Cmd072820EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
VIRTUAL ONLINE MEETING
APPROVED MINUTES
July 28, 2020
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Nelson, Mayor
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Luke Distelhorst, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Vivian Olson, Councilmember
Susan Paine, Councilmember
Laura Johnson, Councilmember
1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE
STAFF PRESENT
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Jessica Neill Hoyson, HR Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Rob English, City Engineer
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
The Edmonds City Council virtual online meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Mayor Nelson. The
meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Council President Fraley-Monillas read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We
acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors
the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these
lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual
connection with the land and water."
3. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present, participating remotely.
4. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
K. JOHNSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER.
Councilmember Buckshnis pulled Items 6.3 and 6.4 from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE,
MOVED TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page l
COnneilmember Buckshnis said she pulled Item 6.3 at the request of Public Works Director Phil Williams
because the date of the extension needed to be changed from December 31, 2019 to December 31, 2020.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE PROPOSAL TO EXTEND THE PERSONAL SERVICES
CONTRACT FOR PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR AT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT
PLANT AS AMENDED.
City Clerk Scott Passey advised the items were pulled from the Consent Agenda as part of the approval of
the agenda. They should be taken up after approval of the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE MOTION.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS HTTPS://ZOOM.US/S/4257752525
Mayor Nelson invited participants and described the procedures for audience comments
Nancy Johnson, Edmonds, on behalf of the Sno-Isle Sierra Club, encouraged the Council's support of
the proposed bike lane project. She has lived in Edmonds since 2013 and when she first arrived, tried to
ride her bike from her home near Yost Park to the grocery store and for exercise, but found it too
dangerous. After a couple close calls on 220"' & 9"' and while rounding a curve on Bowdoin, she retired
her bike. After reviewing the planned project, it will be time to dust off her bike and try again. Bicycles
and pedestrians will be much safer, plenty of parking in the area will be retained, greenhouse gas
emissions will be reduced and people who are not ready to get back on public transit due to COVID-19
will have a safer option. There needs to be public input to ensure all safety measures are considered, but
overall it looks like a great project that deserves the Council's full support.
Andrew Morgan, Edmonds, relayed most residents on 9"' Avenue think bike lanes are fine, but no one
living on 9"' Avenue /100"' Avenue supports losing 50% of the on -street parking which will happen under
this plan. The world has changed since COVID with many more people working from home; people have
family and friends to their homes instead of going to restaurants, parks and public spaces; and the demand
for parking seems to be increasing instead of decreasing. Parking on side streets on 9"' Avenue and 100"'
Avenue is dangerous and impractical because of the slopes on east -west side streets make it difficult and
dangerous to get out of the car especially for the elderly and young children. Sound Transit's ridership is
down 80-90% and their own financial forecast shows them losing up to $12 billion through 2041. The
crisis we now face is not short-term but has changed things perhaps forever. People do not want to get
into crowed buses, trains and planes. He respectfully requested the City Council table voting on putting in
these bike lanes until the pandemic is such that the public can legally get together to discuss the plan to
ensure the interest of bicyclists and homeowners are balanced and taken into consideration and when
there is more clarity about what the post-COVID world looks like.
Shawn Detrich, Edmonds, expressed support for the bike lane project especially the segment on 100"'
and 9"' Avenues as that links a lot of things that cyclists are interested in, especially those who bike for
function rather than for exercise such as QFC, PCC, Yost Park, 5 Corners and Edmonds-Woodway High
School. It is a great connection for a lot of things the City has to offer. That section, 100"' and 9"'
Avenues, can be a little hairy for beginner cyclists without a protected lane.
Margaret Elwood, Edmonds, said she and her husband's disabilities makes bicycling their preferred
exercise especially since the gyms have closed due to the pandemic. She has MS with balance issues and
walking more than a mile does not work, but cycling works well. Her husband has kidney disease and is
easily fatigued, but can get exercise appropriate for his ability riding an e-bike. She is an experienced
bicycle commuter, commuting for 10 years to Snohomish County PUD, using the Swift bus to get within
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 2
bicycling range so she is experienced cycling in traffic. For a biker going between 5 Corners and
Westgate there is a steep hill and it is not particularly safe to go from QFC at Westgate to 220"' where
there are bike lanes but there is a steep hill. She typically turns up 224"', but it doesn't have sidewalks and
is a narrow street. It is distressing for a cyclist who want to promotes cycling to have traffic back up
behind them, but without a bike lane there is no other options and cyclists are entitled to use the road
because they also pay taxes. She strongly advocated for adding bike lanes in this area for safety; more
people are getting e-bikes and for older, experienced cyclists it is not a question of whether they will get
an e-bike but how soon. Bike riding enables them to continue exercising and promoting their own health.
She urged the Council to proceed with the bike plan.
Peter Hallson, Edmonds, Edmonds Bicycle Advocacy Group member and Cascade Bicycle Club
member and ride leader, supported approval of the Sound Transit bicycle grant. As he said last week, five
years ago Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace engineered a network of bike routes to improve
access to health and wellness choices. At that time about 13% of the population surveyed were regular
bike riders and 70% said they would like ride more. The goals of Bike-2-Health were to make bicycling
safer, increase connectivity between the three communities and create a regional connected network of
safe bike lanes. The current Sound Transit plan builds on the last five years and adds value to the Bike-2-
Health project. The stated goals of Bike-2-Health and of the new grant are to have bike routes from
Edmonds connecting with the Mountlake Terrace light rail station by 2024, increase ridership from 13%,
improve safety for riders in the three communities, reduce the barrier of safety concerns for riders, build
riders' confidence by providing bike lanes and sharrows with inter -ride guidance via wayfinding signs,
raise awareness about the health benefits of cycling and provide education. Bicycle safety education has
been provided to 3ra to 8"' grade students in the Edmonds School; the goal is to educate 5,000-10,000
students. Goals also include establishing a bike network that meets the needs of a variety of users
including commuters, recreation, students, seniors and first time rider and building a healthy and
physically active community that cycles thereby reducing the need for parking. The Sound Transit grant
meets the stated goals and improves bicycling infrastructure. For those reasons, he recommend the
Council approve the Sound Transit citywide bicycle improvement grant.
Mike McMurray, Edmonds, expressed support for bike lanes and healthy ridership. One of his favorite
assets in the community is Yost Pool and its partnership with the YMCA has made it a more local and
regional draw in the summer. The majority of parking for this key community asset is the overflow
parking on Bowdoin. For eight years, he lived four doors down from the entrance; during the summer
months cars were often parked on the street. There are only 56 spaces within the park to accommodate the
pool, playground, tennis and pickleball courts, and trails. He suggested if a parking study was used to
justify removal of 50% of the parking in close proximity to this asset, that was not acceptable considering
the global pandemic and closure of the park. It could be justified that every street in Edmonds should
have bike lane if safety was the primary reasoning. Yost Park is evolving rapidly, offering more than just
swimming including tennis and pickleball. The tennis and pickleball courts were so busy last summer that
the City installed two additional portable toilets. There was a movement to save the community pool
several years ago and lie was concerned about the financial jeopardy if parking in close proximity to the
was not taken seriously. It sends the wrong message to the community that visitors are not a priority and
giving the impression of a private pool. He asked the Council to look for alternative bike lane routes to
preserve the parking capacity for Yost Park. He was also interested in a year-round facility in the future.
Michelle Dotsch, Edmonds, referred to a KING 5 news article posted on October 8, 2019 promoting the
benefits of this bicycle lane project that includes an interview with Peter Hallson from the Edmonds
Bicycle Group where he states, "we're hoping that more people will feel comfortable without putting
more cars on the road." The article also states, "parking in those areas will also be improved." Nowhere in
the article does it state that 50% of parking in those areas will be removed. She relayed her concerns:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 3
1) Bicycle numbers she shared last week showing at best a minimal increase and some decreases in actual
bicyclists using 76"' and 2121" after the bike lanes were put in is accurate as it compares direct data points
along these routes from 2016 to 2019. Using the same counts that Mr. Hauss will share, it compares direct
locations before and after versus the combined count chart he showed last week.
2) Promoting the success of bike lanes on 76' also does not compare to the almost entirely residential
nature of Bowdoin and 9"' Avenue; 76"' has 3 schools, a hospital, church, medical offices and businesses
with ample parking lots and the side streets in the small residential portion of 76' is flat with mostly local
access only. Unlike Bowdoin and 9' Avenue with steep slopes and numerous parking and pedestrian
safety issues and no sidewalks and a lot of cut through traffic.
3) This is strictly a bicycle grant for moving bicyclists to use Sound Transit. It is not an Edmonds leisure
bicycle plan. In the scenic but very hilly Edmonds, it seems to benefit a select few commuting residents as
the bicycle counts show. It is not a pedestrian safety plan; pedestrians will have to cross Bowdoin
between Yost and 5 Corners where there is not a single marked crosswalk.
4) A critical flaw of the plan eliminating a full lane of north -south traffic across SR-104 from QFC and
PCC to Key Bank, Bartell and the old WWliS. 'faking 2 lanes down to 1 lane will stack up traffic just
like the Lynnwood north -south bike lane project at 76"' & 1901' causing longer commute times and
making access to local retail more hazardous for drivers. She has personally witnessed two accidents from
cars exiting the Lynnwood QFC onto 196"' as it is now a blind spot.
Mike DeLilla, Seattle, City of Edmonds Utilities Engineer, spoke in favor of the bike project. He bikes
the route from Seattle approximately twice a week in spring to fall or about 40-80 trips/year for the last 10
years. Other members of staff also bike for a combined total of about 4,000-5,000 trips in and out of
Edmonds. The proposed routes are the only feasible routes per the city code and the ordinances that have
been approved regarding these types of projects as it is more a Complete Streets projects with a bike
aspect to it. He served on the North Seattle Design Group for four years and dealt with similar issues and
ended up doing a similar project on Linden between 130"' and 145' where a number of parking stalls
were removed due to the addition of bike lanes; in the end it ;x,as a very successful project. That group
considered board members' experience as well as existing ordinances. Edmonds has similar ordinances
and regulations that cover this, for example, the Transportation Plan limits the streets that are available for
bike lanes. The only candidate street other than 76' is 100"; 95t" does not work because there are no
shoulders and 80"' does not work. He suggested the Council look at Ordinance 3842 which addresses this.
He supported the Council approving the project, and moving forward with design, comment and vetting.
Anthony Dashti; Edmonds, spoke against removing 50% of the parking. Adding bicycle lanes was a
good idea but not at the expense of eliminating that much street parking. He lives on a private driveway
on 9"' Avenue between Pine and Walnut and there have been many occasions when they cannot drive to
their house due to public works activity or snow or freezing temperatures which forces them to compete
for parking on 9"' Ave. With an aging household it is difficult to negotiate parking particularly on side
streets or a private driveway. As a bike rider, he likes to use bike lanes but the health and wellbeing of the
households should be of upmost importance. He see riders negotiating that street quite easily without any
issues; if drivers have to share the road with bikes, riders can do the same. The end result must work for
riders and residents alike; removing that many parking spaces puts residents at a major disadvantage.
Anyone who bicycles any significant distance already must negotiate streets without bike lanes;-9"'
Avenue South is wider than most, allowing for a relatively safe ride. The current limited parking leaves a
lot of room for bikes to negotiate safely. Removing the parking spaces will have little impact on riders but
have a much larger impact on residents. He asked the Council to look for better options.
Lora Hine, Edmonds, described a car accident that occurred at 9 a.m. on Sunday at 96"' Avenue W &
224"' Street S, 3 houses to the west of her home. She rushed outside to see a two car collision, one with
airbags deployed. As there were enough people already at the vehicles, she returned home to call 911;
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 4
Police and Fire arrived within minutes and a neighbor swept up the broken glass in the street. This is not
the first incident at this corner. There have been efforts over decades to make this school crossing
intersection a four-way stop. Traffic coming from the west has just crested a hill and having accelerated
up the grade, often are exceeding the 30 mph (25 mph when children are present) and reach the
intersection where stopped northbound cars may not have noticed the sign, shaded and obscured by tree
limbs, informing them that cross traffic does not stop. Drivers must pull forward to be able to look both
ways; she has seen and heard many near misses, fender benders but never as serious an accident as the
one that occurred on Sunday. This intersection is a thoroughfare of neighbors near and far walking on one
of the few sidewalks. She offered to send in the remainder of her comments.
John Routt, Edmonds, a resident of 25+ years near Yost Park, referred to the parking situation around
Yost Park. He explained a drivers come down the hill from 92°d where there is a blind corner and 2
obscured driveways; often a car coming down the hill does not see a car backing out of their driveway. He
has also seen bicycles flying down the hill and not stop at the stop sign. His concern was due to what he
witnessed on Dexter Avenue in Seattle, a car backing out and a bicyclist unable to stop in time colliding
with the car. He has also seen car doors nearly take out bicyclists. He did not think Bowdoin Way was the
proper place for bike lanes. There are bike lanes on 220"' that are not heavily used and bicyclists use Main
Street which is much wider and does not have a parking problem except near the Wade James Theater. He
requested the Council rethink the process of bike lanes on Bowdoin before someone gets hurt.
Christien Miller, Edmonds, a resident on 10"' & Walnut, said he received a flyer as did many other
residents. He was concerned there will not enough on -street parking. He was unsure what the plan was for
bike lanes and how it would impact parking on Walnut Street. He asked if plans had been released
regarding how the bike lanes will look and how they will affect parking. At times, Walnut will fill with
parking for swim meets or other events.
Nora Carlson, Edmonds, a resident of the Westgate, said she wanted to go on record a second time as a
resident urging the Council to assist the neighbors who have ongoing concerns about the dangerous
intersection of 96"' Avenue W & 224"' SW. Last March she submitted a citizen action and petition for the
City's engineering department's traffic calming program for needed changes to this intersection. Her
request was denied and she was told the flow of traffic did not warrant change. The transportation
engineer encouraged her to resubmit this past spring for consideration; however, she felt the same result
would occur with no changes made. She learned recently two nearby neighbors submitted requests 20
years ago for changes to the same intersection due to their concerns with the same result of no
improvements made. Due to increased traffic and many vehicles using 224"' to bypass Edmonds Way or
220" there is clearly a need to change the intersection to slow vehicles and stop before proceeding. Her
neighbors and she have experienced multiple near misses as a result of vehicle traveling too fast or
driving through the stop signs and drivers appear to be confused about how to use the intersection. The
collision between two cars on July 26"' is further proof this intersection needs to be changed; she
suggested referencing Police Department case 20-17046 for details. On behalf of her neighborhood, she
requested the intersection be altered from a 2-way to a 4-way stop to offer a much safer crossing for all.
She feared it was a matter of time before there was a more serious accident that could potentially injure or
kill an adult or child. It is vital to address this intersection sooner than later; the residents urgently need
the Council's help to address improvements to this intersection.
Jim Carraway, Edmonds, thanked the two Councilmember who responded to his comments and the
individuals who left a flyer at his door. Everyone should benefit from infrastructure because everyone
pays for it in one form or another. In response to a previous comment, he said it was naive to think
someone will ride 30 minutes from the Edmonds station to Mountlake Terrace link light rail in addition to
riding Sounder twice a day 30 minutes in and out of Seattle. He relayed his concerns; regarding parking,
similar to Mr. McMurray's comments, many homes along the street were built in the 50s and 60s and do
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 5
not have adequate parking. By reducing parking, residents and visitors will have to hunt for parking on
other streets, affecting those residents. After reviewing the parking study in last week's packet, he
seriously questioned its validity as it treats the entire stretch of Walnut and Bowdoin the same and only
looks at select periods of time. Anyone who traverses this stretch knows there is heavy usage between 9"'
and Yost Park on Walnut and the 1/10"' mile between 5 Corners and the water reservoir on Bowdoin. On
Sunday he counted 24 cars parked along the 2 stretches plus an additional 2 cars between Yost and the
water reservoir, 30% more than in the study. There is also the steed for parking during special events like
the 4" of July. His second concern was safety with parking on surrounding streets; lie questioned whether
the City would install sidewalks, crosswalks and lighting to enable residents to reach their homes. Similar
to Bowdoin, there is no crosswalk at Walnut & 10"'. The intersection at 9"' & Walnut is notoriously
dangerous; in the 4'/2 years he has lived on Walnut, there have been 3 accidents, the latest of which totaled
the vehicle, imagine if that was a bicycle. His third concern was speeding; Walnut is notorious for
speeding. He has reached out to the City and Police Department but nothing has changed.
Melvin Brady, Edmonds, a resident since 1984 and a resident on 9"' Avenue for the last 8 years,
disagreed with the person who said no one on 9"' Avenue wants parking removed as he wholeheartedly
supports installing bike lanes. He rides both a regular bike and an e-bike. He wrote to Council previously,
submitting pictures of an accident in March 2018 that resulted in a vehicle landing on its roof. There have
been other accidents in the area and he recommended looking into not only the installation of bike lanes
but where parking is located. He agreed with removing 50% or more of the parking; 9"' Avenue S is a
highly trafficked north -south commuter route through Edmonds. Parking greatly reduces visibility when
exiting a driveway on 9"' Avenue S. He has also sent the Council pictures of a trailer one house away that
has been parked there for over a week that destroys visibility exiting driveways. He suggested there be
some rhyme or reason to removing parking as there is currently no rhyme or reason with regard to the
location of parking and residential driveways and he recommend a distance of more than 50 feet. He
supported the bike lanes and removing as much parking along 9"' Avenue S given its capacity and status
as commuter route.
Steve Kaiser, Edmonds, expressed support for the bike lanes. Unless parking spaces are private, they are
owned by the public and bike lanes are one use of that public space. Currently little money is spent on
transportation projects specifically for bicycles, according to one survey it is less than l%. This a small
step forward and he envisioned people will appreciate it more and more in the future.
Matthew Routt, Edmonds, a resident half a block from Yost Park, shared concerns related to parking
especially for events at Yost Park. As Mr. McMurray said, there were only 56 spaces in park which is not
sufficient for swim meets and other events at park. When the pool is open, it is common to see cars
parked on both sides of the street between 92°d Avenue W and 96"' Avenue W as well as to see cars
parked as far west as 10"' Avenue on Walnut. He urge the Council to reconsider where they are putting
the bike lane. He was not necessarily opposed to the bike lane, but felt there were better locations.
Bea Wilson, Edmonds, a resident on 9"' Avenue, said she was opposed to installing the bike lane where
suggested as she felt there were far better places for it. She agreed with a previous speaker that parking
outside Yost Parking during the summer is essential. She questioned why she did not receive information
about this much sooner.
(Written comments submitted to PubIicComment@Edmonds.wa.gov are attached)
6. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 6
Councilmember Buckshnis restated her intent in removing Item 6.3 from the Consent Agenda. City Clerk
Passey recommended the Council vote on approval of the Consent Agenda and then take up the items that
were removed.
Councilmember Paine referred to Item 6.2, Approval of Claim Checks and Wire Payments, noting an
abundance of Amazon purchases (page 69 of the packet). Not that Amazon was bad, but recognizing that
small businesses were struggling, she suggested directing some purchase decisions to other businesses.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 21, 2020
APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT
ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT
1. PROPOSAL TO EXTEND THE PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR PROGRAM
ADMINISTRATOR AT THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT(Previously Consent
Agenda Item 3)
Councilmember Buckshnis explained she pulled this from the Consent Agenda at the request of Public
Works Director Phil Williams so that the date of the extension of the personal service contract could be
changed from December 31, 2019 to December 31, 2020.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K.
JOHNSON, TO APPROVE AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. JUNE 2020 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT (Previously Consent Agenda Item 4)
Councilmember Buckshnis said she pulled this item from the Consent Agenda to vote no because
generally quarterly reports go through a vetting process either at committee or a committee of whole. She
appreciated that Acting Finance Director Turley added this to the Consent Agenda as it will be good to
have these financial for tomorrow's budget retreat and he plans to make a presentation next week.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she will vote yes as she contacted the Acting Finance Director and
got her questions answered.
Councilmember K. Johnson suggested waiting until the presentation was made next week.
Councilmember Distelhorst relayed the agenda memo for this item states no action needed, information
only. He questioned whether the Council was required to vote on this. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed
it had been scheduled on the Consent Agenda. Mayor Nelson said one of the challenges is there is no
place on the agenda for FYI items. City Clerk Scott Passey said the motion would essentially be to
acknowledge the report.
Council President Fraley-Monillas aid it was reasonable to acknowledge the report.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K.
JOHNSON, THAT THE COUNCIL ACKNOWLEDGE THIS REPORT, BUT IT 1S NOT
CONSIDERED A CONSENT ITEM.
Council President Fraley-Monillas encouraged the Council to support the motion as it is just an FYI. She
got her questions answered in advance. Just because it has not been presented to Council does not mean it
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 7
is not relevant. She encouraged Councilmember to vote against the motion and then vote for a motion to
accept the report.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented this is about public transparency. There have been many incidents
this year where the public has been excluded from looking at things asking questions or having it vetted.
Historically the financial statements have gone through committee, a committee of the whole or the
Council where they are vetted publicly. She disagree with setting a new precedent and having the report
on Consent without vetting or presentation to citizens.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said the report has been vetted by citizens; it has been out for 5-6 days
and any questions could have been submitted to staff. In light of COVID, the Council should not spend a
lot of time on mundane and usual things. She encouraged Councilmembers to vote against the motion and
have their questions answered next week.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she was glad one Councilmember had her questions answered; however,
as previously stated, this report usually goes through the finance committee. Since there was a committee
of the whole a week or two ago, this should have been discussed then. Since it wasn't and although it's
great to have this information in advance, until it's presented, she felt it was premature to adopt it. She
relied on the Council President and Council Pro Tern to follow the regular rules of business; this is highly
irregular ad COVID has nothing to do with it.
Councilmember Distelhorst commented if the Council waited for the report until committee night, it
would not be available for two more weeks, the second week of August. He appreciated the early notice
that Acting Director Turley has given Council and the public by including it in the packet. That visibility
provides more information for the budget retreat as well as next week's Council meeting.
Councilmember Buckshnis did not disagree with Cotmcilmember Distelhorst; she disagreed with the
statement that financial reports were mundane. During a COVID situation with economic issues, citizens
should have a presentation from staff like has occurred every other quarter.
Councilmember Paine raised a point of order, that Councilmembers have spoken twice. Mayor Nelson
suggested Councilmembers avoid restating the same arguments.
Councilmember Olson agreed with Councilmember Distelhorst's comment, but it is the same comment
that Councilmember Buckshnis is making, that the Council was happy with receiving the report but
whether it should be approved was the distinction between their approaches.
Councilmember Buckshnis restated the motion:
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE REPORT WAS PUT ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BUT THAT
DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSENTS TO ITS ACCURACY.
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS
AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND
COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
L. JOHNSON, TO APPROVE THIS ITEM.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED TO AMEND TO ACKNOWLEDGE IT IS PART OF
THE CONSENT AGENDA.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 8
Council President Fraley-Monillas accepted that as a friendly amendment to the motion and the seconder
agreed.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. JOINT MEETING
JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING BOARD
Development Services Director Shane Hope explained the joint meeting with Council is an opportunity
for the Planning Board to share their ideas and thoughts and to get Council thoughts and perspective.
Chair Daniel Robles reviewed:
Planning Board Members
o Todd Cloutier
January 2010
o Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig
March 2014
o Dan Robles (Chair)
May 2014
o Matt Cheung
October 2014
o Nathan Monroe
June 2015
o Alicia Crank
February 2016
o Mike Rosen (Vice Chair)
June 2017
o Roger Pence (Alternate)
July 2019
o Conner Bryan (Student Rep)
April 2019
Map of Members' residences in City
COVID-19 changes everything
o Focus on physical spaces
o Flexibility and resourcefulness
o Social consensus
o Shift in resource allocations
Knowledge Endowment
o Civil Engineer
o Software Designer and Program Manager
o Engineer/Business Owner
o Planner/Business Owner
o Construction manager
o Corporate relations officer
o Lawyer
o Marketing executive
o Transportation industry
o High school student
Top Work Priorities
1. Code updates implementing the Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) including updates
to tree regulations
2. Code updates reflecting Climate Change goals, including electric vehicle charging
infrastructure
3. Low -impact subdivision code updates
4. Code updates related to sidewalks requirements for new development
Ancillary Activities (provide necessary support to the primary activities of an organization
instruction or industry)
o Updates:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 9
■ Parks and recreation, housing commission, low- impact/stormwater review and updates,
PSRC Vision 2050, capital projects, comprehensive pan
o Joint meetings/liaison
A City Council, EDC, Architectural Design Board, Housing Commission, Tree Board
o Increase public engagement with Planning Board
■ Outreach, targeted announcements — social media, online attendance
• Conclusion
o Planning Board is available to serve a wide range of city needs
Board Member Carreen Nordling Rubenkonig said the 2020 work program was a response to the planning
department's direction and board members' concerns. The goal of the joint meeting is an affirmation of
the work program and/or adjustment by the City Council.
Councilmember K. Johnson, a former member of Planning Board and a planner, said she was always very
interested in these joint meetings. She relayed her understanding that the Planning Board planned to
review the floodplain regulations in six months. She suggested looking at the model floodplain ordinance
and not just do the minimum allowed but considering whether it is a good idea to allow for development
or redevelopment in the floodplain. Generally, if that is allowed, it can cost cities millions of dollars to
provide the kind of hardening, levies and pumps to get water out of areas where development has
occurred. She liked that there were only four priorities for this year and said the tree code is one of the
most important. She was interested in addressing not only public lands but also private lands, pointing out
the cutting of trees on private land for development. She recalled there had been a lot of discussion over
the past eight years about subdivision and PRD regulations, however, those are not on the list other than
low impact development. Another thing that is not on the list is the 5 Corners land use update.
Chair Robles said other items on the list include Highway 99 Subarea Plan Implementation, Buildable
T.nnric� Neiahhnrhood Center Plans and implementation, and Arehitectural Design Board review process
and policies. The four that were identified were the top priorities. Councilmember K. Johnson noted the
Work Plan in the packet included ten Planning Board priorities plus six updates, joint meetings, liaisons
with other citizen boards and public engagement. The topics she suggested, other than the tree code
update, were not on the work program.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she thoroughly enjoys reading the Planning Board's minutes and the
work they are doing, noting each board member has their own personality. The members are very
dedicated and their backgrounds are evident in their questions and comments. She recalled Chair Robles
saying the Planning Board looked at the bike lane code, pointing out they did not review the Sound
Transit bike lane project that was addressed during audience comments. Chair Robles said five years ago
the Planning Board considered north -south routes and getting people off the thoroughfares in Westgate
and north to 5 Corners. That was before e-bikes although they cautioned that e-bikes were coming.
Councilmember Buckshnis relayed her respect for Ms. Hope who has been leading the charge, noting she
also enjoyed her department summaries. She recalled last year the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee
had a company put.together a_greenhouse gas modeling tool that would be used to reduce greenhouse gas.
She asked if the Planning Board would be part of vetting that model. Chair Robles said the Planning
Board would like to see that as climate goals will influence code revisions. Councilmember Buckshnis
said it was being vetted through the Mayor's Climate Protection Committee and the Tree Board and
wondered when that would be presented to the Planning Board. Ms. Hope said the Planning Board will be
involved in climate change goals and the climate action plan; staff will be making a presentation to the
City Council about the project in the next week or two. More work will need to be done in the next few
months by the Climate Protection Committee, Tree Board, Planning Board and others. Councilmember
Buckshnis commented it was a very exciting model and she looked forward to the presentation.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 10
Councilmember L. Johnson said she watched the meeting online and appreciated the comments about
simplifying and prioritizing the most pressing and feasible topics particularly during COVID. She was on
board with the list of four items, noting they all have an environmental aspect. With regard to increased
public engagement, she appreciated the point about the student representative actively encouraging youth
participation and reaching out to the Youth Commission. As the Council liaison to the Youth Commission
and the mother of three teens, the Planning Board will be impressed, possibly even blown away, by the
perspective and contribution that youth can bring. She was encouraged that they were recognized as a
valued resource in the community.
Councilmember Paine agreed with the top four priorities and suggested including the Architectural
Design Board (ADB) design review process if possible this year. Chair Robles said getting the ADB
involved at the beginning could make a great deal of difference. Councilmember Paine was glad to see
that was on the Planning Board's list of priorities, although item 5, as that process needs attention. She
recognized the work the Planning Board does for the City and for the talents they bring to the table.
Councilmember Distelhorst voiced support for #2, Code updates reflecting Climate Change goals, as that
is very important work as well as addressing affordable housing in the City, although he recognized that
may have to wait for the Housing Commission's recommendations. He relayed two of his external
appointments are Snohomish County Tomorrow and the Alliance for Housing Affordability so he was
interested in the Planning Board's work to promote more affordable housing in Edmonds. Chair Robles
said the Planning Board was at the epicenter of the housing issue meltdown that led to the creation of the
Housing Commission. The Planning Board was glad the Housing Commission was formed to spearhead
ideas and provide feedback.
Councilmember Olson agreed with the top four priorities and was happy to see that the tree code was at
the top of the list, noting a lot of people have been waiting for that. She highlighted the code rewrite
related to sidewalks, commenting it becomes an equity issue where some homeowners are required to go
to great lengths and expense to include a sidewalk in their development or remodel and due to loopholes
or the way the code is written, it does not apply to other development.
Councilmember Olson said in looking at how big the City's budget has gotten over a 10-20 year period,
she wondered whether any consideration was given to utilization of City buildings and the possibility for
savings. For example, privatizing and preserving the historic elements of the Edmonds Museum. She has
attended meetings about developing a presence in other areas of the City where there is not as much
representation. If it were privatized, some of the things in the museum could be displayed elsewhere such
as a welcome station or a koban (Japan's take on a police station that is more friendly, where people can
get directions, etc.). That would avoid the City spending money on elevator updates, etc. Another
example is City Hall where there are empty office spaces that could be used to generate revenue. She
asked whether that was anything the Planning Board would delve into. Chair Robles said that was a new
ideas; baby steps needed to be taken as people get scared by new things. He noted in Japan, they will
build a building over a building they want to preserve. Ideas could include community workspaces,
intentional living, or repurposing larger spaces such as the auditorium in Frances Anderson Center as a
classroom where people could be spaced apart. He summarized everything is up to reinterpretation due to
COVID. The Planning Board could introduce ideas and then allow others to hash out what is practical.
Board Member Crank said she liked the idea but from a procedural standpoint anything with a fiscal
impact should come from Council and trickle down to the Planning Board. It likely would not go over
well for the Planning Board to make that type of recommendation to Council and create community
conflict. While she did not necessarily disagree, it was something for the Council to discuss and make a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 1 I
decision and refer it to appropriate groups. Chair Robles agreed it was up to the City Council to see the
Planning Board as a resource.
Councilmember Olson clarified she was not saying she would ever want to do that without having a full
conversation with the public. It was just a thought that could possibly be pursued but not before asking
the public how they felt about it.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said beyond asking the public, it takes a majority of the City Council
before moving forward with ideas. There have been issues in the past few years with the Planning Board
moving forward without a majority of City Council making a decision. It is important for citizens to
understand that the Planning Board does not proceed based on one, two or even three Councilmembers'
opinion, it must be a majority of the Council that makes that decision. The priority is code updates. She
expressed appreciation for everything the Planning Board does and for having a student representing the
perspective of the younger population.
Ms. Hope relayed her understanding that the Council in general was comfortable with the priorities the
Planning Board has identified, knowing that other things will come up including Climate Action and
other topics like the floodplain update. She asked for confirmation that the Council was satisfied with the
priorities.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked about the timeline for floodplain update, whether it would be six
months from the date the temporary was approved. Ms. Hope advised staff is working on it and it will
come back to the Council this year. Councilmember K. Johnson suggested that be on the list of priorities.
Ms. Hope agreed there were the four priorities mentioned in the presentation plus the floodplain update
and the Climate Action Plan.
The Council was agreeable with the work program.
Mayor Nelson declared a brief recess.
9. ACTION ITEMS
1. PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ECC 2 10 010 FOR COUNCIL REVIEW OF
APPOINTIVE POSITIONS
HR Director Jessica Neill Hoyson said this is continued discussion of a proposed code amendment to
ECC 2.10 Duties and confirmation of appointed officers. Last week the Council discussed adding a
provision to the code that would allow the Mayor to request a waiver of the three interview requirement
for a person who has been in an acting capacity as a director for a certain period of time and move
forward with confirmation of a single appointment. Subsequent to last week's meeting, she and Mr.
Taraday developed two potential code amendments: the first one was the same as was presented last week
with the proposed change to 2.10.010 which added language that allows the exemption for the one
applicant to move forward plus new language regarding if the person had been in an acting capacity for
three months, the Mayor could request the three candidate rule for interviews be waived.
Ms. Neill Hoyson explained after further discussion, there were other amendments to the code that staff
recommends Council consider for consistency. If the Council chooses to amend 2.10.010, they may also
want to consider the additional amendments in the alternate code amendment. The language in the code
section is very clear about the timing to begin recruiting for a director position and when it can be delayed
such as reorganization, salary and compensation review, etc. The amendment clarifies that recruiting did
not need to begin while someone was in the acting capacity and the Mayor would either begin recruiting
after four months or request the variance. With regard to the Mayor reappointing should the first
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 12
appointment lapse; the amendment clarifies the intent of that language is to require Council approval of
subsequent reappointments of an acting capacity even if there is a lapse in the initial appointment.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked what staff was trying to fix. This has been in the code for a long
time and the proposed language removes total authority from the Council regarding appointments. If a
Mayor made a temporary appointment, after six months they would have the authority to appoint without
Council approval, circumventing the Council's involvement. Ms. Neill-Hoyson said the Mayor would still
need to request of Council bringing forward a single candidate who has been in an acting capacity.
Council would need to approve that via a majority plus one. It does not give the Mayor carte blanche to
appoint without Council approval. It provides the Mayor the option to request this of Council and Council
could choose to not approve and request the other options, two or three candidates.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said the current policy requires the Mayor to present three candidates
for an administrative position. She understood the Mayor can still make a decision on one person, but the
proposal takes that process away entirely. Ms. Neill-Hoyson answered the vetting period would occur
during the temporary acting appointive period. It takes into account promotion from within and
encourages that and considers if there is a solid internal candidate who has been in an acting capacity,
whether it makes sense to go through a recruiting process.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked what happened if a Mayor was interested in appointing a person
who had been in the position for six months who may be an appropriate appointment for the Mayor but
was not appropriate for the City or for the Council. She asked if that took away the ability to make a
decision based on skill. In a political environment, if someone is appointed who will agree 100% with
whatever the Mayor tells them to do versus having them look at factors other than leadership approval,
that would be gone at that point. Ms. Neill-Hoyson said she was not tracking the difference between the
Iwo processes. In the end whatever process occurs, whether Council interviews three candidates or two or
the Council chooses to allow the except that allows only one candidate, the Council still has final
authority to approve the Mayor's selection for appointment.
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked what happened if the Mayor comes forward with one candidate
and a majority of the Council says no. Ms. Neill-Hoyson said the appointment would not move forward.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said there also would not be three candidates. Ms. Neill-Hoyson said if
one candidate is presented, the Council would interview the one person and approve or not approve the
appointment of a single candidate.
Councilmember Olson recalled the whole reason the Council liked this idea was allowing the Mayor to
appoint someone from within who the City already has experience with. She had not anticipated the
possibility that the temporary appointment could be someone who was not already a City employee. She
asked if the Mayor had the authority to choose someone to be an acting director before the appointment.
If so, she would want to add that caveat. Ms. Neill-Hoyson said as written it does not state that the Mayor
can only appoint current employees to an acting role. She agreed it would be odd to appoint an external
person to an acting role and she had not seen that happen, but the way the language is written, technically
that would be allowed. City Attorney Jeff Taraday agreed. If the Council felt strongly that this exception
should apply only to situations where it is promoting from within, that amendment could be made.
Councilmember Olson thanked Council President Fraley-Monillas for bringing that up as an option
because that had not occurred to her but was a distinction she wanted to address. She liked the other
proposed changes.
Councilmember Paine raised a procedural question, relaying she was not sure she understood why these
changes needed to be made now. If she did not want to vote for either option, she asked how that would
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 13
happen, whether she would vote no on both. Mr. Taraday advised there are two ordinances in the packet;
if there was a motion for Option A or B and she did not want either, she should vote no. Councilmember
Paine preferred to have an Option C which was no change. Mr. Taraday answered voting no is essentially
Option C. If neither ordinance is adopted, the code remains as is.
Councilmember Paine commented there were a series of dynamics that could crop up with these
configurations, and she was unsure any of them would be considered best practices for hiring particularly
a director or chief of police level position whether it was an either internal or external candidate.
Councilmember Distelhorst voiced caution regarding both options as he did not feel fully briefed or that
he understood all the elements well enough to vote on either one tonight. He appreciated Council
President Fraley-Monillas and Councilmember Olson bring up the possibility of someone external being
appointed acting and then moving to a permanent position. He also voiced concern with the word
"immediately" in Section 2.10.010(D), to interview any other candidate and proceed immediately to
confirming the appointment. If the code allowed for one person in an acting position to be brought
forward, lie felt strongly the Council should still have opportunity to interview that person and he was
concerned with what "immediately" meant, whether that right was waived and Council immediately voted
on the confirmation. There may be instances when he would be comfortable with proceeding to
confirmation but not immediate confirmation as he wanted to ensure the Council and the public were
familiar with the candidates that hold appointive positions.
Councilmember Buckshnis said last week's minutes reflect some good points made by Mr. Taraday. She
pointed out there have been candidates that previous Mayors selected that were confirmed by the Council
but were not the Council's favorite. She recalled examples where there were one, two or three candidates
and once where there was a new candidate due to a retirement. She did not have a problem with
promoting from within and was unsure that needed to added to Section F. She did not think the Mayor
should be able to recruit and appoint an interim witho„t Council confirmation or Coy ncil interview.
Councilmember Buckshnis recalled at last week's meeting Mr. Taraday said the Mayor can in fact
appoint whoever he wants and the Council can confirm or not, but it is still the Mayor's decision. Mr.
Taraday agreed the appointment power lies with the Mayor and confirmation power lies with the Council
and there cannot be a new director unless both of those things happen. Councilmember Buckshnis asked
if the Council confirmation had to be a majority plus one (supermajority). Mr. Taraday said it was just a
majority; a supermajority was only required to waive the interview requirement. Councilmember
Buckshnis recalled this had been done this in the past; Shawn Hunstock had been a one person interview
as was Mary Ann Hardie. She supported having the appointment of an acting director be someone from
within rather than the Mayor selecting someone to serve as acting for a period of time.
Councilmember L. Johnson said this was not personal, it is about policy and procedure, transparency and
public engagement and legislative voice. She had an issue with making a change to a City policy to
accommodate one position, a position that ironically was rooted in policy and procedure. It is a change
that would set a precedent and have long term implications. Right now police departments around the
country are under intense scrutiny and if there was ever a time to not only follow the policy and procedure
but to go the distance and make sure the best choice for Edmonds is made, this is that opportunity. She
was unable to support either of the proposals.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said the Council can currently waive the three person minimum and
have done that multiple times. She did not understand the urgency or need to move this forward. She was
aware of discussion about hiring internally versus externally; she reminded that none of the current
directors or managers were internal promotions and were all hired from outside the City. In her opinion
this was not about the Police Department or what was occurring now, this was about long term as this
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 14
changes the procedure going forward with future mayors. Changing this when there have not been any
problems is not respectful of the citizens and perhaps not respectful to the democratic process as far as
allowing decisions to be made openly in the public eye. Three different mayors have hired candidates
from throughout western Washington. She was uncomfortable with the thought that current employees
should get some level of special treatment or policy that allows them an easy entrance that external
candidates do not get.
Councilmember Olson said there has been conversation that the City Council has granted this exact
exception in the past and talking about granting it now without changing the code. In no way does adding
this exception limit the Mayor to internal hires; it just codifies the ability for the Mayor to ask for an
exception. The City has a history of not adhering to the code, to some degree because it has not been
updated. That is a very bad practice and the City should uphold its laws and include procedures in the law
that made make sense. Obviously if this has been done repeatedly in the past and there is discussion about
doing it now, it makes sense to have it as an exception which does not limit the exercise of that option.
With regard the point about current directors, she pointed out Acting Director Shannon Burley did a
brilliant job in that acting capacity; had she wanted the job, the Mayor may have wanted to appoint her so
why would the City go through the time and effort and moving expenses for a new director. She clarified
she was not saying the Mayor should always choose an internal candidate, but that should be an option.
Mr. Taraday clarified if neither ordinance is adopted, the Mayor will have no choice but to begin
recruiting for at least two candidates to fill the vacant position because there is currently no provision in
the code to waive down to only one candidate. Not adopting either ordinance forces the Mayor to begin a
recruitment process.
Councilmember K. Johnson said the number of candidates have been waived in the past without changing
the code for Mr. Hunstock and for Ms. Hardie. She asked why the code needed to be changed now. Mr.
Taraday said he was not sure those other provisions violated the code. If he remembered correctly, one of
those fell within one of the other exceptions in the code. However, he did not have all facts at the top of
his head so did not want to be quoted on this. If anyone wanted to confirm the facts of the past, they
should review past minutes. As of right now, unless the Council wanted to violate the code, there was no
way of confirming Assistant Chief Lawless as the Police Chief without forcing the Mayor to begin a
recruitment process.
Councilmember K. Johnson realized that Ms. Neill-Hoyson and Mayor Nelson are new to their jobs but
they are responsible for enforcing all the City codes and processes. It is a convoluted process, but it
sounds like recruitment should have begun after there was a vacant position no later than 30 days. She
appreciate that there were a couple different process, 1) the interim position, and 2) the appointive process
that includes Council confirmation. She recalled last week Mr. Taraday said Council confirmation wasn't
applicable and it was ultimately the Mayor's choice, but tonight he said both were needed to appoint a
director. Mr. Taraday said there are two different steps, the appointment step and the confirmation step.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked what happens if the Council does not confirm the Mayor's appointed
person. Mr. Taraday said the Mayor then has to appoint someone else, either someone who was already a
candidate or recruitment starts over.
Councilmember K. Johnson said this whole thing was handled very poorly due to COVID, the nationwide
recruitment, the appointive process, letting the appointment expire, a series of missteps. However, nothing
that has happened affects her confidence in Assistance Chief Lawless. She has known and worked with
him for eight years, he was retiring Chief Compaan's recommendation, and he has the support of the
existing Mayor as well as the rank and file in Police Department. It has been a great disservice to Mr.
Lawless to have this period of uncertainty plus not having a full negotiated salary and only a 5% increase.
She found fault with the process but the end result of appointing Mr. Lawless she could support
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 15
wholeheartedly. She recognized there was another appointed interim position in the Finance Department
so anything the Council does will have repercussions on that position as well.
Councilmember Buckshnis agreed with Councilmember K. Johnson. To Council President Fraley-
Monillas' comment, she pointed out Mary Ann Hardie was promoted from within and she was sure there
have been other instances. Shawn Hunstock was single candidate and she had the minutes that state then-
Councilmember Peterson made a motion to amend so the Mayor may opt to interview as few as one or
two candidates for the vacancy of an appointive office and that motion carried unanimously. She was
unsure why that was not included in Section C of the policy. She recalled when Ms. Neill-Hoyson and
Ms. Hite were interviewed there were two candidates. After Roger Neumeier left, the Council had already
interviewed Scott James and he was brought in via a confirmation.
Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated this had been done in the past without changing the code. She was
confused why a motion could not be made tonight to allow the Council to opt to interview as few as one
or two candidate as was done in 2014 and asked if it was only because there was a wonderful code person
in HR. Mr. Taraday said he recently looked at the minutes that Councilmember Buckshnis was
referencing where then-Councilmember Peterson made a motion to amend the proposed code; lie
specifically made a proposed amendment to the code that would have allowed Council to only interview
one candidate and that motion failed. The language that was adopted is what is in the code today. In 2014,
the Council did not want to have just one candidate to interview. The Council was not bound by that
decision; circumstances have changed and the Council was not thinking as much as they should have been
in 2014 about the possibility of hiring from within and that it might not make sense to recruit when there
was a great internal candidate. Similarly, if previous Councils violated the code, the Council was not
excused by their past violations.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she was not disagreeing with Mr. Taraday but she feels bad for Acting
Chief Lawless who has been doing a .stellar job and has been treated terribly. The fact of the ;natter is on
April 7, 2020, Mayor Nelson indicated he was going to appoint Lawless as Chief of Police. She did not
understand what happened and why this was still being belabored when there were examples of people
being promoted from within and when there had been one or two candidates.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked for clarification; if neither code amendment were adopted, the Mayor
would need to start a recruitment process. Based on the current code, he asked if that date had already
passed or when was it. Mr. Taraday said the code says 30 days from the vacancy. In light of how the code
has recently been interpreted to allow the expiration of an acting director to create a vacancy, it was 30
days from July 1 so pretty soon.
Councilmember Paine said she did not support either option and preferred to retain the current code. As
Councilmember K. Johnson stated, there are currently two vacancies. Everyone benefits from a
competitive process, internal and external candidates. There can be a strong panel to choose from and to
ask questions. Edmonds is a very desirable city to work for, it is a lovely location and the City is pretty
well run overall. Everybody benefits by bringing in external candidates even the internal candidates who
are strong candidates without a doubt. She recalled when Ms. Hite interviewed with the City of Redmond
and their indication that she was a strong candidate. She was very pleased with Ms. Feser who was hired
as the Parks & Recreation Director. The City has a strong process and existing processes that bring in the
best candidate and there are no issues with reduced expectations. Acting Chief of Police Lawless is a
doing a very good job and the City has a great police force and other things need to be encouraged. There
is always room for growth and she wanted to bring forward the best candidates for the City.
Councilmember Olson disagreed entirely with Councilmember Paine's assertion that Edmonds has been a
great city to work for; the circumstance with the police chief is a perfect case study. The acting police
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 16
chief took the desire for a national head hunt as a vote of no confidence. A national search is above and
beyond what is typically done when there is an internal candidate you love, usually the position is just
posted in -state. Thinking that he would not get hired by Edmonds, he began looking elsewhere and
making it far along in other processes until the entire City was notified of via press release on April 9"'
that Mayor Nelson intended to appoint him to the position.
Councilmember Olson said she would not want to work for the City right now because she was so
disappointed. People have said it's not personal but of course it is personal because people's lives are in
the mix. This has been an amateur hour, completely ridiculous and despicable and she was ashamed to
have had any part in it. She anticipated citizens will have a total cow with the Council and she hoped that
would be reflected in the elections in a year and a half if the Council was not supportive of one of the few
leaders in the City that has been above reproach in last few months and has acted so admirably. She hoped
Councilmembers thought about that and the loss to the community if the Council did not confirm Mr.
Lawless because if he was not selected as chief, she assured the City will lose him which would be so
disappointing.
Council President Fraley-Monillas found Councilmember Olson's comment about amateur hour
interesting coming from someone who has been on Council for six months as well as her threats that
Councilmembers would not be reelected because of this.
Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said her concern was public process and the fact that there were
discussions during the elections including by Councilmember Olson about public process. She did not see
this as amateur hour in any sense and she found threats very offensive. She recognized Mayor Nelson
who asked for an opportunity to speak regarding this issue.
Mayor Nelson said there have been a lot of bold statements about how the City should be run during a
crisis, during a pandemic that has not occurred in over 100 years and during a worldwide crisis that still
exists. When he came into office there was nothing like that. When he took office he did not have a
choice and was told who would be the acting chief so he was interested in having a choice. Then COVID
happened which changed how everything was done, but most importantly it changed how he saw the
acting chief. He got to work with him, see him handle these unprecedented times where there was no
playbook on how to respond, how to keep the community safe, how to keep officers safe. He has done an
outstanding job and he could not think of any other time period or thing the City has gone through to see
how someone can perform under those kind of stresses and rise to that occasion. He changed his mind and
decided Acting Chief Lawless was the best person for the City which was why he announced it. When he
announced it, he was very clear that it was up to Council confirmation; it was never a decision that he just
anointed. He understood that any appointment has to be confirmed by Council and that was what he was
seeking. He believed Acting Chief Lawless could do the job because he was doing it right now; the future
is unknown, this crisis is not over, and the numbers are going up. He was very doubtful there would be
candidates who would be able to apply and could do any of the things a leader needs to do during this
crisis; Acting Chief Lawless was the best person for the job.
Council President Fraley-Monillas said she did not disagree with Mayor Nelson in whole,
Councilmember K. Johnson raised a point of order, stating a Councilmember was only allowed to speak
twice on a subject and Council President Fraley-Monillas has already spoken twice. Mr. Taraday said
Roberts Rules of Order says a member is not supposed to speak twice in a row and that the speaking
opportunities are to be shared evenly across the Council but there is no total number of times a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 17
Councilmember is allowed to speak. Mayor Nelson said he would allow Council President Fraley-
Monillas to continue.
Council President Fraley-Monillas appreciated what Mayor Nelson said about Mr. Lawless, but did not
think there should be an issue or concern with bringing other names forward. Everyone seems to be in
support of Mr. Lawless but she wanted the code to be followed and to allow the public to have input. She
understood this had been a very interesting time in the City with COVID and everything else that has
occurred but she wanted to follow the code moving forward.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K.
JOHNSON, FOR AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, CREATING
AN EXCEPTION TO THE THREE -INTERVIEW REQUIREMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE
CITY COUNCIL'S CONFIRMATION OF THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF APPOINTIVE
OFFICERS.
Mr. Taraday asked for clarification regarding which version of the ordinance was being moved, if
Councilmember Buckshnis was moving the one with more changes. Councilmember Buckshnis said she
was moving the ordinance with the lesser amount of changes that allows the Mayor to go ahead with the
process. She thought it was the second one. Ms. Neill-Hoyson said the ordinances are titled differently,
one is the alternate code amendment and the other is the code amendment. Councilmember Buckshnis
answered the ordinance she was moving was the code amendment; the shorter ordinance references an
acting director and interviewing one candidate.
Council President Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order, stating this was getting too confusing. She
recommended Councilmember Buckshnis clarify whether it was the first or second ordinance.
Councilmember Buckshnis said it was the second ordinance which has the least amount of change but
allows the mayor to request an exception to the three interview requirement, on page 146 of the packet.
She wholeheartedly believed in everything that Mayor Nelson said. She was speechless regarding how
this has played out and she hoped things could be moved forward.
Councilmember Olson apologized to the City Council, Mayor and staff for her inappropriate comment.
She would be pleased for the Council to validate these actions by passing the ordinance on packet page
146. This is a change that needs to be exercised now and possibly in the future. It in no way encourages
the Mayor to avoid the public or more competitive process but allows it in a circumstance like this. She
supported making this change so that the Council can comply with the code in this and other
circumstances that may or may not arise again.
Councilmember K. Johnson expressed support for the motion as nothing in it prevented Council
confirmation. Even if the Mayor chose to have one candidate, there would still be a confirmation process.
She relayed an interesting suggestion from a very prominent citizens; because the community is so
interested in the selection of the police chief, he suggested a virtual open house to give people who do not
know Interim Chief Police Lawless an opportunity to meet him and have some greater discussion. She
supported- the- motion and said it has been a disservice to the Police Department not to have resolved this
immediately before COVID hit.
COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
AMEND TO ADD LANGUAGE TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THIS ONE PERSON EXCEPTION
WAS TO BE MAINTAINED FOR INTERNAL CANDIDATES ONLY ACTING AS THE ACTING
DIRECTOR.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 18
Councilmember Distelhorst asked what language would be inserted and where in Section D. Mr. Taraday
suggested the word "someone" be replaced with "an internal candidate" so it would read, "and further
provided that when the mayor appoints an internal candidate who has served for at least three months as
an acting director...".
Councilmember Paine asked if that change would preclude an external candidate. Mr. Taraday answered
yes.
In response to Councilmember Paine's comment, Councilmember Olson clarified this was for the one
interview exception that the Mayor could request, not that there wouldn't be other candidates at other
times.
Councilmember K. Johnson expressed support for the amendment, agreeing that applying it to internal
candidates was good idea.
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K.
JOHNSON, TO AMEND, AT THE END OF SECTION D WHERE IT STARTS, "WAIVE THE
REQUIREMENT TO INTERVIEW ANY OTHER CANDIDATES," CHANGE THE REST OF
THE SENTENCE TO READ, "AND PROCEED TO INTERVIEW AND POSSIBLE
CONFIRMATION OF THE APPOINTMENT."
Councilmember Olson asked in the case where there's only a single candidate and some of the process is
being removed, should the interview be a public interview or open house rather than a council only
interview. Councilmember Distelhorst suggested this would leave those possibilities open.
Councilmember Distelhorst restated the amendment:
"...WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT TO INTERVIEW ANY OTHER CANDIDATES AND
PROCEED TO INTERVIEW AND POSSIBLE CONFIRMATION OF THE APPOINTMENT."
UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT CARRIED (4-3), COUNCILMEMBERS K. JOHNSON,
DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FRALEY-MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
FRALEY-MONILLAS, TO AMEND SECTION D, "...THE CITY COUNCIL MAY, BY MOTION
ADOPTED BY A M-AJORITY PLUS ON UNANIMOUS VOTE OF THE FULL COUNCIL,
WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT TO INTERVIEW..."
Council President Fraley-Monillas asked for clarification, if the Mayor brings one choice to waive the
three candidate rule, does there need to be seven votes or to appoint there needs to be seven votes.
Councilmember Distelhorst answered seven votes would be needed to the waive requirement to interview
one person and confirmation would just be a majority. Council President Fraley-Monillas observed that if
one Councilmember disagreed with bringing only one candidate forward, the Mayor would have to
present three candidates for interview. Councilmember Distelhorst answered yes, either three or two and
two would require a super majority vote.
Councilmember K. Johnson said she was not aware of any decisions by the Council that was required to
be unanimous. Mr. Taraday said he could also not think of any. Councilmember K. Johnson said it was
usually a majority or super majority. She concluded this was a poor precedent to set.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 19
Councilmember Paine expressed concern that that was too high of a hurdle. She preferred to start the
recruitment process rather than that high of a hurdle.
Councilmember Olson agreed with Councilmembers K. Johnson and Paine, that it would be harder to get
the waiver for one interview than to confirm.
AMENDMENT FAILED (1-6), COUNCILMEMBER DISTELHORST VOTING YES.
Councilmember Buckshnis restated the motion:
ON PAGE 146 OF THE PACKET, PASS AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, CREATING AN EXCEPTION TO THE THREE -INTERVIEW REQUIREMENT
ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL'S CONFIRMATION OF THE MAYOR'S
APPOINTMENT OF APPOINTIVE OFFICERS.
Mr. Taraday pointed out there two amendments were passed that amended the version in the packet.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
DISTELHORST, TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:30 P.M. UPON ROLL CALL,
MOTION CARRIED (6-0-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS AND
COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, BUCKSHNIS, OLSON, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON
VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON ABSTAINING.
UPON ROLL CALL, MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED FAILED (3-4), COUNCILMEMBERS K.
JOHNSON, BUCKSHNIS, AND OLSON VOTING YES; AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS AND COUNCILMEMBERS DISTELHORST, PAINE AND L. JOHNSON VOTING
NO.
Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested proceeding with the update to the City's Fireworks
Ordinance and move the other items to the next meeting. She did not see the Council completing all the
times before midnight and once it gets to 11:00, she felt the Council was making poor decisions.
Councilmember Distelhorst wanted to ensure there were no pressing dates for the Six Year Transportation
Improvement Program which he thought had a July 15t due date or for the Sound Transit funding
agreement. Public Works Director Phil Williams answered his understanding was all bets were off due to
COV1D. Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss said this week or next would be fine for both items.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked if there was any point for her to make a motion to approve the other
ordinance.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE OTHER ORDINANCE, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, CREATING AN EXCEPTION TO THE THREE -INTERVIEW
REQUIREMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE CITY COUNCIL'S CONFIRMATION OF THE
MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT. OF APPOINTIVE OFFICERS, VERSION 1.
Councilmember Olson said that ordinance was better than not having this opportunity.
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked Mayor Nelson for his heartfelt statement. As he said earlier, he was
not ready this week. The Council had had some discussion last week and then a new ordinance was
presented this week. He was unsure if the Mayor could delay starting a recruitment process an extra 3-4
days, but he would appreciate an extra week to have a bit more input and understanding on the proposed
amendments.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 20
Councilmember Olson said as a point of order this was not a study item, but was scheduled as an action
item which was not the Council's practice.
Council President Fraley-Monillas requested the maker of the motion withdraw the motion.
Councilmember K. Johnson declined to withdraw the motion.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS CALLED THE QUESTION. CALL FOR THE
QUESTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBER PAINE AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-
MONILLAS VOTING YES.
Councilmember K. Johnson said it was important to make this motion and consider it carefully; however
if it fails, she would like to bring it back for continued discussion next week.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
DISTELHORST, TO TABLE THIS UNTIL NEXT WEEK.
Council President Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order, a motion to table was not debatable.
Councilmember Olson raised a point of order, asking whether there was time to wait until next week
based on the recruitment process.
Mr. Taraday said even though the word "table" was used, he understood it as a motion to postpone to a
certain time which is debatable.
Council President Fraley-Monillas raised a point of order, according to Roberts Rules of Order a motion
to table is very specific.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW THE MOTION.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER K.
JOHNSON, TO POSTPONE TO NEXT WEEK.
Councilmember Buckshnis said this is important and although she wished the Council could vote on it
tonight, she will gladly give Councilmember Distelhorst or any Councilmember extra time to review the
ordinance.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON WITHDREW HER MOTION.
Councilmember Olson wanted to ensure there would be time based on the recruitment issue. Mr. Taraday
relayed the code states "begin recruitment of candidates," but does not define what that means. If the
Mayor takes some action within the 30 days to begin recruitment of candidates, he has satisfied the code
requirement.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. 2021-2026 SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Due to the late hour, this item was postponed to a future meeting.
3. APPROVAL OF SOUND TRANSIT FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR CITYWIDE
BICYCLE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 21
Due to the late hour, this item was postponed to a future meeting.
10. STUDY ITEMS
1. REVIEW OF COUNCIL CODE OF CONDUCT
Due to the late hour, this item was postponed to a future meeting.
ORDINANCE UPDATING THE CITY'S FIREWORKS CODE
Mayor Nelson said he commented on this previously following the most recent 4"' of July and requested
the City Attorney draft an ordinance. After realizing how outdated the City code is in this area, some
things 25 years old, and to kick off why that is important when the dangers of fireworks have not declined
and to update where other communities are with regarding to enforcement and education, he invited South
County Fire Chief Hovis and Assistant Chief Kevin Zweber to speak to [lie Council.
Assistant Chief Zweber, fire marshal for South County Fire (SCF) including the City of Edmonds, spoke
in support of the proposed code amendment. The use of personal fireworks has consequences that are
both predictable and preventable. Fireworks put people, property and the environment at risk every 4"' of
July and can result in numerous things including property loss with the potential of serious economic
impacts. Since 2005 SCF has had more than $3.5 million in property loss related to fireworks. The
average annual fire loss due to fireworks is about $43 million. Death or serious injuries can occur; 12,000
firework injuries are treated in U.S. hospitals annually. Seventy percent of fireworks injuries are sustained
by males, 36% of injuries were to children younger than 15 and children ages 10 to 15 have the highest
estimated rate of emergency room treated fireworks related injuries. An average of more than 7 fireworks
related deaths occur annually in the nation between 2002 and 2017.
The danger, stress and anxiety to pets and wildlife are widespread. PAWS, which has a shelter located in
SCF's service area, reports an increase in lost dogs and cats in the days before, during and after fireworks
use due to the loud noises and bright lights which cause fear, anxiety and confusion. Structural fires and
injuries make headlines, but the most common complaint SCF hears from residents is the loss of their
sense of security. They fear leaving home on the 4"' of July because of fireworks use in their
neighborhoods. This past 4"' of July, SCF responded to a fireworks incident where a citizen lost a portion
of their hand while trying to throw a mortar. Deaths related to fireworks occurred in both Marysville and
Mt. Vernon this year.
As the City's Fire Department, SCF is committed to community risk reduction. This means identifying
risks within the community and developing effective strategies to mitigate risks. The City's fireworks ban
is one of those risk reduction strategies, but bans have shown to be only partially effective in reducing
property loss and injuries and it is clear fireworks bans have not been completely effective in changing
behaviors. SCF supports the proposed code amendment and is committed to working together on code
enforcement, public information and community outreach to educate the communities they serve about
the risk of fireworks, fireworks bans and attending professional community fireworks displays as a better
alternative to using personal fireworks.
Councilmember Distelhorst said 4"' of July is his birthday; he supports these code amendments due to
their importance to the community. He asked about SCF's experience working with police departments in
their service areas in the past, whether it was only educating people about the code or have they been
enforcing and ticketing violators. Assistant Chief Zweber said all the cities SCF serves have fireworks
bans. Most police department are trying to be sensitive and educate the public rather than initially write
citations, but in the past that has not resulted in changed behaviors. These incidents continue to occur,
structural fires and definitely injuries. He was unsure if the education process by the police department
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 22
was effective. He heard when Marysville enacted their ban, their citation was quite stiff and although it
was typically reduced in court, it got people's attention, they saw good statistics after that ban and it was
effective in curbing illegal fireworks in the City of Marysville.
Councilmember Distelhorst asked if increasing the fine from $50-$150 to up to $1000 would be enforced.
Assistant Chief Zweber answered yes. Chief Hovis said SCF also served Mountlake Terrace and Brier
before regionalizing with what was Fire District 1; in the most egregious cases the police departments
usually cite after multiple visits to a home and requests to stop. He talked with the Fire Chief in
Marysville where there was a fatality on the 4' of July as well as a serious injury. In many cases when
that happens, there is not the will to cite because something so terrible happened which skews the data
somewhat.
Mayor Nelson said in addition to updating the ordinance, he has asked SCF to partner in education and
enforcement so it is not just the police but also fire marshals enforcing the code as well begin a robust
education and enforcement campaign prior to next 41h of July.
Councilmember Paine agreed with the changes, commenting on the importance of enforcement having an
education component. She appreciated everything the fire department does. Assistant Chief Zweber said
part of SCF's outreach program falls under the fire prevention division where a total of five people are
committed to community outreach on all different programs including the ACT program, school programs
teaching children about fire safety, etc. SCF has gone beyond especially during the COVID situation to
educate and are actually finding greater success with education via technology than in person.
Council President Fraley-Monillas thanked Assistant Chief Zweber and Chief Hovis for their assistance
and their support of a higher fine. She lives near Lake Ballinger and woke up on July 5"' to find bottle
rockets in her yard and on her roof, things that could have set her house on fire. She emphasized
fireworks are not a necessity and she appreciated SCF's agreement with increasing the fines which will
make people think twice. People still lighting off fireworks in her neighborhood when it's obvious a
Councilmember lives there which shows they do not worry about what happens if they get caught. She
expressed support for the ordinance updating the City's Fireworks Code.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she is in full support of the ordinance. She is involved in the dog
community and things were out of control this year. People know where she lives and they still light off
fireworks. She relayed the dog community's question whether the ordinance will be enforced and how it
will be enforced to ensure fines occur. Many people call the police to report fireworks on the 4"' of July
and they are always too busy. Assistant Chief Zweber said the proposed ordinance includes empowering
the fire marshal and designees with police powers and of course the police department for enforcement
purposes as well as changing it from a civil infraction to a criminal infraction. That topic will need to be
worked through with the police chief because he holds the power to grant limited commissions for
enforcement. He discussed that with Acting Chief Lawless and it sounded like agreement could be
reached if the police department needed SCF's assistance with enforcement. Mayor Nelson said the intent
is to not just rely on the police but have fire marshals and others assist in enforcement because the police
are overwhelmed. Councilmember Buckshnis said it only takes 1-2 tickets and then the word gets out.
She summarized it was great to have rules, but enforcement was key.
Councilmember K. Johnson recalled when she was growing up, there were two kinds of fireworks, the
legal ones available at the grocery store and the illegal ones purchased out of state or on Indian
reservations. She asked if that was still the case today. Assistant Chief Zweber answered yes. The
Washington State Patrol, who regulates explosives in the state, puts out a document every year to educate
fire departments on what is legal and illegal. Typically the fireworks sold in stands in the local
community are legal fireworks and the ones sold at other places such as the Indian reservations are illegal.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 23
Councilmember K. Johnson asked if sparklers and snakes were still legal. Assistant Chief Zweber
answered yes, under the ban there is an exception for sparklers and snake type things. Typically if a
fireworks fly into the sky and explodes, it is illegal.
Councilmember K. Johnson asked the difference between a civil infraction and a misdemeanor in terms of
enforcement and a person's record. Mr. Taraday answered potentially jail time and the burden of proof.
Criminal offenses carry a higher burden of proof than a civil offense. Councilmember K. Johnson asked if
it would be prosecuted at the municipal level. Mr. Taraday said that was his understanding.
Councilmember K. Johnson said this had been a great discussion, she believed there was a problem that
needed to be resolved and she appreciated the Council debate, but before she could act on this, the City
should touch base with the judge and the acting police chief. She recommended postponing this to a date
in the future depending on scheduling and availability of those key people.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
POSTPONE THIS TO A DATE IN THE FUTURE DEPENDING ON SCHEDULING AND THE
AVAILABILITY OF THE JUDGE AND THE ACTING POLICE CHIEF.
Councilmember Distelhorst raised a point of order, stating not all Councilmembers have spoken and this a
study item.
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON WITHDREW THE MOTION.
Councilmember K. Johnson reiterated the need to include these key people when discussing enforcement.
SCF will not do all the enforcement; they will help with education and the fire marshal can be deputized.
Councilmember L. Johnson reported this year in particular it sounded like a war zone and was coming
from all directions. As the daughter and sister of veterans who have served multiple tours, she was very
cognizant of the impact this can have on veterans as well as others with PTSD in addition to the physical
safety and fire risk and impact on pets. It doesn't happen on just one evening; it tends to go for multiple
days. She was in favor of the code update and would be comfortable with it being on Consent next week
or as an action item.
Councilmember Olson agreed independent fireworks are not consistent with an urban environment and
are asking for trouble. As Councilmember K. Johnson stated, she was concerned with the change from
civil to criminal. The fine should be high enough that it is a deterrent and that people know the City plans
to enforce it. She had reservations and concerns that warrant thought from Councilmembers before this is
an action item on the agenda, thinking about what it would mean to have something criminal on a
person's record in terms of future employment. Offenders tend to be young people and she was unsure
about burdening them with a criminal charge, particularly if it was a first offense. She suggested it could
be for a second offense.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
L. JOHNSON, TO EXTEND FIVE MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED (6-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER
K. JOHNSON-ABSTAINING.
In response to Councilmember Olson, Assistant Chief Zweber said in discussion with Acting Chief
Lawless regarding the change from a civil to a criminal offense, the civil process is much lengthier and is
not just writing a ticket. He deals with code enforcement in all cities and agreed criminal was much easier
in his experience. He envisioned that was likely one of the reasons for that change in the proposed
ordinance. Councilmember Olson suggested making that part of the education component, that people
would not want to have that on their record.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 24
Councilmember K. Johnson looked forward to discussing this again. She suggest a warning for a first
offense, $500 fine for a second offense and $1000 for a third offense.
Assistant Chief Zweber said it was great to see familiar faces and he looked forward to meeting the new
Councilmembers outside this forum. The Council will see him early next year for code amendments.
11. REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMISSION MEETING
Due to the late hour, this item was postponed to a future meeting.
12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Nelson reported the Snohomish Health District released information today showing the overall
numbers in Snohomish County continue to go up; 97.2/100,000 residents which is virtually identical to
March 15. The difference is the age group; only 5% of those cases are for those 70 years or over and 55%
are in ages 15-39, indicating an overwhelming amount of young people are spreading the virus like
wildfire. It will only get worse unless people wear masks and practice social distancing. In Yakima where
there was 95% compliance with masks, their numbers are going down. He summarized masks do work
and they do save lives.
13. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Distelhorst thanked everyone for their input on the Sound Transit bicycle improvement
plan project and he appreciated all the productive discussions.
Councilmember Buckshnis thank everyone who has reached out to her. To WNBA fans, she said Seattle
Storm are playing and their games are on TV, go Storm.
Councilmember Paine appreciated Mayor Nelson's comments about the region's collective health. She
reminded that wearing a mask will help us all get through this together. She appreciate everyone's
comments tonight and the lively discussion; parking and bike lanes are always a hot topic. She plans to
follow up with Mr. Williams regarding 96t" & 224"' SW, she used to live down the hill and knows the
intersection well as it was on her bike route.
COUNCILMEMBER L. JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
DISTELHORST, TO EXTEND FOR THREE MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED (6-0-1),
COUNCILMEMBER K. JOHNSON ABSTAINING.
Councilmember Olson said decorum is important and she apologized to the citizens and her fellow
electeds for categorizing recent events in an unflattering way. She tries to live by impatience with herself
and patience with others and she fell short tonight.
Councilmember K. Johnson said Councilmember Olson was forgiven, everyone makes mistakes and can
learn from them. She wished everyone be well and fill out their census. Anyone who hasn't completed
their census will have a census taker come to their home by the end of the month to answer the ten
questions on the form.
With regard to the information from Snohomish Health District, Council President Fraley-Monillas said
that is four times the acceptable amount of people to test positive for COVID in a day. During COVID,
she has been reading a lot including the book, "White Fragility, Why It Is So Hard for White People to
Talk About Racism." She encouraged the Council to order the book, written by a white person, or read it
online.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
.fuly 28, 2020
Page 25
Councilmember L. Johnson thanked everyone who has emailed her. She urged the public to please wear
masks -and -help -get us -out of -this -mess.
14. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:37 p.m.
MICHAEL NELSON, MAYOR
SCOTT PASSEY, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 26
Councilmember L. Johnson thanked everyone who has oniailed her. She urged the public to please wear
masks and help get us out of this mess,
14. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:37 p.m.
M-ItHAEL NELSON, MAYOR
&OTT A57SEY, CFF CL6R
Edmonds City Council Approved.Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 26
Public Comment for July 28, 2020 Council Meeting:
7/28/20 Inez Taylor, Subject: On street parking on Bowdoin Way to be removed if decided by
Council
We have just moved to this area from South King County and live in a cul-de-sac with two
parking spaces only outside our garage on Bowdoin Way. We expected to have some street
parking if necessary for family gatherings. Now it may be that parking is removed from both
sides of the road. This street is not that easy for bicycles and it goes up and down. We walk to
Yost Park often and see that many scooters and bikes are motorized to manage this road. It
seems very abrupt to only know of this through a flyer left at our door Friday evening. An
outside agency like Sound Transit that goes over budget and over any real deadlines for its own
projects now can come with this grant and disrupt a relatively quiet street compared to Main
Street and remove all street parking? Surely there should be more of a survey of how practical
and useful this might be to the actual residents. I am sure other small houses near us would
also be negatively impacted. We are not sure how maintenance trucks can come for repairs or
re -modeling or tree service. This seems an extreme measure. Please consider removal of only
one side if at all. I have seen no heavy bike traffic or special lane need. There are also the
many months of cold weather, rain and low visibility. I hope these considerations can be heard.
7/28/20 Lora M. Hein, Subject: 224th intersection Comment cut short at 28 July meeting
(Trimmed to 443 words) I thank all of you for your dedication and hard work in the midst of so
many challenges. I hope you had some quiet over the weekend to rest in preparation for this
week. About 9:00 a.m. Sunday morning, I was having a cup of tea, getting a little calm and
peace before a full day. I heard SQUEE, Bam, THUMP. I knew where it had come from. Similar
sounds are frequent from the intersection of 96th Ave. W and 224th St. SW, 3 houses west.
This was new — I imagined a body impacted, flung, landing broken, bleeding on the pavement.
rushed to the door, put on shoes, and dashed outside. Neighbors were converging on two
broken vehicles, one facing east on the south side of 224th, the other at an angle on the NE
corner sidewalk, driver's side caved in, side air bag obscuring windows and open door, except a
limp leg. Enough people were there, none masked and I saw no phones. I went inside to call 9-
1-1. The dispatcher informed me another call had been received and officers were en route.
One Edmonds police car arrived, another, then a motorcycle. A firetruck with 3 emergency
personnel showed up. A neighbor brought a broom to sweep up broken glass as vehicles wove
through people criss-crossing the intersection. This is not the first incident at this corner. Many
efforts over decades have attempted making this school crossing a 4-way stop. Traffic coming
from the west has just crested a hill from 100th. Having accelerated up that grade, cars often
exceed the 30 mph (25 when children are present) speed limit by the time they reach the
intersection. Stopped North -bound cars may have not noticed a sign, shaded by trees, saying
"cross -traffic does not stop." Those drivers must pull forward to look both ways. They then see
the crosswalk to their left and assume cars from the west — difficult to see beyond 3 big trees —
are stopping. They proceed, and Scree -wham! I've heard and seen near misses, fender
benders, but not the sound of an air -bag deployed. This intersection is a thoroughfare of
neighbors near & far, walking one of the few sidewalks locally. Some follow children on bikes
with training wheels, others recently progressed to riding on their own. Scooters, strollers, dogs
and skateboards, bicyclists with and without trailers, some with children aboard, elders returning
home with groceries. How much do a pair of stop signs cost weighed against the life of a child
or parent? How are numbers of 4-way stops calculated against lives? Must it come to that?
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 27
7/28/20 Judy-B Wilson, Subject: Opposed to Dedicated Bike Lanes on 9th South
Bea Wilson, 1033 9th Ave S, Edmonds, WA 98020
1 called in with comment & was recognized as last 4 numbers as 0976. 1 was addressed as
Justin, but I identified self as Bea Wilson. Then there was no response, apparently I could hear
you but you couldn't hear me. I think adding bike lanes would become a bigger safety issue
slowing down exceedingly fast-moving, heavy traffic. Safety issue for bikers and residents
trying to cross to their homes. I have witness accidents from my window when Cars are backed
up bumper to bumper from the 4 way stop intersections during peak traffic causing rear end
accidents to occur. That issue should be addressed and resolved before creating safety for
pedestrians.
7/28/20 Jim Carraway, Subject: Final point
My third and most important concern is communication. I find it funny the city does not notify
residents who will be directly impacted by these types of projects, but the city's building
department does notify residents when neighbors are proposing changes to their property. The
councilwoman's response to my public comment including the following
statement. "Unfortunately, there has been some misinformation shared regarding this
project." I'm assuming that is in reference to the flyer left around my neighborhood. While the
flyer may have misstated some of the facts of the project, it got me to act. When I went to verify
its information on the city's website, I couldn't find anything other than the press release issued
last fall. Even the presentation to the council last week which the councilwoman shared only
has one bullet point regarding speeding and doesn't show which streets will be
addressed. Combine that with Mr. Hauss' comments earlier in the year, speeding on Walnut will
not be addressed which has been one of my primary concerns with living in Edmonds. So, the
final question becomes — how to address misinformation and the lack of information? I still
receive NextDoor notifications regarding projects from the City of Kenmore where I used to
live. These notifications even have links to project documentation more detailed than council
notes and presentations. It would be nice if the city could implement this or if this does exists,
evangelize it, because right now the citizens of Edmonds are left in the dark. Thank you.
7/28/20 Albert Cohen, Subject: Parking removal on 9th Ave South
We are adamantly opposed to giving over parking on 9th Ave South for recreational bike lanes.
They may serve a purpose in dense traffic of downtown Seattle for urging more bicycling
commuters, but are hardly appropriate for small town, residential Edmonds. We don't even have
a major bus line on 9th Ave South. Our objections rise from the fact the we, and everyone who
lives on the East side of the street, has to deal with steep driveways in icy weather (and the
West side too, I suspect) and need to park at the bottom of our hills. Parking on side streets is
not an option as most of those are steeper still.
In addition, many of us share driveways that lead to limited -parking. The council has followed
the planner's lead in limiting our impervious surface area as being healthy for the environment
and good storm water management. If this bike lane program becomes the reality of 9th Ave.,
we will need to add some additional parking on our property to accommodate guests, especially
the elderly that cannot walk several blocks from a side street. Recreational bikers are getting
exercise, so why cannot they use the parallel side streets that are safer and connect to the
same locations. I suspect they already do use them, because it is generally a rare event to see
a bicycle rider on 9th Ave S. In conclusion, we feel this is not appropriate for Edmonds, and 9th
Ave South is not "expendable" for the city to look 'hip' or'vogue'. I notice you are not urging
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 28
bike lanes on 5th Ave South, saying this will encourage recreational visitors to the downtown
core and solve parking issues downtown. You know that would never fly. This is simply not a
good idea as it benefits so few, and penalizes many residential homeowners, unlike anywhere
else in Edmonds.
7/28/20 John Hotmail Larpenteur, Subject: SoundTransit bicycle improvements
Please support the changes offered by SoundTransit to add bicycle amenities in Edmonds.
Increasing safety and bicycle awareness will improve Edmonds. The benefits for recreation,
transportation, health and improved air quality are all worthy. Becoming more bicycle friendly
will attract tourists and business to Edmonds. The additions of 'sharrows' to 80th Ave W
between 220th SW and 228th SW and the improvements on 228th will complete an excellent
route connecting the existing bicycle infrastructure to the bicycle route leading to the Mountlake
Terrace Park & Ride, a future lite rail station, and the Interurban Trail. This route also continues
to routes leading to Lake Forest Park and the Burke Gilman Trail. Please support this offer from
SoundTransit.
7/28/20 Nathan Proudfoot, Subject: Public Bike infrastructure
I would like to support the idea of improved cycling infrastructure. I am unsure of the public input
process that took place in deciding on these locations for improvement and have been
advocating for cycling infrastructure/. path going through yost park for some time. This
continues to be overlooked as a family friendly location for improved cycling infrastructure. I
know that my words mean little to the overall goal as when money is available it speaks. please
move forward in the direction that has the least resistance. Thank you.
7/28/20 Kent Smith, Subject: 7/28/20 Meeting- Support for Approval of Citywide Bicycle
Improvement Project
On behalf of parents and coaches of the Edmonds Middle School (6tn_8tn grade) and High
School (9th-12th grade) mountain bike teams we wholeheartedly support the efforts for the
addition of dedicated bike lanes on Bowdoin Way from 5 Corners to Yost Pool; further down
Walnut to 9th Avenue South and from Walnut on 9th Avenue South and 100th Avenue West the
entire way to Firdale Village. In our six years of existence we have seen participation in our
team's grow from one team consisting of nine riders the first year to over sixty riders for the
2020 season. From a higher level view, the state-wide league in which we participate has grown
for around 300 riders when we joined in 2015 to around 1,000 for 2020. Being in Edmonds we
do not have off -road riding spaces available. Many of these riders ride all year round and can be
found riding the streets around Edmonds. In addition, many of our coaches, parents, and riders
commute to school/work and run errands by bike using the very roads and routes that are on
the list for the dedicated bike lanes. This is a great opportunity to add to our cycling
infrastructure and promote a healthy and alternative form of transportation and exercise.
7/28/20 Allan & Nancy Rustad, Subject: Proposed Bike Lanes on 9th Ave.S.,100th Ave.W. &
Bowdoin Wy.
This issue came to my attention via a posting on a neighborhood forum web site, just a few days
ago. I had seen no notice in the Edmonds Beacon, or other publication. I expect the plan would
be similar to the bike lane striping on NW185th St/Richmond Beach Road in Shoreline. My wife
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 29
and I agree that this does not seem like a good idea, considering the consequent complete loss
of street parking, especially on 100th Ave.W -.9th ave.S in the area immediately North of Hwy
104. There is street parking by QFC employees and others daily along the Edmonds Cemetery,
and further North, especially on the West side of the street.. The QFC/Goodwill parking lot is
commonly filled to capacity, and across the street, the PCC/Wallgreens lot is not quite as full.
The message I have received indicates that the survey of parking use in the subject area was
done during the early weeks of the COVID lockdown, when there was a precipitous drop in car
and truck traffic on 100th W/9th S., and consequently little street parking. The present situation
is quite different, as anyone can see, travelling North from Hwy 104 during business hours.
Farther North on 9th, residences generally have off-street parking, some are not easily
accessible by large trucks. Trucks commonly park curbside, both North and Southbound, to
deliver packages and mail, and would block a curbside bike lane, although temporarily. There
are very few side streets to offer parking, and most are rather steep hills, up or down. We
request the Council seriously consider alternatives to this proposal, and seek other routes, or
some arrangement to at least preserve parking near Hwy 104 Westgate. Thanks for your
consideration
7/28/20 Peter Block, Subject:Citywide Bicycle Improvements Project/Comments for 7/28 City of
Edmonds Council Meeting
I have been a resident of the Town of Woodway since 1973 and wish to register my strong
support of the City's acceptance of the Sound Transit Grant for bicycle improvements. I
regularly bicycle about 100 miles a week, most of it within the City, and I often use the roads
identified for bicycle and pedestrian improvements. These streets have been experiencing an
increase in bicycle and pedestrian usage, which can be directly attributed to the COVID 19
pandemic. Bicycle shops have seen an increased demand for child -sized and adult -sized
bicycles. These riders need safe places to ride. As school districts plan for remote learning for
Fall, 2021, there will continue to be an increased demand for bicycle riding and walking. When
we get through the pandemic, bicycle and pedestrian usage will not go away. To the contrary,
the health benefits of safe, alternative transportation will remain. I urge you to accept the Sound
Transit Grant and proceed with the improvements.
7/28/20 Margaret Elwood, Subject: Citywide Bicycle Improvement Project
My husband and I are both seniors with some disability, and bicycling is our only safe mode of
exercise while gyms are closed due to the pandemic. (I have balance issues from MS that make
walking difficult while cycling still works fine. My husband has kidney disease and relies on his
e-bike to assist when walking or a regular bike would be too tiring.) We frequently ride along
Bowdoin Way, 228th St., and 100th/9th Ave. While the power of a -bikes allows us to escape a
dicey traffic situation more quickly than on a regular bike, we are still at a huge disadvantage
when encountering cars. Neither do we wish to hold up traffic while going uphill at a slow speed
with no safe space to turn out and allow cars to pass. We need more_bike lane,9_.__P1easesl�
proceed with the addition of bike lanes to improve the safety of cycling in Edmonds. It would
serve many more residents than it would inconvenience through the loss of some street parking.
Thank you.
7/28/20 Rob Gendron, Subject: Support Expanding Bike Lanes in Edmonds
am writing today to support the expanding bike lanes in Edmonds, especially the section of
100th Ave West between 238th St SW and Edmonds Way. This section of 100th Ave West has 4
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 30
traffic lanes. I am a regular bike commuter, riding 20+ miles from 24011 St SW in Edmonds to
Redmond without feeling unsafe, but can't ride the 1 mile from my house to the PCC on the
corner of 100' Ave West due to safety concerns. The 4 lanes leave no room for bicycles, cars
frequently speed in that section and drivers do not respect cyclist rights to take a lane.
Currently, many cyclists avoid 100th Ave West, which without this unsafe section, would be a
great route from Edmonds Bowl to the Interurban and Burke Gilman / Samish River trails. Bike
lanes serving both 9th Ave and Firdale Ave / 24411 St SW would receive more utilization by
cyclists if the unsafe section in the middle of an otherwise safe route was removed. The section
of 100th Ave West between 238th St SW and Edmonds Way is the home of 2 schools in the
Edmonds School District, Scriber Lake and Edmonds Heights. Few students would consider
cycling to school given the lack of a bike lane. The safety of students waiting for Community
Transit busses would be increased with the extra distance between traffic and the sidewalk. A
single lane will make it harder for drivers to miss the school zone signals and help reduce
speeds, increasing the safety of students. The 4 lanes on 100th Ave West are also unsafe for
drivers. On rainy nights lane markings become hard to see, resulting in cars crossing the line,
both the white lane and double center lines. The lack of a left turn lane creates unsafe
conditions as cars try to change lanes to avoid delays for people making left turns.
Channelization of this section of 100th Ave West will not slow traffic significantly as the left turn
lanes will reduce delays. Drivers using the arterial running from 244th St SW, Firdale Ave, to
100th Ave / 9th Ave would have a consistent experience, without going from 2 lanes to 4, then
back to 2 lanes. Thank you for considering improving the bike lanes in Edmonds, especially the
section of 100th Ave West between 240th and Edmonds Way.
7/28/20 John Kenny, Subject: Parking along 9th ave
Thank you Council Members for your responses to my wife's email this morning. I'm a third
generation Edmonds resident. I live on 9th Avenue. My grandparents lived on 9th Avenue. My
Aunt lives on 9th Avenue. I would appreciate you voting no on eliminating parking spaces along
9th Avenue/100th. I appreciate the myriad of alternatives and believe that a plan can be
achieved that spares the parking spaces along 9th Avenue. Please vote no on eliminating
parking spaces along 9th. Thank you for your time and service.
7/28/20 Emily Bergen, Subject: Bike lane
I know that you are currently receiving a lot of negativity about the bike lane along 100th Ave
w/9th Ave but I wanted to write in support. If there was a dedicated bike lane I would feel more
comfortable riding my bike as a transportation option. I haven't seen the plane yet but I hope
these will be put in as protected lanes- I often see drivers try to use painted lanes to get around
slower cars I also think that safe crossing needs to be addressed if parking is limited to one side
of the road. Thanks!
7/28/20 Hank Landau, Subject: Citywide Bicycle Improvement Project
My wife and I own property in Edmonds along 100th Ave. W. I am a long time member and past
co-chair of Edmonds Bicycle Advocacy Group, worked as a transportation engineer many years
ago, and am one of the original members of the Edmond's Mayor's Climate Protection
Committee (CPC). I write in full support of the improvements planned for 100th Ave / 9th Ave,
Bowdoin Way and 228th St.
Together with the Edmonds School District, Verdant, the Cascade Bicycle Club and the City of
Edmonds we have been successful in introducing bicycle education for children in the primary
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 31
grades and middle schools and the implementation of bike signage in Edmonds and the
surrounding communities. The primary purpose for bicycle education was to reduce childhood
obesity and diabetes while providing children with a safe outlet for a healthy outdoor activity.
Another reason was to teach children how to interact with motorists without impeding motorists
in their use of the roads. Bike signage helps direct cyclists, both young and old, to the safest
and most convenient route to destinations in Edmonds and surrounding communities. I am now
at an age where I often take the routes in question for medical appointments at and in the
vicinity of Edmonds Steven's Hospital. Bike lanes provide me with a much appreciated sense of
security. Bike transport is important for more than good personal health and recreation. The
Edmonds CPC recognizes the growing need to include bicycle use as an important component
of our transportation network. Bicycle riding not only reduces greenhouse gas emissions, it also
reduces traffic congestion and the need for parking by taking cars off our roads. I recognize that
bike lanes sometimes interfere with parking but it is important to remember that our roads, even
those in front of people's homes, are for public use and are paid for by all taxpaying residents,
including bicycle riders. I trust that the Edmonds' Council will prioritize the overall health of our
community and the safety of bicycle riders, especially children and the elderly, and will approve
this project. Thank you.
7/28/20 Jim Kenny, Subject: 9th Ave Parking Replaced with Bike Lanes
I ask you to reconsider your movement toward replacing the parking on 9th Ave with bike lanes.
I write to you in support of Margaret Kenny, 721 9th Ave S. She is writing separately in
opposition to removing the parking. The Kennys have lived on 9th Ave for decades. For our
large family functions at Margaret's house, we use the parking lanes on 9th Ave. There is little
parking in the driveway. If you replace the parking with bike lanes, then we will have no place to
park. I used to live in Edmonds, and I travel the roads in Edmonds regularly. The parking lanes
on 9th Ave seem well -used. Removing the parking lanes will be a significant inconvenience for
residents who park there and their guests and families. Thank you for considering my
comment.
7/28/20 Ken Reidy, Subject: Public Comments for July 28, 2020 City Council meeting
Article 1, section 7 of the state constitution mandates that "[n]o person shall be disturbed in his
private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law." Exculpatory evidence: anything
that clears someone or something of guilt or blame is exculpatory. Exculpatory comes from
the Latin word exculpat, meaning "freed from blame." The verb exculpate means to free from
guilt or blame. By its past conduct, has City of Edmonds administration chosen to act in such a
way that its Policy Makers now need to adopt something like the Brady Rule to place a duty on
-Mayors,-City-Siaffand City Attorneys to affirmathreLy-di 1patory-evidEnce-in---
their possession when they are prosecuting Code Enforcement? I think the answer is
obviously yes. Please appreciate - former Mayor Gary Haakenson met with my wife and I on
November 17, 2009, the same day City Staff drafted notes that prove they knew about and had
discussed that "Setbacks will be grandfathered by Planning if, at minimum, a letter from
neighbor states it was there prior to 1981." City Staff's Meeting Notes dated November 17, 2009
are exculpatory evidence. So are City Staff notes dated July 31, 2009 that clearly stated that
"Non -conforming structures constructed prior to 1980 (new ordinance) are grandfathered." Both
sets of City Staff notes prove that the City of Edmonds knew our setbacks could be
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 32
grandfathered. Please have City Employee Jeanie McConnell disclose why she did not
include the notes dated July 31, 2009 and November 17, 2009 in the documentation
provided Hearing Examiner Sharon Rice before our Code Enforcement Hearing or tell Ms.
Rice DURING our hearing that the City of Edmonds Administration had full knowledge of
the _qrandfathering Ordinance Ordinance No. 3696. Hearing Examiner Rice was provided
evidence during my hearing that my building had been seen as far back as 1968. What
more should any citizen have to do? I followed the procedure — paid the appeal fee
provided the law and the evidence. Rice ruled it wasn't relevant. It was absolutely
relevant and City Staff knew so because they had discussed using the EXACT_
LAW months earlier. That is documented FACT as shown by the City Staff notes. Our
City's laws aren't little play things to be brought out when they help the City but kept
hidden when they work for the citizen. Remember — the City of Edmonds has always had a
duty to be scrupulously just. This duty applies to Mayors, City Attorneys and City Staff. Please
contact me immediately about initiating legislation that will place a duty on Mayors, City
Staff and City Attorneys to affirmatively disclose exculpatory evidence in their
possession when they are prosecuting Code Enforcement. Thank you.
7/28/20 Amy Kenny, Subject: Edmonds 9th Avenue bike lanes
We live on 9th Avenue in Edmonds, WA and are opposed to the elimination of street parking to
create bike lanes. I value the parking spaces along the road. This road is much too busy for
bikers and I fear for the potential accidents given it is such a thoroughfare. Parking is highly
coveted on this street, and a parking study being done during the Covid-19 shelter in place is
inaccurate and unfair. Not only do residents and their families use street parking, but usage is
higher during the following scenarios, which are currently decreased for obvious reasons during
our shelter in place:
1. Activities at the nearby cemetery (funeral or other event) creates the need for street
parking.
2. Parking for bus riders near the Bartel's bus stop.
Please survey residents for safety and practicality of these bike lanes; you will see it is not the
best option. Thanks for your time.
7/28/20 Margaret Kenny, Subject: bike lanes proposal
I write you to register my opposition to the proposal for establishing bicycle lanes along 9th Ave
S/ 100th between Walnut and Firdale Village. My home address is 721 - 9th Ave S. My
concerns are:
1. Safety : It is frequently unsafe to drive onto 9th from my col de sac entrance. One wreck
occurred there and another occurred across the street. Speeding cars are common. I'm
sure an examination of police records for 2018 and 2019 will show many incidents along
the proposed 9th bike route, particularly at the intersections with Walnut, 2201h, and
Edmonds Way.
Spruce to Pine St is a single block with side road residences like mine. For large
gatherings, our guests park on 9th. My guests, at least, are often elderly, as am 1. Getting
together could be a problem for us if all street -side parking is eliminated. Just crossing
the street is difficult — especially at rush hour when cars back up beyond my road
entrance.
2. Bike lanes aren't warranted by the number of Edmonds cyclists using 9th: It's rare
to see families riding 91h as a unit — more often 1 or 2 adults at a time pass my yard. A
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 33
usual weekly count would be small. Recently, more riders per week have
appeared. One told me they are from the Cascade Bicycle Club, a large Seattle based
group. Again I suggest the Council examine any cyclist's 9th Ave usage data be
gathered from 2018 and 2019 statistics lest such an abnormal current increased use
skew city planning.
3. Sound Transit grant for bike lanes planning: Integrating Sound Transit services into
the life of Edmonds citizens should, I think, be openly and publicly discussed to avoid
unintended consequences. Getting a grant from them may be good but what justifies a
rushed Council discussion in July when many interested Edmonds citizens are away or
have never heard of this proposition? For example would these proposed bike lanes be
extended to 9th Ave North in the future? What has or does the grant enable? What city
expenditures do or might result from its use? Unless I missed something, the current
Beacon issue carries no mention of the Council's bringing the 9th Ave/100th Ave matter
forward now. I, for one, want more information before I concur in a move that definitely
adds more stress to my life while potentially endangers motorists, cyclists, or
homeowners. Thank you.
7/28/20 Heidi Karna, Subject: Removal of street parking on 9th Ave and Bowdoin
This past weekend I received a "flyer" on my front porch informing residents of street parking
removal along 9th Ave and Bowdoin Streets. I live along 9th Ave West and STRONGLY
OPPOSE the removal of street parking. Many of us have short driveways and rely on street
parking for a variety of reasons i.e.) family and friends, work trucks, etc. To suggest we utilize
side streets is unreasonable for a variety of reasons due to distance, availability, hills,
negative impact on neighbors living on those streets. I enjoy riding my bike like many folks, but
to ask residents who live along these streets to be inconvenienced for the addition of bike lanes
is wrong and not fair. As a side note, I'm very much aware of the amount of bikers along these
streets and in my opinion I do not think bike lanes are warranted. I believe other options should
be explored to the betterment of all residents. It is discouraging residents were not formally
notified via mail, email or another form of formal communication. I feel this change was trying to
be pushed through the back door rather than full transparency. How does this benefit the
residents along impacted streets?
7/28/20 Eric Goodman, Subject: Citywide bicycle improvements and open streets
First, thank you for your service and dedication to our community during this trying time. I'm
unable to attend tonight's meeting, so this message is meant to express my strongest possible
support for the citywide bicycle improvements. Rather than "improvements" I view the provision
of space for people of all ages and abilities on our streets as an essential duty of our city
government. Right now it is possible for me to reach every address in this region by car without
a thought for whether or not there is a safe path, while only a fraction of addresses have
sidewalk or cycle paths. To achieve a "balanced system" we would need to invest 100% of our
transportation dollars into active modes for more than a decade. I am not asking for that, but I
am asking you to be bold and make a significant investment not only of these ST dollars, but our
own tax revenue as well. Much more than in the past. And I want you to keep and expand the
open streets downtown. I took my children down to experience that and rather than just rushing
into the bookstore where we had an item to pick up, we stopped for gelato and got take-out to
bring home too. I drove and parked on 3rd between Edmonds and Bell without searching or
waiting. For comparison, I would have parked farther away from my destination if it was
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 34
anywhere inside Alderwood Mall. Had the streets been open to cars, and people stuck on
narrow sidewalks, I would have ordered the book on Amazon, left the kids home and picked up
food in Lynnwood. I would not have been browsing windows in Edmonds. Tell that to the shop
owner complainers, or let them experience the bankruptcy of their ideas about parking.
Dedicated and physically separated paths for slow speed travel are essential for safe
movement. Providing wide lanes over 10' for vehicles encourages speeding and increases the
danger to everyone not inside a vehicle. Is it equitable that the city gives me 10' of pavement if I
can afford a car, but only 6' of concrete if I am poor and need to walk? and 3-5' if I choose to
cycle? I am an AICP transportation planner and research in the field bears out the safety of
separating modes and providing a connected grid of options for travel throughout the area.
Studies have also shown that small local businesses get more revenue from people walking and
cycling than from people driving by. I support closing off the fountain circle to cars permanently
and would like you to also look into closing 4th Avenue to cars for its entire length or at least
making it a greenway. If there is demand for private parking, let the market satisfy that demand
the way it does all other valuable commodities in the American capitalist system. Price it and
provide it - privately. We have a public transit system that provides good service to downtown
Edmonds and we should do more to encourage people to walk, bike and bus when they need to
get here. We are struggling to provide housing for our humans, but how many acres of city land
does Edmonds dedicate to housing inanimate hunks of metal? Does that reflect our values -
You bet it does! We love our cars more than our neighbors, and that is incredibly sad. Providing
parking for private vehicles is not an essential function of government. Allowing my children to
travel safely to school is. Allowing me a healthy choice for my commute and my shopping trips
is. Our ancestors have been walking for millions of years, bicycling for almost 200 years and
driving cars for 130 years. The first paved roads were for bicycles. Then cars took over all of our
public right of way and made it dangerous for anyone not in a vehicle. Including anyone trying to
breath near a running motor that pours out toxic gases. You are in the position to correct that
mistake. Cars have a place. They should not have every place. Our city desperately needs
more streets dedicated to human beings, rather than machines. Look up what happened in
Pontavedra, Spain when they closed off streets. But remember, being for the people is not a
European concept, it is as American as it gets. I support protected bike lanes and paths - and if
you have to take half the road and make it one way for cars, then that is what equity looks like.
You have an opportunity to walk your talk and make real change. Please step up and think of
the future, and do not listen to those loud people mired in the past. Please ride around our city
on a bike and walk through our neighborhoods. If you feel safe, then ignore me, but if you can
understand the issues, and why I am terrified to let my children out on our streets, please
address those concerns now. Thank you.
7/28/20 Pauline Dibble, Subject: Bike lanes on Walnut Street
In my opinion the bike traffic is minimal on Walnut and because the hill is steep most people
choose to walk their bikes up the hill. The need for parking is usually great (pre-covid19). With
Yost Park overflow and people parking to walk to events in downtown Edmonds every parking
spot can be taken. I am 70 and have lived in Edmonds since 1956. Many of those years on
Walnut. I visit my son and his family at their home on Walnut and can generally park on the
street near their house. The bike lanes would make that difficult. Please take these concerns
into account and reconsider putting bike lanes on Walnut. Thank you.
7/28/20 Mark Clark, Subject: Bike Lanes Proposal
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 35
I'd like to register my support for the addition of bike lanes and any other improvements that can
be made in the city to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety. My wife and I are avid cyclists,
runners and walkers. We feel immensely vulnerable while cycling through the city. I want to use
my bike to commute to work in Seattle, but there is no safe route that connects to the Interurban
Trail unless I ride miles out of my way in the opposite direction. Adding lanes to 9th through
Firdale would be a logical and much needed north -south route. Bike sales this season are at an
all-time high. People need safe places to ride for exercise, commuting, and reducing carbon
footprints. Need data? Studies show that bike lanes reduce fatalities. Let's not wait for a tragic
accident to take action. Look what happened in„Woodinville this week. Let's make our streets
safer.The bike lanes in Richmond Beach are great. Please do the same for Edmonds! Thanks.
7/28/20 Andrew Morgan, Subject: Proposed Sound Transit Funding Agreement for City Wide
Bicycle Improvement Project
At the July 8, 2020 meeting of the Sound Transit Citizen Oversite Panel, Sound Transit
presented its Program of Realignment in response to COVID-19. During this pandemic ridership
is down 80-90%. For 2020-21 revenue loss projections are between $0.7 Billion and $1 Billion
while losses through 2041 are projected at $ 8 Billion to $12 Billion. Sound Transit's near term
priorities include, "Slower, more incremental approach... as long term realignment takes place,"
with a recommendation to "Wait to advance projects into final design or construction" to "Avoid
over -commitment until Board priorities become clearer." We live in a new world with people
afraid to be confined with a multitude of strangers in a bus, train, or airplane. We have no idea if
or when public transportation will bounce back. Even Sound Transit indicates funding for the
Mountlake Terrace station could be delayed as much as five years or more. If getting bikers to
the local Sound Transit location at Mountlake Terrace is the whole point of this bike lane project
and the potential project delay for more funding of the Mountlake Terrace station is being
recommended to take five additional years then it could be the year 2029 once it is operational.
The City Council is urged to thoughtfully pause and not "zoom" through approval of the bike lane
project now when Citizens are asking for more dialogue on this issue. If not it seems like we
could be could hit with a double whammy: Bike lanes to nowhere and on -street car parking
reduced by half. Thank you for considering our perspective on the matter.
7/28/20 Stacie Eche!barger, Subject: Dedicated Bike Lanes
I would like to express my opposition to adding bike lanes to Walnut & 9th up Bowdoin to 5
Corners because it will drastically reduce the amount of parking available in my neighborhood. I
live at 1052 Alder. Thank you for your consideration.
7/28/20 Jack Nielsen Subject: Bike Lane on both sides of Bowdoin to 5 corners NO, Do not
want it! J. Neilsen home owner
7/28/20 Ann Lawson-Beerman, Subject: Proposed Bicycle Lane on Bowdoin Way
I- think -the_proposed_bike-lane-on_Bo-wdoin Way -from-Five-Cor-ner-s-to Yost -P-ar-k-is-a-mistake. As- --
a frequent cyclist has noted in MyEdmondsNews. com, there is no need for it because Bowdoin
is already wide and easily travelled by bike. In addition, because I live on Pioneer Way and turn
onto Bowdoin daily, I know that the geography of the hill at that intersection makes it challenging
to see oncoming vehicles and even pedestrians. If the City of Edmonds proceeds with this
proposal, it is incumbent on the City to maintain all intersections with Bowdoin Way to ensure
proper visibility. Today, at 2 p.m., I counted 15 cars parked on Bowdoin Way. Where will they go
if a bike lane is created? Onto our curvy, hilly, fully developed residential streets that already
host parked cars? Lest you think I am hostile to bicyclists, I'd like to say that is not the case. In
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 36
fact, I created the first bicycle program in Portland, Oregon when I was an assistant to the City
Council person who was in charge of Public Works, which received state gas tax money for
bicycle transportation improvements. I believe it was the first dedicated bicycle transportation
program in the country. We created an advisory board that knew streets, transportation science,
and bicycling to help craft the program. As we've since seen in Portland, downtown Seattle, and
countless other venues across the country, painting a stripe is not adequate when bicycling is
retrofitted into existing traffic. A serious transportation analysis is needed. Last, I want to ask
why this has come to my attention only through a letter in an online newspaper. Is it not
necessary to post the proposal for all who use the routes to see? Shouldn't we citizens be
advised of a possible change that affects our daily lives?
7/28/20 Allan and Nancy Rustad, Subject: Proposed Bike Lanes on 9th Ave.S., 100th Ave.W. &
Bowdoin Wy.
This issue came to my attention via a posting on a neighborhood forum web site, just a few days
ago. I had seen no notice in the Edmonds Beacon, or other publication. I expect the plan would
be similar to the bike lane striping on NW185th St/Richmond Beach Road in Shoreline.
My wife and I agree that this does not seem like a good idea, considering the consequent
complete loss of street parking, especially on 100th Ave.W -.9th ave.S in the area immediately
North of Hwy 104. There is street parking by QFC employees and others daily along the
Edmonds Cemetery, and further North, especially on the West side of the street.. The
QFC/Goodwill parking lot is commonly filled to capacity, and across the street, the
PCC/Wallgreens lot is not quite as full. The message I have received indicates that the survey
of parking use in the subject area was done during the early weeks of the COVID lockdown,
when there was a precipitous drop in car and truck traffic on 100th W/9th S., and consequently
little street parking. The present situation is quite different, as anyone can see, travelling North
from Hwy 104 during business hours. Farther North on 9th, residences generally have off-street
parking, some are not easily accessible by large trucks. Trucks commonly park curbside, both
North and Southbound, to deliver packages and mail, and would block a curbside bike lane,
although temporarily. There are very few side streets to offer parking, and most are rather
steep hills, up or down. We request the Council seriously consider alternatives to this proposal,
and seek other routes, or some arrangement to at least preserve parking near Hwy 104
Westgate. Thanks for your consideration.
7/28/20 John Kenny, Subject: Parking along 9th ave
Thank you Council Members for your responses to my wife's email this morning. I'm a third
generation Edmonds resident. I live on 9th Avenue. My grandparents lived on 9th Avenue. My
Aunt lives on 9th Avenue. I would appreciate you voting no on eliminating parking spaces along
9th Avenue/100th. I appreciate the myriad of alternatives and believe that a plan can be
achieved that spares the parking spaces along 9th Avenue. Please vote no on eliminating
parking spaces along 9th.Thank you for your time and service.
7/28/20 Susan Brevik, Subject: Bike lanes
I say No to the proposal of new bike lanes on 9th, 100th, Walnut, Bowdoin and 5 Corners in
Edmonds. I live on 9th and there's little action of bike riding. I believe parking is more relevant.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 37
Leave it the way it is. Maybe give the grant money back or if possible fix bad streets and more
sidewalks.
7/27/20 Trish Ruis, Subject: Bicycle Lanes — Opposition
I am writing this to express my opposition to the City Council's proposal to create dedicated bike
lanes on several streets, including Bowdoin Way. I have been a lifelong resident of Edmonds.
was born at Stevens Hospital and grew up in a house on Bowdoin Way - a house that my
parents still reside in. Bowdoin has always been a busy street, and traffic has increased since
the traffic circle was installed at 5 corners. Adding dedicated bike lane(s) to this road, where
there is a blind corner with driveways as you approach Yost, would be extremely dangerous as
bicyclists do not yield to cars. Can you picture a bicyclist flying down the road around the blind
corner approaching Yost as a person is backing out of their driveway? Cars speeding down the
road is bad enough - SO many vehicles speed down Bowdoin, adding a bike lane will just
increase the danger to everyone (bicyclists and drivers alike). Aside from the occasional family
on bikes (riding on the sidewalk),there are rarely bicyclists on Bowdoin. What kind of studies
have you done to assess the bicycle traffic on these roads? I highly doubt that any have been
done and this has been decided on the suggestion of a very small group of people. We also
have an increased need for parking in Edmonds and your proposal takes away street parking on
many roads, especially 9th where many people use the street parking for their vehicles.
Bowdoin has always provided spare parking for Yost, particularly for swim meets, and a bike
lane removes that additional parking. I find it outrageous that the City Council is focused on
creating dedicated bike lanes during a pandemic. It appears that you are using this situation as
a way to push things through without including the public - most importantly those that will be
directly affected by this decision. Usually, the public is able to attend an in person council
meeting to speak their mind. Right now, this feels as if you are avoiding the public altogether. A
zoom meeting is NOT a public forum. Dedicated bike lanes on these roads will create issues for
those who live on those streets - people that are paying THOUSANDS in property taxes. I, like
many others, ask that you reconsider this proposal. What about bike lanes on Main Street?
There are no houses that will be affected by loss of parking on that road. In fact, cars are rarely
parked on Main. There is no reason to create dedicated bike lanes on Bowdoin, 9th, and
Walnut. If you insist on moving forward with this, I would hope that you reconsider pushing this
through without giving Edmonds residents the opportunity to speak their mind in a public
meeting - in person, not via Zoom. I guarantee that the public will speak and the majority will be
against this proposal. Stop following everything Seattle does. Listen to the residents of
Edmonds. We are the ones that elected you to office to be our voice, not to push your agendas
on our behalf. Thank you for your consideration.
7/27/20 Lianne Kono, Subject: Please stop the new bike lanes in Edmonds
ask for your consideration of not putting more bike lanes in the Edmonds 9th street area. I
don't see that there are bikers taking advantage of current bike lanes so I think that giving them
more lanes at the expense of residents being able to park on streets would be wasteful. Street
parking is necessary for those residents who live off the main streets. This would also make it
more dangerous for people to cross 9th with minimal street crossing options. It would also be
dangerous for bikers to be riding in those lanes with cars pulling out onto 9th which is already
difficult to do. Please do not add in bike lanes. Thank you.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 38
7/27/20 Mark Bucklin, Subject: Bike Lanes on 9th/100th.
I urge you to reject the tentative plan to use Sound Transit grant money for bike lanes on 9th
Ave./100th I have lived on 9th Ave. S. For 45 years. The current bike lanes in Edmonds are
rarely used. Second, 9th Ave. S. is a major commuter feeder line for N/S traffic in Edmonds and
to the freeway. Third, there are no good off street parking options for deliverymen, vendors or
guests of those who live on 9th. I see lots of Amazon, UPS and yard maintenance trucks and
residents cars parked during the day on 9th. Those who currently elect to bike on 9th Ave.
S./100th do not seem to be having any problems doing so. I have biked on 9th S. for 62 years
and had no problems. Bike lanes can create a false sense of security for cyclists and increase
the risk of right turn accidents with motorists. (Note young woman lawyer killed last year in
downtown Seattle bike lane.). The premise of the grant seems to be to have commuters bike to
Sound Transit park and ride lot in Mountlake Terrace. Any study to show that this would really
happen? I doubt it especially during the eight rainy months of the year. This is not a good
idea. Please vote no to this idea.
7/27/20 Anthony Dashti, Subject: Sound Transit grant to City of Edmonds for dedicated bike
lanes Adding a bicycle lane to portions of 9th Ave. south is a good idea but not at the cost of
eliminating all the street parking. Our house is on a private driveway on 9th Ave. south between
Pine and Walnut street. We've had many occasions when we could not drive to our house due
to public work or snow situations; we have a steep driveway which easily freezes in winter or
snow conditions, forcing us to park in the street for days or even a week or more. I'm very
concerned about the dangers of leaving my car far away and having to walk on slippery streets.
As a rider myself, I welcome streets with bike lanes while as a resident, the health and wellbeing
of my household is of utmost importance. I don't want me or my family or my neighbors to risk
crossing the busy street specially when passing cars may have less control to stop or slow
down. I see riders on my street all the time without any issues. If drivers can share the road with
riders, riders can do the same. The end result must work for riders and residents alike and
removing all street parking puts the residents at a major disadvantage. There are better options
available. Bike lanes can be on one side only, while some street parking remains intact. I thank
you for your time to take these issues under serious consideration.
7/27/20 Patricia Kajlich, Subject: Parking on Walnut St
Please keep street parking on Walnut St. For the safety of our neighbors on Walnut, to prevent
further congestion around City -owned Yost Park during the summer and to prevent a poor use
of our tax dollars, we ask you to NOT remove parking on Walnut in favor of dedicated bicycle
lanes. Thank you
7/27/20 Dakota Allen Bunger, Subject: Bicycle Lanes Along 9th Avenue
I live along 9th Avenue South and use the street parking every single day. My family and I have
three cars and they are all parked along the street. Adding in bike lanes and taking away the
street parking would be difficult for my family and I. We would have to park along side roads
somewhere, and maybe have to cross 9th Avenue, a very busy street sometimes, at an
unsignalized crossing. If there was a way to introduce bike lanes, but keep current parking that
would be ideal, but just keeping some of the street parking or providing more signalized
crossing across 9th Avenue would be suitable as well.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 39
7/27/20 Virginia Ouellet, Subject: Sound Transit grant to Edmonds to add dedicated Bicycle
lanes on both sides of 9th Ave S and 100th Ave W
I have lived on the corner of 9th Avenue and 224th Street SW for the past four years. I am
opposed to having Dedicated Bicycle Lanes added on either side of 9thAve S or 100th Ave
West. I frequently walk along both that route and seldom see bicycles traveling in either
direction. Crossing 9th Avenue is already dangerous for pedestrians, without the added danger
of encouraging bicycles to use the same route. In fact, crossing 9th onto 14th avenue SW or
Elm's way or East on 224th, none of which have dedicated sidewalks, is dangerous and would
be a city project that is far more needed and to both the neighborhood school children and
residents. In addition, if adding the dedicated bicycle lanes is approved, it will eliminate most, if
not all of the parking spaces allowed on 9th Ave S and 100th Ave W, forcing patrons and
workers for Westgate Village or visitors to the Edmonds Cemetery events to park on side
streets, giving residents in those areas far fewer options. Please also think of USPS trucks,
Frontier vehicles, lawn service vehicles and recycle/garbage trucks, Amazon and FedEx trucks
and the impact to their providing services. All in all, I think it's a bad proposal.
7/27/20 Diane Huson, Subject: Parking on 9th ave south
As a resident living on the west side of 9th ave south I want to let you know this is a terrible idea
to remove the parking and put in bike lanes. We built our home 5 years ago according to city
regulations, following the restrictions of so many square feet we could have for
impervious parking. Knowing this would never be enough parking for our large family,
hoildays & various get togethers that we host we went ahead & built knowing we would have
overflow parking on the street. On an every day basis my family alone has a minimum of 4 cars
parked on the street as well as the 4 we have in our driveway.
Not only concerned about this for my home & family I am also an employee of QFC.on 9th &
Edmonds way.On a regular basis we have employees parked on the street so we may service
our customers better since our parking lot is to small for the volume of business we do.During
Holidays all employees of QFC & PCC are required to park off lot which if you have seen leaves
us parked 4 blocks plus north on both sides of the street. Removing the parking is just wrong.
The cemetery also uses all the parking on 9th for services as well as their Veterans day event.
Traffic on 9th ave is dangerous enough with out putting bike lanes in. This is one of the worst
idea's you all have come up with. We pay a ton of money in tax's to live here which also pays
your wages. Where do you all expect us to park? If you don't live on these streets you should
not be able to make these decisions. We were just put on notice about this today we knew
nothing about it previously. I have 2 neighbors out of town which I am sure also have known
nothing about this and can not comment, and that is just unfair to push something through like
this when people are not made aware of the plan. NO NO NO NO NO leave 9th avenue and
_ _ surr_ounding_str_eets_alone!!
7/27/20 Phuong Nguyen, Subject: No Bike Lanes
My family lives on 911 Ave South and just recently heard that the city of Edmonds is planning to
have dedicated bike lanes on 9th Ave which will remove most or all parking allowed. I used to
live in North Seattle and the city created bike lanes that caused more traffic and the bike lanes
were hardly used by bicyclists. If you ask Seattleites about the dedicated bike lanes there, they
will tell you that they were a waste of money and caused more traffic for the residents. One of
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 40
the reasons why we decided to move from Seattle is because the council members were
making poor decisions and without the peoples' input. I feel like Edmonds is turning into
Seattle. There's already traffic on 9th Ave South during rush hour so I would hate to see the
traffic getting worse. We jog and walk our dog on 9th everyday and hardly see any bicyclists so
the bike lanes will not be used. The bike lanes will only cause more traffic for the residents. If
you think that having bike lanes will make people more comfortable to ride without putting cars
on the road then you are delusional. I bought the house knowing that it is on a busy road, but
there is parking in front of my home for my family and friends to park when they visit me. If
parking is gone, I'm not sure they will visit me often since parking will be challenging. My
mother is in her 80s and has a hard time walking. Where can she park if there's no parking in
front of my house? I'm already bothered about the lack of diversity and the racism in Edmonds
that has made me thought of moving out of Edmonds. Finding out of the bike lanes and limiting
my parking has made it very easy to move out. Just because Sound Transit awarded the city of
Edmonds $1.85 million, does not mean it's in the best interest of the residents to accept it.
7/27/20 Dennis and Ruthann Lenihan, Subject: Parking
Please do not remove onstreet parking on 9th Avenue. We live in a cul de sac on 9th and
frequently experience difficulty safely entering 9th with cars passing north and south. Adding
bicycles would exacerbate the situation.
7/27/20 Megan (Greig) Hansen, Subject: CONCERNED CITIZEN : Dedicated Bike Lanes on 9th
Ave
I live in 9th Ave and have recently learned that there is a plan to remove ALL street parking in
order to add dedicated bicycle lanes on both side of our street. - It is my understanding that a
usage study was done recently - during COVID?? when we were all observing stay at home
orders and had no visitors, babysitters, etc.... and during the SUMMER when people are more
likely to walk and ride bikes vs the winter when all visitors DRIVE? I can tell you that we
regularly use the spots located by our home, but have not been doing so since early March so
any study done recently is not an accurate or fair depiction. - Additionally, the Edmonds bowl is
on a very steep incline, and when it snows, we have to park our cars up on 9th Ave as we can
not get them out of our driveway. - Most of our side streets (on the West side of 9th) are also
very steep and and have no parking blocked - so where are we to park? In short, I could be
supportive of A SINGLE bike lane on ONE side of the road (such as is found in many other
spots around the area), however removing all street parking would cause serious challenges for
myself and our neighbors. Thank you for considering an alternative of keeping parking on one
side of the street (preferably the West side).
7/27/20 Andrew Morgan, Subject: Preserve and Maintain On -Street Parking on 9th Avenue
During this COVID 19 Pandemic the public is not allowed to legally assemble inside City Hall to
show either support or opposition to the proposal to eliminate 50% of the parking on 9th Avenue
and other locations in Edmonds to facilitate bike lanes. A Zoom meeting is a completely
unacceptable alternative because it is incapable of adequately expressing the emotions
underlying this proposal. The City Council should delay a vote on this project until such time as
the people can legally assemble for a full and frank discussion with the City Council. To do
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 41
otherwise will inadvertently lead to an environment of suspicion and distrust as many citizens
will feel that this was "zoomed" through, so to speak, instead of undergoing a full and frank in -
person discussion. It is one thing for the City Council to adopt aspirational policies and quite
another to implement these aspirations in detail without full and frank in person discussions with
affected citizens. Putting this vote off until citizens can assemble inside City Hall will also avoid
potential lawsuits as several Edmonds citizens are seriously contemplating legal action to
challenge this project under the current circumstances. Thank you for considering our
perspective on this issue.
7/27/20 Donald Bruce, Subject: Bike Lanes
I have lived on Bowdoin Way since 1956. 1 have 3 street spots and driveway for my
parking. Next door use one spot for travel to job. if I HAVE kIDS & fRIENDS COME HERE FOR
HOLIDAY OR vISIT, wHERE WILL THEY pARK ?? Delivery or repair trucks or US
Mail ... WHERE wILL THEY PARK?????? I respectfully ask DON'T PUT IN BIKE LANES
7/27/20 Ryan Stoulil, Subject: Parking on Walnut Street
Please keep street parking on Walnut St. For the safety of our neighbors on Walnut, to prevent
further congestion around City -owned Yost Park during the summer and to prevent a poor use
of our tax dollars, we ask you to NOT remove parking on Walnut in favor of dedicated bicycle
lanes.
7/27/20 Tom, Subject: Recent Racism
America has done more than any other Country in the world to atone for its past sins and this
should not be overlooked. We fought a Civil War largely but not exclusively, over the issue of
slavery, we amended our constitution, we enacted civil rights legislation, equal rights, and
affirmative action. Name one other country that has done same. Yes there is racism in the
world, always has been, always will be, we cannot control the way some morons think. That
being said can we please stop beating ourselves up and flogging ourselves for the sins of the
past. Our country is not some evil empire!!! We are the first country to have boots on the
ground in the case of a natural disaster, famine or other problems. When a massive Tsunami
swept over the largely Muslim populated country of Indonesia we were on scene with a massive
aid response. Iran, Saudia Arabia and others had a very limited response.
As a nation we give more to charitys than any other nation in the world. We elected a black
President for 2 terms just recently and our Goverment is full of women and men of color. We
must remember one thing that binds us all together, we are all AMERICANS! And deep down
we are caring, friendly and happy people. Lets come together and stop beating ourselves up.
There are way more positive things about America and Americans than the negatives and
isolated cases of racism. I do not believe that there is a systemic entrenched racist community
in_our _country _that -seeks _to_har_m_people-of_color
_
7/27/20 Rachel Maxwell, Subject: New Bike Lanes - Yes!
I strongly support the addition of bike lanes in our town. It is deeply important that we continue
to encourage all forms of transit that reduce our carbon footprint. This is one important way.
These are all busy thoroughfares and prioritizing bikes over cars encourages not only carbon
emissions reduction but also good health. As a council that wisely committed to reducing our
city's carbon emissions, you must make difficult decisions that cannot accommodate all those
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 42
people who have multiple vehicles and therefore want more on street parking. Thank you for
your commitment to creating a healthier future for us all!
7/27/20 Kelly Keller, Subject: Walnut Street
Please keep street parking on Walnut St. For the safety of our neighbors on Walnut, to prevent
further congestion around City -owned Yost Park during the summer and to prevent a poor use
of our tax dollars, we ask you to NOT remove parking on Walnut in favor of dedicated bicycle
lanes.
7/27/20 Kelsey Boyce, Subject: Support for bike lanes
I am writing in support of adding new and extending existing bike lanes by reducing on -
street parking in Edmonds, WA, in response to the call for opposition in MyEdmondsNews. com.
In order to support alternative carbon -free transportation methods, and healthy activities for
positive community change, the addition of safe spaces for bicycles need to be prioritized over
street parking. Street parking should not be considered part of a home's property value, and no
homeowner should feel ownership about the public space in front of their home. Bike lanes are
for the greater good and safety of our community members.
7/27/20 Erik M. Borgen, Subject: Keep Street Parking On Walnut St
7/27/20 Bre Borgen, Subject: Keep Street Parking on Walnut
We are writing to urge you to NOT remove parking on Walnut St between 9th and 96th
Avenues. We have lived in our home on Walnut for 13 years and heavily rely on street parking.
We have no alley behind our home. We are very concerned about our safety and the safety of
our 8-year old son if you remove street parking on Walnut. Many vehicles travel far too fast on
Walnut, especially heading from the stop sign near Yost Park down to the flashing light at 9th
and Walnut. If there is no parking allowed on the south side of Walnut, we would be forced to
cross this busy street to get to our home. There are no crosswalks near our home and lighting
is very limited. This is especially concerning in the dark, wet winter months. Our personal safety
would be put in jeopardy if you remove our access to street parking in front of our home. We
understand that you or Sound Transit commissioned a "parking study." Did you complete a bike
study? Walnut is a pretty steep climb. We have been home since stay at home orders first went
into effect. We rarely see cyclists come up or down Walnut. Removal of this parking resource
in favor of bike lanes that will likely be rarely used appears to be a poor use of our collective tax
dollars. People attending swimming meets and other events at City owned Yost park use
parking on both sides of the street all of the way down Walnut, well past our home in the middle
of the 900 block of Walnut. These events occur on multiple weekends and evenings during the
summer. Where will these cars park at such times in the future? Removal of parking will make
this situation even worse in the future. For our personal safety, the safety of others living on
Walnut, and for the Edmonds community as a whole, we urge you to not remove parking on
Walnut Street.
7/27/20 Beth Featherstone, Subject: No Bike Lanes on 9th Ave S
As a 25 year resident who lives on 9th Ave S, I strongly opposed the addition of bike lanes
which would eliminate parking on our residential street. Just because the city is offered grant
money, does not mean it's in the best interest of residents to accept. Most lots on 9th lack
driveway parking and rely on street parking for visitors and delivery parking. Removing street
parking will negatively impact property values and quality of life on our street.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 43
7/27/20 Jim Lagucik, Subject: City Wide Bike project
As a longtime resident of Edmonds and a homeowner off of 9th and Pine I was surprises to be
informed the other day of the possibility of removing all parking along 9th Avenue to make
bicycle lanes. I appreciate the idea of connecting bike paths as a way to commute throughout
the city, although I have several concerns with the impact of this proposal. 9th Avenue is
already an extremely busy road, especially at certain times of the day, during commuting hours.
Sometimes crossing 9th Avenue as a pedestrian can be very dangerous and challenging, even
when using the cross walks. I believe by adding bicycle lanes we will actually be increasing the
risks to pedestrian and cyclist and we will be narrowing a road that actually seems to be turning
into an unsafe road. I have not seen the results of the study which this decision is being based
on, but for my opinion to make a decision of this size and scope that can have a serious impact
on 9th Avenue, as well as Walnut and Bowdoin Way we need much more clarity of the impact
this will have on the community, I have also live on Bowdoin way for 10 years previously and
completely reject the idea of removing street parking for bicycle lanes. This proposal should be
postponed for further impact studies or flat out rejected.
7/27/20, Terry Mclenaghan, Subject: From the Mclenaghan home at 1035 9th ave. S Edmonds
I am writing to protest the removal of on street parking on 9th avenue in Edmonds for bike lanes.
This is the only parking for guests or those needing access to the surrounding homes to do work
in a home. If there is no parking where would a vendor park while they are working on a home?
We absolutely need the parking on 9th avenue. There must be a better route to use for the bike
lane. I question the feasibility study being done during a time residents were staying home to
quarantine due to the covid-19 virus. Vendors were not allowed into peoples homes during that
time which gives a false result of how often the parking is used. The people in this area deserve
a voice in this decision. Thanks
7/27/20 Jim Fowler, Subject: Parking on 9th Ave
I find it interesting that the city of Edmonds received a grant from Sound Transit to eliminate
parking along Walnut street and 9th ave for bike paths. I live on a side street off 9th ave and we
don't need more cars parking on side streets that can easily park along 9th ave. It's hard to
believe that Sound transit doesn't have better uses for the money they have in this time of fewer
bus riders and Sound transit riders then to spend it to eliminate parking for bike riding. I walk
every day along 9th ave. Every now and then I see someone on a bike. They are not having
any problems riding on 9th as it is. The people that live along 9th will now have no way to have
any guests because they will have nowhere to park. I believe this is a poor use of funds in this
time of less tax revenue and the council should do a better job of allocating projects.
7/27/20 Rosemary Fraine, Subject: bike lane plans
We are longtime Edmonds residents, having moved here 34 years ago. We live on Bowdoin
Way and have lived in the same home since coming to Edmonds. We raised three children in
this home. We would like to address the plan to place bicycle lanes on Bowdoin from 9 th
Avenue to 84 th Avenue. It is our understanding that these plans could include the removal of
parking for one or both sides of the street. We have been trying to get information from the City
and from the Traffic Engineer to determine what is being proposed and what studies have been
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 44
done to determine these decisions but have been unsuccessful. Over the years, the number of
cars, trucks and other vehicles traveling Bowdoin has increased. The speed limit used to be 25
near our home but is posted at 30 now. The speed of many cars is faster. The speed of
bicycles coming down the hill is also too fast for them to stop suddenly. It is a concern of ours
every time we pull out of our driveway. Bowdoin Way has curves, and multiple driveways that
are "blind", especially on the north side of the street. It is a safety issue. The idea that we, our
guests, delivery services or workers coming to our home should park on a side street and walk
to our home is not acceptable. There are homes on Bowdoin that are not near a side
street. Side streets are already full of cars of those homeowners. We are in our 60's, and my
husband is disabled. Crossing Bowdoin with a cane is unsafe. We sometimes care for our
grandchildren. Crossing Bowdoin with a toddler and an infant is unsafe. There are no
crosswalks, few streetlights, and speeding cars and trucks. There are adult family homes, a
group home, and condos on Bowdoin. All of these require street parking for staff and
visitors. They also require frequent access for disability transportation, medical
emergencies. Yost Park is a busy place and draws people for swimming, pickleball, hiking and
playground use. There are days during the (normal) summer months when park users must use
street parking due to the lot being full. Where will they park? We bought our home with street
parking available. We also bought a house without a garage, so street parking is a
necessity. The houses near me generally do not have space for more than 1 or 2 cars off
street. We have a large extended family. We have holiday gatherings. We expect to be able to
have people continue to visit us and be able to park near where we live. Would not side streets
be safer for all? What are the numbers of bikes you expect to be using these lanes daily? If it is
related to transit, buses, commuting, then are the lanes only "open" during commuting
hours? Are there exceptions for deliveries, disabled parking? If you do this, will there be any
efforts to reduce speed? Is there any reason you need to eliminate parking on both sides of the
street? We urge you to consider these concerns when making a decision.
7/27/20 Justin Chan, Subject: Proposed Bike Lanes
As a citizen of Edmonds for the last 13 years and being a recreational cyclist riding 6 times per
week in addition to commuting to work in Mountlake Terrace, I fully support the addition of the
bike lanes being proposed. Not only for the safety of other riders, but also for my 2 young
daughters who I fear for their safety when riding in Edmonds. The 9th/100th and Bowdoin Way
corridors are highly far trafficked area with few cars parked on the street. Bike lanes will provide
a safe way for everyone to ride in those areas. Thank you for the consideration.
7/27/20 Natalie Endres, Subject: Bike Lanes Proposal
I am writing to voice my objection to the proposed bike lanes along 9th Ave, and Walnut street.
We have lived in Edmonds for nearly 20 years. First near Firdale Village and currently on
Walnut St. We see $1.5mil is a waste of funds to benefit a few. There are not enough avid or
even casual cyclists to warrant the number of people who will be inconvenienced by losing
much utilized parking in our neighborhood. I work from home and while the number of people
walking or jogging down our street increased significantly during the pandemic, the number of
cyclists did not. I have a street view from my "office" window and witnessed a parade of
pedestrians throughout the day but very few cyclists. Today I counted over 18 vehicles parked
on 9th between Walnut and Firdale Ave; including a postal carrier, landscaping vehicles and an
Amazon van. To have those who provide these services be pushed to side streets to do their
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 45
jobs is highly ineffective, inconvenient and unsafe. Again, not a cyclist in sight on a gorgeous
day as I drove toward Shoreline. We, along with all our neighbors along the proposed routes
use the street parking. Many times out of necessity as our own driveways don't allow enough
space for our vehicles and many lack a garage. Also, when people have visitors to have them
park several blocks away is insensitive especially when it is dark (our street is particularly dim)
or inclement weather when there definitely won't be cyclists out. When events occur at Yost
park vehicles overflow down Walnut/Bowdoin and several side streets. The eateries at 5
Corners draw a crowd despite most patrons needing to park on the street. Please consider
alternate routes that would not be as impacted and could accomplish the same goal. Thank
you
7/27/20 Jay and Carrie Halle, Subject Bike lane proposal
As residents of Edmonds for 32 years, we oppose the proposed plan to eliminate parking along
91n Ave South, 100tn Ave West, as well as Bowdoin to 5 Corners to put in a bicycle lane. Similar
to many homes along 9th, we share our driveway with three other homes which limits the
amount of parking available in our driveway. The option to park along 9th has been well -used by
guests, construction workers, trucks and various delivery drivers. Because of the slope of our
driveway, we park our cars along 9th whenever the weather forecast calls for snow to ensure our
ability to make it to work. The parking places are also frequently used by drivers pulling over to
talk on the phone, to get out of the way of oncoming fire, aid, and police cars, to look for an
address, to stop for a garage sale or to just enjoy the gorgeous views.
We feel that each of the roads in question have plenty of room for cars, bicycles AND parking.
We have felt completely safe riding our bikes along 9tn Avenue South while sharing the road
with cars -whether moving or parked. The only area we have ever felt unsafe is on 100tn
between Edmonds Way and Firdale Village. There are a couple turns that can hide a biker (or a
mail truck) just long enough to cause panic and quick lane changes for drivers. We can see a
potential change needed in that area but certainly not North of Edmonds Way. The idea of
having parking only on one side of the street is also ridiculous. Forcing people to run across 9th,
100tn, or Bowdoin to get to their destination is just plain dangerous. And unfortunately, people
will not use the crosswalks unless they are convenient. Please rethink this proposal and find
another way to use any grant money or tax dollars in a way that makes sense and actually
benefits the majority of residents in Edmonds. Thank you.
7/27/20 Richard and Barbara Angus, Subject: Street Parking on 9th Ave.
We are against this proposal since it further complicates the already difficult traffic situation on
9th Ave. where we live. How will that effect the present 4 way stop at 9th Ave. except to make it
more dangerous and less safe for the present residents. No bike lane is necessary for the
amount of cyclists we see on 9th Ave.
7/27/20 Charlie Laughtland, Subject: On -street parking/bike lanes
A lifelong Edmonds resident, I'm writing to voice my strong opposition to taking away street
parking on Walnut Street from 9th Ave. S and Bowdoin, continuing to 5 Corners. I've lived over
30 years on Walnut Street and can confidently say that street parking is used daily by myself
and my neighbors despite the findings of a survey that took place while the public has been
staying home due to COVID-19. 1 would also ask, where is the bike usage survey that points to
the need for these permanent bike lanes? How many cyclists are using these streets regularly?
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 46
Summer after summer, I've seen Walnut Street lined with cars as people gather for swim meets
at Yost Park, or to park and walk down the hill to the Downtown Summer Market, Arts Festival,
Taste Edmonds, and 4th of July parade. Plus, all of the other backyard gatherings that aren't
happening due to the pandemic. It stands to reason that this spring and summer there'd be
significantly less street parking. What an irresponsible time to conduct such a study.
One of the reasons we built our new home on Walnut Street is to be able to host our extended
family and friends for holiday celebrations, birthdays, barbecues and more. Without street
parking, our guests (many over 70 years old) would be forced to park on side streets and walk
up and down the hill to our house. Or is the expectation that homeowners would operate our
own valet service when we want to have people over? Better yet, should we all pave over our
front yards and convert them to parking spaces? These proposed bike lanes are a solution to a
problem that simply does not exist. I've seen bikes and cars safely coexist for over 30 years on
Walnut Street and absolutely no evidence pointing to the need for dedicated bike lanes.
7/27/20 Willie Russell, Subject: Bike Lanes
As usual Edmonds taking away from the many to give to the elitists. Quick monies and quick
votes from a small group is more important that homeowners/TAXPAYERS comfort in their own
neighborhood. Covid 19 being used to push many programs through that will cost citizens with
no public comment. Just another elitist move
7/27/20 Karen Prater, Subject: No bike lanes!
Absolutely opposed to any bike lanes. I vote No!
7/27/20 John Weiss, Subject: Bike Lanes on 100 Ave W, 9th Ave S
I have recently heard about the move to create bike lanes on 100 Ave W and 9th Ave S. I
believe it is ill-advised to create any bike lanes that will reduce street parking on 100 Ave W
between 224th St and Edmonds Way. Current parking is often used to near capacity by QFC
employees, and to a lesser extent for the cemetery. Parking at QFC is already tough to find
some days, and it will only get worse. Another example of what reduced parking is doing:
Sunday morning Jul 26, a gardening service truck & trailer were double-parked on Edmonds St
near Sunset while the gardeners were working at the house. Also, during all the big Edmonds
downtown festivities, people have to park as far away as 9th & Fir. The City Council has to open
their eyes and admit the parking situation in Edmonds is getting worse by the day, so they
should be VERY careful about reducing public parking anywhere in the city. Additionally,
adequate on -site parking should be a requirement for ANY development in the city!
7/27/20 Tracie Schlatter, Subject: No Bike Lanes
No bike lanes on 100th/9th. Parking is already difficult at the QFC/Goodwill shopping center with
businesses shut down for covid. Once things are running again street parking will be even more
necessary. Street parking is also necessary for memorial events at the cemetary. Farther south,
the two stoplights so close together at 238th currently cause traffic back ups from the merging of
8th onto 100th. It would be even worse if lanes were removed.
7/27/20 Krista Merkley, Subject: Walnut Street Parking
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 47
I live near Walnut Street in Edmonds. I want to let you know we heavily rely on street parking
and rarely see bikes on our street. Cars go fast on our road, there is no crosswalk and it is
poorly lit. If we are forced to park away from our home and cross Walnut, we will be risking our
family's safety by just getting home, especially in the dark, wet winter months. Thanks
7/27/20 James and Kathryn Morino, Subject: Please vote no to Bike lanes on Walnut Street
Please keep street parking on Walnut St. For the safety of our neighbors on Walnut, to prevent
further congestion around City -owned Yost Park during the summer and to prevent a poor use
of our tax dollars, we ask you to NOT remove parking on Walnut in favor of dedicated bicycle
lanes.
7/26/20 Ruth Maroun, Subject: Homeowner concern re: Citywide Bicycle Improvement Project -
Impact on Street Parking
I own a home on 100th Ave. W. and naturally often park my car on the street in front of my
home. Please do not remove parking to create a bike lane. This would create undue hardship
for my family and for visitors coming to our home. Our driveway is on the side of the house on
Elm Way. There is limited view of the street and oncoming cars when pulling out of our driveway
onto the street, which can be dangerous for my family and particularly challenging for visitors
unfamiliar with the arrangement. Due to traffic patterns, pulling into our driveway from Elm Way
can also be challenging. Visitors would be forced to park on side streets and walk up Elm Way
to get to our home. The closest side street parking would require a two -block walk to our front
door, including walking along Elm Way, which does not have a sidewalk. This would be
inconvenient, dangerous, and an extreme hardship for those visiting with mobility
issues. Although I understand the need for a safe space for biking as I am an avid bicyclist
myself, as a homeowner living along 100th Ave. W., this is an extremely troubling situation.
Please consider an alternate solution that would accommodate the needs of both homeowners
and bicyclists.
7/26/20 Chad Berman, Subject: Bike Lanes on 9th Ave and 100th Ave West
No bike lanes please. It seems you all don't visit friends my god we try to make a simple life we
are not Seattle
7/26/20 Treg Camper, Subject: Oppose 9th Ave S and Walnut Street Bike Lanes
want to express my opposition to the proposed bike lanes along 9` Ave S and Walnut. I'm
also oppose eliminating 50% of the parking as a result. I urge every member of the council to
vote no on the 9th Ave S and Walnut St bike land project. Here is a short list of reasons.
- 1. - Edmonds is not -a -biking town. -This-is-driven by demographics, -terrain (hills), weather
(cold and rain), and a small percentage of people who bike. Believe me, Edmonds is not
a fun town to bike
2. Building bike lanes along 9th Ave S and Walnut is dangerous. Speed, ingress, egress,
pedestrians and bikers will create additional danger for all parties. The many bikers I
speak with prefer less crowed routes. Should alternative routes be explored?
3. Existing bike lanes are seldom used. I rarely see any biker use any bike lane in this
city. I walk 9th Ave S daily... I can't remember the last time I saw a biker. Building bike
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 48
lanes won't make more people ride bikes. Refer to point 1. Conversely, creating traffic
congestion won't cause fewer people to drive.
4. Spending and estimated $1.91VI for street paint is wasted money; seems like there are
bigger, more important issues to solve.
5. Eliminating parking will increase pedestrian risk. Streets above and below 9th are
steep. Do you expect the people, especially the elderly, to hike up streets or worse
yet —cross 9th to get to their destination?
6. Eliminating parking will cause unnecessary hardship for businesses that depend on
street parking.
7. The neighbors along 9th and Walnut are upset about this —even the bikers. One of my
neighbors left Seattle to escape wasteful spending.
8. COVID has changed our lives. People are looking for ways to avoid mass transit and
flee high density housing if they can.
9. Bikers can bike any street they choose —with or without stripes. It's free.
Please oppose the 9th Ave S and Walnut Street bike lanes and corresponding elimination of
parking. I'm urging the council to table this issue until we can meet again at city hall. I also
encourage the council to table other such issues until we can meet and discuss in person, as a
community. I'm happy to discuss further.
7/26/20 Nick Perrault, Subject: 9th Ave Proposal
I am currently a resident on 9th Ave S between Pine and Walnut. I believe you will be be
discussing a bike lane on 9th Ave proposal during the upcoming Council meeting. While
improvements to 9th Ave sound great for our community, I am concerned about losing a
majority of parking spaces. This is the primary parking for our guests and extended family. Is
there more information available about this proposed project? Thank you!
7/26/20 Doug Canfield, Subject: New bike lanes
Thank you for planning new bike lanes in Edmonds. In particular, I use the Firdale 100th Ave
W/9th Ave S road frequently, and it was my regular commute bicycle for a decade. Where the
road bends from West to North coming into Westgate has always been very sketchy, especially
in the winter when it's dark and wet in the evening. That will be a big help and the traffic lanes
can easily be reduced along there without adding congestion. Having bike lanes to the Sounder
and light rail via bicycle is will be a great incentive to get people using those modes of
transportation. This is smart governing and I appreciate it. Thanks again.
7/26/20 Pamela Ching-Bunge and Christoph K. Bunge, Subject: Proposed Elimination of Street
Parking to put in Bike Lanes: 9th Avenue
As 20-year residents and tax payers of Edmonds, we STRONGLY OPPOSE the elimination of
our street parking on 100th Avenue S. to create bike lanes. As our home is located directly on
100th Avenue S, the street parking in front of our house is essential. Our driveway has limited
parking space for two cars, but we often need the extra street parking for ourselves for
deliveries, loading or unloading large amounts of garden material, guest parking, and for
maneuvering safely into busy traffic. Furthermore, it is incumbent upon the city council before
making this hasty decision, to consider the following serious and consequential concerns:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 49
1) The side streets which we would have to use as street parking are NOT SAFE FOR US, AS
SENIOR CITIZENS. The street off 100th Ave S nearest our house, 14th street SW.,
is extremely steep and would be dangerous to use as street parking even for able-bodied
persons. Parking on such steep inclines would invite bodily injury getting out of and into
the car and attempting to park on such a steep slope would be difficult even in good
weather. Rain, snow, ice would make this extremely difficult if not impossible. I WOULD
STRONGLY ADVISE AN ON -SITE ASSESSMENT OF 14th Street SW (going west off 100th
Ave. S) WHERE YOU EXPECT US TO PARK DUE TO THE REMOVAL OUR CURRENT
STREET PARKING. 2) During the process of parking on 14th Street SW, the abrupt steepness
of 14th St SW creates additional danger because cars turning from 100th west onto 14th St SW
cannot see a car parking below until already heading downhill. 14th St SW is not wide enough
for street parking without driving into parking areas when turning. 3) Many of our visitors (family
and friends) are also senior citizens or persons with disabilities. You are putting these persons
at risk also, and deterring them from visiting to check on us. 4) As a fan of bicycle riding,
support more bike lanes in Edmonds. But why put them on major thorough -fares with lots of
traffic? It is safer and healthier (less auto exhaust) for both bicyclists and vehicle drivers to keep
them separate as much as possible. Have you considered locating bicycle lanes on wide side
streets like 8th Avenue S, where there is less traffic and fewer traffic lights? I feel you could
reduce existing conflicts between vehicle drivers and bicyclists by keeping bike lanes away from
busy traffic. Furthermore, it is much more pleasant a route for bicyclists than 100th!!!!Thank you
for carefully considering our objections and comments. Furthermore, the first we heard of these
proposed changes was yesterday. More timely notification to those directly affected is essential
for an engaged and informed citizenry. We love Edmonds and appreciate your dedication and
hard work. Thank you.
7/26/20 Becky Dickison, Subject: Parking on 9th Ave.
I'm sending my opinion regarding the addition of bike lanes on 9th Ave. and 100th Ave. W. No,
no, no, I don't want this to happen! It will greatly impact the area by taking away the parking
available currently for its residences and the essential workers at Westgate Shopping Center.
As a customer who shops there it can also be hard to park, especially during holidays. I've
had to park on 100th to get to the store when there's no parking in their lots. It will also affect
the cemetery during its services for special events. Where will people go? Will they end up
having to use the side roads that are already impacted with no sidewalks and limited or no
parking? I have property along 100th and I hardly ever see any bikers utilizing this road and if
so, it's very seasonal. One thing that might help is to provide a bike lane along 8th Ave. There
are no sidewalks, you could put some in, and put the bike lane there which has access to many
roads that can get to the ferry, parks, etc. It's also less traveled than 100th/9th which may make
it safer. Another thing that might be a compromise is to lower the speed limit along 100th/9th to
25 mph if people are concerned for bikers' safety. Please listen to the businesses and people
- -who-live-along-this road-.--Do-we-support-a-bike-lane?-NO!-Thanks-for-listening.- - - - -
7/26/20 June Magill, Subject: Bike Route Improvement on 100th Ave W, 9th Ave N, Walnut
Street & Bowdoin Way
My Name is June Magill Address: 935 Walnut St, Edmonds, WA 98020 1 have deep concerns
about the impact on parking of the proposed Bike lane improvement on 9th Ave N, 100 Ave SW,
Walnut str, and Bowdoin Ave. The loss of existing parking will be a serious detriment to many
residents on these streets. The data provided for Walnut street is skewed and doubtful. An
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 50
accurate bike count not reflecting COVID19 impacts is required. Parking on 100th Ave to
Westgate supporting the QFC, PCC, Goodwill, the Cemetery, and other businesses must be
retained. On street parking around Yost Park must be retained to support park activities,
particularly the swimming pool. There are several adult family homes on these streets. Parking
must be provided for staff and visitors to these homes. Also consideration must be given to
service business (e.g. house cleaners, yard services, pest control, and others). Several along
Walnut have these services weekly and required adequate close -in parking to residents
they service. Parking needs must not be sacrificed for the small number of cyclists likely to use
these proposed lanes.
7/26/20 Jay Magill, Subject: Bike Route Improvement on 100th Ave W, 9th Ave N, Walnut Streel
& Bowdoin Way
My Name is Jay Magill Address: 935 Walnut St, Edmonds, WA 98020. 1 was unable to
participate in the Public Hearing concerning the subject project. I do however, want my
comments and concerns to be recorded. First, in general, the Council must not proceed
headlong without considering the full impact of adding bike lanes at the expense of street
parking. Councilperson Buckshnis addressed this at the July 21st Council meeting for Westgate
along 100th Ave W, but this applies to Walnut and Bowdoin as well. Many residents have no
viable option other than street parking, and taking those away will hurt many. Alternate side
parking as proposed, will force some to cross busy streets to reach their residence adding
potential for pedestrian accidents. COVID 19 notwithstanding, we will eventually return to a
more outgoing and social society. Eliminating parking and forcing residential parking to
disperse greater distances and the opposite side of the street they wish to visit increased
accident risks not to mention inconvenience. I noticed a comment from minutes of the July 21st
meeting Steve Kaiser stated in the last 4 or 5 months "bike sales are up 100 -300V implying
this was a clear sign bike ridership would increase. False premise. I offer bike sales are up due
primarily to the COVID19 lockdowns. People not going to work have extra time and opted to
walk, run, or ride bicycles for recreation and exercise. This is only a temporary spike and will
drop off as quickly as it took off as activities return to normal. I also noted that Michelle Dotch
reported Bike land count data from the 212th Strand 76th Ave project completed in 2019. Public
record request data show basically no change in bike counts through that intersection. This
apparently surprised some city staff. This data needs to be verified. If accurate, the bike
element of that project certainly cost more for insignificant results. The future parking and bike
counts must be addressed accurately and in total during the promised design phase of this
proposed project. Parking has an equal value and need with bike plan development.
7/26/20 John Routt, Subject: Comment Regarding Action Item #3: Approval of Sound Transit
Funding Agreement for Citywide Bicycle Improvement Project
I feel there has been a complete lack of transparency regarding this Action Item and only found -
out about this Action Item / issue when a flyer was placed on our doorstep. I also question the
validity of the study and information provided to council members in the draft 21 July Council
Meeting minutes. IMHO the comments of Councilmember K. Johnson don't represent the actual
situation on Bowdoin Way below 92nd Ave: I live on Bowdoin Way a block from Yost Park and
disagree with the study findings (number of parked cars and bicycles traffic): 1)During freezing
weather, I see quite a few (more than 5) cars parked near the entrance to Shell park - did this
study account for them? 2) There are usually 6 - 10 cars parked below 93rd Ave overnight, with
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 51
less during the daytime and these can be in -front of different residences. 3) There are multiple
driveways below a blind curve just west of 93rd Ave where cars backing out of their driveway
already caused heavy braking action to avoid accidents. Bicycles coming down this hill
probably won't stop in a short distance like cars; Thus, the probability of a car - bicycle accident
will be increased. 4) Where has the study accounted for Yost Park event parking (like swim
meets and other large get togethers)? Usually both sides of Bowdoin Way are used for overflow
parking reaching nearly up to 93rd Ave. Did the study consider using Main street for the bike
lanes.up to 5 corners?_ I know it is a step hill, but there are less driveways and minimal on -
street parking except near the theater
7/26/20 Dan Taylor, Subject: Bike lane vs parking
Please do not take away the parking on 9th/100th or Walnut. The cities job is to provide the
greatest good for the greatest numbers. You would be derelict in your duty if you traded 1,000
parking spaces for a few bike riders. Would you be impacted by the lack of parking? A lot of us
who pay a lot of taxes would. We would get over flow parking on our street and that would
negatively impact our lives. It is obvious you would like to make Edmonds into a little Seattle.
Just remember there is a reason why we pay a premium to live in Edmonds and would never
live in Seattle or King County. Make your legacy in city government retaining what makes living
in Edmonds so great and not the ones responsible for everything going to hell under there
(your) watch.
7/26/20 Wendy Taylor, Subject Bike lanes
Bicycle lanes in my opinion are the last thing Edmonds needs. In the years I have lived in
Edmonds I have not seen any bike traffic on Alder street east of 9th, but we would definitely be
impacted by the lack of parking in the immediate area. To take away parking from the
residents of Edmonds is truly uncalled for. The city council needs to know that just because
Seattle does this does not mean Edmonds has to follow suit. WE ARE NOT SEATTLE!I! Please
let Edmonds be Edmonds with all the wonderful things our beautiful city has to offer..
7/26/20 Peggy Estela, Subject: Public comment on Proposed Bike Lanes
appreciate the opportunity to comment on the issues of bike lanes in Edmonds. The northwest,
and Seattle in particular has a reputation for being progressive with deep concerns about
climate change. We should be encouraging as much non -automobile traffic as possible. We
value our quality of life here which includes to a large extent the ability to access the outdoors,
and to maintain an active lifestyle in nature. We cannot just pay lipservice to ideas about livable
cities and inclusion without actually making our surroundings liveable and inclusive for
everyone. Nothing changes without a few people getting uncomfortable or even angry. Seattle
has finally gone the direction of extending the light rail to take the pressure off our overburdened
-highways,--Cars-have-control-and-priority-over all -of the- roads- with -a very -few -exceptions, -and- - - - --
most people understand that this is unsustainable. Bike riders deserve their small share of the
road and an assurance that they can ride in safety. There are bike lanes in Seattle where cars
are much more inconvenienced than in Edmonds A few bike lanes is not asking for much, but
it's a great start in the right direction towards a future where cars will have less and less
significance. Bike lanes are in keeping with the small town friendly feel of Edmonds. The
proposed route is perfect because the parking spaces in question are not used heavily and
there are plenty of alternatives for drivers to park nearby. If we want progressive cities we need
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 52
progressive actions and policies. Looking back on this issue 5-10 years from now, it will seem
utterly obvious that any town such as Edmonds needs a way for all people to use a variety of
safe transportation.
7/25/20 Linda Massey, Subject: Comment submission in response to putting a bike lane on
Bowdoin
Putting a bike lane on Bowdoin is crazy. Too steep/too narrow, and with the curves in that street -
there could be many close calls, or deadly consequences. A driver could be pulling out of their
driveway or a side street to get out on to Bowdoin and not see a biker in time - or the biker doesn't
see the car in time. Bikers can be very difficult to see - depending on the weather/time of day, and
there are many bikers who just plain go way too fast on those streets. There are also many residents
who depend on parking where they are currently allowed to park on Bowdoin near their homes. If you
put in bike lanes - where are those residents supposed to park? Does the Edmonds City Council care
that they could negatively impact and change the lives of those residents? I've seen what bike lanes
have done to too many busy crowded relatively narrow streets in Seattle. Not only is it hazardous for
the drivers and bikers, but also pedestrians. I understand the desire and reason to have bike lanes
but don't make the same mistake Seattle has done repeatedly by putting them on streets that are
similar in width as Bowdoin. There is too much traffic on Bowdoin and add to that the hill and curves.
There just isn't enough room to add bike lanes that can make it safe for anyone.
I have walked along Bowdoin in the curved areas and the bikers just love going as fast as they can
down that hill and into the curves. It's crazy already. It's like a carnival ride for them. Please Edmonds
City Council do not make it easier for bikers to do that. Putting bike lanes in will not make that kind of
biker safer, nor safe for any biker, pedestrian, or motorists in that area. Thank you
7/25/20 Peter Henry, Subject: Bike lane proposal for 9th Ave., Bowdoin, Walnut and Firdale
This is public comment concerning the proposal to add a bike lane to several streets in
Edmonds. I am writing to advocate for NO bike lane even though I am an avid cyclist. I
occasionally park my car on Bowdoin across from the shops at 5 corners, because their parking
lots are often full. So any plan should keep in mind there is a high demand for these spaces on
the street. I am a Seattle substitute teacher and for the last two years I have commuted by bike.
I take Sound Transit to Seattle, then I ride home. I also run errands on my bike, and I ride
recreationally. On the streets in question, I ride often from Pine Street (where I live) down 9th
Avenue, south past Edmonds Way, up 9th Avenue (100th Avenue) to where it becomes 8th
Avenue in Shoreline. I also ride north on 9th Avenue coming home, and also further north to
access Olympic View Drive. I ride from home up the Firdale hill to get to Aurora Village. I also
ride on Bowdoin from the intersection with 98th, and occasionally I ride down Walnut to the
intersection with 9th. I have done this a lot (multiple times a week) over the last 2 years and I
have never run into a problem due to congestion on 9th Avenue, Walnut, Bowdoin or Firdale.
There is one exception - the hill on 9th (100th) Avenue south of 238th Street. There is no
shoulder and cars pass too closely for comfort going south up the hill. Even though there's no
shoulder there is no problem going north downhill because bikes can keep up with traffic.
Otherwise - there are no problems to speak of. All streets (9th, Bowdoin, Walnut and Firdale)
are amply wide for cars to share the street safely with cyclists. An inexpensive solution would
be to paint Sharrows on the streets, to indicate they are suitable for cyclists. If you want to add a
bike lane or shoulder, a great candidate would be Olympic View Drive. It is very popular with
cyclists, but it has no shoulder and is quite curvy, which presents a problem. Thanks for
considering my opinion.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 53
7/25/20 Carl Stout, Subject: Parking on 100 ave w.
Do not remove parking on 100 ave w from walnut street to Firdale village it serves no purpose
we need -the parking. - I -live at 22009 100th ave-w.-We-dont need -people street -parking here:
What are you thinking. During the taste of Edmonds they park all the way up here. When you
close down 5th they park up here. What in the world would it accomplish removing parking. Do
you people really think people will get out of their cars and ride a bike????? What about the
winter and the rain which in most of the year...... A truly pissed off Edmonds resident.
7/25/20 Christian Johnson, Subject: I am a cyclist, please don't put a bike lane on Bowdoin
I ride my bike almost daily on Bowdoin. I have never felt the need for a bike lane. if cars
currently parking on Bowdoin have to park on our street it will make walking, kids playing and
getting our car in/out of our driveway far more dangerous. My 3yr old and 1 yr old won't be able
to see oncoming traffic at the end of our driveway and they regularly ride their balance bikes
down our driveway. Please don't do it. You are going to create a parking problem and endanger
kids in a rapidly growing neighborhood.
7/25/20 Melvin Brady, Subject: Parking Removal and Dedicated Bicycle Lanes on 9th Ave S
from Walnut Street to Firdale Village and from 9th and Walnut to 5 Corners
Further to my email yesterday to the City Council regarding the above proposed measures
please see attached photos of the accident that I refer to in my earlier email which occurred in
March of 2018 on 9th Ave S very near our house and less than a quarter mile south of
Walnut. As mentioned this accident was caused due to view blockage from a parked car on the
west side of 9th Ave S obscuring sight of oncoming traffic heading south on 9th at speeds that
are often above the speed limit. The BMW shown could not see this traffic properly as it
egressed its drive way. These City designated parking stalls are mostly located too close to the
driveways of the houses on 9th Ave S given the amount of traffic that use 9th Ave S as a
commuter corridor.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 54
Olgr
7/25/20 Melvin Brady, Subject: Parking Removal and Dedicated Bicycle Lanes on 9th Ave S
from Walnut Street to Firdale Village and from 9th and Walnut to 5 Corners
As Edmonds homeowning residents since 1984 and now living on the west side of 9th Ave S
since 2012 (situated about a quarter mile south of Walnut Street at 820-9th Ave S) please be
advised my wife and I are truly delighted with, and whole heartedly support, the above
referenced proposed measures. As 9th Ave S is a through street for commenter traffic that often
travels over the speed limit vehicle egress from our driveway has always been difficult because
of poor visibility due to cars parked on 9th Ave S that are too close to our driveway. We
witnessed a major accident about two years ago on 9th Ave S less than a hundred yards north
of our driveway (with one of the two vehicles involved ending up on its roof) which was caused
by a car parked on the west side of 9th Ave S blocking the view of oncoming traffic for a BMW
egressing from its driveway. Shortly after that accident occurred some neighbors and I were
successful in getting the City of Edmonds to remove one designated parking stall on 9th Ave S
that was located far too close to our driveway for good visibility and safe egress. Nevertheless,
given the nature of the traffic on 9th Ave S, the remaining nearby designated parking stalls on it
are located still too close for our safe egress and we would welcome their removal. Additionally,
as a bike owner and frequent cyclist around Edmonds and the nearby Inter -Urban Bike route I
whole heartedly support the proposed installation of dedicated bike lanes in my immediate
area. It is time to make Edmonds even more livable by doing what great international cities like
Vancouver Canada, Amsterdam in the Netherlands and other European municipal authorities
have done by promoting dedicated bike lanes as viable travel alternatives to the overly
ubiquitous automobile. Please pass these parking and bike lane measures as proposed as soon
as possible.
7/25/20 Paul Malatesta, Subject: Parking
I have just learned that Edmonds might greatly restrict legal parking on 100t" Ave W, 9th Ave S,
and Bowdoin. This would be done to add dedicated bicycle lanes on both sides of these
streets. This is a bad idea. Removing all of the on street parking would greatly inconvenience
local area residents and provide little benefit to the small number of bicyclists who now have no
noticeable problems sharing these streets with motor vehicles. Please ask yourselves, who
pays the taxes and fees to support road construction and maintenance? It is not the bicyclists.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 55
7/25/20 Alex Abdo, Subject: Dedicated Bike Lanes Along 9th Ave -NO!
This is a terrible idea! Bike lanes will make these streets less safe -for both pedestrians and -the
motoring public. This change would only benefit a few at the detriment to the many. Adding bike
lanes sounds like a nice enough idea but the infrastructure is not in place to properly handle
bike lanes. There are not enough crosswalks or metered intersections to properly handle the
displaced pedestrian traffic that will result in people not being able to park in front of thier
homes. So ... are you planning on incurring those costs as well? And for what? A very limited
amount of bike traffic? This plan is totally short sighted. And conducting the parking study during
the COVID shutdown...? Nice really nice move. Edmonds was one of the last places unaffected
by the sound transit boondoggle. Please dont change that. Thank you
7/25/20 John and Darlene Wilczynski, Subject: Bike lanes on 9th Ave
It has come to our attention that you are looking at a major traffic revision that would eliminate
parking on both sides of 9th Ave in order to put in bike lanes. As residents living on 9th we have
firsthand experience and can confidently tell you removing ALL parking would cause severe
issues with people living on this street. Many, if not most, of the houses on this street were not
designed with extra parking for visitors or for businesses providing deliveries and other services.
Our understanding is that you studied our street for this project during the lockdown period
associated with the COVID crisis. If so, you are doing all of us an injustice and using severely
compromised data. It would be comparable to saying a business area has little usage because
there was no real traffic when parking was studied at 4am on Tuesday mornings. I do think one
bike lane is not unreasonable and could help with the issue of speeding vehicles which the city
of Edmonds has failed to do anything about. Why not set up a road similar to 76th Ave W which
uses a zigzag pattern. This way you have traffic lanes (which not being straight reduce the
ability to speed), a bicycle lane and areas of parking alternating on both sides of the street. The
parking on both sides would make for a much safer experience since crosswalks are not
plentiful and crossing the street would be very hazardous especially for older individuals or
those with disabilities.
7/25/20 Nicole Titus, Subject: Bike lane on Bowdoin
I live just off of Bowdoin Ave. I heard of the plan to put bike lanes on Bowdoin. If cars currently
parking on Bowdoin have to park on our street it will make walking, kids playing and getting our
car in/out of our driveway far more dangerous. Our children won't be able to see oncoming
traffic at the end of our driveway and they regularly ride their bikes down our driveway. Please
don't put bike lanes in on Bowdoin. My husband rides his bike regularly on Bowdoin and says
bike lanes are not needed. You are going to create a parking problem and endanger kids in a
rapidly growing neighborhood.
7/25/20 Cathy Willcock, Subject: Bike lanes
I am in favor of the bike lanes on 9th and on Bowdoin. Most homes have driveways to park in
and visitors can park on side streets. There are already lots of cyclists on the roads and I think
their safety And of the Safety of drivers is more important than an inconvenience for visitor
parking. Edmonds needs to be more bike/scooter and walker friendly and see that the future is
in alternative methods of transportation other than cars.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 56
7/25/20 Sandra Schenkar, Subject: Parking on 9th Ave. South
I am astounded that the city would even consider such a major change in isolated meetings ---
without general input from the actual residents. It seems as though you are trying to pass this
legislation during this period of time (covid 19) when meetings are not permitted and the
Edmonds Beacon has had to reduce circulation by 50%. As a resident on 9th Ave. S. I have a
very steep, short driveway (allowing only 1 car). 9th Ave. is the only place for guests, delivery
trucks, USPS van and even the garbage and recyling trucks to stop at the curb. In addition, I am
handicapped--- cane, ...sometimes a walker and can't always park in my steep driveway to enter
and exit car. Also, anybody on 9th S. who has to park a 2nd car on a side street would have to
walk themselves and their packages UP the steep side streets (Fir) and then walk along 9th to
their home. This creates an inherent handicap within the supposed solution. In addition some of
the uphill side streets can't be navigated in snowy, icy weather so most folks have to move cars
up to 9th Ave. the night before they have to drive to work. Another problem, there is a safety
issue when heavy trucks and those with pup trailers have to DRAG themselves up streets like
Fir and 'hang on' to the top of hill until they can turn onto 9th. If cars are parked on either side of
the streets it would make driving up the "bowl" dangerous to maneuver without the extra
shoulder space. This is a very ill conceived concept in many ways, and it robs more residents of
the usage of public streets than it adds to the convenience/safety of many fewer bike
riders. Please consider all the negative ramifications and vote NO
7/24/20 Penny N. Lyons, Subject: Proposed Bicycle Lanes on Bowdoin Way
I am writing as a concerned resident on Bowdoin Way in response to information I've received
in regards to proposed bicycle lanes on both sides of Bowdoin Way from 96th Ave. W. (or
actually from 9th Ave. S.) up to 5 Corners. That essentially eliminates all on -street parking for
residents and guests in that area. Side street parking is impossible due to very short cul-de-
sacs off Bowdoin Way. The amount of bicycle traffic on this street does not warrant closing off
all vehicle parking. There are increasingly numbers of delivery vehicles, commercial repair
vehicles, etc., that would also have nowhere to park. I have noticed other area streets with
vehicle parking lanes and bicycle lanes lined off. The situation of vehicles backing out of
driveways into bicycle lanes is extremely dangerous. Also dangerous is having to cross a busy
street, such as Bowdoin Way, on foot to access your vehicle. Bowdoin Way has increased in
vehicle volume as well as increased speeders which also compounds the situation. Having lived
in this area for fifty years, it does not seem fair to take away our right to have street parking
availability eliminated entirely. Please consider the actual residents living in this area before
you install bicycle lanes that hamper street parking and create a very dangerous situation.
Thank you for your consideration.
7/24/20 Debra Shore-Dundas, Subject: Bike lanes on 9th Ave and On Bowdoin Way
I'm against adding bike lanes on 9th Ave and on Bowdoin Way. I live on 9th and it is already
difficult enough for people to find parking. It also further complicates getting in and out of
driveways, deliveries and walking/crossing these streets. Parking studies conducted during
Covid shutdowns are completely invalid. Please don't make things harder for us.
7/24/20 Andrew Morgan, Subject: Preserve and Maintain On -Street Parking on 9th Avenue
My wife Susan Morgan and I have recently purchased a home at 808 9rh Ave S in Edmonds,
WA 98020. One of the reasons we selected this property was that it has adequate on -street
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 57
parking in front of our home. The lot sizes are limited and when we have family and guests at
the home, or USPS/Fed Ex/UPS deliveries, there is nowhere else to safely park except -on -
street. We had to get a City of Edmonds Street Use Permit to park a POD on 9th Avenue when
we moved into our home since the driveway is on a slope and provided no flat space for a POD.
The side streets surrounding our home are a half a block away (making walking inconvenient)
and these side streets are on steep slopes making street parking on those streets impractical
and questionable from a health and safety standpoint. Additionally, restricting on -street parking
to one side of 91h Avenue is impractical and unsafe due to the hazard to pedestrians of crossing
this busy avenue. Furthermore, eliminating on -street parking on 9th Avenue would diminish
property values for the aforementioned reasons which would in turn negatively impact the City's
property tax revenues. 9th Avenue is broad and the laws of the State of Washington currently
provide adequate, safe, legal access for all bikers. It is imprudent and unnecessary to eliminate
on -street parking that is convenient for thousands of individual homeowners who live in the City
of Edmonds to make it more convenient for the limited number of bikers who would transit 9th
Avenue. For the record, we are not opposed to dedicated bike lanes if they do not eliminate on -
street parking. We recognize that Sound Transit has given the City of Edmonds a grant to
create dedicated bike lanes. We understand the reluctance to forego any grant monies;
however, it would not serve the interests of the citizens of Edmonds to eliminate or restrict on -
street parking on 9th Avenue. We understand and appreciate the virtues of "top down"
international policies such as U.N. Agenda 2030 and regional planning exercises conducted by
entities such as Sound Transit. However, what sounds like great idea from a "top down"
theoretical perspective is often untenable in the context of practical, local interests. Well
intentioned "top down" or "regional" policies should be carefully considered in the light of the
local landscape before being implemented at the local level. Eliminating or restricting on -street
parking on 9th Avenue is not a good idea. Thank you for considering our perspective on the
matter.
7/24/20 Andrew Morgan, Subject: Preserve and Maintain On -Street Parking on 9th Avenue
During this COVID 19 Pandemic the public is not allowed to legally assemble inside City Hall to
show either support or opposition to the proposal to eliminate 50% of the parking on 9th Avenue
and other locations in Edmonds to facilitate bike lanes. A Zoom meeting is a completely
unacceptable alternative because it is incapable of adequately expressing the emotions
underlying this proposal. The City Council should delay a vote on this project until such time as
the people can legally assemble for a full and frank discussion with the City Council. To do
otherwise will inadvertently lead to an environment of suspicion and distrust as many citizens
will feel that this was "zoomed" through, so to speak, instead of undergoing a full and frank in -
person discussion. It is one thing for the City Council to adopt aspirational policies and quite
another to implement these aspirations in detail without full and frank in person discussions with
affected citizens. Putting this vote off until citizens can assemble inside City Hall will also avoid
potential -lawsuits as several -Edmonds citizens are seriously contemplating legal action to __--
challenge this project under the current circumstances. Thank you for considering our
perspective on this issue.
7/24/20 Jim Carraway, Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT - Bike Lanes
The plan to install bike lanes along 100th Ave W, 9th Ave S, Walnut St. and Bowdoin Way
utilizing Sound Transit funds is misguided and obviously doesn't take into consideration the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 58
impact this plan will have on the residents of Edmonds. It also shows that the city planners are
not prioritizing safety. Impact
• Many of the homes along the roads slated for bike lanes are from the 1950s and
60s. My home was built in 1953 and does not have a parking space for visitors. If street
parking is removed, the city council is stating that my elderly mother will not be able to
visit me in the future. And in turn telling all residents on affected streets, you cannot
have friends and family visit.
• The city is also forgetting that 9th Ave S and Walnut St are overflow parking for many
city events, including the Fourth of July celebrations. Every year except for this one,
Walnut St is packed with cars from 9th all the way to Yost Park, as are the surrounding
streets. Is the city council truly expecting visitors to our town come on bicycles? Safety
• The intersection of 9th and Walnut is notoriously dangerous. In the four and a half plus
years I have lived on Walnut, I know of three accidents at the intersection.
• People constantly speed on Walnut/Bowdoin. The Edmonds Police Dept set up its
portable radar sign at my request, which slowed traffic down when it was in place. The
minute it was removed speeds increased again. I have also spoken with Bertrand
Hauss, Transportation Engineer, regarding installing a radar sign similar to what is on
95th PI W between 220th and 224th St SW. Mr. Hauss stated all projects had been
decided for the current project roadmap. While there is a project on Bowdoin to
address speed, the earliest the city could do anything regarding the speeding on
Walnut was the year 2022.
• I have heard also heard the rationale for these bike lanes was to connect the Sounder -
Edmonds Station to the Mountlake Terrance Link light rail station. No commuter is ever
going to make that 30-minute ride twice a day. There is nothing stopping people from
riding their bicycles now. On a daily basis, I see people riding up and down Walnut
St. A better use of the funds would be safety education, radar signs
and enforcement. The last of which applies to both car drivers and cyclists. While
drivers speed, cyclists don't stop at stop signs. I have personally seen this occur five
times this year at the intersection of Walnut St, Yost Park, Bowdoin Way and 96th Ave
W.
7/24/20 Thomas Dundas, Subject: Bike Lanes
Just a quick note to express my concerns about the proposed bike lanes on 9th Ave. and
Bowdoin Way. First of all, a parking study done during the COVID crisis is completely invalid
because of the considerable reduction in traffic and parking along 9th and Bowdoin during this
period. In normal times, there are many dozens of vehicles parked on those streets every day
and at night as well. We have had a house on 9th since 1992 and have seen it first hand.
Besides parking, there are deliveries, construction and other activities that need to use 9th and
Bowdoin as streets on which to park vehicles. There isn't that much bicycle traffic on 9th
presently, and what little there is, has little trouble using the street for transits in the present
configuration. If the lanes are put in, it will draw more bike traffic to the area most likely, and
increase dangers when vehicles are attempting to enter or exit driveways. I am completely
against the proposed bike lanes in Edmonds and hope the Council will reject the idea.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 59
7/24/20 Pam Bingen, Subject: Sound Transit Bicycle Lane Grant
I am opposed to removing all parking on these streets, especially around Yost Park and 5
Corners. Street parking is needed to support the small businesses at 5 corners and there is not
enough parking in Yost park during swimming events. In addition, I am opposed to trying to put
a bike lane next to a parking lane. This configuration is dangerous for both bikers and people
who are trying to get in and out of their cars. It is especially a concern on Bowdoin which is a
curvy road with steep uphill and downhill sections. When I saw the agenda for last week's
Council agenda, I looked on line for drawings or detailed plans on how the Sound Transit
Bicycle Grant was to be implemented and found the information very vague. I live one block
from Walnut street and 9th Ave and am impacted by changes on both of these
streets. Residents in the neighborhoods on and adjacent to the streets involved need to see
detailed plans and have a voice in this decision. Have alternatives, such as routing the bike
lane to 96th Ave West or 92 Ave West been considered? Can we afford to afford to sacrifice
parking and car traffic on two of the main arterials? Is the proposed design safe for drivers and
bicyclists?
7/24/20 Megan Hansen, Subject: CONCERNED CITIZEN: Dedicated Bike Lanes on 9th Ave
I live in 9th Ave and have recently learned that there is a plan to remove ALL street parking in
order to add dedicated bicycle lanes on both side of our street.
- It is my understanding that a usage study was done recently - during COVID?? when we were
all observing stay at home orders and had no visitors, babysitters, etc.... and during the
SUMMER when people are more likely to walk and ride bikes vs the winter when all visitors
DRIVE? I can tell you that we regularly use the spots located by our home, but have not been
doing so since early March so any study done recently is not an accurate or fair depiction.
- Additionally, the Edmonds bowl is on a very steep incline, and when it snows, we have to park
our cars up on 9th Ave as we can not get them out of our driveway.
- Most of our side streets (on the West side of 9th) are also very steep and and have no parking
blocked - so where are we to park? In short, I could be supportive of A SINGLE bike lane on
ONE side of the road (such as is found in many other spots around the area), however
removing all street parking would cause serious challenges for myself and our neighbors. Thank
you for considering an alternative of keeping parking on one side of the street (preferably the
West side).
7/24/20 Cinthia Smith Subject: Retain some parking on Walnut St!
I understand that the City of Edmonds is considering removing some or all parking on specific
--neighborhood-streets- i n-Edmonds . I- a m-a-bike-rider-and-resident-of-E-d m and s-(Walnut-St)
I have family members with mobility issues, requiring parking spots directly in front of my
home. I would ask that we retain some parking on neighborhood streets to allow for residents
and guests to have easy access to homes. I live near Yost Park, and have experienced the
summer swim events parking overflow on my street. This negatively impacts the local residents'
ability to park near their homes and restricts potential visitors. While we can deal with
occasional disruptions, a permanent change is not acceptable. PLEASE consider our access to
our homes as you make your decisions.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 60
7/24/20 Lori Cormack, Subject: Sound Transit - 9th and Walnut
As a resident/homeowner on Walnut St., I am upset the councilmembers are considering a
major change to my street, without any engagement with myself and the other
stakeholders. Since learning of the proposed elimination of on street parking, I reviewed the
available data and question the validity, especially of traffic surveys, during Covid. The houses
above and below mine are both Adult Family homes. In normal times, there are a number of
visiting medical personnel as well as family and friends in addition to the caregivers. My house
as well as many others on our street have limited off-street parking. The grade of Walnut
especially at 9th is high and challenging for most people to walk, let alone the seniors that live
there or visit. Having to walk from another street isn't feasible for most and certainly not safe,
especially in wet, ice or snow. The intersection of 9th and Walnut is busy and has many
accidents. I see nothing in the available data that addresses safety for cyclists, pedestrians or
drivers. External funding is attractive, it should not however, entice action that is not well
thought out and not coordinated with the affected residents.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
July 28, 2020
Page 61