08/19/2014 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
August 19, 2014
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:45 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Diane Buckshnis, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Lora Petso, Councilmember (arrived 7:44 p.m.)
Strom Peterson, Councilmember
Joan Bloom, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember (arrived 6:53 p.m.)
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation Director
Scott James, Finance Director
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir.
Doug Fair, Municipal Court Judge
Joan Ferebee, Court Administrator
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Rob English, City Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Gerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
At 6:45 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding
pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). He stated that the executive session was
scheduled to last approximately 15 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the
Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session.
Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling, and Councilmembers Johnson,
Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson, Petso, Bloom and Mesaros. Others present were City Attorney Jeff
Taraday, Public Works Director Phil Williams, City Engineer Rob English and City Clerk Scott Passey.
The executive session concluded at 7:00 p.m.
Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:02 p.m. and led the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of
Councilmember Petso.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PETERSON, TO REMOVE ITEM 12 FROM THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Petso was not present for the vote.)
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 1
Council President Buckshnis explained that due to tonight's lengthy agenda, Item 12 will be rescheduled
to the September 2 meeting.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER AS AMENDED.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Petso was not present for the vote.)
4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
(Councilmember Petso was not present for the vote.)The agenda items approved are as follows:
A. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 4, 2014
B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #209872 THROUGH #210012 DATED AUGUST 7,
2014 FOR $1,881,841.10 AND CLAIM CHECKS #210013 THROUGH #210129 DATED
AUGUST 14, 2014 FOR $364,923.42. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND
CHECKS #61120 THROUGH 61135 FOR $473,349.33, BENEFIT CHECKS #61136
THROUGH #61144 FOR $90,906.53 AND WIRE PAYMENTS FOR $308,381.98 FOR THE
PERIOD OF JULY 16, 2014 THROUGH JULY 31, 2014
C. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM ERIC T. OVERTON
(AMOUNT UNDETERMINED), NANCY COHEN ($116.99), AND JOHN HEIGHWAY
($6,900.00)
D. 2014 JUNE QUARTERLY BUDGETARY FINANCIAL REPORT
E. DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE A BUSINESS LICENSE LATE FEE AMENDMENT
F. REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 220 7TH AVE CURB RAMP
AND CURB/GUTTER PROJECT AND ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
G. AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE 2014
CITYWIDE STORM DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT TO D&G BACKHOE,
INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $337,759.43
H. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO APPROVE ACCEPTANCE AND RECORDING
OF A QUIT CLAIM DEED FOR 740 15TH ST SW
L PFD QUARTERLY REPORT
J. INFORMATION SERVICES UPDATE
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Charles Gold, Edmonds, on behalf of the hundreds of Edmonds citizens who have voiced support for
the train trench proposal, thanked Mayor Earling for authorizing an engineer study to assess the initial
costs and challenges of a train trench. He thanked Councilmembers who have engaged with Mayor
Earling on this subject and helped the proposal reach this point. He thanked the citizens of Edmonds for
their positive response to a train trench. It will take commitment and skill to put together the building
blocks politically and financially to make Edmonds a showplace of targeted beneficial City planning. The
stakes are high; without a serious, thorough and credible proposal to BNSF or if a multi-year alternative
study is conducted, Edmonds will be double or triple tracked and there will be large overpasses along the
waterfront. He recalled when he first introduced this concept over two years ago, former Community
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 2
Services/Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton said this would be worth twice the cost of
Edmonds Crossing. Mayor Earling explained a professional engineer is being engaged to do an analysis
of potential challenges, benefits, and costs. A timeline has not been established.
Jim Wassall, Edmonds, resident on Sunset Avenue resident, spoke against Agenda Item 11. He
questioned the cost of the proof -of -concept, anticipating paint and the labor to apply it would not be
cheap. He was opposed to the entire Sunset Avenue walkway project and viewed this as just another
attempt at getting it approved and paid for by someone else. He also expressed concern with the City's
use of the sidewalk on the east side of Sunset Avenue that is on his property. Neither he nor the previous
owners have been compensated for the City's use of the property.
6. WSDOT LANDSLIDE MITIGATION WORKING GROUP PRESENTATION
Ron Pate, WSDOT, acknowledged there have been concerns regarding the potential for landslides on the
rail line north of Seattle. Significant problems during the 2012/2013 rainy season sparked discussion in
Olympia about how to make the situation better. WSDOT does not own the rail line but sponsors the
Amtrak Cascade service and Sound Transit operates trains in that corridor. The working group originally
began with four participants, Amtrak, WSDOT, BNSF and Sound Transit. Today there are over 17
participants. The original goal was to look at root causes/effects of the landslides; there was a great deal
of debate whether it was just terrain shifting, land management practices, etc. As the group considered
contributing factors, it was determined water was the root cause of moving slides onto the tracks, delaying
trains and causing significant safety concerns.
The working group has worked hard over the last couple years to develop short term and long term
strategies; today they have an action plan for mitigation. He provided the Council written material that
included the action plan. The plan has been touted by BNSF as one of the only places in the nation they
have seen this done, bringing the state, cities, municipalities, companies and a commuter agency together
to find solutions to make the problem better. Everyone recognizes the problems cannot be completely
fixed due to the terrain but steps can be taken to mitigate, make things better and institute better
preventive measures. The work group has met over 24 times, their next meeting is September 19;
Woodway recently joined the group.
BNSF has agreed to waive permit fees for property owners who want to bring stormwater under the tracks
in a way that will prevent washouts. Two slope stabilization projects have been constructed. There has
been a great deal of public outreach and an open house is scheduled in Edmonds on October 9. When
asked by KING 5 the simplest thing property owners on the slope can do, he said grass clippings. When
touring the rail line, they noticed people throw grass clippings over side which then become saturated
with water. Other things property owners can do will be shared at the workshop.
David Smelser, Program Manager, WSDOT, emphasized the importance of local agencies in this
process; without them it is difficult to get things off the ground. He appreciated Edmonds' commitment
and offer to host a workshop. Workshops have been held in Mukilteo where a majority of the issues exist
and Everett also hosted a workshop this summer. He referred to a list of participants in the Landslide
Mitigation Action Plan, the executive summary, and short term, medium term and long term actions. All
the short term strategies have been implemented, they are in the middle of the medium/intermediate
strategies and he acknowledged there are challenges with the long term strategies although there are large
benefits. He encouraged the Council to review the action plan to see if there were ways they could help
move the actions forward.
He referred to a brochure developed for homeowners, an amalgamation of all the best practices for slopes
and stability, particularly those that apply to the rail line. The open house will include representatives
from BNSF and the City and homeowners are invited to attend. At the open houses in Mukilteo and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 3
Everett, there were many instances where it was the first time a conversation had occurred with a BNSF
representative that could make decisions, the local agency and the homeowner. WSDOT's role is to
facilitate discussion because they do not own the rail line or any property nor establish the regulations.
Mr. Smelser relayed they received $16.1 million in federal funding to address areas. He referred to a map,
advising two projects have been completed and a third, near the Port of Everett, will be underway next
week. Preliminary engineering approval and additional funding was recently received for the three
projects located in the center of the rail line. They looked at the history of slides over the past 80 years
and flew the coast from north of Seattle to Everett with lidar and photogrammetry; that information was
used to choose locations where the most frequent slides occur. He referred to a photograph of one the
techniques used to prevent slides, a catchment wall, explaining some of the catchment walls are already
full. The new catchment walls are set out and are of height that BNSF can clean out behind them. There is
also a slide fence on top; if the slide fence is hit and the low voltage electrical current broken, it triggers
lights to stop the train until the slide can be evaluated. Other techniques include dewatering the slope and
carrying the drainage tightline to the ditch and removing debris from the slope. He explained grass
clippings get weighed down and the extra weight can cause a slide. He summarized two projects have
been completed, one will be constructed this year and three will be constructed next year, completing that
segment of the federal program.
Mayor Earling advised the pamphlets will be available tomorrow at the front desk on the main floor of
City Hall.
Council President Buckshnis thanked WSDOT for the update, commenting on the importance of
transportation to economic development. She asked for examples of what has been done to mitigate issues
caused by stormwater. Mr. Smelser responded there are several ways to approach it. One of the first was
BNSF agreed to handle stormwater from any property owner that is properly conveyed to their ditch via
an engineered system as well as waive permit fees which total approximately $3500. Another example,
some of the low impact development (LID) techniques that put water into the ground may not be the best
method to use close to slope. They worked with Mukilteo to make decisions where to apply LIDS in new
development. They also facilitated a discussion between BNSF and Mukilteo to arrive at a solution
regarding a city -owned culvert. He summarized no promises but they are willing to help facilitate any
discussions and handle stormwater in a way that works for the rail line, the property owner and City.
Council President Buckshnis referred to typical mitigation strategies such as stabilization, noting there are
some issues with stabilization on banks in Edmonds although they may not cause landslides. She asked
who pays for stabilization. Mr. Smelser answered the federal program is paying the cost in the six areas
he identified. BNSF has paid for some of it on other occasions. BNSF owns up to 200 feet of right-of-way
at the base of the hill but someone else nearly always owns the slope. BNSF is not allowed to work off
their property. There is potential for liability for something that happens on property that affects BNSF
property. BNSF likes to work cooperatively with the property owners and municipalities; there have been
several instances where BNSF has done their own projects. BNSF typically looks at high impact areas but
he would be happy to talk to BNSF regarding any low cost projects.
Council President Buckshnis referred to erosion at the dog park from the water that has nearly reached the
BNSF fence. She asked whether the City or BNSF would be responsible for stabilization if the erosion
continues. Mr. Smelser suggested emailing him with any specific areas and he will coordinate BNSF and
City representatives looking at the situation.
Councilmember Bloom asked whether any landslide areas have been identified in the Edmonds area. Mr.
Smelser answered there are literally hundreds of areas identified; he offered to provide a map that
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 4
identified all the historic slides. Geologists have said the bank has been migrating into Puget Sound for
thousands or millions of years and that will likely continue.
Councilmember Bloom commented residents at Pt. Edwards have seen some sloughing or mini
landslides. She asked whether he could recommend something to stabilize that slope and whether that was
one of the landslide hazard area. Mr. Smelser offered to talk with her and/or the property owners. Mayor
Earling explained it is just south of the Port of Edmonds. Mr. Smelser explained there are general things
in the Mitigation Report as well as resources. WSDOT does not give engineering advice, everyone has to
hire their own licensed engineer and he also recommended hiring a geologist and perhaps an arborist.
7. LEAD COURT CLERK JOB DESCRIPTION
Parks & Recreation/Human Resources Reporting Director Carrie Hite explained this job description was
reviewed by the Public Safety & Personnel Committee and Councilmember Fraley-Monillas requested it
be forwarded to Council for a brief presentation. She explained an operational need has been identified in
the Court to work a Court Clerk out of class as a Lead Court Clerk. Establishing a Lead Court Clerk
position will also assist with promotion ability and succession planning within the Court.
Municipal Court Judge Doug Fair explained early this year the Court Administrator was out for four
months on medical leave. At about the same time, the Probation Officer, who has worked for the court for
25 years and has been the de facto lead when the Court Administrator is out, gave two weeks' notice and
moved out of state. A temporary Court Administrator was brought in and the most experienced Court
Clerk was moved into a temporary lead position to provide backup for the temporary administrator,
provide institutional memory and provide some experience to assist her with the development process to
become a Court Administrator. This worked extremely well. A new Probation Officer was hired but he
does not have the institutional memory and is not familiar with the court's operating system. Establishing
a Lead Court Clerk position provides an incentive for Clerks to stay by providing opportunity for
promotion, backup for the Court Administrator and the Probation Officer, institutional memory and a
great training for succession.
Court Administrator Joan Ferebee commented this position also frees her up to work on establishing a
paperless court which would save the City a lot of money. A paperless court would allow all information
to be emailed, paperwork scanned, and all the files would be on the computer rather than paper files. As
tickets increase, a paperless court would allow the same level of level of quality and staff to be
maintained.
Ms. Hite clarified this is not a new position; a current Court Clerk position will be reclassified. The cost
will be $2500/year which is within the Court's current budget authority.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE JOB DESCRIPTION AND RECLASSIFICATION OF THE
COURT CLERK POSITION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Petso was
not present for the vote.)
8. EMPLOYEE EXPENSES, VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION AND REIMBURSEMENTS POLICY
Finance Director Scott James relayed that the Finance Committee reviewed the policy and made a few
amendments. The policy is intended to add clarity to the reimbursement policies in the personnel policy
such as the volunteer recognition, staff recognition events, etc. that include light refreshments. The heart
of the issue is reimbursing expenses where Staff, the Council or the Mayor are conducting City business;
it is not intended for birthday or retirement parties.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 5
Council President Buckshnis recalled a question raised with the auditor last year about requiring people to
sign in for events such an open house, volunteer appreciation, etc. Mr. James relayed the policy states the
attendees need to be tracked. He recommended having a sign -in sheet to provide further documentation
that the expense is legitimate.
Council President Buckshnis recalled the former Finance Director indicated there was $7/person limit; the
policy refers to a reasonable limit. Mr. James explained the IRS has a de minimis fringe benefit rule that
states anything over $100 is no longer considered a de minimis/fringe benefit and becomes a taxable
event. He did not expect the City to pay $100 to recognize volunteers or staff, if it is over $100, it is a
taxable event. The policy list things that are taxable and non-taxable, he was unable to find any mention
of a $7/person limit. Council President Buckshnis recalled the former Finance Director indicated that was
stated by the local auditor.
Councilmember Johnson recalled in her discussion with the former Finance Director, the limit was under
$10/person. Mr. James relayed in his conversation with the Office of Financial Management, they did not
have any recollection of an amount but referred him to the IRS' de minimis fringe benefit rule.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled in her experience the State had guidelines for meal purchases
which were similar to the IRS rules regarding breakfast, lunch and dinner. She was satisfied with the
policy but felt it left open the amount that would be paid for an event. She preferred to establish a not to
exceed limit. Mr. James referred to clauses that the Mayor has the authority to approve which he
acknowledged provide some leeway. A dollar amount could be added to describe "reasonable."
Councilmember Mesaros asked whether an amount is established in the budget for these types of
expenses. Mr. James answered the issue arose as a result of emails regarding whether there was a budget
for these types of expenses for a Tree Board meeting. A budget authority could be established for each
board and commission.
Councilmember Mesaros commented in other organizations there is an annual budget established for
meetings. Rather than an individual limit, he preferred to establish an annual amount.
Councilmember Bloom relayed her understanding of the policy was there were not funds for individual
commission meetings but funds for open houses. Mr. James answered the policy refers to board or
commission meetings where City business is conducted. He referred to the narrative at the beginning of
the policy regarding what is reimbursable, individuals, their office/capacity, what the business is and who
is being reimbursed and what is reimbursable. With regard to special events, the policy refers to open
house, anniversaries; the policy also specifically refers to business meals.
Councilmember Bloom referred to the sentence regarding open houses, City anniversary celebrations and
hosting delegations from other jurisdictions. With regard to open houses, she assumed boards and
commissions were not allowed money for food at regular meetings but could be for an open house where
the public was invited. She asked how reimbursement was handled if a board member paid for the food
themselves. Mr. James the proposed policy states an Employee Reimbursement Form is completed and
receipts and documentation provided. The name of the form could be modified to remove "employee." He
suggested the Department Head, Mayor or Council President approve the expense.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas suggested establishing a budget for each department during the budget
process. Councilmember Mesaros suggested during the budget process, staff could look at opportunities
and past experience in establishing a budget. Directors could have the authority to approve expenditures
for refreshments associated with those activities. He agreed with Councilmember Bloom that
refreshments are not served at every meeting, but there many occasions where the need arises and there
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 6
should be funds for reimbursement. He summarized establishing a budget authority would limit the
amount. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed with his suggestion.
Council President Buckshnis relayed there are plans to establish a budget authority for events. For
boards/commission, the volunteer would submit records to the Council Executive Assistant and she
would complete the form and submit for payment. Council President Buckshnis was uncertain how the
Mayor wanted to handle City departments.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the Mayor how he wanted to handle City departments. Mayor
Earling answered his intent was to spend as little money as possible. This type of policy needs a limit so
there are not endless expenses and that would be his intent for departments under his administration.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether Mayor Earling's intent would be one budget in his office
rather than individual department budgets. Mayor Earling said his preference would be one budget in his
office for departments and he will make the allocations.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO
APPROVE THE EMPLOYEE EXPENSES, VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION AND
REIMBURSEMENT POLICY.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether Councilmember Johnson's intent was to add a budget to
the policy or just hope everyone does the right thing. Mr. James suggested adding a 5th bullet on page 1
under Documentation, subject to the budget available to fund the event/meeting.
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO AMEND TO ADD A FIFTH BULLET AS DESCRIBED BY MR. JAMES, THAT
THE REIMBURSEMENT WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THE BUDGET AVAILABLE AND
PREAPPROVAL UNDER THE MAYOR'S AUTHORITY FOR DEPARTMENTS AND UNDER
THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT'S AUTHORITY FOR THE COUNCIL.
Councilmember Johnson commented she was uncertain how a preapproval would occur since the Tree
Board had never had open house before nor anticipated it in their budget. Councilmember Mesaros
explained in Councilmember Johnson's example, a representative of the Tree Board would seek
preapproval from the Mayor prior to event.
The amendment was restated as follows:
BULLET 5 WOULD READ, SUBJECT TO BUDGET AVAILABLE FOR EVENT AND
PREAPPROVAL BY MAYOR FOR STAFF -SPONSORED EVENTS AND BY COUNCIL
PRESIDENT FOR COUNCIL -SPONSORED EVENTS. AMENDMENT CARRIED (6-0-1),
COUNCILMEMBER PETSO ABSTAINED.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (6-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO ABSTAINED.
9. PUBLIC WORKS QUARTERLY PROJECT REPORT
City Engineer Rob English explained this would be an overview of the larger projects under construction
and projects that have been underway since May 2014. He provided photographs of the stormwater
detention vault and subgrading for the pavement at the Five Corners Roundabout, explaining the first lift
of asphalt pavement has been placed on the northern end of the intersection and work is progressing on
the southern end including curb, gutter sidewalk and pavement. The contractor anticipates the intersection
can be put into roundabout operation in early September. Even though the center of the road will not be
complete, it will be signed and striped to operate as a roundabout. There will be flaggers at the
intersection to assist motorists.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 7
He provided a photograph of chip seal done on 2nd Avenue as part of the 2014 pavement preservation
program and a photograph of the fog seal coat. Chip sealing was also done on 72nd and 73rd. The chip seal
is a pilot project; fog sealing was done on two of the three streets in order evaluate the difference in wear.
He provided a photograph of a signal cabinet; the City received grant funds to replace antiquated traffic
signal equipment at five intersections. He displayed a photograph of the Railroad Avenue sewer main
replacement project that also included installation of a water main. The project began in late May and has
reached substantial completion. He provided a summary of the projects:
• Transportation Projects
0 5 corners Roundabout ($2.93M)
■ Status: 50% complete, expect to complete by end of October
o Pavement preservation program ($1.2M)
■ Status: chip seal complete, overlay work August/September
o Citywide Signal Improvement ($210k)
■ Status: 4 of 5 intersection complete
• Utility projects
o Sewer main replacement phase 1 ($1.2M)
■ Status: Substantial complete
o Sewer main phase 2 ($1.7M)
■ Status: 20% complete
0 2015 watermain replacement ($1.47M)
■ Status: construction underway
With regard to the Fishing Pier Rehabilitation Project, Mr. English recalled in February 2014 the Council
approved an Inter -local Agreement with the Department of Fish and Wildlife for a $190,000 grant to
begin the design work for rehabilitating the fishing pier. The statements of qualifications for that project
were received last week and the process to select a consultant to begin the design work is underway.
Councilmember Bloom referred to Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming $10,000 on page 3 of the
report which states, The 2014 funds for this program are being allocated to the construction phase of the
mid -block pedestrian crossing along SR -104 (directly north of Pine St. / WSDOT project). She asked Mr.
Williams to reiterate the explanation he provided at the Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee
meeting regarding how the $10,000 was allocated to this project. Public Works Director Phil Williams
explained there was a lot interest, primarily by residents west of SR -104 who find it difficult cross SR -
104 due to the speeds and the width of the road. There is no crosswalk at Pine Street and the need has
existed for some time. In searching for funding and determining the cost, there were several
conversations, some facilitated by Mayor Earling, and the City approached WSDOT to inquire whether
they were interested in assisting with such a project. WSDOT applied and received funding for the project
and are executing the project. The crosswalk which will cost approximately $300,000, will be located
slightly north of the alignment of Pine Street for sight distance issues and will include retro -reflective
beacons for pedestrians that will help calm traffic and notify drivers of the crosswalk.
WSDOT contacted the City a few weeks ago indicating it would be easier for them to obtain the
construction money if they had a local partner and asked if the City could provide some funding. At that
time the $10,000 budgeted for 2014 traffic calming, which is an element of this project, had not been
allocated. In the past two years the funds had been used to purchase and install radar signs. As the
crosswalk relates to traffic calming, the City offered a $10,000 match on a $300,000 project to assist
WSDOT in acquiring construction funding.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 8
Councilmember Bloom recalled Mr. Williams saying Mayor Earling and Councilmember Peterson
advocated with the legislature for the funding for that project. Mr. Williams did not recall saying the
Mayor Earling or Councilmember Peterson lobbied the legislature for the funding but the City actively
worked the process through WSDOT.
Councilmember Bloom indicated she had several concerns with this. She recalled when the Council
reviewed the Sunset Avenue project in June, it was stated $16,000 was allocated in 2011 from the traffic
calming program. At that time she inquired about the criteria for the traffic calming program and did not
receive an answer. In conducting her own researching, she found approximately 19 pages on the traffic
calming program in the Transportation Comprehensive Plan which includes three phases. Phase 1,
resident's petition for local street traffic concerns and eight households are supposed to be on the petition.
She pointed out this is not a local street traffic concern; it is a state highway concern. The 19 pages
include a list of 23 prioritized traffic calming project; this crosswalk in not on that list. In addition, this
project is not on the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). She summarized this had not gone through
the proper public process and she did not support allocating $10,000 from the traffic calming program to a
major $300,000 project.
Councilmember Bloom asked who prioritized this project, commenting it did not seem to be a priority of
anyone except perhaps the residents at Pt. Edwards. She questioned why $10,000 from the 2014 traffic
calming program would be allocated to a $300,000 project which had not been vetted by the public, how
it became a priority when it did not meet the criteria of the traffic calming program and it was not on the
TIP. Mr. Williams explained the City was contacted by many more than eight citizens who live west of
SR -104. It arose as an emergent issue, it was related to traffic calming and he made the decision.
Councilmember Bloom clarified Mr. Williams made the decision to allocated $10,000 to the project. Mr.
Williams agreed he had. Councilmember Bloom asked whether the forms in the traffic calming program
were completed by those citizens and were the other phases were completed such the second phase, staff
and residents develop education and enforcement solutions or the third phase, staff reviews traffic
calming devices for funding, priority and technical feasibility. She observed none of these phases seem to
have been followed and none of the public process has happened.
Councilmember Bloom relayed her understanding that the Council had jurisdiction over the funds in the
traffic calming program. Mayor Earling explained opportunities arise that may not be on a list. There has
been considerable comment from the public, including people on the hill, looking for a safe way to cross
the street. He did not go to Olympia to advocate for the crosswalk; he did meet with WSDOT. This is a
rare opportunity; $10,000 for traffic calming that, although it may not be on the list, leverages a $300,000
project that will create safety for motorists and pedestrians.
Councilmember Petso asked if the project was on the Comprehensive Plan, TIP or CFP. Mr. Williams
answered he would need to check the CFP, it is possible. Councilmember Petso suggested putting this on
the Finance Committee agenda instead of continuing this discussion. She recalled parameters when funds
are budgeted for a certain purpose; sometimes the funds must be used for that purpose, other times if it
within the same fund, it can be used for another purpose. If it is not appropriate to take the funds from the
traffic calming program, she suggested allocating the funds from ending cash instead and it was likely the
Council would still approve it. She suggested referring it to the Finance Committee to allow her and
Councilmember Johnson to discuss with Mr. James the extent of Council's and staff's authority with
regard to the budget.
Councilmember Bloom agreed and requested a presentation regarding the traffic calming program to
inform citizens how to access those funds. Mr. Williams responded he was happy to provide that
presentation; he did not recall a previous request for that information.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 9
Councilmember Bloom referred to a letter in the Beacon regarding many near accidents involving
children at City Park that has been observed by the residents in the nearby condominiums. She noted that
could potentially be a priority, also it was also not among the 23 priorities in the traffic calming program.
She did not support allocating that $10,000 to the SR -104 crosswalk when there are so many other traffic
safety issues throughout the City. She spoke in favor of following the public process and reiterated her
request for a presentation to inform citizens about the process. That would allow residents near City Park
to learn about the process and for funds to be allocated to small projects as was intended rather than major
projects.
Mr. Williams assured this major project is a traffic calming project. It was an emergent issue; WSDOT
contacted the City in search of City funds to obtain their construction funding. That was the only place he
had to get the funds. It was used for a very legitimate purpose related to traffic calming. The issue on 3rd
was called to staff s attention and staff is working on it. He had a conversation with Ms. Hite recently; the
problem has gotten worse as a result of increased pedestrian traffic crossing 3rd Avenue due to the new
play equipment in City Park. They are trying to determine a solution that could be included in the project.
He was uncertain whether that would be funded by future traffic calming funds. He agreed it was a
legitimate need and assured staff is working on.
Council President Buckshnis said she will schedule a presentation regarding the traffic calming program
on August 23. She referred to the Perrinville Creek Flow Reduction Retrofit Study, and asked about the
public meeting scheduled on the draft plan. Councilmember Johnson advised it was held last week.
Council President Buckshnis referred to the Willow Creek Daylighting Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study,
and asked whether it included the $155,000 grant. Mr. English answered it did not. Council President
Buckshnis relayed she has asked Keely O'Connell, Stormwater Engineering Program Manager Jerry
Shuster and Development Services Director Shane Hope to make a presentation regarding Willow Creek.
There is a great deal of interest in that project including by WRIA 8.
Councilmember Peterson commended staff for finding a way to get the Pine Street crosswalk funded and
budgeted. He did not lobby in Olympia; he called his State Representative and encouraged Pt. Edwards
residents and others who were interested in the project to call their State Representatives. This is an
incredibly important project especially as Pt. Edwards grows. There is often talk about increasing
walkability and what that means for citizens' health as well as economic development and making
Edmonds a great community to live in. This safety project is a key element to connect the one of the
major developments constructed in the past 15 years to the rest of the City. He commended staff for
working on this, noting this project was pointed out to him in his early days on Council. It will be a great
safety improvement as well as a community asset.
As the only Councilmember impacted by the crosswalk, Councilmember Mesaros expressed his pleasure
at its installation. He often walks to Council meetings and especially in the evening it is risky to cross SR -
104, requiring "ready, set, run." He noted government does not have good reputation for well managed
projects, he was impressed when staff reports on projects, how well project have been managed. He
thanked staff, especially Mr. Williams and Mr. English.
10. ACTION ON ORDINANCE REPEALING ECC 10.80 CITIZENS COMMISSION ON THE
COMPENSATION OF ELECTED OFFICIALS
Council President Buckshnis commented the Council can consider initiating a citizens commission in
future. On August 26 the Council will have a work session on the Judge's salary and the Finance
Committee will discuss the Mayor's salary at their September meeting. There was little impact on the
Council's salary from the commission's recommendation other than the addition of $2,000 for training.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 10
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO,
TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. _, REPEALING ECC 10.80 CITIZENS COMMISSION ON
THE COMPENSATION OF ELECTED OFFICIALS.
Councilmember Petso clarified although she will support the motion she is not voting for any future
actions that Council President Buckshnis described. Her motivation was not to attempt to redo the citizens
commission's work but to acknowledge that the process and procedures were not what was desired. She
was content to let the issue rest until the next review period. She did not mind whether a new citizens
commission was established only for Council compensation or for all elected officials. She anticipated
some changes would be made to the code section to provide clarity regarding the appointment process,
the number of commissioners that are required and to state that all meetings need to be open public
meetings.
Councilmember Peterson advised he will vote against the motion for the reasons he stated at the August
14 meeting.
Councilmember Mesaros stated he will vote against the motion. He found it unfortunate that the results of
the previous commission and the hard work done by those citizens was not honored by the Council. He
believed the commission acted in good faith and made a forthright recommendation that the Council
should accept.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas anticipated if there had been a full commission with seven voting
members, the outcome probably would have been different, at least for her.
Councilmember Petso recalled the commission's action was deemed null and void due to a failure to fully
comply with the Open Public Meetings Act. City Attorney Jeff Taraday agreed that was his opinion.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS AND
COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM, FRALEY-MONILLAS AND PETSO VOTING YES; AND
COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON, MESAROS AND PETERSON VOTING NO.
11. PROOF -OF -CONCEPT PROPOSAL FOR THE SUNSET AVENUE SIDEWALK PROJECT
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained conversations about Sunset Avenue began before he came
to the City and it has been discussed frequently since 2011, increasing during the past year when grant
funds were obtained to pursue design of a project. There are a lot of concerns about the project related to
the geometry, safety, interface with BNSF railroad property, and parking and how the project would
affect those issues. The intent of a proof -of -concept project on Sunset would be to test the theories to
determine which concerns are real, worse than thought and better than thought and to gather experience
over a year with the geometry in the most difficult part of the alignment. The project is contained in the
CIP, CFP and TIP, PROS Plan and the budget as well as referenced in the Comprehensive Plan.
The reasons for this project include maximizing the public's access to views, improved safety for all
travel modes and providing accessibility. He displayed photographs of people walking in the street and
west of the curb on the dirt path to illustrate accessibility issues.
The Sunset Avenue Walkway proof -of -concept only deals with the "railroad line" segment where the
geometry has been questioned and where the BNSF property line extends beyond the curb and onto the
developed footprint of Sunset Avenue. The proof -of -concept is mostly a painting project to gain
experience with the concept at very little cost, approximately $20,000 versus $2 million to build the
project as has been discussed before.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 11
He displayed an aerial photograph of Sunset Avenue beginning at the south, at the end of the existing
sidewalk. The plan would be to connect the existing sidewalk to the painted walkway. There is sufficient
width in this area to accommodate the existing parking, two-way traffic lanes and a pathway. The
pathway would be on the waterside of the existing curb on Sunset, 8 -feet wide to connect the existing
sidewalk to locations near Edmonds Street where the railroad line section begins. He displayed the next
section at Edmonds Street, identifying the curb line that extends into Sunset Avenue where the one-way
street begins. The proposal is to put in a crosswalk at this location so people walking on the east side of
Sunset Avenue can cross to the temporary walkway. An ADA ramp will need to be installed on the west
side to provide ADA -compliant access. Just past that point, the current angle parking begins.
He displayed the next photograph that shows the angle parking continuing. The recommendation is to
slightly change the angle of the angle parking and add 8 spaces to the existing 12 for a total of 20 angle
spaces. He pointed out that to this point the temporary walkway is on the west side of the curb. He
identified the railroad property line on the map, pointing out it moves closer to the path as Sunset
continues north to the point where it touches the new temporary path. To avoid constructing anything new
on railroad property, at this point the existing curb would gradually be moved further east so that the 8 -
foot path stays off railroad property. At the point where the railroad property jogs east is where the
overlay between BNSF property ownership and the City's existing street is most acute. At this point the
path would transition to the existing pavement on Sunset Avenue. He identified the multi -use walkway, a
2 -foot clear zone painted yellow, 9 parallel parking spaces, and a travel lane marked as a sharrow that is
shared by vehicles and bicycles. If a walkway is constructed in the future, the 2 -foot area would be a
mountable curb.
Councilmember Bloom asked about the dirt path in relation to BNSF property line. Mr. Williams
identified the dirt path just the outside the existing curb. The temporary pathway would have people
walking on the west side of the street but further east than the existing dirt path. Councilmember Bloom
asked the location of the dirt path between Bell Street and Caspers. Mr. Williams identified the point
where the BNSF right-of-way jogs; the dirt path is on railroad property in that area. He noted the dirt path
is not continuous through that area, in some places it disappears and people walk in the street.
Councilmember Bloom asked whether the proposal was a pathway that would be on the east side of the
curb. Mr. Williams answered yes, from this point. The proposal is to stripe the current asphalt as a
walkway next to the curb, the 2 -foot clear zone, and then parallel parking.
Councilmember Bloom observed where the BNSF property line jogs, the pathway goes completely off the
dirt path and into the street and moves the parking further east. Mr. Williams answered yes, commenting
all the parking is shifted east. From the point where the curb is moved east, the path will be on the
existing street. Councilmember Bloom asked how much space is left in the street. Mr. Williams answered
in the areas where there is parallel parking there will be a 13 foot wide sharrow which is fully compliant
with MUTCD standards.
Mr. Williams displayed the alignment further north, identifying the curb, the 8 -foot path, the 2 -foot
yellow striped zone and 9 parallel parking spaces. The parallel parking beyond this point will be
redistributed to avoid problems with the narrow driveways on the east side. As this is a temporary project
he did not want to undertake the expense of modifying the driveway entrances. The result is one more
parking space than currently exists although it is in different locations and there is more angle parking. As
the walkway nears the north end of Sunset there are 3 parallel parking spaces. There are currently 17
parallel parking spaces and 12 angle parking spaces for a total of 29; in the proposed proof -of -concept
there are 20 angle parking spaces and 12 parallel parking spaces for a total of 32.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 12
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the issue Mr. Wassall raised regarding the City sidewalk on
their property. Mr. Williams explained on the east side of Sunset Avenue some property made dedications
for the sidewalk and others did not.
For Councilmember Petso, Mr. Williams identified the location of the railroad right-of-way in this
section, advising it eventually returns to about the curb at approximately Caspers.
Mr. Williams displayed drawings of how the pathway would be marked, the 2 -foot area between the
pathway and parallel parking, red lines to identify no parking areas and the sharrow. As BNSF depends
on the City to maintain plantings to discourage people from accessing their property, he suggested the
City plant low level plantings such as Oregon Grape just west of the existing curb to discourage walking
on that side of the curb and to encourage use of the walkway.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether this would move bikes off the walkway onto the sharrow.
Mr. Williams said the proposal is not to move bikes off the walkway. The symbol on the pathway will be
a multiuse pathway. He suggested since this is a trial project, it begin with allowing bicycles on the
pathway to allow an informed decision whether bikes and pedestrian can co -exist on an 8 -foot path. If an
issue arises during the trial, bikes can be taken off the pathway. If the projects begins with not allowing
bicycles on the pathway, there will be no way to determine if it will be a problem. He acknowledged there
are a lot of opinions regarding that issue.
Council President Buckshnis asked whether the benches and tables would be removed. Mr. Williams
answered no, the benches would remain. Council President Buckshnis asked whether there was a
minimum sharrow width, recalling in Vancouver BC she did not see any less than 15 feet and most are
18-20 feet. Mr. Williams answered it depends on traffic volumes and the professional judgment of those
designing the street. For example this is 13 feet marked as a sharrow; there are 11 -foot lanes on 5`b
Avenue marked as a sharrow. Many people think 13-14 feet is better; Seattle marks a lot of lanes as
sharrows that are less than that.
Council President Buckshnis asked about access for fire trucks, oil trucks, etc. Mr. Williams answered
under the International Fire Code, fire trucks need 20 feet to set up a truck. They would not choose to set
up their truck in a place on Sunset Avenue where there is parallel parking. Dragging hoses 200 feet is a
standard expectation for a pumper truck so fire personnel would set up in an area where there is no
parallel parking where they would have the requisite space to operate.
Mr. Williams reviewed the last section at the end of street. A crosswalk would be marked from the
pathway to the existing sidewalk on the south side of Caspers. What is done on Caspers and south of
Edmonds Street are future decisions. The key is to gather information regarding the railroad line section.
He summarized the proof -of -concept project:
• Redistributes some parking along the street but keeps total parking spaces the same
• Does not require approval of BNSF
• Cost, at approximately $20,000, is less than 1% of full project cost
• Data can be gathered that will either be used in the design of a follow-on walkway project or used
to make a decision not to pursue the concept further
• Cheaper than moving forward with a detailed design
Councilmember Peterson asked the existing speed limit on Sunset Avenue. Mr. Williams advised it is 20
mph. Councilmember Peterson commented in his work with bicycle groups, that is a reasonable speed
limit for a sharrow. He recalled public comment that some with severe mobility issues may be unable to
access this walkway even if it is accessible. He asked how many ADA parking spaces will be provided in
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 13
this configuration and whether more could be added. Mr. Williams answered there are currently three;
that number could be at least duplicated and more could be marked if desired.
Councilmember Petso commented her research found this is a walkway project in the CIP. She asked
whether the primary reason for moving away from the walkway to a multiuse pathway was to secure
grant funding. Mr. Williams explained it is called the Sunset Avenue Walkway but that does not mean it
was not envisioned as a multiuse pathway. Although the preponderance of users will be pedestrians, he
envisioned families with young children on bikes with training wheels using the pathway to practice their
skills. He did not envision serious bicyclists would find this a comfortable place to ride; the
trail/demonstration project will prove that one way or another. Councilmember Petso recalled the
language in the current CFP describes this as a walkway which would allow instead of striping it as Mr.
Williams described, painting a 5 -foot sidewalk, a 2 -foot clear zone, the same travel lane and a 3 -foot bike
lane on the east. Mr. Williams advised the existing bike lane is 6 feet. He agreed Councilmember Petso's
proposal, a 5 -foot sidewalk, 2 foot clear zone, parking, 11 -foot travel and 6 foot bike lane would fit.
COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDED
DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ON SUNSET AVENUE.
Councilmember Peterson expressed appreciation for the thought that has gone into this by citizens,
council and staff to try to answer some of the questions that cannot be answered without a demonstration
and actual data whether empirical or subjective. He pointed out Sunset Avenue is and can be an important
piece of the walkability puzzle that is Edmonds. If the desire is to have Edmonds be a walkable city for
families, retirees and children, this is a phenomenal project that will take full advantage of the waterfront
as well as be an environmentally sustainable way to get people out of their cars. He concluded this is a
very sensible step.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas liked the idea of having the concept painted and then determining in a
year what will and will not work. This project illustrates flexibility and an in-between approach that she
viewed as a win-win. She was concerned about the property owner's comment about the sidewalk on the
east. She pictured having to move sidewalk west three feet which would kill the project. Mr. Williams
responded that is a valid question but he did not envision the issue would be approached in that manner.
A more likely scenario would be to work with the property owners to get the property dedicated.
Councilmember Petso said she will not support the motion due to her concern with the safety issues of
mixing dog walkers and cyclists on the west side above the cliff. She preferred a walkway on the west and
a bike path on the east to keep those user groups separated. If that means the City has to pay for the
sidewalk itself she was willing to do that. She did not consider this a reasonable test; if something goes
wrong, she hoped the project could be terminated. She feared the data could unfortunately be an accident
that was between unfortunate and tragic.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS,
JOHNSON, MESAROS AND PETERSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT
BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCILMEMBERS BLOOM AND PETSO VOTING NO.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO MOVE AGENDA ITEMS 14 AND 15 PRIOR TO AGENDA ITEM 13. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
14. PHASE 4 — ENERGY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 14
Mr. Williams explained the City has gone through several Energy Service Contracting (ESCO) processes
in past. They have been very successful in reducing energy consumption, reducing the carbon footprint
and saving money. This is Phase 4 which is focused at the waste water treatment plant (WWTP).
Mr. Williams asked for approval to authorize Mayor Earling to:
• Extend agreement with Washington State Department of Enterprise Services (DES)
• Accept a Department of Commerce grant for $255,000
• Authorize the allocation of $550,000 for the completion of two energy efficiency measures using
the ESCO means for project delivery
Ron Major, Project Manager, State of Washington Department of Enterprise Services (DES),
explained DES has been conducting energy services performance contracting (ESPC) for 20 years and
saving public sector clients including Edmonds a lot of energy and money. ESPC is a program DES
offers. They prequalify ESCOs every two years via a formal competitive process. He explained an ESPC
is a contract between an energy service company (ESCO) and the DES under which DES:
• Prequalifies firms wishing to participate in the ESP programs an ESCO
• Manages the contracting process
• Enforces contract provisions
The City selects from DES' preapproved list which ESCO they want to use. The ESCO:
• Performs detailed energy audits
• Identifies energy and operational savings opportunities
• Designs infrastructure improvements that reduce resource consumption
• Causes the improvements to be implemented as the general contractor
• Guarantees not -to -exceed cost, performance, and energy savings.
After the audits are performed, the ESCO develops an energy services proposal that defines the scope of
work, project cost, energy savings and performance parameters for the equipment to be installed. There
are three guarantees: 1) maximum project cost, 2) energy performance, and 3) equipment performance. If
the project exceeds the maximum guaranteed project cost, there is no cost to the City; that cost is paid by
the contractor. If the energy performance guarantee is not met, the ESCO contractor corrects the
deficiency and if that is not possible, pays the City for the shortfall in the energy savings. With regard to
the equipment performance guarantee, if the equipment fails to perform as indicated, the ESCO contractor
must fix the equipment to ensure it operates as promised.
Mr. Major described energy performance contracting benefits:
• ESPCs shifts project risk from the customer to the ESCO
o ESCO guarantees the construction cost and is responsible for cost overruns
o ESCO guarantees energy savings and reimburses owner for shortfalls
o ESCO provides annual measurement and verification of resource savings
• ESPCs provide single source accountability and enhance customer control of equipment and
subcontractor selection
• ESPCs reduce future energy costs and use the saving to pay for infrastructure improvements
implemented today
He advised in the 20 years of doing ESPCs, DES has never had a project go to arbitration or a lawsuit. He
provided a graph of ESPC impact on costs, illustrating how projects can be funded via the energy savings.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 15
Gary Roberto, Project Developer, Ameresco, explained he represents a team of skilled engineers,
construction managers, contracting specialists and technicians that deliver the projects. He reviewed
previous successes in Edmonds:
• Phase 1: HVAC at City Hall, Library and Public Safety Buildings
• Phase 2: Lighting and water conservation
• Phase 3: Citywide projects: HVAC, lighting and building controls
o Saves 250,097 kWh and 9,823 therms = $29,187/year
o Electrical energy savings equivalent to powering 20 Snohomish County homes
o Simple payback of 13.7 years
o Carbon footprint reduction of 174 tons/year
He noted the WWTP received the SnoPUD Energy Challenge Award in 2013. He displayed a diagram of
the WWTP process flow, noting the key is separating solids from liquid. He described the process flow:
influent enters, goes into a primary clarifier in which dense solids settle to the bottom and liquid is
transferred into one of three aeration basin in which microbes act on the solids in the present of oxygen
that bubbles up through the aeration basin. The remaining liquid containing the solids flows to a
secondary clarifier where the solids settle to the bottom and the clarified liquid is transfer to the chlorine
contact chamber where it is disinfected through the use of sodium hypochlorite that is introduced into the
stream and discharged into Puget Sound. The solids are collected in a dewatering system where the water
is pressed out and the resulting moist cake is transferred to an incinerator where it is burned and the ash is
delivered to the landfill. He noted this is a complex process that requires skilled operators. Anything done
to one of the processes affects another downstream. In doing energy conservation projects in the City, the
easy projects are done first, leaving more complex projects such as these proposed at the WWTP. He
identified the phases at the WWTP:
Phase 4: Aeration basins
Phase 5: Disinfection and dewatering systems
Phase 7: Alternate means of disposing of dewatered sludge
He provided details regarding the current project:
• Compressed air system upgrades
o Replace existing compressors with two high efficiency units with capacity matched to the
load
o Analyze system for leaks
o Energy savings $63k kWh/year and $5,000/year
• Aeration basin 2 upgrades
o Install baffles to achieve plug flow
o Install upgrade air distribution system and ultrafine bubble diffusers which will reduce
airflow requirements
o Install high efficient blower which will supply air at the lower requirement based on current
flow and high efficiency diffusers
o Evaluate the potential for enhanced process controls
o Energy savings: 3500,000 kWh/year and $29,000/year
He summarized Phase 4, Compressed Air and Aeration Basin 2 Upgrades
• Total savings of 417,430 kWh = $34,062/year
• Electric energy equivalent to powering 34 Snohomish County homes
• Project has simple payback of 13.6 years
• Carbon footprint reduction of 187 tones
• Total guaranteed project price $884,792
• Less approved grant from Dept of Commerce $254,000
• Less SnoPUD emergency incentive $ 80,767
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 16
• WWTP partner
• Edmonds' responsibility
$550,025
$278,833
He provided a preview of Phase 5:
• Sludge Dewatering (belt filter press installed 1988)
o Install screw press dewatering system
■ Closed system simplifies foul air handling
■ Uses less spray and washdown water, reduces recycle flow and pumping costs
■ Better solids capture reduces secondary treatment
■ Produces dryer sludge for downstream processing
■ Saves electrical energy
■ Scalable
Polymer mixwater heating
o Install heat exchanger to capture waste heat from incinerator ash slurry
Sludge mixing tank
o Install 14,000 gallon primary sludge/WAS mixing tank with large bubble mixing in belt
process room
Ultraviolet disinfection
o Eliminates worker exposure to chemicals
o Non corrosive, protects the receiving waters and marine life from potential of toxic
byproducts of chemicals
o Reduces truck traffic to plant by 65 loads/year
o Saves $55,000 in electricity vs. chemical costs
o Eliminates ongoing chlorine contract chamber O&M, daily residual testing, cleaning of
channel, equipment and instrumental maintenance estimated at $65,000/year
o Will reduce recurring capital costs for channel repairs due to corrosiveness of chlorine
He described Phase 7, alternative means of disposing of the dewatered sludge. Future emissions standards
will increase the cost of operating incineration equipment.
Mr. Williams advised Ameresco was selected based on their past excellent performance on energy saving
projects in the City. One of the benefits is replacing old equipment that would have to be replaced at some
point anyway. The new equipment is more energy efficient and the savings generate a revenue stream to
access low interest loans, qualify for grants and SnoPUD energy incentives. In addition to the energy
savings, carbon footprint reduction and cost savings, there are maintenance and labor savings as well as
the opportunity to replace old equipment with new without the City paying for it all.
Councilmember Johnson asked about the alternative methods of disposing of the sludge. Mr. Williams
answered the City has generally been happy with the onsite incineration; it can be done on City property
and produces a small volume of material to be disposed of. The EPA plans to further regulate sewage
sludge incinerators. The City can meet the new standards initially but there is a possibility or even
likelihood those standards will continue to be lowered over time. Gasification would be one way to avoid
that problem. If it qualified as an energy savings project, the City could access financing to replace the
aging incinerator with new technology. That is a future phase; the only phase the Council is asked to
approve tonight is phase 4.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
JOHNSON, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO APPROVE A DEPARTMENT OF ENTERPRISE
SERVICES ENERGY PROGRAM CONTRACT FOR $884,792 FOR PHASE 4 - ENERGY
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME FORM AS PRESENTED. AND
ALSO AUTHORIZE PLACEMENT OF A DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE GRANT FOR
$254,000 TO BE FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONSENT AGENDA FOR
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 17
APPROVAL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AFTER THE GRANT CONTRACT IS RECEIVED AND
REVIEWED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY.
Councilmember Peterson recalled years ago when he and Councilmember Fraley-Monillas had a tour of
the treatment plant, he found it a fascinating operation. He asked whether there were alternatives to taking
the ash to the transfer station such as using it as mulch. Mr. Williams answered it is not impossible but is
complicated. One of the obvious ways to use it would be an additive in cement thereby encapsulating any
remaining materials of concern and also generating a usable product. The regulations associated with
reuse are very complicated and he was unsure that was a productive thing to pursue.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
15. REPORT AND PROJECT CLOSE OUT FOR THE WWTP SWITCHGEAR UPGRADE PROJECT
Mr. Williams explained the equipment is outside in the marine air and although it has a rain hood, the
internal workings and electrical connections are corroding and is a potential future point of failure. The
other key piece is the automatic transfer switch which has been corroding over time; in the event of a
failure or the incoming power failed in a storm, the transfer switch senses the loss of power and connects
the plant to the onsite diesel generator to continue operating the plant. The fear was that one or both
would fail in the middle of the night during a storm when flows are high and result in wastewater going in
places it was not intended. The City contracted with Ewing Electric for $1.39 million, $118,000 was paid
to HDR to design the improvements, plus miscellaneous costs brought the total project cost to $1.274
million. The overall budget was $1.4 million so the project was approximately $126,000 under budget
and completed on time.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
MESAROS, TO ACCEPT THE SWITCHGEAR UPGRADE PROJECT.
Councilmember Mesaros commented this is another example of good budgeting and good spending, an
example of the fine work done by staff.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
12. INTRODUCTION TO POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) MODIFYING THE DEFINITION OF "LOT" (ECDC 21.55.010),
DEFINING "LOT OF RECORD" (ECDC 21.55.015) AND ESTABLISHING A PROCESS FOR
DETERMINING "INNOCENT PURCHASER" (ECDC 20.75.180). (AMD20140001)
This item was rescheduled to the September 2 Council meeting via action taken under Agenda Item 3.
13. DISCUSSION OF PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
TEXT AMENDMENTS, INCLUDING WESTGATE, AND POTENTIAL ACTION
Development Services Director Shane Hope explained the Comprehensive Plan proposal for amendment
has three parts:
• Replacing the 2009 Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Plan with the 2014 plan approved
by Council earlier this year.
• Replacing the 2009 Community Cultural Plan with the 2014 plan approved by Council earlier this
year
• Text amendment regarding Westgate
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 18
She advised there were no Comprehensive Plan zoning map proposals. Typically Comprehensive Plan
amendments are considered no more than once a year, but there is no specific timeline in the City's code
or under State law for when that occurs. In addition to the once a year Comprehensive Plan amendments,
there are some exceptions such as amending the Capital Facilities Element. For example if a budget
amendment or adoption of the budget necessitates changing the Capital Facilities Element, that can be
done outside the annual process. She anticipated that would occur later this year.
The 2014 amendments are relatively simple; there were no citizen applications. The text amendment
regarding Westgate differs from the Westgate zoning proposal, a separate but related proposal that will be
discussed at the Council's August 26 meeting. This is the third meeting regarding the 2014 amendments;
the first was July 22 as part of the Westgate proposal and the second was a public hearing on August 4.
Planning Manager Rob Chave advised the ordinance prepared by the City Attorney includes background
on the processes. In January/February 2014 the Planning Board held a public hearing followed by the
Council's public hearing on the Community Cultural and the PROS Plans. During the past couple years
the Planning Board has had several hearings on the Comprehensive Plan text amendment in combination
with the zoning issues relate to Westgate. The Council also had a public hearing on August 4. The packet
includes documentation regarding the PROS and Community Cultural Plans as exhibits to the ordinance.
There is already a section in the Land Use element regarding community commercial. The only
community commercial area is Westgate. The intent of the Westgate text amendment is to combine the
goals identified via the Westgate process into the Comprehensive Plan text to provide a framework for
potential revisions to the code that will be discussed next week. It is anticipated the Council will adopt the
CFP later this year as part of the budget process. Adoption of the Comprehensive Plan amendments will
wrap up the Comprehensive Plan now versus waiting until December.
For Council President Buckshnis, Mr. Chave advised the CFP would be adopted later this year; there are
no other Comprehensive Plan amendments. Council President Buckshnis inquired about removing the
Steven Hospital Master Plan. Mr. Chave advised that would be done as part of the 2015 update. Council
President Buckshnis asked whether this text amendment was a Westgate subarea plan. Mr. Chave
answered these are very general policies; a subarea plan is much more detailed. Council President
Buckshnis asked whether the community commercial text was being removed and replaced with the
Westgate text. Mr. Chave referred to packet page 547, pointing out Westgate is now specifically
mentioned but the language regarding community commercial is retained and the Comprehensive Plan
map still identifies Westgate and community commercial area. He summarized this is very general, high
level language that includes concepts identified in the Westgate study.
Council President Buckshnis spoke in support of adding amusement establishments as proposed by Dr.
Senderof£ Mr. Chave agreed that could be done but suggested taking out the parenthetical reference to
conditional use because that is zoning issue versus a Comprehensive Plan issue. Council President
Buckshnis asked how an amusement establishment would be defined, noting it was a somewhat nebulous
term. Mr. Chave agreed, relaying it was fine as a general statement of intent; translating it into zoning
would be challenging. For example there is no way to regulate family friendly; a use can be family
friendly in one context and family unfriendly in another context such as a video arcade or movie theater.
Councilmember Petso asked whether community commercial applied to the areas on the Comprehensive
Plan map designated as Westgate Corridor and Edmonds Way Corridor in addition to Westgate. Mr.
Chave answered those areas have their own map designations and there are text sections that address the
corridors. This language does not apply to those corridors in the current Comprehensive Plan and will not
apply to them with this text amendment.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 19
Councilmember Petso pointed out the Comprehensive Plan map designates a Westgate area that does not
match the Westgate proposal area. Mr. Chave was uncertain what the discrepancy was, advising the
Westgate area is generally described on the Comprehensive Plan map. Councilmember Petso explained to
the west it runs into the Westgate Corridor, to the east it runs into the Edmonds -Way Corridor, to the
south it runs into properties now designated residential near the high school. She summarized there are
three areas that have been discussed as part of the Westgate plan that are not identified as Westgate on the
Comprehensive Plan map. She asked whether the text amendment would only apply to the smaller area
designated on the Comprehensive Plan map. Mr. Chave answered the text amendment matches what is
shown on the Comprehensive Plan map.
Councilmember Petso asked whether the area outside Westgate on the Comprehensive Plan map would be
governed by the existing Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Chave said he would need to analyze the area
Councilmember Petso referred to in more detail. In general, the Westgate area is identified on
Comprehensive Plan map; these policies apply to that area. There will also be some transitional areas.
Councilmember Petso recalled previously being told with regard to the CFP that there were limitations on
how often it could be amended and that it needed to be consistent with Parks and Transportation Plans
which it presently was not. By approving this amendment, part of the plan would be inconsistent but that
inconsistency was not being fixed. Mr. Chave was not aware of any inconsistency.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED (6-1),
COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM VOTING NO.
Councilmember Petso provided examples
• The 76th & 212th project which is in the CFP as a dot in the intersection, is now restriping the
corridor
• The Sunset Walkway project is a walkway and does not include Caspers Street, but the current
proposal includes Caspers and is a multiuse pathway.
Councilmember Petso recalled raising this issue when the Council approved the TIP and understood the
plan was to fix inconsistencies at the next Comprehensive Plan amendment opportunity. City Attorney
Jeff Taraday recalled the discussion that the TIP would always be inconsistent with the CFP for a brief
period of time because the TIP is adopted in the summer and the CFP is adopted in conjunction with the
budget. He recalled any inconsistencies would be resolved when the CFP is adopted. Councilmember
Petso recalled there was discussion regarding amending the Comprehensive Plan as she assumed the
inconsistency would be addressed when the Comprehensive Plan was amended. This proposal does not do
that and she questioned whether that was a GMA violation. Mr. Taraday answered most cities have the
same period of time where the TIP is adopted in the summer and the CFP is adopted with the budget and
nothing is being done to increase that period of time. Because there were very few Comprehensive Plan
amendments this year, the amendments can be adopted earlier.
Councilmember Petso commented the previous schedule was to adopt the Comprehensive Plan
amendments in December so everything was consistent. Mr. Chave commented historically the CFP is
not adopted at the same meeting as other Comprehensive Plan amendments as the CFP is tied to the
budget. Councilmember Petso relayed her understanding the CII' was tied to the budget and the CFP was
a planning document. Mr. Chave answered there is some overlay; some of the CFP projects are CIP
projects and vice versa.
Councilmember Petso recalled there is criterion in the code that applies to Comprehensive Plan
amendments decisions. Ms. Hope advised the findings are referenced in the ordinance. Councilmember
Petso relayed one of the standards is maintains the appropriate balance of land uses in the City. The map
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 20
she sent staff allows 40% of the greater Westgate area to have residential only buildings. Ms. Hope
advised that was part of the zoning code decision and was not related to this text amendment. It is the
same commercial area; some of it could be mixed use under the Comprehensive Plan amendment but the
amendment does not specify where, what type of mixed use, or a percentage. Councilmember Petso
relayed under the proposed zoning some areas can be straight multi -family. She asked whether that will
that be eliminated if the Council adopts the mixed use amendment tonight. Ms. Hope advised the zoning
code still needs to be decided; that will not affect the text amendment.
Councilmember Petso observed the text amendment designates the area in the Comprehensive Plan as
mixed use. Ms. Hope clarified the text amendment states mixed use could occur there. Mr. Chave read
from the Comprehensive Plan on packet page 547, goal C, "The intent of the community commercial
designation is to recognize both of these purposes by permitting a range of business and mixed use
development while maintaining a neighborhood scale and design character." He explained the idea of
mixed use has always been there; that language is not being changed. The details of how that mixed use
occurs and to what degree it occurs is implementation which is done via zoning.
Councilmember Petso referred to the deletion of C2, "Provides for transit and pedestrian access in
addition to the need to accommodate automobile traffic." and asked whether automobile traffic will no
longer be accommodated at Westgate. Mr. Chave answered that was deleted due to redundancy with other
language.
Councilmember Petso observed another other major change is deleting language regarding providing for
the pedestrian scale design of buildings that are two stories or less in height and contain architectural
features that promote pedestrian activity, observing the proposal is up to four stories in height and there
are no pedestrian design features. Mr. Chave answered there are plenty of pedestrian design features. The
limitation on two stories is being eliminated. The implementation will be accomplished via zoning.
Councilmember Petso asked what the height limit would be if the two story limit were removed before
the height limit in the zoning code is adopted. Mr. Chave answered the height limit would be in
accordance with the existing zoning until the Council adopts new zoning for Westgate. If the language
regarding two stories is retained in the text, the zoning could not be contrary to that.
Councilmember Petso asked why that was being removed before the zoning was adopted. Mr. Chave
answered the Comprehensive Plan should not designate things such as stories but rather the overall
character and what is trying to be achieved. Specifying stories or a height limit is an implementation tool
which is zoning.
If the Council adopts this tonight and then acts on the Westgate Plan using the larger area,
Councilmember Petso asked whether the Comprehensive Plan map would need to be changed to match
that map. Mr. Chave answered if any of the zoning changes go outside the Westgate proper, it likely
would not be inconsistent with the language that applied to the corridors. He would need to look at what
Councilmember Petso was referring to. Councilmember Petso relayed concern that the Westgate Plan
map does not match the Comprehensive Plan map, yet the Comprehensive Plan text is being revised but
not the Comprehensive Plan map. Ms. Hope advised the official Comprehensive Plan map is the land use
map not the illustrations that go with the text. For Councilmember Petso, Mr. Chave advised there is a
zoning map and a Comprehensive Plan map. Councilmember Petso asked whether the text amendment
applied to the Comprehensive Plan map. Mr. Chave answered yes.
Council President Buckshnis commented the definitions are not being changed the changed, the only
change is paragraph C, Goals for the Westgate Community Commercial Area. Paragraph B, the goals for
the Westgate Corridor, identifying it as a key transportation corridor, are not being changed. And
Paragraph F, the goals for the Edmonds Way Corridor, are also not being changed. Mr. Chave commented
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 21
the designations on the Comprehensive Plan map are not hard boundaries; there will be transition areas
where decisions are made by the zoning.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM, TO
CONTINUE DISCUSSION TO ANOTHER DATE DUE TO THE LATE HOUR AND THE
IMPORTANCE OF THE ISSUE.
Councilmember Johnson raised a concern about the lack of evaluation or prioritization of projects in the
PROS Plan and that Council direction is not considered in submitting application for grant or determining
which projects the most important. She recommended the Council discuss how to identify capital
projects.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed it was late to decide these issues and she anticipated greater
productivity if the issue was discussed earlier at a future meeting. Council President Buckshnis offered to
confer with Ms. Hope and schedule further discussion at the September 2 or 16 meeting.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
MESAROS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED (6-1),
COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM VOTING NO.
16. LIQUOR/RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA LICENSE REVIEW PROCESS
Council President Buckshnis explained this removes the Council from the review process for
liquor/recreational marijuana licenses and makes it an administrative process. Requiring approval by the
Council has the potential to slow the process.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas advised this was reviewed Public Safety & Personnel Committee and
she requested it be presented to the Council primarily for notification. Lists of liquor license renewals are
approved on the Consent Agenda; this would change that to an administrative process. City Clerk Scott
Passey explained the proposal is to take the Council out of the review process for practical reasons. Most
cities handle it administratively and do not require Council approval due to the tight timeline on license
applications. In the past the Council has approved the lists of renewals. The City also receives sporadic
individual license applications; it would be difficult to obtain Council approval within the required
timeline.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
JOHNSON, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT A CODE AMENDMENT TO
TAKE THE CITY COUNCIL OUT OF THE REVIEW PROCESS FOR LIQUOR AND
RECREATIONAL MARIJUANA LICENSES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
17. APPROVAL OF CITY ATTORNEY EVALUATION PROCESS
Councilmember Mesaros recalled when this was discussed at the August 4 meeting, two suggestions were
made, 1) to include the past Council President along with current Council President in the formal
evaluation process which he added, and 2) having the Council approve the standards of performance
which will be developed after the performance review.
COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE CITY ATTORNEY EVALUATION PROCESS. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 22
18. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF AUGUST 12 2014
Due the late hour, this item was rescheduled to next week's Council meeting.
19. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Earling reported it had been a great pleasure to have a delegation from Hekinan in Edmonds the
past ten days. He acknowledged the work of the Sister City Commission and thanked his Executive
Assistant Carolyn LaFave and Sister City Commissioner Iyoko Okano who were instrumental in the
success of the program. He relayed that a student boarding the bus to the airport mentioned they could not
find their passport. The bus left with the students; Ms. LaFave went to the host family's house, found the
passport and met the student at the airport with the passport. He summarized it was a marvelous
experience and he was pleased it was great success.
20. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Buckshnis reported the last concert in the park is this Sunday.
Councilmember Johnson invited volunteers to the 2 Annual Volunteer Appreciation Picnic on Sunday
from 2:00 — 4:00 p.m. followed by the concert. She requested volunteers RSVP to Ms. Spellman.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported she had a great time at the Taste of Edmonds. She thanked the
organizers and expressed her appreciation for the neighbors who tolerated the noise and people.
Councilmember Petso thanked the City Clerk and the Council for accommodating her late arrival.
21. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER RCW 42.30.11 Of 1)(i)
This item was not needed.
22. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION
This item was not needed.
23. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:27 p.m.
DAVID O. EARLING, MAYOR
SCOTT PAS SEY, CITY CERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 19, 2014
Page 23