n point two
and one-half fee[ in From the outside edge, of a �neileremd reef, whichever
vers the greatest arlA.
OE
Incomplete
N/A
crwKaweas
Critical area detenn ination an [he properly wiNrl uIe last frveyears-
Criti[alWinh report if study required.
OE
Incomplete
NA
TrLe RetellHnn and PEate[tlon Plan-ECOC 73.ID.C50,C
Tree Lmrentory
m g2ae.+ OroF-w.-ftLtsr.ut AW14-
1 TYPICAL SHEAR FLOW
31 SW TO SW - JOIST PERP NT
CITY OF EDM k
packet Pg. 176
Development 5
`�...w� entering city Rail
h+VmM wrrlC. __. must use the :.{;+';..
8.1.a
- - hand sanitizer IF NU FEEL SILL STAY 1lUME
located just insider'"oir.'R'm. m �°
rWy rw r�.rrp •-.� T Y ••... --- - the lobby. - -
N.cr..uWrb.vrc.
Ifr i,
1
ii
/1
i Heallh Check
Required
[* before surfing r
in - warkr r� D
K V
.. - �.. Q
. d 2
O
04
AP Nz
to
�Ne MaCG
package ho _�__�:
0g a���ce - �
>'
dd
ACOpte AZ5 JX-
AZO
Mks 5etJices11�_
Online Submittals, Site E
c�elaPmQ�t gill�n� A25 ��
Virtual
�2�- Checks, Meetings.
oe u�����y w9tk5 � •
a
CITYOF EDM
Development S Packet Pg. 177
COVID Impacts to Permitting
L
City
Hall
Home
Office
My Building Permit (MBP)
is the City's main portal for accepting
and issuing building permits
8.1.a
✓ City Hall remains
closed to the public
✓ Majority of staff are
telecommuting and/o
rotating office shifts
E
✓ Customer feedback o
0-
CD
electronic processes i
positive
✓ DRC and Pre-App
meetings continue
over Zoom -
N
N
Homeowners and the
L
project team can
attend from their
homes and/or offices
0
✓ Customer assistance
provided over Zoom,
phone and/or email
a
CITY OF EDV
Pmeff
acket Pg. 178
Development
AkTAh
40
•
Development Review Committee (DRC) Meetings
Free Project Review Meetings with the Public
- o x
Ou4211 C:1=:30
4�] o f 1 3a F
Meetings offered every Thursday at 1:30 and 3pm
36 meetings held in 2020
Coordination Meetings Amongst Staff
eM Bjwback ' i S - b[ngYZM1
JY 4
c Ve� N
zrichardson
Jeanie
R
,, an �i nnao Q
8.1.a
COVID Impacts to Construction
• March 23rd
Governor declares
shutdown of all
0
non -essential
A)
business, including a
construction
proj ects
0
0
0
• April241h
Phase 1 begins
Q
• June 51h
r
N
N
Phase 2 begins
a
which allows all
2"
construction to
;i
resume with the
implementation of
an on -site safety
plan.
a
CITY OF EDM Packet Pg. 180
Development S
'0
rel rriraRf n oFq
Apply for
Check
Permit
Status
do
�wf
"'.I��i'
View My
Dashboard
A
Getting Started - Resources - About Us Contact Us Help Log In
�I
1� r �wrc..w■1�
tow 1!/■�N in I
'� ::::....
M1a
4
Schedule
nspections
J
I
Pay
Fees
I111pipr001l
1
00
I 1
Sri
h�
Visit Training
and Seminars
Streateries
• In response to COVID, a Special Event
Permit was issued in 2020 to allow for
curbside dining
• Fall 2020, Special Event Permit extended
while regulations are considered
• December 2020 Ord. 4209 went into effect
• Streatery standards and publications were
developed
• 14 streatery permits approved to date
• Ordinance allows for up to 20 streateries
• Uniform streatery design presented by
business owners and implemented by many
• The public is actively enjoying outdoor
dining!
kknim L "— I it
QR■W ._py 5 , _
1 r \ � � ■ ..4
Packet Pg. 182
r,
00
I
AW
-M-M
AL -
ado
2
E
.2
w
>
0
C14
0
C %4
Permit history, valuation
-Wool of activities, solar, impact E
fees and general facility
charges (GFQ
CITY OF EDMt-,%P-'—r
Development Packet Pg, 183
Development Services
Permit History
$2,000,000 T
$1,800,000
$1,600,000
$1,400,000
$1,200,000
$1,000,000
$800,000
$600,000
$400,000
$200,000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
$0 =L+ 0
�D l-- 00 011 O .--i N M It W) �0 � 00 01 K1 �t W) \C � 00 01 O �t tf) � � 00 01 O
00 00 00 00 00 01� 0� 01 01 011 01\ 01, 01 01 01 O O O O O O O O O O - - - - - - - - - - N
01 C 1 01 O) O� 01 01 01 C� 0� C� 01 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Total Devel Svc Revenue # Building Permits
CITY OF EDM packet Pg. 184
Development 5
8.1.a
Permits
Reviewed by development services 2019 vs. 2020
p_ of Permit
New
Single Family
Duplex
Apartment/Condo
Commercial
Mixed Use (Office/condo)
Additions / Alterations
Single Family
Apartment / Condo
Commercial
Other
Mechanical / Plumbing
Demolition
Miscellaneous
Issued # Issued
26 32 $11,692,071 $13,220,676
1(2units) 0 $131,125
4(26units) 2 (202 units) $3,343,502 $27,298,995
0 3 0 $2,456,999
0 0 0
154 148 $9,851,167 $8,678,810
15 18 $1,674,247 $754,563
53 42 $8,263,097 $6,124,564
441/379
17
456
470/333
21
256
MA
$9,918,505
$1, 848, 609
1 Packet Pg. 185
8.1.a
Engineering Division
Right-of-way, side sewer, street use, and encroachment
activity 2017-2020
Permits Issued 415
Permit Revenue $421806
Inspection & Review
$416,959
Revenue
M
$58,221
$2491427
447
$411595
391
$55,433
$2231678 $2481499
2D
a
E
0-
0
>
d
0
C
0
CU
N
O
N
N
I
0
I
0
C
0
Q
CITYOF EDM Packet Pg. 186
Development S
8.1.a
IMPACT FEES AND GENERAL FACILITY CHARGES (GEC's) FOR 2020
Transportation Impact Fees
Parks Impact Fees
Water GFC
Sewer GFC
Storm GFC
N
d
r
r
V
Q
$805,648 E
0
0
$553934 2
0
Cu
$340,899 "
0
NI
fA
L
$75,154
0
E
$42,573
Q
CITYOF EDM
Development S Packet Pg. 187
8.1.a
c -' -- Y Permits
Year
# of Permits
# of Permits
%
Online
2012
3
0
0%
2013
6
5
83%
2014
39
35
90%
2015
32
29
91%
2016
17
16
94%
2017
14
14
100%
2018
14
13
93%
2019
12
11
92%
2020
11
8
73%
Totals
4.
,
2
a
E
0-
0
0
a
CITY OF EDM Packet Pg. 188
Development S
8.1.a
4�384
a�
D
r
Building Inspections N�
N
N
L
21775
Engineering
o
Inspections
a
CITYOF EDM packet FPg.1111111!!
9
Development S
8.1.a
Building
Inspections
Avg/working
day
E
0-
0
d
2399 0
CU
(2019)
7.4
(2020)
CITYOF EDM Packet Pg. 190
Development 5
8.1.a
Number of Building Inspections per Month, 2020
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
January February
March April
May June July August September October November December
a
a�
E
0-
0
a�
m
0
c
0
a�
ca
r
N
O
N
I
N
N
L
I
I
>
0
C
w
E
U
2
Q
CITYOF EDM
Development S Packet Pg. 191
Key projects N
0
N
N
N
L
C
w
E
:i
a
CITYOF EDM
Development 5 Packet Pg. I
8.1.a
M ��M
Graphite ITM ME=C
Kahlo's Cantina *Studios
*Civic Field
Waterfront **Von's Bell St APT.
Center —�
:IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�
Port Office
Building
Main Street N
WWTP 111 M=
Commons ,:CM
Carbon A
Recovery Pine Park
614
all C
•: II! �Ii�i�IIIIIII
IIIIIIIII�
Paradise Heights
MIF211: -ii;W
Woodway
F Station
Brackett'
Reserve
oil
a■�;� INA
'
Anthology °••III
Senior Livin III
Ford Hunter , g'
Townhomessr �lIII
�illf�
�C
mm M
ow
Edmonds
Crossing Apts
Sunde
ownhomes
Nyland
* Apts.
Apollo Apts.
Edmonds
Townhomes
N
m
r
c
m
a
0
a)
m
0
0
CU
N
O
NI
;v
a
i
m
>
0
E
Q
CITYOF EDM E
'—`Development SPacket P=193
ew Single Family Homes
75thAve W
ew Single Family Homes
Olympic View Dr. 72"d Ave W.
ew Single Family Homes
244th St SW
ew Single Family Homes
aAM
r7i,�
A..
Olympic View Dr. 82nd PI. W
ew Townhomes
82ndPlace
Townhomes
Waterfront Center
2
' .-vt
26,000 sf New Commercial
220 Railroad Ave.f AF,
�
Finaled
W ..
ahlo's Cantina
.4 PINr a +
ilk-
�..
Fi naled
" .L �
I
Packet Pg. 201
Nyland Apartments
19 New Residential Units
8509/8513 244th St. SW
F. .fey r � `.•: ':Ty -; y(. {L. �•,�.� }�i :6�`
� �. � fir_ ` ' �„ '. .- ru• �s5" •
� i� � �f�•, f � i�Q' YFN.J' .ir
s $rim, -� � s;-�•.� • , _
4 aY.
X3
`'� Packet Pg. 2C
Graphite Studios
W,
11,000 sf New Commercial
202 Main St.
a
gipp'�;; .�:.��
- A! 7jjilly
Issued
Main Street. C mmons
Ir
mawuai�i f. r �Y6�w�':•a.
�•tisY�i.1'
Retail, restaurant, and
event space
� 550/558 Main St.
GRE Apartments
• il
FIE;
rA
192 New Residential Units r
23400 Highway 99
r�
r. -
c
m` z• r
Issued
_ �'Packet-. 205
Paradise Heights
it
EIS
12 New Residential Units
546/550/ Paradise Lane,
In=
WE'D
Issued (bldg. A)
Applied (bldg. I I
1 41.
Edmonds rossin 4+
'A
MIFLL-10 AIL
L A'
44.1
10 New Residential Units
R`,
23830 Edmonds Way :: ,
0
Issuedl 1
ntholociv oV'-'-Ivr dmonds
14
Ali
'40
47
01
Y:;P*
S,
Senior Living
192 Units ,:M1 Applied
21200 72nd Ave W. Pac et Pg. 208
Kisan Townhomes
..Sig
illy.
._J_______.
7V
18 New Residential Units
22810 Edmonds Way
0
M
il ..
'M No
0 P. nr,- 'L
,� W 40. *.ad. w. q„,* w3q,�6 w�"
Applied
a
r*
Sprague St
.f . 1 0
CIVIC
300 6th Ave. N
� r
r �
t
� 4
_ � 1
� r -
m4
H EADOWS Sprague S#
r
Te
THE GREAT LAWN
-
Edmonds
�. LL
#�4 J
Applied
� 4
mdale 8each PlarK,
Enhanced
� Ri arian Area
' Replaced
Railroad Brld e
Picnic Viewpoinl
Enhanced
:Y Creek h labitat
. T 4
42
L-� ' • r '
Restored Pocket �
Estuary Improved _ Enhanced Pond
t Pirnir Shelter -
Tmpinv,-.d lawn
RcaLt Parking, and
RelocatLd Drairogc Improvemonts
f(estruorn watCr
a Imp Enclosure Tredime
glw�' Pedestrian Trail Swale n
- rx �y rrrrrrrr
-.,i ysiia]eGpr&bA F E-0 P.nw � qureMH.N �q—in Wan do..
Proposmd Project Site Pla Packet Pg. 212
Mmdaw&le 9garh Park and lm.My R—L—L.— I . _ 1
Apollo Apartments
i
L
51 New Multi -family Units
23601 Hwy 99 J
tf�l �aar��rru�� j
I
I
Il..
App
Sunde Townhomes
li i�11 _ ice■■■'
ICI � ■■ ■■■ ■■
■■■ ■■■ I� �I ■■ ICI ■■ I.iia�mm MEN on
_ II _■■�■■� �■■MEN ■■
II � ■ II
IL.... q
riY.z.ri.
iir�iiiii�iii�r�iiiir� --•_ _'-_= _'-_IN
I
�
,� ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■
�,
Irrrr
'' Irrrr'===' Irrrr "'''
=
Irrrr
&EMU Irrrr:_=
^Irrrr
1 Duplex + 1 Triplex
8629 238th St. SW
III I I::I::I::I::I IN
Niwwwwil
jimmm L" .
IMIMIMIM
ii
Irrrr
■5 I �
Design Revie
Ford Hunter Townhomes �
P
KU
4 Unit Townhomes
7528 215th St. SW
k ..
Ow
sy -weft IcExistin
_..
s v-^
Apply for So
Wastewater Treatment Plant Carbon Recovery
rM M.-
P PL
L or (1:
iG
200 2nd Ave S
L .
I:
Ir if
Pre-ap
� ei6,
r%-L. -d ° amp :. VFW mm 1F��mqjjrmt';_:`I
\IJ
V
C
d
Q
0
a�
>
d
O
Q
N
O
NI
N
d
�I
d
�I
N
+
�R
Packet Pg. 217
Port Office Building
6,650 sf
New Commercial
471 Admiral Way
Pre-app § j
Wui i:�l'iilnF117:i a 701 peo
D M 1: • L h .4 Y 3A ADMIRAL WAY, EDMONDS YACHT CLUB �
J
'ORTOFEDMONDS
3000 ADMRAL WAY. RESTAURANTS OF ICE � u
AREA OF 1R -
y F�\ %2lJNEAR FEET CF i o i
P! dhIICFf1 RCihRf1W61 If r' i....-
2
a�
0-
0
N
as
0
C
O
a�
Q
N
O
N
N
I
N
L
I
N
I
>
0
E
m
u
2
Y
Y
Q
Packet Pg. 219
estgate Station
low
IF.
;OW &7�A_
r
20 Multi -family Units +
4,704 sf new commercial
9601 Edmonds Way
• - -•-- Desin Revie
g
Wsis
z MR rep I I to
7m-T
(Pine Park 614
.w
M
3 Mixed Use Bldgs.
6145thAve S
Design Revie
THANKYOU
a
CITYOF EDM
Development Packet Pg. 223 /
S
8.2
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/11/2021
Comprehensive Plan Performance Review - Presentation
Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead}
Department: Development Services
Preparer: Jana Spellman
Background/History
On an annual basis, a report is provided to the City Council and public on progress for key
implementation actions and performance measures that were adopted in the Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Recommendation
Consider the information.
Narrative
Attached is a Comprehensive Plan Monitoring report that will be presented at the City Council's May 11
meeting.
Attachments:
Comp Plan Monitoring Report.2020_05.5.21
Packet Pg. 224
8.2.a
Cox,,&kllrel� PlaIr �
MONITORING
MDNP D D
LN'�� : IT
Shane Hope
Development Services Director
City Council Meeting
May 11, 2021
r�C. 1$9"
Packet Pg. 225
8.2.a
Comprehensive Plan contains:
K
r Implementation
dCt10115 steps that must betaken
within a specified timeframe to
address high -priority goals.
C i Performance
measures targeted
information about the
implementation & effectiveness of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Packet Pg. 226
8.2.a
c
Cu
n.
Develop the following:
Street I ree Plan by EOY2018;
O
• Urban Forest Management Plan b EOY2018; Ny in
LO
• Development of level of service standards for key publi.
CD
0
facilities by EOY2019;
• Housing policy option,,-. by EOY2020.
IMPLEMENTATION
Packet Pg. 227
8.2.a
Develop an update to the Street Tree Plan by EOY 2018
• Street Tree Plan had last
major update in 2016.
• Now that the Urban Forest
Management Plan is
complete, a more
comprehensive update of
comprehensive Street Tree
Plan is underway.
• Environmental consultant,
The Watershed Company,
is working on inventory
and helping draft the new
plan.
GEPEPS ST
6
�«'�. r
a
'
�cc
EDMONDS DOWNTOWN STREETTRFF PLAN
Symbol Botanical Name / Common Name
Acer platonoides'Columnare'/ Columnar Norway Maple
0 Acer rubrum'Scarsen'/Scarlet Sentinel Maple
0 Acer rubrum'Bowhall'/ Bowhall Maple
0 Acer x freemanii'Jeffsred'/ Autumn Blaze Maple
0 Fraxinus pennsylvanica'Summit'/ Summit Ash
0 Pryus calleryara 'Capital'/ Capital Pear
0 Pyrus calleryara'Chanticleer'/ Chanticleer Pear
0 Stewartia pseudocamellia /Japanese Stewartia
0 Acer rubrum'Karpick'/ Karpick Maple
0 Fraxinus pennsylavanica "Johnson"/ Leprachaun Ash
0 Ginkgo bi loba'Blagon'/ Golds pire Ginkgo
0 Mix oftree species as identified in the 4th Ave. Cultural
Corridor Design Implementation and Funding Plan (2009) &
4th Ave. Arts Corridor appendix to the Streetscape Plan
Special Intersection Treatment as approved by City
Packet Pg. 228
8.2.a
Develop Urban Forest Management Plan by
EOY2018 �
The Urban Forest
Management Plan was
adopted in July 2019.
0 CityLimits
- Tree Canopy
GrasslLow-Lying Vegetation
- Impervious Surfaces
Bare Soil
- Open water
N
A
0 0-5 1
Miles
a
ry
.N
c
Iv
L
IZ
E
0
U
Packet Pg. 229
I
'01'TPII
E-1
1
8.2.a
Develop housing policy options by
EOY 2020
• Citizens' Housing
Commission
established
• Resolution no. 1427 (April 2019) & amended
via Resolution no. 1428 (May 2019).
• Housing Commission
submitted their housing
policy recommendations to
Council in January 2021.
r "P iC
Packet Pg. 231
8.2.a
........................
Xt
Annually report:
• city-wide and city government energy use;
a
a
• number of residential unity permitted;
L
• average number of jobs within the city;
• lineal feet of water, sewer, and stormwater mains LO
replaced or rehabilitated;
N
• Capital Facilities ro Plan •ect deliveryresults;
��
L
• lineal feet of sidewalk renovated or rehabilitated.
PERFORMANCE
b �&OUENO
Packet Pg. 232
8.2.a
Annually report city-wide and city government Qnergy use
CITY -OWNED PROPERTIES
Electric Utility for city -owned 8
Ln
r-I
Oq Ln
property reduced by 18 m
ri
percent from a decade ago. 6
r�
V
J
2
Ln
1.4
r-I
0
cn
rn
O
r-i
N
lD
N
n
r-I
Q0
Ln
i_*
N
N
Ln
n
1-4
00
01
Ln
N r-1
U�
r-i
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
❑ Electric Utility Street Lighting
_
a
a�
.N
E
0
U
Packet Pg. 233
8.2.a
Annually report city-wide and city government Qnergy use
Commercial energy use
declined slightly in recent
years from a decade ago
Residential energy use
has dipped a little, even
though more people live
here.
250
200
150
100
50
I
CITY-WIDE
00 00 L o
M M N
M00 00
r-I Ol l0 p') M I� �
a) 0 � Op lD rl Ol 0 0 0 0 0 Ln
m
CY,
0
00
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
❑ Commercial ❑ Residential
Packet Pg. 234
8.2.a
Annually report number of esidential (inIT permitted
Target of 21,168 units by
2035 or adding 112 UIIItS on
average annually.
89fz
Annual Average
Year
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
SF
32
26
57
60
41
53
46
36
27
15
MF
202
26
4
120
97
4
43
Housing
Type
Duplex
ADU
-
6
2
7
4
9
4
7
-
4
-
5
14
6
-
5
- 5
Demo
(20)
(16)
(24)
(23)
(16)
(11)
(19)
(19)
(8)
(6)
220
45
50
168
126
51
90
22
19
103
tota 11 393 585 24 54 (162) 894
Packet Pg. 235
8.2.a
Annually report average number of jobs within the city
Goal of reaching 13,948 jobs
by 2035 to meet growth targets.
Requires adding
approximately 95 job-r,
annuallyfrom 2011 to 2035.
An average of '32jObs have
been added annually since
2011.
Year I Covered Employment'
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
NA (June 2021 release)
12,738
12,480
12,717
10,883
10,677
11,542
12,721
11,952
10,880
Packet Pg. 236
8.2.a
Annually report lineal feet of water, sewer, and stormwater mains
replaced or rehabilitated
Year
2020
Lineal Feet
Replaced 7,016 2,369 4,361
Rehabilitated - 1,934 -
New - - -
2019
Replaced 11120 1,315 21139
Rehabilitated - - -
New - - 497
8.2.a
Annually report Capital Facilities Plan ,project delivery results.
Civic Playfield Acquisition and/or Development Conceptual Acquisition complete. Development In -
progress
Community Park/Athletic Complex - Old Woodway High School Conceptual Complete
Main St. & 9th Ave S (interim solution) Conceptual Complete
76th Ave. W & 212th St. SW intersection improvements Design/ROW Complete
228th St SW Corridor Safety Improvements Design/ROW Complete
Residential Traffic Calming Conceptual On -going annual program
Trackside Warning System or Quiet Zone @Dayton and Main St. Conceptual Complete
Dayton St. and Hwy 104 Drainage Improvements Design Complete
Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger Cr/Willow Cr/Day-lighting /Restoration Study Conceptual
Perrinville Creek Hi h Flow Reduction/ Management Project Stud On oin ca ital ro ram
Previously added UP projects that are active
Highway 99 Gateway/Revitalization Conceptual Design In Progress
238 St. SW Walkway from Hwy 99 to SR104 Complete
Dayton St. Walkway from 3rd Ave to 9th Ave Conce tual Selected Sections Com leted
' • • - .••-• 1 1 1
mpw .
Walnut St. Walkway from 6th Ave to 7th Ave
SR104 Walkway from HAWK Signal to Pine St/Pine St from SR104 to 3rd Ave
Citywide Bicycle Improvements
Downtown Lighting Improvements
Waterfront Re -development
Completed in 2020
Project does not have secured funding
In-Progress/On-going
Project does not have secured funding
Completed in 2020
SR-104 Adaptive System
236th St. SW Walkway from Hwy 99 to 76th Ave
Design to begin in 2022 Packet Pg. 238
Project does not have secured funding
8.2.a
Annually report lineal feet of
rehabilitated.
renovated or
Year
Lineal Feet
2020
Contractors
1,170'
Public Works
300,
Private Development
3,459'
2019
Contractors
1,300'
Public Works
275'
Private Development
3,177'
Packet Pg. 239
8.2.a
THANK W DU
Q
Packet Pg. 240
8.3
City Council Agenda Item
Meeting Date: 05/11/2021
Process for Reviewing Housing Commission Recommendations
Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead}
Department: Development Services
Preparer: Jana Spellman
Background/History
The Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission was tasked by a City Council resolution with developing
"diverse housing policy options for Council consideration designed to expand the range of housing" in
Edmonds. This work was due January 31, 2021 and the Commission was slated to sunset one day later.
The Housing Commission's 15 policy recommendations (attached) were submitted to the City Council on
January 29, 2021. This milestone was publicly acknowledged at the Council's February 2, 2021
meeting. The recommendations were not discussed in any detail.
On March 16, 2021, the City Council meeting featured an "introductory Overview of the Housing
Commission Recommendations". This was a longer session but still recognized that each policy
recommendation, perhaps one or two at a time, would come back in more detail to the City Council
during the next year.
Since then, one of the simpler housing recommendations --to establish an interlocal agreement with the
countywide housing authority --came to the City Council for further review and action as part of two
public meetings.
Council members have also expressed interest in a more specific process to review the remaining
recommendations.
Staff Recommendation
Approve Option 1 or 2 to guide the review process.
NARRATIVE
In planning for the process to review the policy recommendations of the Edmonds Citizens' Housing
Commission, it is important to keep in mind several things, including:
1. What is a policy recommendation?
2. What can the City Council do with the Housing Commission's recommendations?
3. If the Council wants to pursue implementing a recommendation, what tool/method would be used?
4. What is the difference between "general recommendations" and "recommendations subject to
Planning Board involvement"?
5. How do you know whether a policy recommendation is fairly simple vs. fairly complex?
6. What should be done with overlapping or closely related recommendations?
7. What is the relationship between housing and the environment?
8. What are the options for City Council review of the housing policy recommendations?
9. Will community engagement be part of the decision process?
10. How should the City approach the Housing Commission's "supplemental policy proposals"?
Packet Pg. 241
8.3
Each of the above questions are addressed below.
What is a policy recommendation?
Let's start with defining a policy. Basically, a "policy" is a statement that is intended to guide future
actions about something. It is not nearly as detailed as a regulation --but may provide guidance for
developing more detailed regulations and programs.
Furthermore, a "recommendation" is simply advice that follows from a deliberative effort.
For the Housing Commission, each recommendation reflects a policy proposal that the majority of
Commissioners voted to recommend to the City Council. The proposed policies are not necessarily
meant to be adopted "as is" but to guide more specific actions.
What can the Council do with the Housing Commission's recommendations?
After reviewing each policy recommendation, along with public input and additional information, the
City Council may choose to:
(a) Take no action to move the recommendation forward
(b) Send the recommendation (or a set of recommendations) to the Planning Board for more
review, research, and the development of any options for Council consideration
(c) Direct that a more detailed study and/or possible options be developed for further Council
consideration (without Planning Board review); and/or
(d) Direct that specific action be taken toward implementing the recommendation in some form.
If the Council Wants to Pursue Implementing a Recommendation, What Tool or Method Would Be
Used?
To implement a selected amendment, the City Council could choose from several different
tools/methods, including:
o Voting on a motion to follow a particular course of action
o Authorizing an interlocal agreement
o Authorizing a budget amendment
o Adopting a resolution about key findings or intentions
o Adopting a Comprehensive Plan amendment
o Amending the City's development regulations
o Adopting a change to the municipal code (outside of the development regulations)
A table has been prepared to illustrate how some of these tools could apply. (See "Policy
Implementation Methods", attached.)
What is the Difference between "General Recommendations" and "Recommendations Subject to
Planning Board Involvement"?
Of the Housing Commission's 15 policy recommendations, 9 affect the Comprehensive Plan and/or
zoning regulations. These 9 are subject to Planning Board review before final action is considered more
deeply by the City Council. The other 6 recommendations are distinct from the first type because the
City Council may take any final action on them without Planning Board input. From this perspective, the
15 recommendations break into 2 primary categories. (Seethe attached "Policy Aspects Table"for a
summary view of this.)
The first category is: Recommendations Subject to Planning Board Review. (NOTE: Planning Board
review would include gathering of additional public input, analysis of detailed information, and
development of very specific recommendations/options for Council consideration). The 9 policies (by
Packet Pg. 242
8.3
short title) in this category are:
6 Missing Middle Housing in Single -Family Neighborhoods
6 Equity Housing Incentives
6 Medium Density Single Family Housing
6 Neighborhood Village Subarea Planning
d Cluster/Cottage Housing
6 Detached Accessory Dwelling Units
6 Inclusionary Zoning
d Multi -Family Design Standards
6 Update Comprehensive Plan to Include "Parking Solutions" as a Goal in Transportation Element.
The second category is: Recommendations Not Requiring Planning Board Review before the City
Council takes any final action. These recommendations do not affect the comprehensive plan or
development regulations. The 6 policies (by short title) in this category are:
d Multi -Family Tax Exemption
d Use of Existing Sales Tax Revenue for Affordable and Supportive Housing
6 County Implementation of Sales and Use Tax for Housing and Related Services
6 Edmonds-HASCO Interlocal Agreement
d Develop Community Housing Partners
d Eliminate Discriminatory Provisions in Covenants and Deeds.
How Do You Know whether a Policv Recommendation is Fairly Simple vs. Fairly Complex?
Different people may have different opinions about whether something is fairly simple or complex. For
purposes of this process, we are assuming that an item is "fairly simple" if it can be understood or
implemented in a relatively short time and without extensive technical analysis. On the other end of the
spectrum, an item is very complex if it would require a great amount of study or the development of
entirely new regulations or programs that are very different from those that exist now.
Whether something is fairly simple or complex makes a difference in planning the schedule for
considering that item.
What is the Relationship between HousinLy and Environment?
All development, including existing and future housing, is to be considered in relationship to the rest of
the environment. That implies that, as we think about the need for housing across our region and how
Edmonds is able to meet its fair share of housing needs, we also understand that providing for open
space, trees, walkability, good schools, etc., is an integral part of providing for housing. In other words,
as a community and part of bigger region, we take a balanced and thoughtful approach to achieving
both housing and environmental goals-- recognizing no one will ever have all the answers but our
community can continue to make progress. It does not mean that all environmental issues must be
tackled before one can do anything about housing. In fact, this relationship is at the heart of
"sustainability" -- the idea that achieving a healthy environment, economic vitality, and social well-being
is an ongoing, integrated process.
For example, this relationship aligns with several sustainability goals in our Comprehensive Plan,
including:
Sustainability Goal A: "Develop land use policies, programs, and regulations designed to support
and promote sustainability. Encourage a mix and location of land uses designed to increase
accessibility of Edmonds residents to services, recreation, jobs, and housing."
NOTE: A policy under that same goal goes on to say "Holistic solution should be
Packet Pg. 243
8.3
developed that employ such techniques as Low Impact Development (LID), transit -
oriented development, "complete streets" that support multiple modes of travel, and
other techniques to assure that future development and redevelopment enhances
Edmonds' character and charm for future generations to enjoy."
Sustainability Goal G: "Develop housing policies, programs and regulations designed to support
and promote sustainability. Support and encourage a mix of housing types and styles which
provide people with affordable housing choices geared to changes in lifestyle...."
So how are environment and housing considered together as development occurs? One important way
is by ensuring that development regulations are designed to incorporate both environmental needs and
housing opportunities, for example, through good stormwater management. In addition, the City can
take steps to encourage or acquire open space, to retain trees, and to protect critical areas and the
shoreline.
What Should Be Done with Overlapping or Closely Related Recommendations?
Some of the housing policy recommendations overlap each other and should be considered
concurrently, at least in part. The two sets of recommendations that are subject to Planning Board
review and have overlap with each other are:
1. "Missing Middle Housing in Single Family Neighborhoods" with "Equity Housing Incentives";
and
"Medium -Density Single Family Housing" with "Neighborhood Village Subarea Planning".
Policy recommendations that are closely related -but not requiring Planning Board review --are:
o "Use of Existing Sales Tax Revenue for Affordable and Supportive Housing" with "County
Implementation of Sales and Use Tax for Housing and Related Services".
What Are the Options for the City Council's Review Process?
Below are two options for a City Council review process.
Option V'Divide the work first"
In this option:
For the 5 remaining policy recommendations that do not affect the Comprehensive Plan or zoning
regulations, the City Council would consider 4 of them in 2 or more batches between late spring and fall,
2021. [Note: the 5t" recommendation, regarding Multifamily Tax Exemption, is technically complex and
better to consider in early 2022, given that non -housing topics (including tree programs, budget, etc.)
will take plenty of agenda time before then.]
For all 9 policies affecting the Comprehensive Plan or zoning regulations, the City would conduct brief
initial review in 2 or more batches during summer/fall of 2021, then assign the batch (in whole or part,
with any additional direction) to the Planning Board for further work and recommendations. Sometime
later, after the Planning Board prepares its recommendations for each assigned policy (or group of
related policies), the City Council would have a more extensive review and public process, probably
beginning in early 2022 and extending through fall 2022 or later.
Option 2 - "Start simple"
In this option:
Between this spring and late fall (i.e., prior to the rush of budget and other year-end work), the City
Packet Pg. 244
8.3
Council could start reviewing policy recommendations that are relatively simple and do not need
significant research before the Council begins considering them. This includes initial review of: (a) one
or two policies that do not need Planning Board review; and (b) one or two policies that may then be
forwarded to the Planning Board for more work (and possible options) before detailed consideration by
the City Council. Thus, review of several policies could be started this year, with exact dates to be
determined per the extended agenda and any necessary updates. For example, this could mean:
Late spring --Consideration of one or two relatively simple policies that do not need Planning
Board input (such as: "Use of Existing Sales Tax Revenue"; and "County Implementation of Sales
& Use Tax");
Summer --Consideration of one or two relatively simple policies that could be assigned
to the Planning Board for additional work/options during 2021 (and come back to the Council
later), especially regarding Detached Accessory Dwelling Units;
Fall --Consideration of two other recommendations that do not require Planning Board input,
such as: "Develop Community Housing Partners" and "Eliminate Discriminatory Provisions in
Covenants and Deeds").
Then in early 2022, the City Council could begin considering the remaining, more complex
recommendations in a logical order. For example:
VY Quarter 2022-
(a) Consideration of any remaining policies that are not subject to Planning Board
review (such as "Multi -Family Tax Exemption"); and
(b) Consideration of 2 or more policies that may be complex and related to each other -
AND that could be sent to the Planning Board for further review and options before
final Council consideration.
2nd Quarter 2022-
(a) Consideration of any recommendations or options that have come back from the
Planning Board's 2021 assignments
(b) Preliminary consideration of remaining policies that could be sent to the Planning
Board for review and options before final Council consideration
3d Quarter 2022 (and possibly beyond)-
6 Consideration of any additional recommendations or options that come back from
the Planning Board's 2021 or 2022 assignments.
Will Communitv Eneaeement Be Part of the Decision Process?
Additional community engagement will be sought in making decisions about housing policies. (Note:
That does not mean that every public opinion can or will be automatically followed but rather, that
everyone is welcome to share their perspective and to know that the City Council will thoughtfully
consider it.) Furthermore, every Council decision will be made in a public meeting. If the decision is part
of an amendment to a development regulation or to the comprehensive plan, it will also require a public
hearing, which provides another opportunity for community input. To go forward, many of the
recommendations would also trigger Planning Board review and a whole set of additional public
engagement opportunities.
How should the City Council approach the Supplemental Set of Policy Proposals?
The Housing Commission offered 7 additional policy ideas that did not necessarily fit within the
Packet Pg. 245
8.3
Commission's mission or timeframe but might be worth exploring later. These were:
Improved Tenant Protections
Childcare Voucher Program
Renter's Choice Security Deposit
Low -Income Emergency Repair Program
Property Tax Exemption for Low -Income Households
Simplify Zoning Code Language
Streamline Permitting Process.
The first of these (Improved Tenant Protections) relates closely to legislation that has been moving
through the state legislative process. If this legislation is signed into law, it may have local implications
that the City Council should consider later this year.
The other 6 ideas above could be addressed in 2022/2023, after all or most of the Housing Commission's
official policy recommendations have been considered.
Attachments:
POLICY PACKAGE FOR COUNCIL-02.01.21
Policy.Implmtn.Method
HC.PolicyAspectsTable
Packet Pg. 246
8.3.a
■ CITIZENS'
HOUSING
,,COMMISSION
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE
EDMONDS CITIZENS' HOUSING COMMISSION
Date: January 29, 2021
Corrected: February 1, 2021
Acknowledgements:
Citizens' Housing Commissioners
Alena Nelson-Vietmeier
Bob Throndson
George Keefe
Greg Long
James Ogonowski
Jess Blanch
Judi Gladstone
Karen Haase Herrick
Keith Soltner
Michael McMurray
Nichole Franko
Tana Axtelle
Tanya Kataria
Weijia Wu
Will Chen
Citizens' Housing Commission Alternates
Eva -Denise Miller
Jean Salls
Kenneth Sund
Leif Warren
Rick Nishino
Wendy Wyatt
City Council Liaisons
Luke Distelhorst
Vivian Olson
City Staff
Shane Hope
Amber Groll
Brad Shipley
Debbie Rothfus
Jerrie Bevington
Scott Passey
Consultant Support
Cascadia Consulting Group, Inc.
Gretchen Mueller
Jasmine Beverly
Packet Pg. 247
8.3.a
January 29, 2021
To: Edmonds City Council and Mayor Mike Nelson
From: The Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission
RE: Submittal of Final Housing Policy Recommendations from the Edmonds Citizens' Housing
Commission
Council members and Mayor Nelson, you gave the Edmonds Citizens Housing Commission this mission:
"Develop diverse housingpolicy options for (City) Council consideration designed
to expand the range of housing (including rental and owned) available in
Edmonds; options that are irrespective of age, gender, race, religious affiliation,
physical disability or sexual orientation " — City Council Resolution No. 1427
Our mission has set this Commission on extraordinary path. Our community has been through a pandemic
and the Housing Commission has suffered the loss of one of our members. For the past 17-months,
Commissioners have solicited public input from diverse communities throughout Edmonds; researched
current, and future population growth and housing needs; examined city codes and state law; studied what
works and why; and worked to create new opportunities for all residents. We believe our ideas can enhance
our unique city to keep Edmonds a vibrant, diverse and welcoming community for all.
Community engagement has been a top priority. Early outreach included `in -person' events. After COVID-
19 struck, most events happened online. We live -streamed all our meetings and community outreach
seminars with diverse groups city-wide. We have conducted online community surveys; sent out extensive
news releases updating the community and flyers encouraging public involvement, as well as hundreds of
post card notifications and survey invitations.
The Commission believes that the set of policy ideas we are submitting is consistent with your Resolution
#1427. Additional support material is outlined in each proposal and the Commission would be happy to
provide any further input required.
Each Commission member appreciates the opportunity to serve the people of Edmonds. Each member
brought commitment, passion and vision to this process. We had frank and robust discussions among
Commissioners that reflected our wide range of opinions. Our considerations included whether proposed
ideas fit with our mission and whether they could achieve the intended results. We offer opportunities to a
broad section of diverse groups. We believe this city and our city leaders can fulfill these proposals to
benefit all of Edmonds. Attached to our report is a short list of proposals the Commission feels strongly
about, but that we agreed did not seem to fit the mission we were given. We hope you give them the close
scrutiny they deserve for the people of Edmonds.
We profoundly appreciate the expertise, the insight and the patience of Development Services Director
Shane Hope, Associate Planner Brad Shipley, Planner Amber Groll and so many others on city staff who
helped us navigate the complexities of Edmonds housing needs. Our grateful thanks to Councilmembers
Vivian Olson and Luke Distelhorst, our Council liaisons, for their commitment and support. To Gretchen
Muller and her colleagues at Cascadia Consulting, we are grateful you were our guides and helped to keep
us on task and moving forward.
Packet Pg. 248
8.3.a
Our final Commission report is dedicated to the memory and public service of Commission member John
Reed who passed away during his tenure on the Housing Commission. John was a friend and a public
servant who gave himself, his ideas and his hard work to the efforts of this Commission. He cared
passionately about the people of Edmonds and the city's future.
The Housing Commission voted on each draft recommendation we developed. Those with majority
approval are now brought together for your consideration. There remain many other ideas worthy of future
discussion.
Submitted by all members of the Edmonds Citizens Housing Commission
Packet Pg. 249
8.3.a
Recommended Policies
of the
Edmonds Citizens' Housing Commission
The following is a list (by title) of the policies recommended by the Citizens' Housing
Commission at its January 28, 2021 public meeting. Each policy recommendation is included in
its full form in this section.*
1. MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING in SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS
2. EQUITY HOUSING INCENTIVES
3. MEDIUM -DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING (SR -MD)
4. NEIGHBORHOOD VILLAGE SUBAREA PLANNING
5. CLUSTER/COTTAGE HOUSING
6. DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
7. MULTI -FAMILY TAX EXEMPTION (MFTE)
8. INCLUSIONARY ZONING
9. USE of EXISTING SALES TAX REVENUE FOR AFFORDABLE AND
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
10. COUNTY IMPLEMENTATION OF SALES AND USE TAX FOR HOUSING AND
RELATED SERVICES
11. EDMONDS-HASCO 1NTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
12. DEVELOP COMMUNITY HOUSING PARTNERS
13. MULTI -FAMILY DESIGN STANDARDS
14. UPDATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE "PARKING SOLUTIONS" AS A
GOAL IN TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT SECTION
15. ELIMINATE DISCRIMINATORY PROVISIONS IN COVENANTS AND DEEDS
*The Additional Information language for each policy was provided by the committee that initially developed the
policy.
Packet Pg. 250
Policy Recommendation
8.3.a
Short Name of Policy: MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS
Policy:
Develop design requirements and zoning changes that allow for home -ownership of two attached single
family homes (duplex or two -unit townhouses) in single family residential areas and are compatible with
those neighborhoods.
Neighborhoods with significant tree canopy (pocket forest) should be considered exempt from being
included in SF zone augmentation (Pocket Forest could be identified by the Tree Board with help from
the local Sierra Club and assimilated into this zoning recommendation).
Additional Information:
Two attached single family homes, otherwise known as duplexes or two -unit townhomes, offer an
alternative to typical detached single family homes. They help to address the need for smaller, more
affordable housing choices in neighborhoods characterized by single-family homes. Over the past fifty
years, the median square footage of new single family units has increased from about 1600 to 3100. This
policy would allow two units within the same square footage. Structures containing two dwelling units
designed to look like a detached single family home can have the exact same footprint as one single
family home, and isn't much different than having a single family home with an attached accessory
dwelling unit. More and more cities across the country are allowing two attached single family houses in
traditional single family residential areas to address the need for more affordable housing. One example
locally is the City of Kirkland.
This policy also helps to balance out the housing unit types available with the household size need. Data o
provided to the Housing Commission in its early days showed that one or two person households' a
account for 69% of the households in the city, yet only 37% of the housing is one or two bedrooms. At
the same time, four person households make up 12% of the households and 21% of the housing are four r
bedroom units. Only 2% of the available housing is duplexes. Scaling housing to the demographics offers N
more affordable options for those who want to own a smaller house, such as seniors who want to 9
downsize and first time homeowners. v
Allowing two attached single family homes in single family areas would be considered up zoning. That
term, however, is often associated with the image of allowing large apartment buildings. The Housing
Type Committee considered the possibility of including triplex and four-plexes in earlier versions of this
policy, but we narrowed it to two units based on feedback from the commissioners and the community
This policy does not include more than two attached single family units like the ones in the photos
below located in the Edmonds/Lynnwood area. Allowing smaller homes in our single family
neighborhoods makes them more affordable and accessible to middle income households that are
seeking the amenities that we enjoy in Edmonds, i.e. excellent public schools and low crime. Not
allowing smaller homes into our neighborhoods helps to create housing scarcity which in turn
contributes to the continued high cost of housing.
Packet Pg. 251
8.3.a
This policy represents incremental change to increase the stock of missing middle housing in our city to
more closely align housing needs with household size. With appropriate design requirements we can
increase housiig availability and help stabilize housing prices with changing the character of single family
neighborhoods. (See graphics below.)
In addition, in Years 1 through 5 only 25% of Single-family zones in Edmonds receive augmentation.
Years 5-10, another 25% of Single-family zones receive augmentation. Each 5 year milestones public
engagement anbd assessment is revisited, facilitated by City Council, Planning Department and maybe
also the Planning Board to see if policy change has been well received by our community, successful and/
or if adjustments or expansions of policy need to be made at those milestones.
Packet Pg. 252
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: EQUITY HOUSING INCENTIVES
Policy:
Develop incentives that apply to "missing middle" housing types city-wide that allow home -ownership
for those at or below average median family income.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
1. "Missing Middle Housing" types provide diverse housing options such as duplexes, triplexes,
fourplexes, and cottage courts. These house -scale buildings fit seamlessly into existing
residential neighborhoods.
2. This policy is designed to promote homeownership of smaller homes for people who
would not otherwise be able to afford purchasing a home in Edmonds.
3. The policy encourages racial equity housing options by allowing ownership of smaller type
housing in neighborhoods where households that may occupy those homes were excluded from
in the past.
Additional material to be made available.
r
N
Packet Pg. 253
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: MEDIUM -DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING (SR -MD)
Policy:
Establish a new zoning type of single-family housing that allows for construction of zero -lot
line duplexes, triplexes, and quadruplexes of only 1- or 2-story height located in specified areas
of Edmonds that are:
• Contiguous to or along high -volume transit routes, or
• Sited next to Neighborhood Business (BN) zoning districts, or
• Close to schools or medical complexes
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
This policy acknowledges the value of single-family housing in Edmonds and recognizes a lack of
attainable single-family housing options across the city. By providing additional single-family
housing types the policy aims to increase housing opportunities for a more diverse group of
individuals and families within the community, while preserving the existing neighborhood
characteristics.
• SR -MD Key Facts:
o Opportunity for smaller attached single-family housing by removing side setbacks.
o Houses would be on a separate lot with a zero -lot line construction but sharing a o
L
common wall a
o Each individual home would have a front and back yard N
SR -MD Key Features:
o Locates single-family housing in a manner that increases access to essential services
o Would create housing at a lower cost per square foot than an individual single-family
home and likely at a lower expense than larger multi -family buildings.
o Encourage new residents to utilize nearby transit options.
o Level -entry single story homes increase the opportunity for active mobile seniors.
o The combination of attached and individual single -story homes provides visual interest
by modulation and flexibility for seniors and people with special needs.
o An important purpose for attached single-family homes is to specifically offer "missing
middle" housing options that foster community cohesion, livability, and character.
Packet Pg. 254
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: NEIGHBORHOOD VILLAGE SUBAREA PLANNING
Policy:
Develop subarea plans to rethink areas zoned 'Business Neighborhood" such as 5 Corners, Perrinville,
etc. The subarea plans should create unique, thriving neighborhoods and social gathering points with
the surrounding properties to integrate community values including missing middle housing, business
opportunity and environmental stewardship in these areas. Additional areas that could be intentionally
rethought are Westgate area and Downtown Business (BD) areas.
Additional Information:
The Neighborhood Village [NV] concept includes key features:
1.
A focal point of the village should be a plaza for socializing and promoting local community =
activities, creating a path to grow the city economically, environmentally, and residentially. c
2.
The NV concept includes small commercial and mixed -use [live -work] buildings, in designated
neighborhoods, often in the current BN zoning.
3.
NVs are accessible by vehicular traffic, bike lanes and connected walkways.
L
4.
These NVs would offer unique areas of Edmonds that are on or close to transit lines. °
5.
N
NV areas would include a variety of housing option segments, such as Medium Density Single- N
m
Family, cluster housing and artist housing, apartments, or condominiums, creating diverse o
L
housing and business opportunities. Development of these segments could be incentivized so a
that nearby single-family neighborhoods have separation from thriving business hubs. N
6.
These NVs would have comprehensive design guidelines to ensure they are developed in a o
planned and disciplined manner to enhance and reinvigorate the surrounding communities. N
0
7.
Businesses should be clustered independently and on the ground floor of multiple residential i
buildings, with the following features: Z
a. Multiple residential buildings may include duplex, triplex and four-plex buildings which
would be limited to two stories above commercial spaces.
b. Multiple residential units of larger capacity, not to exceed 20 units in two stories above
commercial spaces could also be a part of the NV. Modulation of these buildings should
meet current and revised design standards.'
c. Parking should be landscaped at the perimeter and between rows of parking. Capacity could
be determined by a percentage of the total lot area. Parking for NVs could be separate
from, but integrated into, the residential parking area.
d. NV development should accommodate site conditions such as but not limited to site
contours, existing natural vegetation such as large trees.
1 Revised design standards are developed by the zoning committee as a separate standard summary.
Packet Pg. 255
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: CLUSTER/COTTAGE HOUSING
Policy:
Add Cluster/Cottage housing as an option within single-family or multi -family housing in Edmonds.
Additional Information:
Cluster/Cottage housing is a flexible approach to land development that can provide more
affordable homes, especially to those in middle -income ranges. Currently, for Edmonds, clustered
or clustering of housing is mentioned primarily in ECDC 20.35 PLANNED RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT [PRD]. The policy idea being proposed would allow Cluster/Cottage housing
options within single-family or multi -family zones for certain Edmonds areas where site conditions
permit.
1. Small homes are clustered together in ways that can maximize open space, create common
areas, limit traffic flow to ensure safe play areas for children, and encourage the walkways
through the cluster development. These walkways can link to off -site trails and walkways
and to off -site activity centers. Cluster housing offers an alternative to conventional lot -by -
lot development that is achieved by allowing departures from lot dimension and setback
requirements.
2. Housing units are often one-story units, but can be two-story units, and are smaller in size
(650 to 1500 sq. ft.). One-story units can also be developed in ways to support independent
living for seniors or individuals with unique mobility needs. o
3. Allowing site development in clusters may also allow for less infrastructure development
thus lowering costs. This will minimize stormwater run-off and erosion which also lessens
the burden on the City Storm Sewer system.
4. Offering the Cluster/Cottage housing option would allow developers a more direct
permitting process rather than solely through the more costly PRD process. This may lower
overall costs for the housing. Density bonuses could incentivize builders by allowing them to
build more small and affordable homes in these cluster communities.
5. Additionally, cluster housing could be used in proximity to Neighborhood Villages to
increase the housing capacity, enhance the livability, and encourage walking between the
housing and the Neighborhood Village. As an example, cluster housing could be developed
near Swedish Edmonds medical complex to offer smaller, relatively more affordable housing
for seniors and/or employees.
Packet Pg. 256
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: DETACHED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
Policy:
Allow either one attached or detached accessory unit on a property in the SFR area, with clear
and definitive development requirements such as size, ownership, and parking, under the
standard permitting process and not require a conditional use permit.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
1. This policy does not limit the detached accessory dwelling to any specific zone(s) within
the City.
2. This policy allows the City to generate its own development and design requirements,
and codes. These can be guided by existing standard for ADU's in Edmonds and may
reference the standards already adopted by other neighboring cities and reclined as
needed speciifcally for the current needs of Edmonds based upon on favorable
community feedback. Examples of requirements include: limitations on floor area
based on lot size, yard setbacks, height limitations, and off street parking specifications,
and ownership stipulations are some of the requirements the City should consider.
3. This policy makes it possible to develop detached accessory dwelling units without the
added expense and trouble of a conditional use permit.
Additional material to be made available.
N
Packet Pg. 257
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Draft Policy: MULTI -FAMILY TAX EXEMPTION (MFTE)
Policy:
Make significant changes to the MFTE as it currently exists to:
• Create a third low income eligible category for tenants whose income is 60% of MFI or less*
• Mandate that developers set aside 25% of all units in a project for MFTE (currently it is 20%)
• Construction incentives for additional units/floors, if builders reserve 25% of units for MFTE tenants*
• Require MFTE eligible projects to include some two -bedroom and larger units*
• Increase the number of 'residential target/urban center areas' for MFTE developments*
• Create incentives for developers to renovate existing multi -family apartments to become MFTE
eligible*
• Ask the Legislature to extend the current MFTE limits beyond 12 years, to preserve affordable
housing*
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Increase affordable rental housing opportunities for low/moderate income tenants
• MFTE can increase low/moderate/missing-middle/senior and special needs housing in Edmonds.
• This can increase housing options for people discriminated against in the past.
• It will not reduce property values in the long term.
• It may or may not increase tax burden on residential and property owners for the term of the
exemption.
• It may reduce tax revenues for the city for the period of years a property is certified as MFTE.
• It may increase business opportunity as commercial space (taxable) may be built on ground floors.
• These units, built in 'residential target/urban zone areas' take into account accessibility to transit,
shopping, parks, the environment, parking and other services.
• In properly zoned areas, MFTE will not affect community livability or neighborhood character.
• The city has authority to offer MFTE to smaller developments (less than the 20 minimum now set.)
• Lynnwood, Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace, Everett have MFTE programs.
• Affordable housing research urges that rental costs exceed 30% of a tenant's monthly income.
• There are no 2-3-bedroom units in Edmonds only MFTE property at Westgate.
• 75% of all MFTE units built in the state are studios or 1-bedroom.
• Only two areas in Edmond (Westgate and the Highway 99 subareas) are designated for MFTE
properties.
• State law already allows Edmonds to create incentives for renovation of existing properties for
M FTE.
*For additional information on the citations above, please see these research reports:
■ The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee — 2019 report on MFTE.
■ The Puget Sound Regional Council — Housing Innovations Report.
N
Packet Pg. 258
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: INCLUSIONARY ZONING
Policy: Require new developments (above a certain size) in Edmonds to provide a percentage of
affordable housing units or require in lieu of fees that will go towards funding affordable
housing elsewhere in the city.
Additional Information:
Overall purpose of policy is to leverage profitability of new developments to increase supply of
affordable housing units and funding for affordable housing development; to create more inclusive
and economically diverse communities.
Specific policy proposal includes:
• Applicable to residential developments with more than 10 units and commercial spaces larger than
4,000 sf (chargeable at 5-10% of floor area based on location, zoning, etc.).
• Developments must provide 10-20% affordable units on site or pay an in lieu of fees.
• Rental units must serve households that earn below 60% AMI. Ownership units must serve
households that earn 80-100% AMI. Units must remain affordable for 50 years.
• Projects that do not build affordable units on site must pay 'In Lieu of fees that will go towards an N
Affordable housing fund. The 'In Lieu of fees will be calculated based on the use and square footage o
of the building. The 'in lieu of fees should be set high enough that motivates developers to build a -
units on site.
• The Affordable Housing Fund can be used to build new affordable housing, renovate existing units,
r
offer landlord protection or assurance, or used by the city to sub -contract with housing agencies,
N
social service or religious agencies, or Community Land Trusts to build new affordable housing. c
• Participation in this program would be mandatory and can be offered along with incentives such as
density bonus increase, parking ratio reduction and expedited processing. It can be applied to
geographically targeted areas within Edmonds, such as areas where zoning increase is proposed, or
in transit -oriented areas.
• Inclusionary Zoning is a great tool to provide housing for the missing middle in Edmonds.
• Research shows that inclusion of mixed income housing can provide for increased community
livability or neighborhood character and provide better outcomes for children and families.
• There are over 900 inclusionary housing programs in 25 states. Several of our neighboring cities such
as Federal way, Redmond, Issaquah, Sammamish, Seattle and Portland utilize this program.
Packet Pg. 259
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: USE OF EXISTING SALES TAX REVENUE FOR AFFORDABLE AND SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING
Policy:
Per RCW 82.14.540, use the City of Edmonds' share of the existing state sales tax that is reserved for
affordable housing:
a. In the short term, to provide rental assistance to low-income households in Edmonds that have
been impacted by the coronavirus
b. In the longer term, to contribute to a regional organization, which could be the County, the
Alliance for Housing Affordability (AHA), or a partnership of cities in southwest Snohomish
County with the goal of the revenue going toward affordable housing in the sub -region.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Under RCW 82.14.540, housing and services may be provided only to persons whose income is at or
below 60% of the median income of the city or county utilizing the tax revenue.
Counties over 400,000 population and cities over 100,000 population may use the revenue for only:
a. Acquiring, rehabilitating, or constructing affordable housing, which may include new units
within an existing structure or facilities providing supportive housing services under RCW
71.24.385 (behavioral health organizations);
b. Funding the operations and maintenance costs of new units of affordable or supportive housing. r
For counties under 400,000 population and cities under 100,000 population, the revenue may be used
for the purposes above AND for providing rental assistance to tenants. The estimated population is over
800,000 for Snohomish County, and 42,000 for City of Edmonds.
The bill sets a maximum tax rate of 0.0146%. The County is eligible to receive the maximum tax rate of
the taxable retail sales (TRS) in unincorporated Snohomish County and could potentially receive
0.0073% or 0.0146% of TRS in individual Cities. The amount the County could potentially receive through
TRS in Cities is dependent on each individual City and if they choose to participate or not. WA
Department of Revenue currently sets maximum annual capacity at $1,343,274.79 for Snohomish
County, and $71,931.05 for City of Edmonds.
Jurisdictions may bond against the revenue that would be produced over a period of 20 years to
provide an up -front investment. Under this revenue source, Edmonds' 20-year bond revenue would be
$1,438,621.
Packet Pg. 260
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: COUNTY IMPLEMENTATION OF SALES AND USE TAX FOR HOUSING AND
RELATED SERVICES
Policy:
Advocate for Snohomish County Council to adopt the optional 0.1% sales tax as allowed by state law to
provide affordable and supportive housing for low-income households.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
RCW 82.14.530 (otherwise known as HB 1590) allows cities and counties to adopt a 0.1% sales tax (or 10
cents for every $100) for affordable and supportive housing, facilities, and services that benefit people
earning less than 60% of the area median income of the county, and who are persons with behavioral
disabilities, veterans, senior citizens, families who are homeless or at -risk of being homeless,
unaccompanied homeless youth or young adults, persons with disabilities, or domestic violence
survivors.
The Metropolitan King County Council voted on October 13, 2020 to implement a 0.1% sales tax to fund a
housing for people who have been chronically homeless. N
Packet Pg. 261
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: EDMONDS-HASCO INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
Policy:
Execute an interlocal agreement (ILA) with the Housing Authority of Snohomish County (HASCO)
allowing HASCO to operate within Edmonds geographic boundaries.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
0
The Housing Authority of Snohomish County is the public housing agency of Snohomish County and =
receives federal funding to acquire, develop, and operate low-income housing. To do so, HASCO must c
have an agreement with each city in which it operates.
HASCO owns three properties in Edmonds. Some areas of the city are not currently covered by an
L
agreement with HASCO, so the agency cannot acquire property there without an extensive process ,o
involving the City Council. This policy would allow HASCO to better compete in the market to N
m
purchase property to build and preserve affordable homes in Edmonds.
0
L
Q.
While an ILA would reduce red tape and timelines for property acquisition, HASCO would still be
required to meet all permitting and development requirements.
Packet Pg. 262
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: DEVELOP COMMUNITY HOUSING PARTNERS
Policy:
• Edmonds needs more affordable housing options for:
o low/moderate income residents (especially those who earn less than 50% of AML)
o special needs residents
o seniors
o veterans
• Construction and land costs make building low income housing economically challenging.
• This policy establishes community partnerships with for-profit/non-profits to build affordable
housing:
o public agencies
o neighboring communities
o housing/for-profit/non-profit groups
o community care providers (transitional housing for patients with 'no safe place to go'
while recovering from hospitalization)
o Edmonds would establish regulations for these partnerships
o The city contract would contract with those partners to manage this housing
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Edmonds should develop community partners throughout South Snohomish County to create/build
affordable housing options for low/moderate income residents.
• Potential partnerships already exist in South Snohomish County.
o The cities of Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Brier
o 'Homes & Hope' Community Land Trust in Lynnwood
o Housing Authority of Snohomish County
o The Alliance for Housing Affordability
o Habitat for Humanity
• Partnerships can seek private grants/state/federal funding.
• Create incentive opportunities for land donation from private owners.
• Explore 'surplus' property of the School District, PUD, other entities.
• Existing agencies can be contracted to manage projects.
• Apply for Washington State Housing Trust Fund monies.
• Some funding from existing sales tax revenue is already dedicated for low income housing.
• Work with the county to create additional sales tax revenue as authorized by state law.
• Satisfy all zoning criteria for housing/apartments/MFTE renovation properties.
• Meet needs for services, parking, access to transit, green space, environmental impacts.
• Additional community resources available from Appendix E. Edmonds Housing Strategy (2018)
• Our Community I Verdant — representing Public Hospital District #2/Swedish-Edmonds
N
Packet Pg. 263
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: MULTI -FAMILY DESIGN STANDARDS
Policy:
Enhance current design standards of new multi -family dwellings to maintain and enhance the
unique characteristics of the Edmonds community. Building types would include mixed use
buildings, small multi -family buildings and larger multi -family buildings.
Additional Information:
This policy creates design standards to achieve an end solution that is visually appealing and
reflects a human scale, resulting in compatibility with the City of Edmonds neighborhoods. This
summary is a supplement to current zoning design standards.
1. Building visual interest:
a. Vertical and horizontal modulation. This condition is important for larger scale buildings
b. Site and building landscaping, ground level: At entry and in courtyards.
c. Landscaping integrated into the building where stepped modulation on decks of units
and common area decks occur shall be enhanced with free-standing or hanging pots
and/or built-in platforms or planters.
d. In common areas, roof decks and modulation step -back decks enhance livability.
2. Step-backs/Incentives: Street and alley sides
a. Maintain the current 3-story height limit. Step -back the upper floors. Stepping back the
3rd Floor provides the developer the opportunity to increase income from creative use
of space that may increase building costs. The higher income from the use of creative
space will help offset affordable housing income on the lower floors.
b. Further incentives would include a partial 4th Floor (not within view corridors). Step -back
all sides to provide a combination of common and private areas for the 4th Floor. This 4th
Floor reward provides a developer another opportunity to increase income from the
above items that will result in building cost increases and to offset affordable housing
loss of income.
c. Height exception: Elevators and Stairwells
d. Color and material variations should be used to complement modulation.
N
Packet Pg. 264
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: UPDATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO INCLUDE "PARKING SOLUTIONS" AS A
GOAL IN TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT SECTION
Policy:
Adopt LANGUAGE that includes Parking Solutions as a goal defined in our Transportation Element
under the City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Current traffic impact fees assessed by the City to new traffic contributing developments to our
community currently do not allow these fees to be allocated to solve parking solutions in our
community. The Irony of imposing fees calculated on the anticipated traffic impact to our community
by newly established development then consequently not allowing parking solutions to be one of
current possible uses of these funds collected is a flawed policy. Simply updating language in our
Comprehensive plan would allow flexibility for some of these traffic impact fees to be allocated for
parking solutions more efficiently (examples of parking solutions: leasing parking lots, shuttle services,
trolley services, purchasing land for parking lots, and low profile parking structures).
r
N
Packet Pg. 265
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy:
ELIMINATE DISCRIMINATORY PROVISIONS IN CONVENANTS AND DEEDS
Policy:
Prior to the sale or transfer of any property in Edmonds, all discriminatory language in any associated
covenants and/or deeds must be legally removed from said documents.
ADDTIONAL INFORMATION
Historically, many parcels of property in Edmonds had legally binding language prohibiting the sale of
said property to individuals based on their race, religion, sex or other discriminatory provisions.
Covenants restricting ownership by race were ruled unenforceable by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1948,
and housing discrimination was made illegal by Congress in 1968 under the Fair Housing Law. While
today enforcing these documents is illegal, none -the -less they still exist and are passed down to
successive property owners at the time of sale. This policy is targeted to break that cycle. State
legislation (SHB 2514) has recently been enacted with provisions to modify these documents through
a "restrictive covenant modification" document filed with the county that legally strikes and voids the
unenforceable provisions from the deed. This policy would mandate that property owners file a
r
restrictive covenant modification document with the county (at no cost) prior to the sale or transfer N
of said property. o
While this doesn't erase history, it does provide a means to state our values for future Edmonds
residents and property owners.
Packet Pg. 266
8.3.a
SUPPLEMENTAL SET OF POLICY PROPOSALS
This section provides a set of seven policy proposals that the Edmonds Citizens' Housing
Commission found worthy of the City Council's consideration but that did not necessarily fit
within the Commission's specific mission, as identified in Resolution # 1427.
The policy ideas in this section have the following short titles:
• IMPROVED TENANT PROTECTIONS
• CHILDCARE VOUCHER PROGRAM
• RENTER'S CHOICE SECURITY DEPOSIT
• LOW-INCOME EMERGENCY REPAIR PROGRAM
• PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
• SIMPLIFY ZONING CODE LANGUAGE
• STREAMLINE PERMITTING PROCESS
The City Council is encouraged to explore this supplemental set of policy ideas at the
appropriate time.
Packet Pg. 267
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: IMPROVED TENANT PROTECTIONS
Policy: Adopt measures to improve residential tenant protections, such as:
• Just Cause Eviction Ordinance: limiting the grounds upon which a landlord may evict a tenant to
a "just cause" or valid business reason
• Prohibiting arbitrary of retaliatory evictions
• Prohibiting evictions based upon the tenant's status as a member of the military, first
responder, senior, family member, health care provider, or educator
• Prohibiting retaliation and discrimination in lease renewal actions
• Adopting penalties for violation and procedures to protect the rights of landlords and tenants
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
L
Seattle has had a Just Cause Eviction Ordinance since 1980. Federal Way and Burien have more recently ,o
enacted eviction protection legislation, and a statewide bill was proposed in the 2019-2020 legislative vyi
m
session.
0
L
More information about just cause eviction protections can be found at Local Housing Solutions and
PolicyLink's All -In Cities Initiative �!
r
O
The City must determine what types of rental properties and landlords (e.g. small vs. large) should be c
regulated in this way. The City must also determine what reasons would constitute a just cause eviction.
Examples can be found in the links to other communities' approaches, above.
Packet Pg. 268
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: CHILDCARE VOUCHER PROGRAM UNDER THE DIRECTION OF NEWLY
ESTABLISHED HUMAN SERVICE MANAGER
Policy:
Recommend Council explores Childcare Voucher program for people who work and/or live in Edmonds
under the direction of the City's newly established Human Services manager.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Not everyone who works in Edmonds can afford to live in Edmonds, that's just the facts of life, and the
geography constraints of a small seaside town of just 8 square miles. We as a community can be more
creative and make Edmonds more desirable to work in and perhaps make it more achievable to afford
to live in for some in Edmonds by offering Childcare subsidize voucher program.
r
N
Packet Pg. 269
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Title of Policy Proposal: RENTER'S CHOICE SECURITY DEPOSIT
Specific Policy Proposal: Reduce the up -front cost of security deposits for renters while keeping
landlords whole for costs that are normally covered by such deposits. The policy may be
implemented through the following steps:
• Allow tenants of all income levels choices in how to pay those security deposits.
• Allow tenant applicants to pay by:
o Buying rental security insurance
o Installment payment of security deposits - at least six equal monthly payments.
o Pay 'reduced' security deposit of no more than 50% of one months' rent.
• All rental properties of 25 or more units will offer the Renter's Choice program.
• Before signing a rental agreement, the landlord provides tenant written notice of the Choice plan.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Purpose of policy proposal: remove a rental barrier for all tenants regardless of income.
Key Factors Considered:
• Landlords charge prospective tenants security deposits which may be as high as two months' rent. 0
• Renter's Choice eliminates a barrier to rentals for all tenants regardless of income. N
• It is likely to increase housing options for people who have been discriminated against in the past. o
• Changing the way security deposit fees are paid can save significant money for all tenants. d
• That puts money back into the local economy.
• Security Deposit insurance is available from a number of companies.
• The proposal is based on a unique policy developed for the city of Cincinnati, Ohio in 2020.
• Cincinnati got 'buy in' from landlords who helped develop the policy.
• It provides landlords with protection for any damage to their property.
• There are also legal remedies for landlords, if tenants violate the terms of the agreement.
• The policy can be expanded to cover all landlords, regardless of the number of units they control.
• Edmonds has the authority to regulate rental fees, though it has not done so in the past.
• State law recognizes that "...certain tenant application fees should be prohibited". *
• State law recognizes that "...guidelines should be established for the imposition of other tenant fees".
* Contained in findings to Washington State law - RCW 59.18.253.
Additional research Information:
• Hard copy attached of City of Cincinnati Renter's Choice Law.
• Hard copies attached of media articles on the Cincinnati Renter's Choice Law.
• Virginia, New Hampshire, New York City and Atlanta are considering this policy.
Packet Pg. 270
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: LOW-INCOME EMERGENCY HOME REPAIR PROGRAM
Policy:
Fund a program, or contribute funding to an existing program such as Homage, to assist low-income
homeowners with emergency home repairs.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Emergency home repair programs correct housing conditions that threaten low-income homeowners'
safety, such as failing plumbing or heating systems, rotten floors, or a leaking roof. Beyond home
insurance coverage, home repair costs can typically be covered by a bank -issued home equity loan or
line of credit. However, banks may reject loan applications due to bad credit or lack of income. With the
assistance of these repairs, residents are better able to remain safely housed for as long as possible.
Other emergency home repair models offer financial assistance, in grants or below -market -rate loans,
for emergency home repairs to low-income homeowners. Homage's Minor Home Repair program ,o
serves low- and moderate -income elderly and special needs homeowners in Snohomish County.
m
Funding for this program is provided by the Snohomish County Community Development Block Grant o
(CDBG) Program, the City of Everett CDBG Program, the City of Marysville CDBG Program, city funding a
from City of Bothell, and other private donations. Edmonds' participation could better fund this N
program, or potentially help expand it to serve more low-income homeowners. r
Other local example programs imay be seen in the following webpages:
• Sound Generations
• City of Renton
• Rebuilding Together
• City of Seattle
Packet Pg. 271
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
Policy:
Extend the property tax exemption program currently available to seniors and the disabled to low
income households.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
This policy would mirror the current property tax exemption available to qualifying seniors and
disabled households. Those homeowners with an AMI below TBD would be eligible subject to
a qualifying criteria similar to what's currently defined in:
https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1387/Senior-Citizen-Disabled-Person-
Exemption-Program-Publication?bidld=
This policy results in a direct benefit to qualifying households, thus fostering home ownership with
its associated wealth creating opportunities.
N
Packet Pg. 272
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: SIMPLIFY ZONING CODE LANGUAGE
Policy:
Use diagrams, pictures, and tables in place of text where applicable. Use plain language where
text is necessary.
N
Packet Pg. 273
8.3.a
Policy Recommendation
Short Name of Policy: STREAMLINE PERMITTING PROCESS
Policy:
Reduce the number of conditional uses to streamline the permit process.
N
Packet Pg. 274
8.3.b
HC Policies & Methods for Implementation
Housing Commission Policy
Consist
Options
CP Amdmt
w/Exist'g
Possible
Needed
CompPln
Missing Middle Housing in SF Neigbhorhoods
Generally
Y
Probably
Equity Housing Incentives
Generally
Y
Probably
Medium -Density SF Housing
Generally
Y
Probably
Neighborhood Village Subarea Planning
Generally
Y
Depends
Cluster/Cottage Housing
Generally
Y
Not likely DC
Detached Accessory Dwelling Units
Generally
Y
Not likely DC
Multifamily Tax Exemption
Generally
Y
Not likely DC
Inclusionary Zoning
Generally
Y
Not likely DC
Existing Sales Tax for Affordable Housing
Generally
Y
N
County Sales Tax for Affordable Housing
Generally
Y
N
HASCO Interlocal Agreement
Generally
Y
N
Development of Housing Partners
Generally
Y
N
Multi -family Design Standards
Generally
Y
N
Parking Solutions as Comp Plan Goal
Probably
Y
Y
Discrimatory Provisions in Covenants & Deeds
Generally
Y
N
Other
Impltn
Method
DC
DC
DC
Budg; DC -depends
MC
Budget
Other
Other
Other
DC
TBD
Other
0
m
c
r
E
a
E
0
a
c
a�
E
z
U
2
r
Q
Packet Pg. 275
8.3.c
HOUSING COMMISSION POLICY ASPECTS TABLE
Housing Commission Policy
Subject to
Level of
Need for
Est. Time for
PB Review
Complexity
Outside Consultant
PB consideration*
Missing Middle Housing in SF Neigbhorhoods
Yes
High
Probably Not
4 -6 mo.
Equity Housing Incentives
Yes
High
Probably Not
4-6 mo.
Medium -Density SF Housing
Yes
High
Probably Not
4-5 mo.
Neighborhood Village Subarea Planning
Yes
High a
Yes
8-9 mo
Cluster/Cottage Housing
Yes
Moderate
Probably Not
4 mo.
Detached Accessory Dwelling Units
Yes
Low
No
3 mo.
Multifamily Tax Exemption
No
Moderate
Probably Not
Inclusionary Zoning
Yes
High
Probably Not
4-5 mo.
Existing Sales Tax for Affordable Housing
No
Low
No
County Sales Tax for Affordable Housing
No
Low
No
HASCO Interlocal Agreement
No
Low
No
Development of Housing Partners
No
Low
No
Multi -family Design Standards
Yes
Moderate
Probably Yes
4-5 mo.
Parking Solutions as Comp Plan Goal
Yes
Moderate
No, not at this stage
2-4 mo.
Discrimatory Provisions in Covenants & Deeds
No
Low
No
*NOTE: "Est. Timefor PB Consideration" includes the Planning Commission process and simultaneous staff time.
Some of the policies, such as items 6 and 7 above, could be considered together.
Packet Pg. 276