20160607 City Council
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
June 7, 2016
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Kristiana Johnson, Council President
Michael Nelson, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir.
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Rob English, City Engineer
Leif Bjorback, Building Official
Kernen Lien, Senior Planner
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Andrew Price, Legislative/Council Assistant
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS,
TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Buckshnis requested Item 1 be removed from the Consent Agenda so that she could
abstain from the vote.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL,
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT DIRECT DEPOSIT, CHECKS AND
WIRE PAYMENTS
3. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM CHRIS AND LESLIE
MCGINNESS ($58,740.00), AND G. CHRIS GRADWOHL ($6,725.97)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 2
4. 2015 SANITARY SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT CLOSEOUT
5. CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENT OF WILLIAM PHIPPS TO THE CITIZENS'
TREE BOARD
6. APRIL MONTHLY BUDGETARY FINANCIAL REPORT
7. ACCEPTANCE OF THE FIVE CORNERS ROUNDABOUT PROJECT
8. ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 8.16.040 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE (ECC);
AMENDING THE SPEED LIMIT ALONG A SECTION OF SR-104
9. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH
MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES FOR THE DESIGN OF THE 2017 WATERLINE
REPLACEMENT PROJECT
10. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH
BHC CONSULTANTS FOR THE 2017 SEWERLINE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
11. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH COMCAST FOR
THE UNDERGROUND CONVERSION OF OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE WITHIN THE
76TH AVE W AND 212TH INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT LIMITS
12. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH WAVE
BROADBAND FOR THE UNDERGROUND CONVERSION OF OVERHEAD UTILITY
LINES WITHIN THE 76TH @ 212TH INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
LIMITS
13. AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT WITH JAMES G. MURPHY TO SELL SURPLUS
CITY EQUIPMENT
14. AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE (1) NEW CATERPILLAR 420F2 HRC BACKHOE
LOADER FROM NC MACHINERY. WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT #00410 AND
AUTHORIZATION TO SURPLUS THEIR EXISTING BACKHOE, UNIT #18, AT
AUCTION
ITEM 1: APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 24, 2016
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE ITEM 1. MOTION CARRIED (5-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS
ABSTAINED.
4. PRESENTATIONS/REPORTS
1. MUSIC4LIFE PROCLAMATION
Mayor Earling read a proclamation declaring June as Music4Life Month in the City of Edmonds and
encouraging citizens to donate any lovingly used musical instruments they may have to
www.Music4Life.org and show what financial support they can to this fine home-grown organization.
Mayor Earling presented the proclamation to David Endicott, Co-Founder of Music4Life. Mr. Endicott
two years ago, with the blessing of Edmonds School District Nick Brossoit, the Music4Life program
began for Edmonds School District. During the 2014-2015 school year, the program provided 20 ready-
to-play instruments to Edmonds schools with an estimated retail value of $15,430. Since September 1,
2016 of this school year, they delivered another 33 music instruments with an estimated retail value of
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 3
$28,680, far outpacing the 2014-15 school year and the year is not yet over. Included in the instruments is
a very rare violin now being played by the concert master in an Edmonds High School orchestras. Public
support is important to fund instrument repairs; support is provided by the Hazel Miller Foundation, the
Rotary Club of Edmonds, First Choice Health and others. He encouraged the public to donate instruments
as well as make financial donations to repair instruments.
2. SNOHOMISH COUNTY TOURISM BUREAU PRESENTATION
Development Services Director Patrick Doherty introduced the presentation by Snohomish County
County Tourism Bureau (SCTB), explaining Edmonds has a great collaboration with SCTB in promoting
tourism. The City provides an annual contribution of $6,000 to the SCTB from Lodging Tax funds. He
introduced Amy Spain, Executive Director of the Snohomish County Tourism Bureau, who presented
the SCTB 2015 Annual Report. She described the importance of tourism to economic development;
visitors to Washington spent $20.7 billion in 2015, accounting for $1.2 billion in local/state tax revenues
and creating 170,500 jobs. She displayed a drawing illustrating the impacts of tourism on many different
aspects of the community.
She commented on the State’s lack of a Tourism Office:
All other states have some form of state funding and/or involvement
Washington Tourism Alliance is not a sustainable organization using a membership-funded
model
o Receive funds from members and $500,000 bridge funding from the legislature to keep
the website open and distribute the Visitors Guide.
Legislation was introduced in Olympia in 2015 to create a state tourism funding program - not
passed
Legislation will be introduced in 2017 to create a state tourism funding program
She provided a comparison of competitor states’ budgets:
Washington $481,000 (WTA 2013-2015 budget)
Alaska $17 million
Idaho $7 million
Oregon $12 million
California $50 million
Nevada $15 million
Montana $12 million
Wyoming $13 million
Utah $14 million
Arizona $13 million
Colorado $15 million
New Mexico $7 million
Vancouver BC $53 million
She described the impact of travel to the local economy:
Overnight travelers to Washington State (staying in commercial lodging)
o Average 2.2 people per travel party
o Stay 2.5 nights
o Spend $477 per travel party per day
Overnight travelers to Snohomish County (staying in commercial lodging)
o Average 2.1 people per travel party
o Stay 2.1 nights
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 4
o Spend $360 per travel party per day
Ms. Spain displayed a bar graph illustrating the impact of travel to local economy, day traveler compared
to overnight travelers. She described the effect of tourism in Snohomish County:
Visitor spending in Snohomish County is $1 billion/year, up 1.8% from previous year
o Restaurants: $308 million
o Transportation and Fuel: $146 million
o Retail Stores: $136 million
o Accommodations: $141 million
o Recreation and entertainment: $136 million
o Grocery stores: $63 million
10,750 Jobs
$273.9 million payroll
$21.1 million local taxes
$50.9 million state taxes
Ms. Spain provided a brief overview of SCTB’s accomplishments in 2015:
Generated 4,577 requests for information from ads
Website visitation up 3% - over 228,000 unique visitors
Achieved over $296,000 of free media coverage, up 8%
22,091 definite and 9,406 tentative group and convention room nights were processed in 2015
representing $44.3 million in economic impact
Visitor centers served 38,000 visitors. Countywide centers served 107,651 visitors
Tourism spending and economic impact of tourism in Snohomish County was $1 billion – up
1.8%
Hotel occupancy levels were down 2% to 70.9%; ADR was up 4.3% leading to an increase in
RevPar of 2.2%
Hotel/motel tax collections were up 12.9%
She reviewed convention, sports and group tour sales and services, explaining ads generate leads, support
branding and generate interest in Snohomish County as a meeting/event destination:
22 trade shows
o Packaged Travel
o Sports Marketing
o Consumer Travel
o Meeting and Events
o 237 direct leads
o 199 groups assisted
Distributed 3,886 group tour, convention and sports events collateral materials at 22 trade shows
and 5 sales missions
5 sales missions to Vancouver BC, Olympia, Seattle, Indianapolis and Colorado Springs
o 31 new leads for hotels and attractions
o Distribution of 76 guides
18 familiarization tours conducted
o 237 direct leads
o 199 groups assisted
Bar graph of tentative, definite and total room nights for 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015
o Group tour, meeting and event planner bids were prepared which resulted in 22,091 total
definite room nights
o Additional pending bookings at year end totaled 9,406 room nights
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 5
o Totaling 31,497 room nights
Bar graph of economic impact of room nights 2011-2015 - $44,252,079
Tammy Dunn, Sports Development Director, SCTB, explained Snohomish County is a premier sports
destination, generating $35.6 million in economic impact from international, national, regional and local
events. She relayed recognitions and awards:
Sports Events Magazine Readers’ Choice Award – 5-time winner
Champions of Economic Impact in Sports Tourism
Ms. Spain advised Ms. Dunn received the NSC Game Changer Award and the Women in Sports Tourism
- inaugural recipient. Ms. Spain reported on tourism development:
4,577 requests for information from ads
Online presence
Print publications have online version
New E-Newsletters
Website visitation up 3%
Over 6,400 visits to RoomsAtPar and StayShopAndSave websites
New collateral
o East County Backroads
o Hiking guide
o Golf in Snohomish County
85,000 copies of the official visitor guide distributed
6 issues of StoryLine were mailed to over 1400 travel writers with each issue
She commented on public relations and media:
6 media fam tours for travel writers
34 press released
92 media pitches
56 articles
$296,518 free media coverage
Social Media: Flickr, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and Pinterest, You Tube
3 television ads aired
She described visitor information services:
Implementing strategic tourism plan initiatives
o Traditional advertising in Alderwood Mall
o Ambient advertising at Everett Mall
o Electronic kiosks at Future of Flight, Lynnwood Convention Center and Tulalip Resort
Mobile VICs operating at events and festivals
Visitor snapshot:
o 76% from more than 50 miles away
4% from other WA counties
32% from other states
40% from other counties
24% from local area
o Served 107,651 visitor countywide
She described industry education
Conducted three countywide tourism related programs
Industry Training Tools
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 6
o Monthly hotel hot sheet
o Tourism Industry monthly tours
Councilmember Nelson asked how the economic impact of tourism is calculated. Ms. Spain answered
they use a number of different measurement tools; the Destination Marketing Association International
tracks cities and provides an economic impact figure for a convention attendee, a leisure traveler, etc.
That is overlaid with information from the National Association of Sports Commission regarding what a
sports team brings to a community, overlaid with the Dean Runyan Report which is specific to
Washington State as well as the Smith Travel Research Report that reports average daily occupancy rates
and revenue for hotels in Snohomish County.
Councilmember Nelson referred to the report that overnight visitors spend four times the amount a day
visitor does and asked how that data was tracked. Ms. Spain answered that data is provided by Dean
Runyan & Associates, the company that provides visitor spending information in Washington State; they
have a proprietary method of determining spending.
Councilmember Nelson referred to the 4,577 requests for general information from ads and asked what
they learn from the types of requests that can be applied moving forward. Ms. S pain answered those are
requests for leisure travel information, requesting a print visitor guide or a special interest guide. With
regard to meetings, events and groups, they are constantly learning what they are looking for with regard
to convention space, field space, court space and targeting their efforts to those that can be
accommodated.
Councilmember Tibbott asked what cities in Snohomish County receive most overnight stays. Ms. Spain
answered SCTB receives county data not individual city data. South county has more hotels than north
county; Lynnwood has more hotel rooms than any other city in Snohomish County. Due to their location
on the south end of the county, Edmonds, Bothell, etc. tend to receive overflow when when Seattle hotels
are full.
Councilmember Tibbott asked what type of accommodations guests are seeking, whether it was 4 or 5
star hotels, bed & breakfasts, etc. Ms. Spain answered the Tulalip Resort is the only 4-star hotel in
Snohomish County and has a very high occupancy rate, often pushing business to other hotels. All the
other hotels in Snohomish County are 3-star. Airbandb and VRBO are beginning to impact the B&B
market and hotel stays.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to the report that tourism spending in Snohomish County was up 1.8%
and asked how that compared statewide. Ms. Spain offered to provide that information, noting state travel
is also up.
Council President Johnson said she looks forward to this presentation every year and remembers Ms.
Spain’s mantra, tourism is economic development. Although she understood most of the information was
aggregate to Snohomish County, she asked how Edmonds could increase sports tourism or general
tourism to increase economic development. Ms. Spain said Mr. Doherty and Program Coordinator Cindi
Cruz have held a series of workshops this spring with community members and Kitsap County and
Lynnwood to develop partnerships. SCTB is a partner in those workshops and also participates to help
those organizations work collectively and cooperative to get more bang for buck from their efforts.
With regard to sports tourism, Ms. Dunn recalled meeting with Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite
about four years ago when they toured the City, looking for sports niche. She continues to look for unique
events to hold in Edmonds. One possibility is a criterium, a downtown bicycle race, similar to the race in
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 7
Ballard. That requires finding the right event owner and working with the City. The SCTB has a great
relationship with Edmonds Parks.
With regard to Ms. Spain’s comments regarding the impacts that Airbandb and VRBO are having,
Councilmember Mesaros suggested rather than viewing those as something taking away, it is a shift in
how people around the world think. He suggested considering how to track and encourage it. Ms. Spain
said Airbandbs began collecting room tax within the last couple months. Until that time, SCTB was not
promoting them at all because they were taking away. She referred to a meeting this morning with east
Snohomish County, which is woefully short of lodging opportunities, to determine how many Airbandbs
and VRBOs are operating in that area. There is an effort to contact Airbandbs and VRBOs to establish a
list and promote them on the website.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented the brochures are fabulous.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Hank Landau, Edmonds, a member of the Edmonds Bicycle Group and the Mayor’s Climate Change
Committee, reported there were a number of events last month which was Bicycle Month. He thanked the
City and staff for all they have done to support those programs. Six years ago he requested Council
support for the Basics of Bicycling Program, intended to teach young children in the Edmonds School
District how to safety ride bicycles to improve safety, improve health, reduce obesity and diabetes and
interact better with traffic. Edmonds and several surrounding communities endorsed the program;
fundraising followed with cooperation from the Edmonds School District Cascade Bicycle Club and and
the Edmonds Bicycle Group and with financial support from donors including the Hazel Miller
Foundation and Verdant. The program has served thousands of children to date and is currently serving
15 elementary schools, 4 middle schools and they hope to go to the high schools soon to train for bicycle
races. He gave special appreciation to the PE teachers who implement the program. Another program the
City has been instrumental in is Bike to Health, formerly Bike-Link, which promotes interconnectivity
and improvements to routes that connect Edmonds to surrounding communities. City staff has also been
very supportive of Safe Routes to Schools; the City has successfully obtained grants for sidewalks and
walkways leading to schools including 220th Street, 228th, and 238th. He thanked the City for their support
on Bike Everywhere Day.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, commented it was nice to see the new arrangement on the dais. Next, he
recalled the Council approved a moratorium on crumb rubber but it has a short life. To educate the
Council about new information related to crumb rubber, he suggested contacting the principals of the
citizen groups who provided comment to Council and ask them to give a presentation regarding what’s
new in crumb rubber, new regulations, organizations that have decided stop using crumb rubber, etc.
6. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2017-2022 SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss presented the 2017-2022 Six-Year Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP):
RCW requires that each city update their TIP by July 1
Document contains all significant transportation projects that a city possibly plans to undertake in
next six years
City of Edmonds policy: TIP financially constrained first three years
Federal grants, state grants and local funds are programmed as revenue sources for TIP projects
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 8
He identified completed/soon to be completed project in 2016:
220th St. SW Overlay from 84th Ave. to 76th Ave
228th St SW Corridor Safety Improvements
Hwy 99 Lighting (Phase 3) 220th St SW to 212th St SW
238th Street SW walkway from100th Ave W to 104th Ave W
Citywide protective/permissive left turn traffic signal conversions
He reviewed scheduled construction projects in 2017:
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th St SW to 212th St SW
Project Description
o Pavement overlay
o Curb ramp upgrades
o Mid-block crossing improvements (near Chase Lake Elementary)
o New project in TIP
Funding
o Federal Grant $691,000
o Local $249,000
Schedule
o Design Spring ‘17
o Construction Summer ’17
76th Ave W @ 212th St SW Intersection improvements
Project description
o Add left turn lane for NB and SB movements on 76th Av. W
o Add right turn lanes for SB, NB, and EB movements
o Improve intersection delay
o Add bike lanes / wider sidewalk
o Various utility upgrades (including conversion of overhead utility lines to underground)
Schedule
o Start of Construction July ‘16
o Construction Completion Spring ‘17
Funding
o Estimated total project cost
Design $582,000
ROW $789,000
Construction $4,966,000
o Funding sources
Federal Grant secured: $3,960,000
Local Funds (Fund 112, Utility): $2,377,000
Trackside warning system/quiet zone at Dayton St & Main St Railroad Crossings
Project description
o Install Wayside Horns at (2) Railroad Crossings to reduce noise level (within Downtown
Edmonds) created during daily train crossings
Schedule
o Construction completion 2017
Funding
o General Fund Transfer: $300,000
236th St SW Walkway from SR-104 to Madrona School
Project description
o 600 feet of sidewalk along 236th St from SR-104 to school entrance
o Pavement Overlay
o Bicycle sharrow markings
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 9
o Stormwater upgrades
Schedule
o Completion of Design 2016
o Construction Completion 2017
Funding
Secured Safe Routes to School grant $494,000
Local Funds (Fund 422) $250,000
General Fund: $202,000
Citywide Bicycle Improvements (formerly known as Bike-Link)
Project description
o Complete critical missing links of bicycle’s network (bike lanes / sharrows in Lynnwood,
Mountlake Terrace, and Edmonds)
o Bicycle route signage and parking at key locations
o Bicycle education and outreach
Status/Schedule
o Design Completion Fall 2016
o Construction Completion Spring 2017
Funding
o Secured Verdant grant (Lynnwood, MLT, and Edmonds)
o $1.9 Million (~ $737,000 allocated to Edmonds)
Other projects in 2017-2022 TIP
New projects / not identified in 2016-2021 TIP
o Corridor Intersection/Improvements
Hwy 99 from 216th St SW to 224th St SW
o Pavement rating study
Determine future overlay projects (based on pavement condition of all City Streets)
Previous study completed in 2013
o Citywide pedestrian crossing enhancements
9 crossings
Preservation / safety / capacity projects
o Annual street preservation (REET & General Fund)
o Signal upgrades
Puget Dr. @ OVD (2020– 20201)
238th St. SW @ 100th Ave. W (2020)
Main St. @ 3rd Ave. (2021 – 2022)
o Intersection Improvements
220th St. SW @ 76th Ave. W (2017 – 2020)
196th St. SW @ 88th Ave. W (2020-2022)
Hwy. 99 @ 212th St. SW (2020–2022)
Hwy. 99 @ 216th St. SW (2020-2022)
Hwy. 99 @ 220th St. SW (2020-2022)
SR-104 @ 95th Pl. W (2020-2021)
SR-104 @ 238th St. SW (2020-2021)
Non-motorized transportation projects
Sunset Ave. (2017-2020)
4th Ave. Corridor Enhancement Walkway (2020-2022)
Walkway projects near schools / parks
- Maplewood Dr. Walkway (2017-2020)
- Elm Way Walkway (2017-2019)
- Walnut St. Walkway (2020)
Short Walkway projects
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 10
- 2nd Ave. S from James St. to Main St. (2020)
- 216th St. SW from Hwy. 99 to 72nd Ave. W (2020)
Minor Sidewalk Program (2017-2022)
ADA Curb Ramp Improvements (2017-2022)
Mr. Hauss provided a summary of secured transportation grants over the last four years:
Project Name
(year grant secured) Grant Type Total Grant
Amount
228th St SW Corridor Improvement project (2013) Federal/State $ 5,934,000
236th St SW, 238th St SW & 15th Ave W Walkway projects (2013) Federal/State $ 1,459,000
ADA curb ramp upgrades along 3rd Ave S (2013) Federal $ 90,000
School Zone Flashing Beacons (2013) Federal $ 37,500
Bike-Link (2014) Local $ 737,000
220th St SW Overlay from 84th Ave to 76th Ave (2014) Federal $ 780,000
76th Ave @121th St Intersection Improvements (20140 Federal $ 3,020,000
Waterfront At-Grade Crossing Study (2015) State $ 500,000
238th Walkway from SR104 to Hwy 99 State $ 348,000
84th Ave W Overlay from 220th St SW to 212th St W (2016) Federal $ 691,000
Total Amount ~$13,500,000
He provided a summary of recently submitted transportation grants:
Project Grant Type Total Request
80th Ave W Walkway from 212th to 206th Pedestrian and Bicycle $ 210,000
Maplewood Dr Walkway from Main to 200th Pedestrian and Bicycle $ 230,000
Elm Way Walkway from 8th to 9th Safe Routes to Schools $ 789,000
Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancement Safe Routes to Schools $ 1,310,000
Edmonds Multimodal Grade Separation Project FAST Act $79,390,000
Total Request $81,929,000
Mr. Hauss relayed staff’s recommendation that the City Council approve the TIP.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed compliments she has received about the 228th project. She inquired
about the upgrade to traffic signals such as at Puget Drive & Olympic View Drive. Mr. Hauss answered
the signal at Puget Drive/Olympic View Drive signal is on a span wire and has no mast arms; the existing
signal would be upgraded to install mast arms on all approaches. The signal poles are 25-30 years old and
need to be upgraded.
Councilmember Buckshnis inquired about the Safe Routes to Schools grants. Mr. Hauss referred to a list
of non-motorized transportation project list, advising they are either Safe Routes to Schools or Pedestrian
and Bicycle program grants. For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Hauss identified walkway that were
funded with federal Safe Routes to Schools grants and State TIB grants.
Councilmember Teitzel referred to the Pavement Rating Study, recalling one of the highest priorities in
the Strategic Action Plan (SAP) was the pavement condition. He asked if the Pavement Rating Study will
be completed in 2017. Mr. Hauss answered yes, it takes about six months to complete. Councilmember
Teitzel asked if it would consider all the streets in Edmonds. Mr. Hauss answered yes. Councilmember
Teitzel asked what effect the study will have on prioritization decisions. Mr. Hauss answered the study
will provide a pavement condition index (PCI) of 0-100 for minor arterials, collector and local streets.
The City will prioritize repaving based on the PCI as well as citizen requests/complaints. Councilmember
Teitzel commented there are numerous projects on the TIP with large numbers but it is difficult to
determine what is front loaded. Citizens prioritized streets in the SAP and the City stopped maintaining its
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 11
streets during the recession. He favored front loading the schedule to address streets. Public Works
Director Phil Williams said the PCI is one piece of information used to identify pavement priorities.
There are other considerations such as where utility work is being done; operations and engineering staff
and the PCI are used to determine the best investments each year.
Councilmember Nelson said the wayside horns were originally planned in 2016 but are now into 2017.
Mayor Earling said he was also surprised by that change. Mr. Williams commented where that got high
centered was with the railroad. He explained passenger trains, which fit between the two crossings
(freight trains do not) always stop at the station. For example, a northbound crossing Dayton will sound
their horn manually, the signal arms operate automatically, the train slows and stops at the station. The
train reaches the triggering point on the track for the Main Street station before it comes to a complete
stop at the station which brings the signal arms at Main down briefly until the train completely stops and
the signal arms go up until the passenger train is loaded. Once the train begins moving, the signal arms go
down again. The current option given to the City for triggering the wayside horns is the same signal that
operates the signal arms. That would mean every time a passenger train comes through there would be
two sets of horns for 17 seconds each, in this example at Main for a northbound train or at Dayton for a
southbound train.
Instead of increasing the number of horn blasts, staff is trying to keep them the same, quieter but the same
number. The City and the railroad are trying to determine if the railroad can reprogram their signal
cabinets to accomplish that. If the railroad can’t, and to date that is the answer that has been given, he will
return to Council to inquire whether to proceed with the project. His recommendation would be to
proceed but that would be a glitch in the system. The railroad has not yet provided a firm answer, hence
the expectation the project will be extended into 2017. Mayor Earling said he knew of the technical
problem but not the delay in the project to 2017. Mr. Williams said it may be done in 2016 but this issue
would need to be cleared up quickly for that to happen.
Councilmember Mesaros relayed his neighborhood is very concerned about the timing and strongly
anticipate the project being concluded. When a passenger train is in the center between Dayton and Main,
the gates open at Main for a southbound train and the horn will stop once it passes through. He asked if
the Main Street crossing would be activated as the train passed through Dayton. Mr. Williams answered it
would not impact the Main Street gates but there would be two sets of horn blasts at Dayton if the train is
traveling south. Northbound there would only be one horn because the train is moving and it will hit the
trigger point south of Dayton, bringing the signal arm down and activating the horn when the train comes
into the station. The first signal the train arrives at would work normally; the second horn would also be
activated due to the proximity. Councilmember Mesaros asked how many passenger trains travel through
Edmonds each day. Mr. Williams answered 12.
Councilmember Teitzel said the citizen’s expectation is that this project will reduce the amount of noise
from horns within hearing distance of the tracks. He asked if it was possible after the project is complete
there would be the same or more horns in a 24-hour period. Mr. Williams answered there would be more
horn blasts heard locally unless the railroad provides a different answer. The number of people in
Edmonds that hear the train horns will be reduced dramatically either way. For those closest to the
crossings, the experience would not be much different. Of 40 trains per day, 12 are passenger trains which
will have twice as many horn blasts as before, that is an outcome the City would rather avoid so are trying
to get that changed. The ferries, beaches, and other places close to Main would still be within the 92
decibel footprint but that is a much smaller footprint than before although there would still be noticeable
noise near the crossing. Councilmember Teitzel summarized more horn blasts could be expected for
passenger trains but the distance they were heard would be reduced.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 12
Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Hearing no comment, Mayor
Earling closed the public hearing.
As the TIP does not need to be submitted until July 1, Council President Johnson suggested discussing it
at the next study session and taking final action the following week.
7. ACTION ITEMS
1. CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION 853
REGARDING THE TAKING OF MINUTES/NOTES IN EXECUTIVE SESSION
City Clerk Scott Passey explained this was originally presented to Council on May 10 with rationale,
implication and impacts. Council directed staff to bring it back May 24 to allow time for public comment.
One public comment was received opposed to the idea of no longer taking minutes/notes in executive
session. Following discussion at the May 24 meeting, Council directed the City Attorney to prepare a
resolution repealing Resolution 853 that requires taking executive session minutes. The draft resolution is
included in the packet.
City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained the whereas clauses in the resolution add additional detail. One of
the points in the whereas clauses that he may not have clearly explained previously was it has been
suggested with regard to executive session notes that involve a level of attorney client privilege, the
Council could take affirmative action in the future to over waive that attorney-client privilege so the
public could read the executive session notes. The issue with that is under the rules of evidence when a
party takes a deliberate action to disclose privileged material, the party cannot strictly confine the extent
of that disclosure in the way they may think. In other words, by making deliberate disclosure of executive
session notes on a particular lawsuit, the Council may be waiving much more than just the content of the
executive session notes; they may be opening the door to allow for other privileged material to be
released as well by court order.
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON,
TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 1360, RESCINDING RESOLUTION 853.
Councilmember Mesaros said the Council has created an atmosphere that minutes are being kept but they
are actually notes because the Council never reviews, corrects or approves them. That has given the
public an unreal impression and he felt it was time to stop doing that. In addition, both the City Clerk and
City Attorney have informed that few organizations kept minutes/notes and the only other they could find
was the Port of Seattle. Further, the Council does not make decisions during executive session; decisions
are made during an open public meeting. He expressed support for this action.
Councilmember Tibbott agreed with Councilmember Mesaros comments. In conversations with various
members of the public, he assured the Council only discussed topics that qualified for executive session;
those eight topics are listed in the packet. The Council also states in advance the topic for the executive
session. He recommended any time an executive session topic arises at a Council meeting that the
Council inform the public that it was previously discussed in executive session. He also requested the
Council commit to a robust discussion regarding anything that was previously discussed in executive
session. There may be an impression that because a topic has been discussed in executive session, it is not
fully discussed in public. He assured that has not been practice; anytime a topic comes to a public
meeting, there is a robust discussion of issues. The City is well-served by allowing Councilmembers to
have confidential discussions in executive session. He committed to citizens any time an executive
session item comes to a public meeting, that the public be informed and the Council have a r obust
discussion.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 13
Councilmember Teitzel also expressed support for rescinding Resolution 853. The Council does not
review the notes so they are archived and rarely subsequently reviewed. The Council has an obligation to
its citizens to analyze the cost/benefit; it is costs the City a great deal to take notes and archive them, time
that could be spent responding to appropriate public records requests for example. For those reasons, he
supported discontinuing the practice of taking notes in executive session.
MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS VOTING NO.
8. STUDY ITEMS
1. UPDATE ON THE EDMONDS WATERFRONT ANALYSIS
Rick Schaefer, Tetra Tech, displayed an aerial photograph of the waterfront and identified the purpose
and need for the Waterfront Analysis:
Safe and reliable access to the entire waterfront area by emergency responders
Ferry loading and unloading
Access to the waterfront area by people driving, walking or biking
Ferry, rail and bus connections
He displayed the schedule and described how the alternatives will be studied, identifying five study
milestones, technical analysis steps and ways to be involved. The Level 1 screening of the solution
concepts has been completed and the analysis is advancing into the Level 2 evaluation of more
comprehensive alternatives. A fourth public meeting will be held at the conclusion of the Level 2 analysis
to review the outcomes of the evaluation and the recommendations. He anticipated recommendations will
be presented by September.
He described how rail traffic affects access:
Gate closures at Main Street and Dayton Street crossings
o 37.5 closures average per day
o 80 minutes average per day (5.5% of the day)
o 2:12 average closure duration (3:54 for unit trains)
At Main Street crossing (daily average):
o Vehicles delayed (84%) ferry traffic
709 delayed by closures
28.7 vehicle-hours
o Pedestrians Delayed
115 delayed by closures
4.7 person-hours
10-11 people/day crossing under/around gates
o Over 10 ferry loadings/off loadings affected daily
Three extended closures since the study began last fall
50-100% increase in number of trains passing through Edmonds daily in next 15 years (primarily
through freight traffic)
o BNSF’s installation of second track has the potential to mitigate amount of closures
Mr. Schaefer displayed a graph of response time for emergency calls across the tracks (Fire District 1
records July 1, 2010 – December 8, 2015)
277 incidents
64 had response times of 7 minutes or longer
Variety of causes for delays
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 14
He displayed graphs of hourly distribution of emergency calls west of tracks and average number of Main
Street gate closures. He displayed another graphic of the 2-stage screening/evaluation process:
CONSIDERED SOLUTION CONCEPTS
(from public, study team, prior studies)
LEVEL 1 SCREENING → Document Decisions
HIGHEST RATED CONCEPTS
We are here
LEVEL 2 EVALUATION → Document Decisions
HIGHEST RATED ALTERNATIVES
PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE
RECOMMENDATIONS → Document
Recommendations
He displayed a graphic of the initial 51 concepts that included:
Overpass solutions
Underpass solutions
On-site solutions
Operational solutions
Railroad modifications
Ferry facilities modifications
He reviewed Level 1 concept screening criteria that were screened as to yes, somewhat, not very well,
with challenges, no-fatal flaw:
1. Does the concept improve reliable emergency response to the west side of the railroad?
2. Does the concept reduce delays to ferry loading/unloading of vehicles?
3. Does the concept reduce delays and conflicts at street -railroad crossings for people walking,
biking or driving?
4. Does the concept provide safe and efficient passenger connectivity between available modes of
travel?
5. Is the concept feasible to implement?
6. Does the concept avoid creating social and/or economic impacts?
7. Does the concept avoid negative environmental effects
Mr. Schaefer displayed a sample Level 1 Rating sheet of the overpass solutions that identified projects
that would/would not be advanced to Level 1. The concepts were reduced in the Level 1 screening from
51 to 6 early recommendations and 13 concepts that were combined into 10 alternatives for consideration
in the Level 2 process. He reviewed the 6 early recommendations from Level 1:
Recommend City advance independently
o Crosswalk improvements at Main Street/Railroad Avenue (Onsite 4)
o Crosswalk improvements at Dayton Street/Railroad avenue (Onsite 5)
Recommend City advance with BNSF
o Emergency notification to stop trains outside of Edmonds (Operational 4)
Recommend local agencies create/implement a Waterfront Emergency Evacuation Plan
o First aid training for waterfront staff and residents (Onsite 1)
o Helipad operational planning (Onsite 3)
o Tsunami evacuation plan (Operational 7)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 15
He identified the Level 1 outcomes – 13 advancing concepts, consolidated into 10 alternatives:
Level 1 Concepts Level 2 Alternatives
Overpass 1 Admiral Way Pedestrian/Emergency Vehicle Overpass
Overpass 4B Dayton Street Pedestrian/Emergency Vehicle Overpass
Overpass 9 Edmonds Street Pedestrian/Emergency Vehicle Overpass
Overpass5/Onsite 2 Midblock Pedestrian Overpass, with stationed equipment
Overpass7A/Onsite 2 Main Street Pedestrian Overpass, with stationed equipment
Underpass 4/Onsite 2 Main Street Pedestrian Underpass, with stationed equipment
Ferry4/Ferry8 Main Street Ferry Overpass 1
Overpass 6 Main Street Ferry Overpass 2
Underpass1/Ferry 5 Main Street Ferry Underpass
Ferry3 Dayton Street New Ferry Terminal
He provided a map identifying the location of the above Level 2 alternatives:
Pedestrian/bicycle/emergency vehicle
o Admiral Way Overpass
o Dayton Street Overpass
o Edmonds Street Overpass
Pedestrian/Bicycle
o Mid-block overpass (pedestrian/bicycle)
o Main Street overpass
o Main Street Underpass
General traffic/pedestrian/bicycle
o Dayton St New Ferry Terminal
o Main Street Ferry Overpass 1 (Full Build)
o Main Street Ferry Overpass 2 (Minimum Build)
o Main Street Ferry Underpass
Mr. Schaefer reviewed the Level 2 Alternative Evaluation Criteria:
Purpose & Need
1. Reliable emergency response
2. Reduce ferry delays
3. Reduce delays and conflicts at crossings
4. Safe/efficient passenger connections
Other Function
5. Emergency evacuation
6. Urban design and community goals
7. Consistent with transportation operations
Implementation
8. Fundable and permittable
9. Temporary construction impacts
10. Environmental effects
11. Address sea level rise impacts
He provided information regarding the three public meetings held to date:
November 18
o 116 attendees
o 326 online visits
o 259 unique visitors
o 54 comment submittals
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 16
January 27
o 83 attendees
o 38 newcomers
o 175 online visits
o 131 unique visitors
o 33 comment submittals
May 12
o 58 attendees
o 28 newcomers
o 268 online visits
o 191 unique visitors
o 20 comment submittals
Councilmember Tibbott recalled at the May 12 public meeting, he asked WSDOT representatives how
often traffic has been a problem for loading ferries. Their response was it was minimal, they have an over
90% on-time schedule. This raised the question to him how necessary it was to have a solution for loading
ferries when it did not seem to be a problem; the primary issue was emergency, pedestrian and bicycle
access. Mr. Schaefer agreed there was some slack in the ferry schedule; they eliminated some sailings
providing more turnaround time and ability to absorb delays. However, traffic is increasing and they may
add sailings reducing the turnaround time which could increase delays. Mr. Williams commented the
Director of Ferries and the Regional WSDOT Director are members of the Task Force, and several other
Ferries representatives attend Task Force meetings; WSDOT is very interested in this project. He recalled
WSDOT totally supported Edmonds Crossing which was a very large project that ended up being too
expensive. The net effect of Edmonds Crossing would have been to allow loading/unloading of ferries
without interference from the railroad. He did foresee any lack of commitment on WSDOT’s part, they
would like to have the problem of the train tracks removed. WSDOT just started their long range ferry
plan, and this analysis will coordinate with their planning efforts.
Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding of Mr. Williams’ comments that WSDOT would
prioritize a vehicle crossing in addition to pedestrians and emergency access. Mr. Schaefer answered yes,
noting Ferries anticipates costs for rehabilitating the existing terminal and some of those costs may be
avoided as part of one of the alternatives. Mr. Williams commented any of larger projects will require
State funding partners such as the Ferries Division as well as Transportation. He recalled the State as well
as federal transportation funds were the primary contributors to Edmonds Crossing; he expected that same
commitment to any large project that Edmonds sought to develop. At some point the City will have
guided the project to a point where consensus has been achieved locally and with the State; he did not see
the City delivering a project of this size locally, the State would end up taking on the project therefore it
needed to be one they were enthusiastic about.
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the hourly distribution of emergency calls and gate closures for a
period of five years, not one year. She asked whether the emergency was defined or whether they were
911 calls. Mr. Schaefer answered they were 911 calls which are primarily emergency medical. He learned
last week in a meeting with FD1 that they did not include calls to Marine 16 in this data which total about
40-50/year, doubling the number of calls shown in the graph. Mr. Williams commented it was difficult to
use the boat moored at the marina if personnel are unable to reach it, noting it was similar to having an
engine on other side of the tracks, the key is the ability for personnel to reach it.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled Edmonds Crossing was a pie in sky because the plan was to get rid of
the Mukilteo dock. Now that a new dock is being constructed at Mukilteo, she did not foresee WSDOT
having the money to move the ferry terminal.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 17
Councilmember Mesaros referred to the map of options and asked for a description of the Admiral Way
overpass and the merits of that location. Mr. Schaefer said although it may seem out of the way for
emergency response, it is a distinct location and it is screened from view or back-dropped visually by
hillside. It can drop into the Port property which may provide flexibility for a landing. It would follow the
Unocal access road along the bottom of the hill, climb to an overpass structure, clear the to-be-relocated
Willow Creek and the railroad and drop down into the edge of Port parking area. Councilmember
Mesaros asked whether it would have pedestrian access. Mr. Schaefer said it would be routinely used for
pedestrian and bicycle access and could accommodate an emergency vehicle when necessary.
Councilmember Mesaros commented another benefit of that alternative is the ability to circumnavigate
the marsh. Mr. Schaefer said the ability to tie it into the trails, through marina and Marina Beach Park was
identified as a community amenity. Mr. Williams said the same could be said for the Edmonds Street
alternative; it would be available for emergency vehicles to provide aid on the west side of the tracks as
well as allow pedestrians and bicycles to access waterfront amenities. Councilmember Mesaros
commented that alternative did not circumnavigate the marsh. Mr. Schaefer said the grades in all
alternatives provide ADA access.
Councilmember Teitzel asked if the Dayton Street Overpass would require Port property and demolition
of existing buildings. Mr. Schaefer agreed it would require some property but would not require any
demolition. It would launch from the north side of Dayton along the edge of the Salish Crossing property,
climb over the parking area south of the rail station, diagonally over the intersection and drop into the
Port property behind their sign. It would encroach into the yard area of new Jacobson Marine but would
not impact their building.
Council President Johnson commented one of the advantages of this presentation is it gives the public an
opportunity to hear everything that has been considered to date, especially those not able to attend public
meetings or visit the website. She asked where the Level 2 evaluation criteria were firm. Mr. Schaefer
answered they were drafted and presented to the community at the last meeting. Some comments were
received although fewer than at past meetings which is the reason the online open house was extended an
additional week and another notice issued.
Council President Johnson observed the language on the working draft page and the criteria were similar
but not exactly the same. Mr. Schaefer advised the language on the working draft had to be more brief;
the language on the working draft page is not the criteria, it is the purpo se and need. He pointed out there
are multiple components of each criterion. In Level 1 the consultant team did the first assessment against
the criteria which was then validated by the Task Force. In Level 2 the consultant team is providing
information and the Task Force is taking the first cut at the rating.
Council President Johnson offered to provide Mr. Schaefer send her notes. She recalled an operational
issue that has been discussed intermittently over the last 10 years was having a ferry reservation system
on the Edmonds-Kingston route. She suggested that be considered in this effort.
Councilmember Nelson (Co-Chair of the Task Force) recognized how hard the Task Force and and Mr.
Schaefer have been working.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
2. DISCUSSION OF WHETHER TO CONTINUE CITY'S PRACTICE OF CONDUCTING
QUASI-JUDICIAL LAND USE HEARINGS
Senior Planner Kernen Lien said this topic was discussed at the retreat and the May 10 Council meeting.
Currently, there are three ways a land use action can come before the City Council for a quasi -judicial
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 18
decision under a closed record review: 1) site specific rezone, 2) appeal of Type III-B decision (ADB or
Hearing Examiner), and 3) public agency variance request. The Woodway Playfields quasi-judicial
hearing was an appeal of a public agency variance request.
The three issues the Council requested further information on included, 1) the history of quasi-judicial
decisions before the Council, 2) recent decisions by the Council, and 3) what other jurisdictions are doing.
With regard to the history, Mr. Lien explained the current code framework was established in 1980 and
since then the City Council has been doing quasi-judicial hearings for appeals of Hearing Examiner, ADB
and public agency variance requests. Prior to that time, the City had a Board of Adjustment, a 7-member
board that heard variances, condition use permits, etc., things the Hearing Examiner now hears. Decisions
of the Board of Adjustment went to Superior Court.
In 2009 the City established the current process framework, Type I through V permits. At that time there
was considerable discussion regarding the Council’s involvement in the quasi-judicial decision process.
Discussion was focused primarily on the Type III-B decisions by the Hearing Examiner and ADB. He
referred to minutes from the 2009 update that were emailed to Council today. Also included in the packet,
Exhibit 3, is a list of pros and cons prepared by Rob Chave in 2009 regarding Council involvement in
quasi-judicial decisions.
When the Title 20 update was passed in June 2009, Hearing Examiner and ADB appeals were taken out
of the City Council and became appeals to Superior Court. At the first Council meeting in January 2010,
an interim ordinance was passed that again inserted the Council into closed record appeals. The
discussion at that time did not focus on rezones or public agency variances, only appeals and whether to
have oral or written arguments to Council on appeals as it is easier to track whether something is in the
record when the record is written versus oral. A permanent ordinance was passed in September 2010.
Mr. Lien reviewed quasi-judicial decisions since 2010 in the 3 categories:
Seven site specific rezones
o Planning Board makes recommendation to City Council
o Council upheld 6
o One was denied on a 3-3 vote
Four public agency variance requests
Council approved most requests
Woodway Playfields was more complex and included five permits
o Hearing Examiner recommended denial of two
o By the time it reached the Council, the School District withdrew those two
o Council essentially upheld Hearing Examiner decision and added a few conditions of
approval to the Hearing Examiner’s recommendation
Type III-B decisions
o Four projects
o 5 appeals (Building 10 appealed to City Council twice)
o 2 reversed
o Regarding Building 10, the City Council reversed the ADB decision and a critical area
variance request
With regard to other jurisdictions’ quasi-judicial procedures, Mr. Lien referred to Exhibit 4, explaining
most jurisdictions have a quasi-judicial process for site specific rezones. Some include an appeal to City
Council from the Hearing Examiner, others do not.
Councilmember Mesaros asked how many times a City Council decision has been appealed to Superior
Court. Mr. Lien answered in the last 10 years, Building 10 and Woodway Playfields were appealed to
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 19
Superior Court. There was a settlement agreement for Building 10 so no decision was issued and the City
prevailed with regard to the Woodway Playfields. City Attorney Jeff Taraday explained the court never
ruled on Building 10 decision so it was unknown whether the Council’s decision would have been upheld
had the court ruled. That project was of a magnitude that had the Council’s decision not been upheld,
there could have been real damages resulting from that application process.
Councilmember Teitzel recalled the Council previously discussed the cost to appeal a decision to Superior
Court versus to the City Council. Mr. Lien answered the fee for an appeal of a Type III-B decision to City
Council is $500. Mr. Taraday said the filing fee for Superior Court is $250; the cost could be much more
if the appellant hired an attorney.
Councilmember Buckshnis recommended the Council read the 2009 minutes. She commended Mr. Lien
for his research and for summarizing it for the public.
Councilmember Mesaros commented there could also be attorney costs for an appeal to City Council if
the appellant chose to hire an attorney.
Councilmember Nelson thanked Lien for the summary. He recalled going through one public agency
variance request and found the information regarding other decisions very comprehensive and helpful.
Council President Johnson commented there is also a cost to the City Council for the more elaborate
appeals that come to the City Council. For example, Burnstead and Building 10, the City engaged
separate counsel for the City Council at a cost of approximately $5,000 per case. There is also the expense
of time; they were not easy decisions and required many meetings. She said it makes sense for some
quasi-judicial proceedings to come to the City Council, those that are quick and efficient. However, for
the ones that seemingly take endless amounts of reading, study and evaluation, she preferred they go to
Superior Court because they usually end up in Superior Court anyway. She asked if a distinction could be
made in the Type III-B decisions between large and small application. She recalled two of the Type III-B
decisions were very small involving one property and two were very large and required tremendous time
and effort. Mr. Taraday said the City probably could distinguish; there would need to be criteria
established in advance for distinguishing between them. For example, the current categories of decisions
are not the universe of possible categories. One category the City Council is stuck with hearing is site
specific rezones.
Council President Johnson referred to the risk associated with Council serving in a quasi-judicial
capacity; if the City lost in an appeal to Superior Court, the City would be responsible for much more
than just the filing fee. Mr. Taraday explained the City could be required to pay damages if the City
Council’s decision was found to be arbitrary and capricious. In extreme cases Councilmembers as
individuals can be held personally liable for decisions made when serving in a quasi-judicial capacity. In
its legislative capacity, the Council has nearly absolute personally immunity. In a quasi-judicial capacity,
there is the theoretical possibility of a personal liability lawsuit because the immunity is only qualified not
absolute. For example, in the Mission Springs in Spokane Councilmembers were found not to be immune
from the personal suit filed against them.
Councilmember Tibbott thanked staff for the synopsis the Council received this afternoon and suggested
it be included in a future packet. Development Services Dir ector Shane Hope agreed it would.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled the Planning Board heard four quasi-judicial cases, three were
straightforward and the questions Planning Board Members asked provided material for the City Council.
One was more complex and the Planning Board needed more preparation to process it adequately. If the
Council continued to hear site specific rezones, he asked if they would still go to Planning Board for a
recommendation to City Council. Ms. Hope answered yes, the process would stay the same.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 20
Councilmember Tibbott recommended providing Planning Board enough notice regarding upcoming
hearings so they do not engage with a project before it comes to Planning Board to avoid tainting the
process. He discussed this with two former Planning Board Members, one was in favor of the Council
moving away from quasi-judicial reviews and the other was in favor of retain the Council in that role so
he was able to see benefits on both sides, especially with rezones. If the Council continued to hear site
specific rezones, he recommended identifying ways to improve the process; for example, inform the
Council in advance so they do not engage with proponents or opponents.
Councilmember Tibbott preferred the Council not hear more extensive appeals. While on the Planning
Board, he felt members were asked to provide input regarding topics they were not trained for. There was
one lawyer on the Planning Board who was able to look at the issue from a legal perspective but other
Planning Board Members were not. There are benefits from a diversity of views looking at a project and
offers insight; however, on complex appeals that require a great deal of study, he preferred to delegate
them to the Hearing Examiner or other body. Ms. Hope agreed the Planning Board needed to have the
proper training; staff has been more proactively recently in helping the Planning Board understand their
role and legal requirements. Staff will consider how to distinguish between small and large projects for
example according to the value of the project, property size, etc.
With regard to whether the Planning Board would continue to make recommendations to the City Council
regarding rezone, Mr. Taraday said they could but they do not have to; it could be done by the Hearing
Examiner.
Quoting Councilmember Councilmember Nelson, Councilmember Mesaros said citizens elected
Councilmember to primarily be legislators, not judges. The skill set Councilmembers bring to the Council
is for pondering legislative opportunities and making choices for citizens; serving in a quasi-judicial role
puts the Council in a difficult position, a role they not be as equipped for.
Councilmember Nelson asked Mr. Taraday to explain qualified immunity versus absolute immunity,
pointing out if Councilmembers are making decisions for which they are personally liable, they need to
know what that entails. Mr. Taraday offered to provide a more in-depth analysis in writing. With qualified
immunity, a Councilmember is not as fully protected personally from a suit; although there is a decent
chance of having a suit dismissed, in extreme case a Councilmember could have personal liability. The
prospect of a Councilmember being sued is not just a theoretically possibility; a Councilmember was
named in the Building 10 lawsuit.
Councilmember Teitzel said he was also concerned about the Council’s skill set to serve judges. It gives
him pause personally to act in quasi-judicial fashion, reviewing the record to determine whether an
Administrative Law Judge or Hearing Examiner made a legal error. He felt ill equipped to make that
decision as he was not an attorney and wanted to avoid being in that role in the future. He agreed the
Council could be involved in site specific rezones.
3. TITLE 19 BUILDING AND FIRE CODE UPDATES
Development Services Director Shane Hope introduced Building Official Leif Bjorback and Fire Marshal
Kevin Zweber. She referred to a pile of books that represented thousands of pages; the ordinance
summarizes key changes made to the code based on State requirements. Following the presentation and
Q&A, she requested the ordinance be forwarded to the Consent Agenda.
Mr. Bjorback explained every three years the International Building Code (IBC) is updated and
republished by the International Code Council. The IBC is a family of codes including commercial,
residential fire, plumbing, energy, etc. that are used in most areas of the country including the State of
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 21
Washington. The codes are adopted with certain changes at the State level and mandated by RCW 19.27
to be adopted and enforced by all jurisdictions within the State. The 2015 IBC along with the State
amendments become effective statewide July 1, 2016. The proposed revisions to ECDC Title 19 will
adopt the 2015 codes along with the State amendments. In addition, Edmonds-specific amendments are
proposed to provide clarification as well as better coordination with other portions of the City code. No
substantial changes to the Building or Fire Code are being proposed at this time.
Attachment C contains the ordinance text as proposed, including comments in the margin explaining the
changes. The two main building codes in the City are the IBC and the International Residential Code
(IRC). Mr. Bjorback reviewed:
Changes to the IBC:
o Total reorganization of Chapter 5 which identifies how big, tall a building can be and the
requirements
o Rewrite of Chapter 5, not many impacts to actual building construction
o Accessibility requirements increased in scope and specifics, most significantly for
recreational facilities (amusement rides, boat slips, swimming pools)
o The Building Code and the Existing Building Code have had duplicate language regarding
alterations to existing building such as remodels, change of occupancy, etc. In this update, the
IBC dispensed with the chapter because it was duplicated in the Existing Building Code.
o New appendix for solar readiness developed by State and available for voluntary adoption by
jurisdictions with regard to solar zones on a roof, roof penetration, structural design, etc.
Changes to the IRC:
o Swimming pools for single family homes are now regulated by the International Swimming
Pool and Spa Code. Regulations previously in an appendix in the IRC.
o Expanded regulations regarding solar provisions, increased scoping, specific regulations
regarding access and array
o New provisions in energy code to accommodate State and Federal mandates for increased
energy efficiency
State amendments
o Added definition of nightclub and improve safety requirements
o Align with regulations for licensed care facilities and medical facilities and Department of
Health
o Accessibility
o Energy code tweaks
Fire Marshal Zweber reviewed changes in the International Fire Code (IFC).
Authorization can be given to begin emergency repairs without a permit and apply for permit the
next business day
Decorative open flame tables
Compressed CO2 - Over 100 pounds requires alarm
Local: Banned sky lanterns
Fire code gives him authority make fire lanes wider, added authority to make smaller
Councilmember Buckshnis asked about construction in a designated floodway and the difference between
a flood hazard areas, a floodway and a floodplain. Mr. Bjorback said a flood hazard area is the general
term for all areas that flood; a floodway is related to a river or stream and any adjacent land area expected
to be inundated in a flood event. The City has very few properties that are in floodways. Councilmember
Buckshnis asked if the critical area ordinance would trump locating a house in floodplain. Mr. Bjorback
answered he believed it would. After consulting with Mr. Lien, it was agreed to retain the language in the
IBC.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 22
Councilmember Teitzel recalled controversy in the past regarding the definition of director; in Section
19.10.020 director is defined as, director shall mean director of development services as well as any
authorized representative of the director. Section 23.40.230 of the Critical Area Ordinance defines
director as, director means the City of Edmonds development services director or his/her designee. He
requested the definitions be consistent with the recently approved CAO. Ms. Hope said that could be done
although it is a distinction without a difference, it would not be interpreted differently.
It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item for approval on the Consent Agenda.
9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Earling reported on the unveiling of the spray pad; hundreds of people, mostly children, have been
visiting the spray pad. It was a great opening as reported in an article in today’s Herald. With regard to the
Proclamation for Music4Life, he invited anyone with an easily restorable instrument to contact his office
for contact information for Music4Life.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Nelson said he and his two children have visited the spray pad twice and they love it.
Next, he referred to the oil train derailment in Mosier, Oregon, relaying the words of their fire chief that
they dodged a bullet because they did not have the resources to equip themselves to address even a minor
oil incident. Sixteen oil cars derailed carrying Bakken oil which has been documented to be more
explosive than crude oil. Although the oil was being transported in modern, safer steel cars, 42,000
gallons of oil were released and it took 15 fire departments to put the fire out. Ten oil trains a week pass
through Snohomish County carrying a million gallons of Bakken oil. In future discussions regarding fire
services, he urged consideration of the risks that face the community and the necessary resources to
respond.
Councilmember Teitzel reported on Sunday’s presentation of a plaque to the North Sound Church
designating the church on the local registry of historic places. The church appreciates the plaque and the
designation and are excited to be on the local registry.
Councilmember Buckshnis agreed the community needs to be conscious about what is happening with oil
and the takers. She thanked all involved for the wonderful Waterfront Festival last weekend. It was a a
fun, well attended event. She expressed appreciation to the Port for allowing the use of their property.
Council President Johnson announced Edmonds was selected by Western Washington University and
AWC as a participant in Western’s collegiate program. She listed the ten projects that the students will
work on with the City during the next year:
Sea level rise mitigation planning
Edmonds Memorial Cemetery inventory and mapping
Stella’s Landing environmental assessment
Public relations campaign for the 4th Avenue cultural corridor
Zero waste and food waste programs
Edmonds Mash environmental enhancement
Wastewater treatment plant information brochure and tour materials
Downtown business tourism local application
Playful city initiative
Green business program
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 7, 2016
Page 23
A contract as well as further information regarding the projects will be presented to the Council in the
near future. Council President Johnson reported installation of the art feature, Illuminous Forest, has
begun on the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor.
Councilmember Mesaros reported on the Memorial Day ceremony at the Edmonds Cemetery attended by
Mayor Earling and Councilmembers Teitzel, Nelson, Fraley-Monillas, Johnson and himself.
Approximately 400 people attended the wonderful ceremony, an event the City should be proud of. The
highlight was a student essay.
Councilmember Tibbott reported on last week’s Town Hall meeting at the Meadowdale clubhouse, an
opportunity to hear about the City as well as the neighborhood’s concerns which include the Haines
Wharf residue. He was hopeful that could be addressed in the coming years.
Councilmember Tibbott referred to the arts magazine published by the Meadowdale High School Art
Department depicting artwork by local high students including a drawing by City Clerk Scott Passey’s
son.
11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
This item was not needed.
12. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION
This item was not needed.
13. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:54 p.m.