2023-10-24 Special MeetingEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
APPROVED MINUTES
October 24, 2023
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Neil Tibbott, Council President
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Will Chen, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Jenna Nand, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER
STAFF PRESENT
Oscar Antillon, Public Works Director
Angie Feser, Parks, Rec., & Human Serv. Dir.
Rob English, City Engineer
Shannon Burley, Deputy Parks, Rec., & Human
Serv. Dir.
Mike De Lilla, Senior Utilities Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
The special Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6 p.m. by Mayor Nelson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
3. COUNCIL BUSINESS
1. PROPOSED 2024-2029 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM
City Engineer Rob English explained this agenda items is further discussion on both the Parks and Public
Works CIP/CFP. No presentations are planned; presentations have been made twice to council committee
and the full council. The planning board's recommendation is included in the packet. A follow-up memo
from the planning board chair corrected reference to a sidewalk project in the memo, rather than 236t' Street
from 84' to Highway 99, it should be 84t' to SR 104.
Mayor Nelson said Council President Tibbott recommended, and he concurred, beginning council questions
via a round robin.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, stating that decision was not made by the council
president and the council should vote whether to proceed that way. Mayor Nelson responded it a Roberts
Rules of Order issue, but he did not have a strong opinion, and invited a motion to do questions via a round
robin.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 24, 2023
Page 1
COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
CONTINUE THIS DISCUSSION AS A ROUND ROBIN DISCUSSION OF THE COUNCIL.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS NOTING NO.
Mayor Nelson advised councilmembers will ask one question each
Councilmember Teitzel referred to PWT-32, 84' Ave. W walkway from 238' St. SW to 234t1, St. SW,
commenting there has been a lot of discussion with the community about that walkway, it is highly desirable
because there is no walkway along that stretch and it is heavily traveled. He has personally witnessed
individuals in wheelchairs using the travel lane with vehicles whizzing by which is simply not safe. Most
of the funding in the CIP/CFP has been moved back to 2027. He asked if there was a way to move funding
around so that project was moved forward to no later than 2025. Mr. English responded last year the city
council added that to this year's budget; it was funded with ARPA funds. An RFQ was issued, a consultant
selected and a predesign consultant scope of work was ready to go, but then funding was removed from the
project. Given reduced REET projections and lack of additional funding sources, it is a difficult project to
move forward, especially when the estimated construction cost is over $1 million. Preservation has been
the priority, for example there is supposed to be $2.8 million for the overlay program, and the City is at
$1.5 million this year plus a federal grant. He summarized it is hard to prioritize a new project over trying
to maintain the existing street system.
Councilmember Teitzel advised the council will be looking at ARPA funds again. He asked if funds could
be freed up for this project, would staff have the ability from a workload perspective to move it up in the
schedule. Mr. English answered from a staff capacity in 2024, it could be moved forward.
Councilmember Paine said she had that same question. She referred to preservation and maintenance
projects such as PWT-5, 6 and 7 which are all scheduled in the future with significant unsecured amounts.
She asked if that was based on REET projections or other contingencies. She was not worried about the
schedule, but if funding for these three projects and others could be funded via the Bipartisan Infrastructure
Law (BIL). Mr. English answered those three projects are signal upgrades/maintenance and typically grants
programs fund new capital infrastructure, there are not a lot of grant sources for maintenance. He reminded
the funding for the last three years of the CIP/CFP is unconstrained, projects that are needed but don't have
secured funding sources. He did not envision those projects would be good candidates for grant funding
programs in the future.
Councilmember Paine said it would be helpful for the council to know if staff identified projects that would
be good candidates for BIL funding because having additional revenue sources in the future will be
important for the community. She expressed interest in knowing which projects would be eligible for BIL
grants. Mr. English answered staff could go back through the infrastructure bill's grant programs to see if
there are any opportunities, but he anticipated there would be few because for the most part these are
maintenance upgrades of the traffic signal system. If a safety component can be tied to the upgrade, there
may be an opportunity to security a transportation safety grant to fund a portion of the cost. Councilmember
Paine acknowledged she did not understand all the limits of the BIL, but it would be great to find some
opportunities.
Councilmember Chen referred to DP# 19, the Lake Ballinger ILA, recalling $200,000 was a budget
amendment for 2023 and the Mountlake Terrace City Council and the Edmonds City Council already
approved the ILA. He asked if funding needed to be pushed back to 2024. Ms. Feser agreed the council
approved the ILA, but did not believe there was a budget amendment for 2023. Staff was aware the project
would not be completed in 2023 so there was no reason to do a budget amendment in 2023 to authorize the
funds. She anticipated the project will be completed in 2024 so it is listed in the CIP/CFP and in other
materials as a carryforward into 2024. It is in the budget and will be accounted for via the formal
carryforward process in February 2024.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 24, 2023
Page 2
Councilmember Chen clarified during the 2023 budget discussions, that was an amendment to the budget.
Deputy Parks, Recreation and Human Services Director Burley advised it is in the 2023 budget, but the
check will not be written in 2023 because the ILA states the check won't be written until the project is
complete. The project won't be complete until 2024 so the budget includes a request to carryforward the
2023 budget allocation into 2024 so it can be paid once construction is complete.
Council President Tibbott referred to PWF-06, 07 and 08, maintenance projects in 3 fire stations over the
next 4 years. He observed some stations may also have inefficiencies related to operations, and asked if
there have been any discussions with South County Fire regarding needed upgrades. Public Works Director
Oscar Antillon answered a lot of the information regarding maintenance comes from the review of facilities
that was done in 2016 and 2018/2019. The more critical maintenance projects are prioritized in the CIP/CFP
such as roll up doors. Council President Tibbott asked if that was considered maintenance. Mr. Antillon
answered it was considered maintenance, but it is a capital maintenance expense.
Council President Tibbott commented at some point it will make sense to look at capital facilities
improvements that are required to bring fire stations up to modern standards. Mr. Antillon answered the
fire stations are some of the best facilities in the City, they are taken care of pretty well. Unlike Frances
Anderson Center, where huge needs are expected in the next couple years. Staff is going through the
assessment now; the state is requiring a lot of work be done to bring that facility up to new standards.
Councilmember Olson observed the CIP/CFP does not include a HAWK signal at Firdale Village which is
a safety, access, and economic development issue for that plaza. There are a lot of residences in that
immediate area with pedestrian usage of that center and a HAWK signal definitely needs to be added to the
CIP/CFP. She realized 2024 was a scant budget year, but if it is in the CIP/CFP, staff could pursue grants
for it. She asked if a council vote was required to add a project to the CIP/CFP. Mr. English answered that
would be appropriate to add or delete something from the document.
Councilmember Olson asked if council was doing decision packages for CIP/CFP. She asked if council
needed more information or did they know enough about it to vote without more information. Mr. English
said it is one thing to add it to the CIP/CFP for potential funding, but it is another thing to add it as a decision
package in 2024 budget with an identified funding source. Councilmember Olson recalled staff recently
quoting her a price of up to $600,000. Mr. Antillon said that estimate is without considering all the factors
such as right-of-way acquisition or other things that may make it more complex. The first step is to justify
the project via an analysis of the intersection, etc. which could be included initially. The transportation plan
is being updated and what needs to be done to improve the crossing might be flushed out through that
process.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
ADD IT TO THE CIP/CFP FOR DESIGN IN 2025 AND MOVE IT UP SOONER IF A WAY CAN
BE FOUND DURING THE BUDGET PROCESS BUT AT LEAST THIS WAY WE WILL NOT
LOSE TRACK OF IT AS AN ITEM OF INTEREST.
Councilmember Buckshnis questioned the estimate of $600,000 for a HAWK signal at Firdale, recalling
the Pine Street HAWK signal was $20,000 and the City received a state grant due to the location on SR
104. Mr. English answered the cost of the HAWK signal installed by the state was close to $400,000; the
City's contribution was $20,000. He noted even the rectangular rapid -flashing beacon (RRFB) at
crosswalks typically cost $7500 each. Councilmember Buckshnis asked the cost of a crosswalk with flags
without a HAWK signal. Mr. English answered one of the options discussed was potentially a RRFB in
lieu of a HAWK signal which would cost $15,000-20,000 depending on striping and signage.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if that could be installed first in anticipation of a HAWK signal in 2025.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 24, 2023
Page 3
Mr. English said that would be a sunk cost if the RRFB was replaced with a with a HAWK signal; he did
not recommend installing the RRFB anticipating a HAWK signal in the future.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked if a HAWK signal was needed, noting that stops traffic for 30 seconds
versus the RRFB where traffic just stops to allow people to cross. Mr. English answered if the intent is 3'
Avenue, there is a horizontal curve that affects sight distance. There will need to be some evaluation to
determine the best location for the crosswalk and at least pedestrian counts done to determine if there is
enough use to warrant a HAWK signal which is a major investment. He summarized there would need to
be some preliminary evaluation before anything like a HAWK signal could go forward.
Councilmember Olson added it is not a very safe intersection right now, she would not want to cross that
street, so she was unsure a pedestrian count would be a valid indicator of use.
Councilmember Paine commented the cost information is important, but there needs to be data to back it
up. There are also requests for a pedestrian crossing at Pine Street across 5t1i. She asked if the transportation
committee will be developing non -motorized opportunity. Mr. English answered yes.
Councilmember Chen referred to the increase in the traffic calming program budget and asked if that
funding source could be considered. He agreed time was needed to develop a more detailed analysis related
to traffic counts, etc. Mr. English answered the traffic calming program is a separate source of funds to
calm speeds. The HAWK signal is more of a pedestrian safety issue and traffic calming funds would not
be used for that type of improvement. Given the magnitude of the cost, another funding source would need
to be identified. Neither the pedestrian safety program nor the traffic calming program have enough funding
for a HAWK signal.
Councilmember Chen suggested traffic calming may be a way to mitigate the situation to where a HAWK
signal is not needed. Mr. English commented this conversation is getting into the weeds; an evaluation of
that area has not been done and he was not aware of accident history on that stretch. He agreed with Mr.
Antillon's suggestion to wait for the transportation plan update to evaluate the entire City best rather than
a one-off addition to the CIP/CFP. Councilmember Chen said he liked that approach better.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON WITHDREW THE MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE
SECOND.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked about the timing, cost and negotiation aspect of the Lynnwood plant and
why it is not in the CFP. Mr. Antillon answered not all the facts on that plant are known, Lynnwood is
going through a very preliminary exercise. Lynnwood is doing value engineering on their preliminary
design so it is still early in the process. Councilmember Buckshnis asked about the timeline, recalling it
took Edmonds a couple years to get the Edmonds WWTP approved for design. She asked if a lower amount
would be negotiated. Mr. Antillon answered the full analysis of growth of both cities will determine
Edmonds' fair share.
Senior Utilities Engineer Mike De Lilla said he has been in discussions with Lynnwood; they are planning
to have phase 1 start construction in 2025. The reason it is not in the CIP/CFP is because it is a Lynnwood
project and it is in their CIP/CFP. Edmonds' obligation is only to provide its fair share to build the project.
With regard to value engineering occurring now, that is being done because the location of the site is very
challenging, in the middle of a canyon. There is an expectation that the cost estimate is actually low. A
specialist in wastewater treatment design is doing the value engineering. Lynnwood has a 10% design after
working on it since 2019. Lynnwood approved new rates effective in 2022; 21 % increases this year, next
year and the following two years and then 12% increases for a couple more years. Councilmember
Buckshnis wanted to ensure Edmonds' 11% was accurate and Edmonds was not funding Lynnwood's
growth which is much greater than Edmonds' growth. Mr. De Lilla answered at the beginning a lot of the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 24, 2023
Page 4
plant work is work that Edmonds depends on as well. It will probably be 2-3 cycles until there has to
consideration of bonding. Most of the upfront costs fall within that but Edmonds will be actively negotiating
to ensure the City only pays its fair share.
Councilmember Nand asked why the Lake Ballinger flood plain purchase is under Public Works and
Utilities and if there was any possibility that that lakefront purchase could benefit the public as park land
or lake access. Mr. De Lilla answered no, the property was purchased using a grant from the Department
of Ecology which does not allow public access. Another issue with public access is how people will enter
the property which would require paving or a road and a pier and the whole point of this property is a
stormwater mitigation facility. Cars would also have to queue on SR104 to reach the site which is not a
good idea.
Councilmember Nand asked about the stormwater usage of the property. Mr. De Lilla answered it would
be for stormwater quality. In addition to restoring the site, there are future plans for installing rain gardens
and other stormwater quality mitigation because east of the property is a large storm drain pipe that catches
flows off SR-104. This can be thought of as another version of what is being done off SR-104 by the
Edmonds Marsh, retrofitting catch basins. On this site, flows from pipes can be captured before it enters
Lake Ballinger.
Councilmember Nand observed the last time the property was on the market it was $400,000, but the City
is paying $120,000. She asked what depressed the price. Mr. English answered $120,000 is in the 2024
budget; the Department of Ecology grant for acquisition was $500,000. The property was appraised and the
appraised amount was $480,000. The City is currently in discussions with the property owner.
Mayor Nelson reminded this is round robin with only one question per councilmember. Councilmember
Nand responded her questions were quite topical and brief compared to other councilmembers.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to PWT-69, 7' Avenue sidewalk repair along the new Civic Playfield,
relaying it was scheduled in the CIP/CFP in 2028 for a total of $750,000 and has been moved up to 2024.
He walked that sidewalk recently, several sections have already been improved including a new ADA
compliant sidewalk curb ramp and other sections have been repaired. The sidewalk, although not in great
shape, appears serviceable. He wondered if that could be a source of funding for the 84' Street walkway or
was it too late to reschedule that. Mr. Antillon advised there is a JOC contract for the sidewalk and the work
is scheduled for next year. It is a complete replacement of the entire sidewalk because with the patches that
have been done, it will be difficult to continue patching it to make a uniform surface.
Councilmember Teitzel relayed his understanding of Mr. Antillon's explanation that it was possible to move
that project back if council wishes so he could potentially offer a budget amendment to make that change.
Mr. Antillon answered the contract would need to be cancelled and he was unsure what that cost would be.
Councilmember Teitzel asked if that was doable and what the penalty would be. Mr. Antillon advised it
would need to be negotiated with the contractor. Councilmember Teitzel asked Mr. Antillon to let him
know the cost to cancel the contract.
Mayor Nelson reminded round robin is one question per councilmember.
Councilmember Paine referred to PWT-53, ADA Transition Plan update, observing it was scheduled for
2025. She recognized plans take time, but without an active plan the City is not eligible for any ADA grants.
She asked if there was any way to move that up, noting some funding was provided by REET but the bulk
was General Funds. She asked if it was scheduled in 2025 due to funding or staff capacity or both. Mr.
English answered the $440,000 represents a comprehensive ADA transition plan. An ADA transition plan
for the right-of-way was done in 2017. The ADA Transition Plan scheduled for 2025 would include City
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 24, 2023
Page 5
facilities, parks, and updating the right-of-way. There would need to be an identified funding source for the
General Fund contribution related to facilities and parks. If the council identified a funding source, it could
be moved up into 2024, but that is a challenge because the General Fund is in a difficult position. Staff
applied for a SS4A (Safe Streets and Roads for All) grant though PSRC and expect to hear the results next
month. Once that plan is complete, the City could apply for funding for the ADA Transition Plan update
for the right-of-way and have it paid for with infrastructure funds. That was one of the reasons it was moved
to 2025. Councilmember Paine asked if staff had the capacity in 2025. Mr. English answered yes.
Council President Tibbott referred to page 37 of PROS Plan related to acquisition to complete the Interurban
Trail. He asked if there were other anticipated acquisition or improvements anticipated along the Interurban
Trail other than regular maintenance such as lighting or expanding the trail to make it more useful as a
recreational resources. Ms. Feser recalled Public Works mentioned at the last meeting that they are
considering a lighting study for the Interurban Trail so those funds would be in Public Works not Parks.
There are funds identified for Interurban Trail expansion in 2029 focused on the piece in Mathay Ballinger
Park going southwest to 240t1i or SR-104 and improving that connection to other nonmotorized
transportation routes. There is not much else left of the Interurban Trail to the north. There are opportunities
for other trail corridors that may become available between now and 2029. The intent is expansion of trails,
the Interurban Trail is the second intent in the second priority. Council President Tibbott advised he would
email Ms. Feser the second part of his question.
Councilmember Olson observed the green streets project was moved from 2023/2024 for design and
2025/2026 for construction. She was surprised to see it that soon in the CIP/CFP as she did not remember
that was the result of last year's budget season. She recalled it was farther out and just a placeholder in case
there was a grant opportunity. She wondered if that project should be moved out further or even taken out
of the CIP/CFP. At the community engagement for the Burlington site, there was discussion of actual
flooding happening in the streets in that area. If the City wanted to do a project, it seems like it should be
moved closer to where the flooding is happening. This was also one of planning board's comments, to move
this project further out. Mr. English answered two projects were proposed last year through green streets,
one on 238t1i and the other on Dayton. The council took action in last year's budget discussions to remove
the Dayton portion of that project, but 238' Street was retained and ARPA funding assigned to that project.
Councilmember Olson recalled it was kept in the CIP/CFP but not the budget. Mr. English explained it was
up to council to decide if they want to slide that project into the out years; there is no funding identified in
the current CIP/CFP document. Councilmember Olson recalled the concern was seeking grants for
something that would need matching funds when it was not a priority, and that neither the council nor the
community wanted to spend the time going after those grants. Mr. Antillon commented in thinking about
projects that can be competitive for grants, this is one of those, it has all the necessary pieces that everyone
wants to do. Therefore, it is nice to have it in there, but if council wants to remove it, it can be removed. No
resources are being spending on it, but if there is a grant that could be a good source of funding, it could be
brought back. Councilmember Olson said she was concerned because it seemed grants almost always
require matching funds from the City. Mr. Antillon agreed it was usually at least 20%.
Councilmember Buckshnis said removal of creosote -treated logs from Marina Beach was in the media
recently. She recalled there was a grant to remove the creosote -treated logs from Haines Wharf which she
assumed had expired. She asked if removal of the creosote -treated logs was in the CIP/CFP or did it need
to be added and had consideration been given to the creosote piers at Haines Wharf that collapsed into the
water. Ms. Feser advised removal of the Haines Wharf creosote piers was not included in the capital
program and she believed it was earmarked as a potential mitigation project which is the reason it sits as is.
There is great potential for other projects along the water where mitigation needs to be provided so it is
being held for that. Councilmember Buckshnis commented DNR has grant programs to remove them for
free.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 24, 2023
Page 6
Mayor Nelson told Councilmember Nand that as everyone is interpreting this as a broad one question, he
will extend that same courteous to her. Councilmember Nand thanked Mayor Nelson, relaying she had
intended to make a motion in the interest of fairness that councilmembers be allowed to ask two follow-up
questions or comments because some councilmembers are allowed to and others are being scolded which
she did not feel was fair.
Regarding the beautification programs and plans Parks & Recreation developed over a five year period,
Councilmember Nand said she was aware work had already started at Five Corners with filling in and
hardening of the flowerbeds and removal of irrigation and planting of succulents. She asked staff to describe
plans for 2024 and whether Firdale was next. Ms. Feser answered the agreed upon beautification project
for 2024 were the hanging baskets at the Five Corners roundabout which requires installation of arms and
10-12 flower baskets. The project being completed now, although it coincides and supports that, was a
separate project.
Councilmember Nand asked if the flower beds in Five Corners will be available for adoption by local
businesses and community groups. Ms. Feser answered that has not been considered yet, but it could be
part of the corner parks adoption. Councilmember Nand asked if there would be Floretum Club involvement
in the Five Corner flower baskets and corner parks. Ms. Feser answered Edmonds in Bloom, not the
Floretum Club, has offered to help pay for materials and equipment to make that happen so they will be
assisting with the development of the new hanging flower baskets.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to PWT-52 Traffic Calming, recalling at a council town hall at the
Meadowdale Clubhouse last summer attended by approximately 35-40 people and a majority of
councilmembers, they clearly heard concerns from citizens about speeding and accidents on the 1.5 mile
stretch of 76t'', approximately 15 serious accidents in the past 10 years as well as a number of accidents that
weren't reported to the police. The council appealed to Public Works to help with some mitigations and he
learned last week the Public Works team installed a 3-way stop at Meadowdale Beach Road & 76t1i. He
relayed citizens are thrilled by that and appreciate the responsiveness and care for that community. Mr.
Antillon thanked Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss who did the analysis and determined the
intersection met the warrant requirements to install a 3-way stop.
Councilmember Paine referred to PWT-27 Olympic View Drive & 174' Street Intersection Improvement
and asked what an acceleration lane was and whether it was needed. Mr. English answered an acceleration
lane helps vehicles merge into the general purpose lane. That is a project from 2015 and it may not be the
right solution for that area.
Councilmember Chen recalled discussions about the library roof and asked if there was any follow-up or
study about accelerating the roof repair or possibly replacing the roof. Mr. Antillon answered no, reminding
that the flooding issue and the roof issue are not related and are completely separate. Over the years, the
facilities team has implemented mitigation measures to control the library roof leaks and those have not
caused any damage to the library or the tenants who use it. Sno-Isle knows about that and are replacing and
revamping that to catch the leak. The roof is nearing the end of its expected life and funded of a full design,
scope, etc. will probably need to be funded in the next five years. Councilmember Chen recalled a study
about the mold issue in the library and the result that the air quality was ok. Mr. Antillon answered there is
no mold and the air quality inside the space is fine. An industrial hygienist did the analysis and it all came
back with good results.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the WWTP, advising her question is about the $40 million set aside
to comply with the nutrient removal standards. It is listed as construction and she asked whether more would
be constructed onto the building or was that the only category available. She also asked how the $40 million
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 24, 2023
Page 7
estimate was derived. Mr. Antillon answered it is a preliminary estimate from the consultant regarding
possible options; there will be some modification. Mr. De Lilla said in talking with the consultant and
WWTP staff, it should be on site within the treatment plant campus and the consultant is estimating the cost
at $40 million. There is also space across the street; the preliminary plan is to put it on the site.
Councilmember Buckshnis observed it was scheduled for 2024 or 2025. Mr. De Lilla answered there is 1-
2 years of design followed by construction. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if the same company used for
the pyrolysis project would be used for that project. Mr. Antillon answered that company would probably
be used, they have done a lot of plants in the area. Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not see any
revenue from the biochar and asked if that would be included in the budget if there is ever any revenue
from biochar. Mr. Antillon advised it would be added to the budget; it is still in the early stages of
identifying a source to purchase it. The goal is to at least get someone to take it for $1; as long as it is sold,
the Department of Revenue will provide a tax break for a large portion of the equipment.
Councilmember Nand referred to the Lake Ballinger regional facility design and construction, commenting
due to a lack of footprint in SE Edmonds, there is a lot planned for the park such as permanent restrooms,
picnic shelter, etc. She asked it would make sense to also run the stormwater infiltration through there or
possibly look at other sites so less is concentrated in that very small footprint at Mathay Ballinger and asked
how that would impact usage of the park. Mr. De Lilla answered based on the original findings, the entire
facility could not fit on that site so other sites are being considered, possibly a smaller footprint and not
retaining and/or treating as much of the water as originally planned. Staff is still determining what else can
be done and identifying grants to fund the project.
Councilmember Nand asked what sort of above ground footprint that will have versus underground. Mr.
De Lilla answered most of it should be underground facilities to decrease peak flows and treat the
stormwater. With regard to surface usage, Public Works can talk to Parks, but he assumed that would be
smaller role because it is a park, possibly there would be a way to have it as a feature in the park, but he
assured there would not be an entire rain garden in that area.
Councilmember Chen asked whether a study to look at the bike connection between King County and
Snohomish County through SR 104 should be a budget amendment or could that be worked into the
CIP/CFP. MR. English answered that project along with the other project that was mentioned earlier could
be evaluated in the transportation plan update which is currently underway. Mr. Antillon added staff will
continue discussions with Shoreline and collaborating with them. Once it is determined an analysis needs
to be done, staff will come back to council.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked where the red light cameras are in the CIP/CFP. She recalled the school
zone cameras were not in the CIP/CFP because it was related to police. The eight new red light cameras
and the costs are not in the CIP/CFP. Mr. Antillon agreed it not included in the CIP/CFP. It will come back
as a project once there is an agreement like the agreement for the school zone cameras. Councilmember
Buckshnis asked if any studies had been done to determine the intersections, traffic counts, traffic impact
fees, etc. Mr. Antillon answered he believed the police department had that information.
4. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 6:58 p.m.
sa-:4-
SCOTT PASSEY; CKCLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
October 24, 2023
Page 8