On the agenda: Stanwood meeting — Flock Camera (Apr 24)

City of Stanwood

City Council Packet
Stanwood City Council
Regular Meeting
Thursday, April 24, 2025

AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
April 24, 2025 | 7:00 p.m.

Stanwood-Camano School District, Admin. Building Board Room
26920 Pioneer Highway, Stanwood, WA 98292
Members of the public may attend Stanwood City Council meetings
in-person or via Zoom. The click this Zoom link or visit the City’s website calendar
https://www.stanwoodwa.org/calendar

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
PRESENTATIONS
Stanwood High School Update – Elizabeth Burton
PUBLIC COMMENTS
• Verbal comments may be provided in-person.
• Written comments must be provided to the Clerk by 12:00 p.m. the day of the meeting via this link:
https://stanwoodwa.org/FormCenter/City-Clerk-5/City-Council-Meeting-Remote-Public-Comme-61
• Remote (online or phone-in) comments can be received by reasonable accommodation only.
Any requests for reasonable accommodation for remote participation, must be sent in writing to the
City Clerk at [email protected] by 12:00 p.m. the day of the meeting.

6.
7.

8.

9.
10.
11.

12.
13.

14.
15.

STAFF / DEPARTMENT REPORTS
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
a. Community Development Meeting Minutes – April 3, 2024
b. Planning Commission and City Council Joint Meeting Minutes
– February 10, 2025
c. Public Safety Committee Meeting Minutes – April 10, 2025
d. Public Works Committee Meeting Minutes – April 14, 2025
CONSENT AGENDA
a. Approve Vouchers and Payroll Checks
b. Approve City Council Regular Meeting Minutes – April 10, 2025
c. Approve Second Utility Account Adjustment
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING
NEW BUSINESS
Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Contract with RH2 for the Wastewater
Treatment Plant Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System
Improvements Engineering Report
PUBLIC CLOSING COMMENTS
EXECUTIVE/LEGISLATIVE REPORTS
a. Mayor’s Report
b. City Administrator’s Report
c. Councilmember’s Reports/Questions
RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
ADJOURN

Upcoming Meetings:
Thursday, May 8, 2025 City Council Workshop 5:00 pm
Thursday, May 8, 2025 City Council Meeting 7:00 pm
Thursday, June 12, 2025 City Council Meeting 7:00 pm

7.1
7.3
7.9
7.11
8.1
8.5
8.9

11.1

CITY OF STANWOOD
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT

ITEM NUMBER:

7a

DATE:

April 24, 2025

SUBJECT:

Community Development Committee Meeting Minutes

CONTACT PERSON:

Patricia Love, Community Development Director

ATTACHMENTS:

A – April 3, 2025 Meeting Minutes

SUMMARY STATEMENT:
Minutes from the April 3, 2025, Community Development Committee Meeting are
attached to this staff report for approval as presented.

7.1

ATTACHMENT A

Community Development Committee
Meeting Minutes
Thursday, April 3, 2025 | 5:00 pm
Council Members Present: Dani Gaumond, Tim Schmitt, Steve Shepro
Staff Present: Patricia Love, Audrey Rotrock, Tansy Schroeder, Niki Strachila
Others Present: Cathy Wooten
Councilmember Shepro called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
1. Storefront Improvement Program
The Committee would like to communicate to the applicant that the plants added
to the planters must be maintained by the owner. Members are supportive of
moving this application to the City Council Consent Agenda.
2. Critical Areas Code Overview
The Committee would like to require split rail fences around critical areas, as
opposed to chain link fences. This will allow wildlife to better move through the
areas. The committee would like to see illustrations of the difference between net
density and gross density to provide a better understanding. They would also like
to know how increased buffer sizes will impact developable land in the City’s Urban
Growth Area. All approve moving forward with the review.
3. Preliminary Subdivision Code Language
The committee would like to see visual representations of the Floor Area Ratio and
Lot Clustering. This discussion will continue in more detail at future meetings.
4. Stanwood Mural Art Project
This topic will be further discussed at the May Community Development
Committee meeting.

Adjourn: 6:35 p.m.

10220 270th St NW, Stanwood, WA 98292 | 360-629-2181 | www.stanwoodwa.org

7.2

CITY OF STANWOOD
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT

ITEM NUMBER:

7b

DATE:

April 24, 2025

SUBJECT:

Special Joint City Council & Planning Commission
Meeting Minutes

CONTACT PERSON:

Tansy Schroeder, Senior Planner

ATTACHMENTS:

A – February 10, 2025, Meeting Minutes

SUMMARY STATEMENT
Minutes from the February 10, 2025, Special Joint City Council & Planning Commission
Meeting are attached to this staff report for approval as presented. These minutes were
approved at the April 14, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting.

7.3

ATTCHMENT A

Planning Commission & Special Joint Council
Meeting Minutes
Monday, February 10, 2025 – 5:30 pm
Call to Order: 5:30 pm
Roll Call
Commissioners Present:
Eric Warnat, Commissioner
Kathy Moe, Commissioner (Online)
Melissa Toner, Commissioner
Patrick Hosterman, Commission Chair
Cody Davis, Commission Vice-Chair
Gabrielle Braley, Commissioner (Online)
Jeff Wheatley, Commissioner

Staff Present:
Patricia Love, Community Development Director
Tansy Schroeder, City Planner
Audrey Rotrock, Associate Planner
Scott Black, Building Official
Kevin Hushagen, Public Works Director

Absent: N/A
Also known to be present: Matt Hough of CPH Consultants, Sam & Dennis Long, Cathy Wooten,
Cindy Wilfong, Tim Poetzl, Beth Munson, Peter Kamb, Judy Williams, Peggy Wendel, Arne
Wennerberg, Mike (online)
Public Requests and Comments: Cathy Wooten requested to have page numbers referencing
to the packet materials added to the minutes.
Approval of Minutes:
The minutes from the January 13, 2025 Planning Commission meeting were unanimously
approved.
New Business:
Public Meeting: Viking Village Site Development Permit 24-0121
WV Holdings I, LLC, the applicant, is proposing to construct a mixed-use development consisting
of 78 townhome units, 24 multi-family flats, and 16,075 square feet of ground-level commercial
space. The project is located northwest of the intersection of 88th Avenue NW and SR 532 with
Viking Way traveling east-west through the site. The project is located on two parcels zoned as
Mainstreet Business II (MB-II) which total 6.46 acres, of which 4.72 acres
(approx. 205,603 square feet) are proposed for development. The development proposes to
include 18,603 square feet of common open space areas and 19,674 square feet of “private open
space” to serve as individual yards for the townhome units. The project will also include utility,
storm water management, and street and landscaping improvements. This will be a two-phased
project with the first phase consisting of the site area and public roadway frontage improvements
on the north side of Viking Way. The second phase will complete the site area and roadway
improvements on the south side of Viking Way. See page 7 of the February Planning
Commission
packet.
Tansy
Schroeder
discussed
the
project
further
with
residents/attendees after the meeting concluded.
Commissioner Questions & Comments
• Will the garages fit larger sized vehicles? The garages will likely be 20’ wide by 24’ deep.
It will be a challenge to fit larger vehicles. There will be no driveways, but there will be
some street parking and shared commercial parking.
• Residential units will be for sale.
10220 270th St NW, Stanwood, WA 98292 | 360-629-2181 | www.stanwoodwa.org

7.4

Planning Commission & Special Joint Council
Meeting Minutes
Monday, February 10, 2025 – 5:30 pm
•
•
•
•
•
•

Are there wetlands onsite? Staff has requested the work from the biologists who surveyed
the site. Additional work may need to be done.
How will the developer protect existing adjacent businesses from stormwater runoff from
the project? Sheet flow is not allowed in Stanwood. Storm drainage will be installed
onsite. All drainage plans will be reviewed against floodplain and city code requirements.
Commissioners asked specific questions such as the square footage of residential and
commercial spaces. Staff will follow up with these details.
There are concerns that there is more residential and open space than commercial space
proposed for this project. Since the zoning is Main Street Business II, some are concerned
that more commercial space is needed.
The developer has more experience with residential projects than commercial projects.
The Commissioners have concerns about insufficient parking.

Public Questions & Comments
• Have current tenants in the existing building been given notice about the future of plans
Viking Village? Tenants are aware of the project. The developer hopes to begin
construction in 2026.
• A representative from FourSquare church has the following concerns: people using the
new commercial properties might park in their parking lot; there is a potential for damage
to their property from the future construction; church activities may disrupt future residents.
• Does the city have a Fee Simple Code? Currently, fee simple lots are not in the city code.
Staff is considering adding it with the Municipal Code Update project.
• Please visit the city’s website project page to view the Viking Village Site Development
Traffic Study.
• A large sum of money was recently spent on Right of Way improvements in the Viking
Village area, this project could potentially tear up that work.
• An attendee commented that this is an exciting project for Stanwood. It would provide
opportunities for residents of the development to walk to church, trails, nearby businesses
and more.
Special Joint Planning Commission and City Council Meeting
Commissioners Present
Council Members Present
Eric Warnat, Commissioner
Sid Roberts, Mayor
Kathy Moe, Commissioner (Online)
Dani Gaumond, Council Position 1
Melissa Toner, Commissioner
Marcus Metz, Council Position 2
Patrick Hosterman, Commission Chair
Darren Robb, Council Position 3
Cody Davis, Commission Vice-Chair
Robert ‘Chili’ Hicks, Council Position 4
Gabrielle Braley, Commissioner (Online)
Steve Shepro, Council Position 5
Jeff Wheatley, Commissioner
Andreena Bergman, Council Position 6
Tim Schmitt, Council Position 7
Old Business:
Unified Development Code: Housing, Subdivisions, and Flexibility Discussion
The Growth Management Act mandates that cities plan for and accommodate housing for all
income levels. The City recently adopted its 2024-2044 Comprehensive Plan, which provides
policy guidance on meeting this requirement. The joint City Council and Planning Commission
meeting aimed to facilitate an open discussion on how these housing policies translate into
10220 270th St NW, Stanwood, WA 98292 | 360-629-2181 | www.stanwoodwa.org

7.5

Planning Commission & Special Joint Council
Meeting Minutes
Monday, February 10, 2025 – 5:30 pm
regulations within the Municipal Code. The meeting also provided an opportunity for the Council
to give direction to staff and the Planning Commission on drafting code changes that align with
state law. The City has several policy plans that guide future housing decisions, including the
Comprehensive Plan, Housing Action Plan, and Strategic Plan. The Comprehensive Plan and
Housing Action Plan are long-term planning documents that shape city growth and development
over a 20-year horizon, while the Strategic Plan serves as a short-term implementation strategy
that helps the Council set annual budget priorities. Together, these plans support diversifying
the city's housing stock to provide a range of housing options. See page 62 of the February
Planning Commission Packet.

Housing Units in Existing Buildings

Comments / Concerns
• What safeguards can the city put in place to preserve the commercial building stock?
• Can the City restrict small commercial along 271st Street from converting to residential?
• Is the intent of the legislation to only allow conversion of larger office buildings/big box
stores to convert to residential?
• What are the impacts to Main Street if commercial buildings/uses convert to residential?
• Can Cedarside convert their commercial building space to residential? Will the
development agreement prohibit conversion?
• Does the conversion law apply to schools, churches, storage unit facilities, or other types
of uses?

Accessory Dwelling Units

Comments / Concerns
• Require compliance with setback and lot coverage requirements.
• Evaluate design review requirements: compatibility with house and/or neighborhood
characteristics.
• Prohibit use as a short-term rental; aka “AirB&B”.
• Prohibit the use of yurts, RV’s, shipping containers, or similar as ADU’s.
• Define a maximum allowable size – such as not more than 50% of primary house, but
not less than 1,000 square feet.
• Review height limitation in state law against RCW 64.04.140 and 150; can height be
limited based on sunshine / solar or privacy needs. How is building height measured?
• Address parking constraints.
• Research who are building ADU’s: builders, homeowners, new construction, or additions
to existing structures.
• Detached ADU’s should have their own separate water meters as they can be sold as
fee simple units.
• Review utility and impact fees; the city needs to recover its cost of services.

Missing Middle Housing

Comments / Concerns
• Re-evaluate percentage mix of housing types in TN zone.
• Allow mix of housing unit types in SFR zones and consider location restrictions such as:
10220 270th St NW, Stanwood, WA 98292 | 360-629-2181 | www.stanwoodwa.org

7.6

Planning Commission & Special Joint Council
Meeting Minutes
Monday, February 10, 2025 – 5:30 pm
Townhouses on main streets and/or corners: 80th Ave, 64th Ave, 72nd
Avenue,284th Street, 276th Street, 272nd Street
o Cottages within subdivisions.
Restrict townhouses to 3- or 4-unit buildings in SFR zones to break up mass and scale.
Support additional cottage housing; evaluate if 1,200 SF size limit should be changed.
Consider cottage housing as “workforce” housing with potential density bonus and
additional open space using cluster techniques.
Mixed use buildings in industrial parks: are there any examples and how are use
conflicts addressed?
o

•
•
•
•

Emergency Shelters, Transitional Housing, Emergency Housing & Permanent
Supportive Housing
Comments / Concerns

•
•
•

Concerned about potential impacts on adjacent properties.
Are there potential mitigation measures such as fencing or landscaping?
Consider an emergency / interim ordinance to meet GMA deadline.

Co-Living Housing

Comments / Concerns

•

Can Co-Housing be prohibited in the uptown TN zone? Makes sense in TN
mixed use and MF zones.

Uptown Commercial Infill
Comments / Concerns

•
•
•
•

Carefully consider the uses that would be allowed; how would you feel living next
door to a commercial use: odors, noise, trash?
Only uses that support neighborhoods.
Not intended to attract new traffic to neighborhoods.
Keep small scale, “mom/pop” stores, not chain stores.

Unit Lot Subdivisions
Comments / Concerns

•
•
•
•

Address needed easements: access, utilities, parking, landscaping, and open
space.
Require compliance with exterior setbacks.
How is lot coverage addressed?
Allow administrative unit lot subdivisions without public comments on built
projects.

Split Lot Subdivisions
Comments / Concerns

•
•

Allow 1 lot to be split into 2; more than 2 will require a short plat.
Require street front improvements and utilities with building permit.
10220 270th St NW, Stanwood, WA 98292 | 360-629-2181 | www.stanwoodwa.org

7.7

Planning Commission & Special Joint Council
Meeting Minutes
Monday, February 10, 2025 – 5:30 pm
•
•
•
•

Address how the “existing” lot frontage improvements will be installed – prior to
final plat?
Require any potential access and utility easements with final plat.
If a private road is proposed, then require a short plat.
Address standards for ADU’s versus new lots meeting underlying zoning
standards.

Lot Size Averaging

Comments / Concerns

•
•

Provide examples of existing projects.
No increase in density; only lot design flexibility.

Cluster Housing and On-Site Density Transfers
Comments / Concerns

•
•
•

•

Creates a perceived increase in density.
No benefit to community.
Consider if additional community benefits are provided: open space, park space,
trails – above what is required by code.
Provide examples.

Model Home Development Option
Comments / Concerns
• Limit to 4 units.

Other Issues Reviewed by Planning Commission

Comments / Concerns
• Consider in-lieu fees for park space (in addition to park impact fees)
• Support lot dimension flexibility to create interesting subdivision design – break up rows
of similar housing and lots.
• Support use of PRD regulations for new base standard.
• Define what qualifies as open space versus park space; update park improvements
options.
• Address grading / elevation changes and impacts on adjacent properties during the
subdivision process.
• Evaluate how to address quality materials comment – cheap materials which causes
future homeowners to pay cost of replacements sooner than expected.
Recent Council Action on Commission Items:
• Public Hearing and First Reading on Procedures Code
Upcoming Items:
• Continued discussion on Critical Areas Code
Adjourn: 8:31 pm

10220 270th St NW, Stanwood, WA 98292 | 360-629-2181 | www.stanwoodwa.org

7.8

CITY OF STANWOOD
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT

ITEM NUMBER:

7c

DATE:

March 27, 2025

SUBJECT:

Public Safety Committee Meeting Minutes

CONTACT PERSON:

Jason Toner, Police Chief

ATTACHMENTS:

A – Safety Committee Meeting Minutes - March 13, 2025

SUMMARY STATEMENT
The minutes of the March 13, 2025, Public Safety Committee Meeting are attached to this
staff report for approval as presented.

7.9

ATTACHMENT A

Stanwood
Public Safety Committee
Meeting Minutes: 4/10/25
LOCATION: School Admin Bldg., 26920 Pioneer Hwy, Stanwood WA
ATTENDANCE:
City Council Members Andreena Bergman and Darren Robb. Council Member Marcus Metz was excused.
Stanwood Police Chief Jason Toner and North County Regional Fire Chief Dave Kraski.
CALLED TO ORDER: Meeting Called to Order at 6:00 pm.
DISCUSSION:
Police Department Update
•

Chief Toner reported on a recent string of vehicle thefts involving a juvenile suspect. The suspect was
arrested a few days ago while in possession of a stolen vehicle, this is the second time he has been
arrested for the same offense.

•

Chief Toner noted that staff is working on revising the CompStat report to make it more reader friendly.
Changes will be implemented in the July report and presented to the City Council for input.

•

The Stanwood Police Department has applied for and received funding from the Target Zero Taskforce
to support DUI and speed enforcement emphasis patrols within the community.

•

Chief Toner also addressed questions regarding the local homeless population, school district matters,
and a recent Facebook post about the suspect who threw rocks at transit buses and a patrol vehicle.

Fire Department Update
•

Chief Kraski expressed his gratitude for the community support shown during his swearing-in ceremony
and shared his enthusiasm about getting started in his new role.

•

He reported that response times within Stanwood are currently meeting established goals. He also
presented a heat map highlighting areas with the highest call volume, noting that a significant number
of calls come from senior living centers.

•

Chief Kraski announced that the Regional Fire Authority (RFA) will be seeking a levy lift on the August
ballot.

•

He also shared the exciting news of a $300,000 grant awarded to fund CARES Program positions with
paramedics dedicated to working with patients to identify long-term, sustainable solutions to complex
medical and social needs. The program focuses on care coordination as an alternative to emergency
medical services, with a secondary goal of reducing non-emergent calls for firefighters and paramedics,
thereby improving overall service delivery.

Adjourn: Meeting Adjourned at 6:54 pm.

7.10

CITY OF STANWOOD
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT

ITEM NUMBER:

7d

DATE:

April 24, 2025

SUBJECT:

Public Works Committee Meeting Minutes

CONTACT PERSON:

Kevin Hushagen, Public Works Director

ATTACHMENTS:

A – April 14, 2025, Public Works Committee Minutes

SUMMARY STATEMENT
Minutes from the April 14, 2025, Public Works Committee Meeting are attached to this staff
report for approval as presented.

7.11

ATTACHMENT A

Public Works Committee
Meeting Minutes
April 14, 2025
Attendance:
Councilmembers: Darren Robb, Robert Hicks, Andreena Bergman
Councilmembers Absent: Marcus Metz
City Staff: Public Works Director Kevin Hushagen, City Engineer Alan Lytton
Meeting was conducted in person. The full meeting agenda packet with detailed information can
be found on the City’s website Agenda Center.
Call to order at 5:35 pm
Agenda Items:
1. Heritage Park Playground
• The committee reviewed the proposals and playground designs submitted in
response to the RFP for the Heritage Park Playground. Members provided
feedback, but no action was taken.
2. 271st St NW Twin City Mile Project
• The committee reviewed the rendering and cost estimate for the 88th Ave NW and
midblock segment. No action was taken.
3. Project Updates
• Alan Lytton, City Engineer, provided the committee with a status update on the
Cedarhome Sewer Bypass project. No action was taken.
•

Alan Lytton, City Engineer, gave a status update on the Church Creek Pathway
project. No action was taken.

•

The committee reviewed the scope of work and fee proposal from RH2 for
preparing an engineering report for the WWTP expansion project. Staff provided
an overview of the scope and outlined the next steps. No action was taken.

Adjourn: Chair Robb adjourned the meeting at 7:15 PM

10220 270th St NW, Stanwood, WA 98292 | 360-629-2181 | www.stanwoodwa.org

7.12

CITY OF STANWOOD
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT

ITEM NUMBER:

8a

DATE:

April 24, 2025

SUBJECT:

Approval of Voucher and Payroll Checks

CONTACT PERSON:

Amy Bergemeier, Accounting Specialist

ATTACHMENTS:

A - Voucher Check Detail

SUMMARY STATEMENT
Approve issuance of Washington Federal Bank voucher checks 39451 through 39470
and electronic fund transfers in the amount of $944,934.02 Approve issuance of
Washington Federal payroll electronic fund transfers in the amount of $399,952.31.
RECOMMENDED MOTION
“I MOVE TO APPROVE ISSUANCE OF WASHINGTON FEDERAL BANK VOUCHER
CHECKS 39451 THROUGH 39470 AND ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFERS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $944,934.02. APPROVE ISSUANCE OF WASHINGTON FEDERAL
PAYROLL ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFERS IN THE AMOUNT OF $399,952.31.”

8.1

01203ÿ52678925

ÿÿ

 ""!!""!

%& 
' ())ÿ* +,ÿ* -
! 0""! #%-1
23
!" 0""! #%-1
23
!1 0""! #%-1
23
! 0""! #%-1
23
!! 0""! #%-1
23
!7 0""! #%-1
23
!5 0""! #%-1
23
!0 0""! #%-1
23
! 0""! #%-1
23
7 0""! #%-1
23
7 0""! #%-1
23
7" 0""! #%-1
23
71 0""! #%-1
23
7 0""! #%-1
23
7! 0""! #%-1
23
77 0""! #%-1
23
75 0""! #%-1
23
70 0""! #%-1
23
7 0""! #%-1
23
7 0""! #%-1
23
7 0""! #%-1
23
7" 0""! #%-1
23
71 0""! #%-1
23
7 0""! #%-1
23
7! 0""! #%-1
23
77 0""! #%-1
23
75 0""! #%-1
23
70 0""! #%-1
23
7 0""! #%-1
23
7" 0""! #%-1
23
7" 0""! #%-1
23
7"" 0""! #%-1
23
7"1 0""! #%-1
23
7" 0""! #%-1
23
7"! 0""! #%-1
23
7"7 0""! #%-1
23
7"5 0""! #%-1
23
7"0 0""! #%-1
23
7" 0""! #%-1
23
71 0""! #%-1
23
71 0""! #%-1
23
71" 0""! #%-1
23
711 0""! #%-1
23
71 0""! #%-1
23
5 0""! #%-1
23 (38(
5 0""! #%--

1

23 (U ÿ2'-ÿVÿ%.&

5" 0""! #%--

1

23 --ÿ8ÿ_&.%)

ATTACHMENT
A
ATTACHMENT A

  !""!
#$
(. /
45"650/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!456 /%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-74!67"/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-14561!/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-14!67!/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!060/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-45"671/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-45651/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-1410067 /%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!411670/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-04"060/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-4756"/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-"41"67"/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-146"7/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-406!7/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!76/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!4""0670/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-4""6/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!5"65/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-04""60/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!40561/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-"4!6"/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-747060!/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-5410605/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-45567"/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!7060/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-54!065/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!4"1!65/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!06/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-"45""60/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-14776/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-"4"561/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-"4 !67/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-47116/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!7060/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-1417!60!/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-4"677/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!706/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!4!611/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-45"65/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!4"065/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!4"56 /%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-541165!/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-!416""/%)+ÿ""!ÿ#%-"!6059:;ÿ=;>?@ABCÿDEFDGFHDHIÿJKÿ

DEFDGFHDHIÿLÿMNOM=Pÿ9Q@LJ:RSÿ9:;ÿ
=;>?@ABCÿDEFDGFHDHIÿJKÿDEFDGFHDHI
LÿMNOM=Pÿ9KBTLJ:R
"40609:;ÿ=;>?@ABCÿDEFDGFHDHIÿJKÿ
DEFDGFHDHIÿLÿMW=ÿLÿX@:?TYÿNZQBTÿ
HIDSÿ9:;ÿ=;>?@ABCÿDEFDGFHDHIÿJKÿ
DEFDGFHDHIÿLÿMW=ÿLÿ[@\T:?ÿ]Sÿ9:;ÿ
=;>?@ABCÿDEFDGFHDHIÿJKÿDEFDGFHDHI
LÿMW=ÿLÿ^ZBZK\Sÿ9:;ÿ=;>?@ABCÿ
DEFDGFHDHIÿJK
7765!9:;ÿ=;>?@ABCÿDEFDGFHDHIÿJKÿ
DEFDGFHDHIÿLÿ=K?K\Z:?ÿOZ̀@ÿ
a\BbQ:\>@
8.2

01203ÿ52678925

ÿÿ

 ""!!""!

%& 
' ())ÿ* +,ÿ* -
01 2""! #%-1
34 5%67&ÿ8ÿ9ÿ(.
0 2""! #%--

1

34 ](ÿ^,

0! 2""! #%-0l 2""! #%-00 2""! #%--

1
1
1

34 dbXCUb=BÿZCeCbWCÿ̀CUecACÿDfHgF
34 8$-ÿ+-
34 / &&ÿp.%ÿq %

02 2""! #%-0 2""! #%--

1
1

34 stÿ^&
34 7&%ÿ%)ÿÿ&%&
#&ÿ%.&

0 2""! #%-0 2""! #%--

1
1

34 &%&ÿxÿ8)-ÿ"1
34 7(ÿÿ'%ÿÿq %ÿ
&&

0" 2""! #%--

1

34 7&+$ÿ&%&ÿ7-%ÿ
%.&

011 0""!
01 0""!
01! 0""!
01l 0""!
010 0""!
012 0""!
01 0""!
0 0""!
0 0""!
0" 0""!
20 ""!

-&
-&
-&
-&
-&
-&
-&
-&
-&
-&
-&

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

34 &)ÿ' )ÿ#.'$:ÿ88
34 d@zud{ÿw=XCUTNU|EÿD}`FÿdbAi
34 €%.'ÿ&%.)ÿ)
34 s'.ÿ5%-ÿ%)%&
34 q'%ÿ&%.)ÿ);
34 8&ÿ/ÿ,-,
34 ÿ(.ÿ#%&
34 ÿ(.ÿ#%&
34 %$&ÿ1lÿ)
34 &&
34 ÿ‚.&ÿ%ÿ%%%ÿÿ%)%$ÿ
)+),ÿ1626"!ÿ))ÿ06

22 ""!
2l 1""!
21 2""!
21" 2""!
01 0""!
0 0""!

-&
-&
-&
-&
-&
-&

1
34 ]%-ÿ#ÿ&&
1
34 +&ÿ#)+
1
34 „'%&&^--ÿ#
1
34 stÿ^&
1 ÿÿÿÿ1! ^$%ÿ/%:ÿ)
1 ÿÿÿÿ1!" +ÿ-ÿ]%-

ATTACHMENT A

  !""!
#$
"
(. /
:12;<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ

GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿHLPÿOÿQRSNTCUÿ
DV=EEÿVWXW=BFYÿ<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿGHIGJIKGKLÿOÿZNX[ÿ
HLPD\FQRSNTCUDV=EEVWXW=BF
0";!<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿ_`aÿ@NbXUc\WXcNbEÿ
QZYÿ<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿ_`aÿ@NbXUc\WXcNbEÿ
QQ
JHhKKgiJgfHgÿjCSNEcXÿkNUÿ<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿGHIGJIKGKL
l1;2!<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿmCn=Bÿ̀[cCBo
1:l";10<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿHLPÿOÿVcEEcNbÿ̀rW=UC
ZCXDd@VaF
!!;<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿu=ec=ÿmcRcXCoÿv`a
":";10<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿw@M<<ÿ
@NbXUc\WXcNbE
":";<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿMC=REXCUEÿjWCE
!1:00;"<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿ<QZ`ÿKYÿ<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿGHIGJIKGKLÿOÿ<QZ`ÿ
yYÿ<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿHLPÿOÿjZ`ÿDj@<FYÿ<=>
@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿGHIGJIKGKL
OÿZNX[ÿHL

1:!!l;<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ

GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿMC=REXCUEÿjCbX=BYÿ
<=>ÿ@>ABCDEFÿGHIGJIKGKLÿMNÿ
GHIGJIKGKLÿOÿMC=REXCUEÿVCocA=B
!"1;2! ÿÿ
~GJiGG (
l!:1"; ÿÿ
10:"; ÿÿ
2:1!";2 ÿÿ
1!; ÿÿ
1;l!l 
l;12!l 
":; ÿÿ
!";l210l1
";ÿ‚.&ÿ%ÿ%%%ÿÿ%)%$ÿ
)+),ÿ1626"!ÿ))ÿ06ÿ
)+%$ÿƒ),ÿÿ).&%ÿÿ^„:ÿ
ƒ,ÿ)+%$ÿ.%ÿ)+),$ÿÿ
66"!
"0;22('%-ÿ&ÿ%ÿ/%)+ÿ""!
:";0!('%-ÿ&ÿ%ÿ/%)+ÿ""!
:;"„'%&&ÿ ÿ%ÿ/%)+ÿ4&
;('%-ÿ' ÿ%ÿ/%)+ÿ&
22;"2l02
"l!;".ƒÿ" "020 8.3

ÿÿ

01203ÿ52678925

 ""!!""!

ATTACHMENT A

  !""!
#$
%

&' 
( )**ÿ+ ,-ÿ+ .
)/ 0
1! 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%!% 2/'3ÿ44
"""5 67)
18 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%! 9:&ÿ&.ÿÿ;&,ÿ
"3!5" ÿÿ
 .ÿ6*
11 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%!! < .ÿ4/=&ÿ>ÿ?.'
"15!88
1@ 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%!8 # ÿA'ÿ6*Bÿ#/&*,'ÿ#&
!5@8@BB! B!811
1 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%!1 ?*,ÿC)3ÿ6*B0
"%5@"!@ Dÿ"!@
1! 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%!@ ,&BÿCÿEFÿ44
@%51 "@%!"
1! 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%! -$ ÿG&&'ÿ/((.
5! %!!"Dÿ%!!"
1!" 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%8 -$ ÿF..ÿ#/=.',$
1815 @@%Dÿ@@%
1!% 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%8 ÿÿ,&'ÿ*ÿÿÿÿÿÿH
83@5< Dÿ< Dÿ<
1! 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%8" , ',ÿ/ ÿ
3@5@ ÿÿ
1!! 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%8% 9:& ÿ.ÿ<&.ÿ/ÿ
!5"  !1Dÿ !1
#/=.',$3ÿ6*5
1!8 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%8  ..ÿ)/ÿ#&'ÿ44
8"5@%"1 1
1!1 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%8! C)ÿA./=%511@""@
1!@ 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%88 C/ÿ4ÿ6'/&*
%5" ÿÿ
1! 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%81 I)ÿÿ)/ &J'ÿ*
@3"5!@ ÿÿ
18 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%8@ I)ÿÿ(ÿÿ4*'$ÿÿÿH
%!5 ÿÿ
18 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%8 I',$ÿÿ#&.ÿÿÿÿH
85 ÿÿÿ !!
18" 1""! .'
% ÿÿÿÿ%1 I&.ÿK*ÿ9&$ÿ&:*'
%31%5 )# 
ÿL&.ÿG/
@83@5
ÿ&ÿG/
31!15@@
%ÿ&ÿ'&/*ÿG/
8!3!1518
ÿ#&-ÿ)ÿ&.ÿÿ6(&:ÿG/
@3!@5"
!ÿ/&'ÿ)ÿ0&- $
83!5"
ÿ&ÿG/
131%"5%
ÿ&$ÿG/
"3%815!
 ÿ&$ÿ'&/*ÿG/
%13"5
"ÿI&ÿG/
1@3%@5@
8%ÿ)$*ÿG/
!%5
.'
3%5"
Hÿ&'*ÿ<'ÿ0 Mÿ?:/ÿ)ÿ9M('ÿ)**/'
3%3@@85%%#&..
%3!"5%

NOPQRSRNTQRUVWÿRYÿZ[\ÿ]^_\`abc^\_ÿ_dÿ[\`\efÿg\`Zbhfÿ]^_\`ÿi\^jkZfÿdhÿi\`l]`fYÿZ[jZÿZ[\ÿmjZ\`bjkaÿ[jn\ÿ
e\\^ÿh]`^ba[\_YÿZ[\ÿa\`nbg\aÿ̀\^_\`\_ÿd`ÿZ[\ÿkjed`ÿi\`hd`m\_ÿjaÿ_\ag`be\_ÿ[\`\b^ÿj^_ÿZ[jZÿZ[\ÿgkjbmÿbaÿjÿ
l]aZYÿ_]\ÿj^_ÿ]^ijb_ÿdekbcjZbd^ÿjcjb^aZÿZ[\ÿNbZfÿdhÿoZj^pdd_Yÿj^_ÿZ[jZÿRÿjmÿj]Z[d`bq\_ÿZdÿj]Z[\^ZbgjZ\ÿ
j^_ÿg\`ZbhfÿZdÿajb_ÿgkjbmr
sÿtÿSb^j^g\ÿub̀\gZd`ÿsÿtÿT]_bZb^cÿUhhbg\`ÿvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvÿÿÿÿÿujZ\Wvvv4-15-2025
vvvvvvvv
sÿtÿu\i]ZfÿSb^j^g\ÿub̀\gZd`ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ

8.4

CITY OF STANWOOD
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT

ITEM NUMBER:

8b

DATE:

April 24, 2025

SUBJECT:

City Council Meeting Minutes – April 10, 2025

CONTACT PERSON:

Lisa Sokolik, City Clerk

ATTACHMENTS:

A – City Council Meeting Minutes

SUMMARY STATEMENT
The City Council meeting minutes for April 10, 2025, are attached to this staff report for
Council’s approval.
RECOMMENDED MOTION
“I MOVE TO APPROVE THE APRIL 10, 2025, CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
AS PRESENTED.”

8.5

ATTACHMENT A

CITY OF STANWOOD

Regular Meeting of the City Council
April 10, 2025 | 7:00 p.m.
MINUTES
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Mayor Sid Roberts called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmember Bergman led the
Pledge of Allegiance.
2. Roll Call
City Clerk Lisa Sokolik called the roll with the following Councilmembers Present:
Dani Gaumond, Darren Robb, Robert Hicks, Steve Shepro, Andreena Bergman, and Tim
Schmitt. The meeting was quorate.
Motion by Councilmember Robb, second by Councilmember Hicks, to excuse Councilmember
Marcus Metz. Motion carried unanimously.
Also present: City Administrator Shawn Smith, Community Development Director Patricia
Love, Public Works Director Kevin Hushagen, Finance Manager Wendy Dowhower, City
Attorney Nikki Thompson, Police Chief Jason Toner, Fire Chief Dave Kraski, City Engineer
Alan Lytton, and City Clerk Lisa Sokolik. Utility Supervisor Leigh Danielson attended via Zoom.
3. Approval of the Agenda
Mayor Roberts requested to amend the agenda by removing item 11a adopting Resolution
2025-03 Keller Annexation 60% Petition.
Motion by Councilmember Bergman, second by Councilmember Shepro to approve the agenda as
amended. Motion carried unanimously.
4.

Presentations - None.

5. Public Comment
Name
Cathy Wooten

City
Stanwood

6. Staff / Department Report
Police Compstat – March

Topic
Encouraged Council to maintain a long-term view when
making decisions regarding zoning, development
standards, and future growth.

Chief Toner provided an update on the Flock Cameras, noting deployment to patrol is pending
policy approval. The system is in limited investigative use but expected to be fully activated in
two weeks.
7. Council Committee Reports
a. Finance Committee Meeting Minutes – March 24, 2025
Stanwood City Council Meeting
April 10, 2025
Page 1 of 3

8.6

b. Economic Development Board Meeting Minutes – January 17, 2025
The Finance and Economic Development Committee Meeting Minutes were submitted.
No questions were raised.
8. Consent Agenda
a. Approve Vouchers and Payroll Checks
b. Approve City Council Regular Meeting Minutes – March 13, 2025
c. Approve the Storefront Improvement Program Application for MQ Gadgets,
Gifts, and Goodies
d. Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Task Order with Perteet for the Final Design
of Depot Park
e. Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Contract with Reaper Construction for the Heritage
Loop Trail Project
f. Authorize the Mayor to Sign a Contract with Northend Excavating for the 80th Ave
Sidewalk & Overlay Project
Motion by Councilmember Gaumond, second by Councilmember Shepro to approve consent
agenda items A. approval of vouchers and payroll checks, B. approve city council regular meeting
minutes for March 27, 2025, C. approve the Storefront Improvement Program Application for MQ
Gadgets, Gifts, and Goodies, D. authorize the Mayor to sign a task order with Perteet for the final
design of Depot Park, E. authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with Reaper Construction for the
Heritage Loop Trail project, and F. authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with Northend Excavating
for the 80th Ave Sidewalk & Overlay project. Motion carried unanimously.
9. Unfinished Business - None.
10. Public Hearing - None.
11. New Business
Authorize the Mayor to sign a Task Order with Transpo Group for the SR 532 Corridor
Study
Love presented the proposed $150,000 contract with Transpo Group to perform a 10%
corridor design and intersection control evaluation study for SR 532, expanding upon two
previously approved intersection studies (72nd St and 102nd Ave). The study will coordinate
with WSDOT, assess multimodal transportation, and establish long-term mobility planning
across the corridor.
Council discussed funding implications, previous WSDOT study input, and the strategic value
of a comprehensive design. The Mayor and several Councilmembers expressed strong
support for pedestrian safety and smart growth strategies.
Key points discussed:
• Collaboration with WSDOT on a coordinated multimodal transportation plan.
• The expanded project scope will evaluate corridor efficiency, pedestrian and bike

safety, access to downtown, and traffic flow at key intersections.

• The study will support future grant applications and funding requests.
• Several councilmembers emphasized the importance of prioritizing local needs

and safety over increasing regional pass-through capacity.

Stanwood City Council Meeting
April 10, 2025
Page 2 of 3

8.7

Motion by Councilmember Robb, second by Councilmember Hicks to authorize the Mayor to sign a
Task Order with Transpo Group for the SR 32 Corridor Study in the amount of $150,000.
Motion carried unanimously.
12. Public Closing Comments
No public closing comments.
13. Executive/Legislative Reports
a. Mayor’s Report
Mayor Roberts shared updates on recent community events, ribbon cuttings and school visits,
and welcomed Dave Kraski, Stanwood’s new Fire Chief.
b. City Administrator Report
Shawn Smith reported:
• Viking Way Phase 2 construction begins May 5.
• A sewer project that will bore a sewer line beneath SR 532 near the fire station
begins May 1 with minimal traffic impact.
• The SR 532 corridor study will help develop a Capital Improvement Plan and
identify grant opportunities; some projects may be self-funded.
• Reiterated that Flock Cameras will soon be active citywide.
c. Councilmember’s Report/Questions
Councilmembers welcomed Fire Chief Kraski.
• Robb asked Smith if there will be traffic impact during the SR 532 sewer boring
project. Smith answered yes, there will be minor impacts.
• Shepro reflected on the city’s growth and livability over the past 15 years. He
asked Love a question regarding language used when annexing property, “within
the Urban Growth Area established by Snohomish County”. Love said it was the
early 1990’s that the UGA was adopted she will look at the language and bring
back an answer.
• Schmitt encouraged driver awareness for cyclists crossing SR 532 and praised
local bus drivers following a recent incident.
14. Executive Session
No executive session scheduled for this meeting.
15. Adjourn
There being no further business before the Council, and hearing no objection to adjournment,
Mayor Roberts adjourned the meeting at 7:50 p.m.
CITY OF STANWOOD

ATTEST:

Sid Roberts, Mayor

Lisa Sokolik, City Clerk

Stanwood City Council Meeting
April 10, 2025
Page 3 of 3

8.8

CITY OF STANWOOD
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT

ITEM NUMBER:

8c

DATE:

April 24, 2024

SUBJECT:

Utility Account Adjustment—Accounts 1416 & 2705

CONTACT PERSON:

David A. Hammond, Finance Director

ATTACHMENTS:

A – SMC 12.20.060 Adjustment to bills.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this agenda item is for Council consideration of a second water leak
adjustment to Utility Account Number 1416 in the amount of $126.81 and Account
Number 2705 in the amount of $344.41.
BACKGROUND
Stanwood Municipal Code (SMC) Section 12.20.060; provides authorization for the
Finance Department to adjust a utility account when a leak occurs, however, no more
than once each two-year period. The code allows, after evidence the leak was repaired,
for a rate adjustment up to 50 percent of the volume consumed in any one billing period
in excess of the bi-monthly average of water consumed over the previous twelve months.
Additionally, the SMC authorizes City Council approval of a second adjustment, within a
two-year period, if one or more of the following circumstances exist:
i) The leak could not have been readily detectable with reasonable diligence;
(ii) The customer does not occupy or use the subject property on a continuous basis;
(iii) Any prior leak for which an adjustment was made by the city was repaired within 30
days of discovery;
(iv) The customer account has been kept current and there have been no delinquencies
within the previous 24 months.

8.9

ANALYSIS
Staff recommends approval of these second leak adjustments, which qualifies according
to SMC 12.06.020.
Fiscal Impact
The 2024-2025 budget for utility operations is adequate to make the requested adjustment.
Fund(s):
Utility Operating
Amount:
Budget Authorized

$ 126.81 & 344.41
[ X ] Yes [ ] No

Project Estimate:

$

Amendment Required

[
]
Yes
[ ] Monitor

[X]

No

RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends Council authorize the Finance
Director to approve second utility bill adjustments in the amounts of $126.81 and
$344.41.
Committee/Board Recommendation: N/A
CITY COUNCIL OPTIONS
1. The City council may authorize second utility bill leak adjustments in the amount
of $126.81 and $344.41
2. The City council may choose not to authorize second utility bill adjustments in the
amount of $126.81 and $344.41.
3. The City council may direct staff to provide additional information.
PROPOSED MOTION
“I MOVE TO AUTHORIZE THE FINANCE DIRECTOR TO APPROVE A SECOND
UTILITY BILL ADJUSTMENT FOR ACCOUNT 1416 IN THE AMOUNT OF $126.81
AND ACCOUNT 2705 IN THE AMOUNT OF $344.41.”

8.10

ATTACHMENT - A
12.20.060 Adjustments to bills.
(1) In the event a meter fails to register the correct amount of water used, the customer will be charged
at the average rate of monthly consumption for the previous 12 months as shown by the meter when in
working order.
(2) In the event a leak or failure of a private water system or private service between the meter and the
structure located on private property results in excess consumption, the city may, through a
determination of the city finance director, provide for a rate adjustment up to 50 percent of the volume
consumed in any one billing period in excess of the bi-monthly average of water consumed over the
previous 12 months at that service address.
(a) Customers shall be required to provide proof of repair to leak or failure prior to receiving any
rate adjustment.
(b) Application for the credit or adjustment must be made in written form and approved by the
city finance director or his/her designee.
(c) No more than one application for credit may be considered per service address in any 24month period without city council approval. In order to grant a second adjustment the council
must find one or more of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The leak could not have been readily detectable with reasonable diligence;
(ii) The customer does not occupy or use the subject property on a continuous basis;
(iii) Any prior leak for which an adjustment was made by the city was repaired within 30
days
of discovery;
(iv) The customer account has been kept current and there have been no delinquencies
within the previous 24 months.
(3) In the event of a leak or failure of a private water system or private service between the meter and the
structure located on private property that was the result of a city project involving a public work as defined
by state law, or maintenance performed at the expense of the city, the city public works director will have
the authority to provide a rate adjustment for more than 50 percent of the volume consumed in excess
of the bimonthly average of water consumed over the previous 12 months at that service address.
Adjustments are final and requests for reversal will not be granted and are not subject to appeal. (Ord.
1415 § 1, 2016; Ord. 1405 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2015; Ord. 1359 § 1, 2013; Ord. 1295 § 2, 2011; Ord. 1189 § 4,
2006).

8.11

8.12

CITY OF STANWOOD
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT

ITEM NUMBER:

11

DATE:

April 24, 2025

SUBJECT:

WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling
Engineering Report

CONTACT PERSON:

Alan Lytton, City Engineer

ATTACHMENTS:

A – Scope of Work and Fee

PURPOSE
The purpose of this agenda item is to authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with RH2
Engineering for professional services required to develop a Facility Plan/Engineering
Report for the WWTP upgrade and solids handling system not to exceed $732,400.
BACKGROUND
This project will complete an Engineering Report in accordance with WAC 173-240-060
to analyze and recommend improvements to the WWTP. The existing plant was originally
constructed 20 years ago and has been maintained without major overhaul to maximize
its useful life. Many major components of the plant are at the end of their service life and
will need replacement either in kind or with newer treatment technologies. The
Engineering Report will evaluate several alternatives to our current plant design and
recommend upgrades to replace aging equipment as well as increase the WWP capacity
and reliability. Addressing these needs also provides the City opportunity to proactively
improve discharge water quality and enable the City to more readily adapt to future
discharge regulations. This scope of work will take approximately 12 months to complete.
ANALYSIS
Fiscal Impact
Fund(s):

403

Amount:
Budget
Authorized

$1,100,000
[x ] Yes [ ] No

Project Estimate:

$732,400

Amendment Required?

[ ] Yes [x ] No
[ ] Monitor

11.1

RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends proceeding with the scope of work.
Committee/Board Recommendation:
The Public Works Committee have reviewed the scope and fee and have been briefed
on the project.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
1. Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract with RH2 Engineering Inc.
2. Send back to the Public Works Committee for additional discussion.
3. Reject or amend the proposal and delay project.
RECOMMENDED MOTION
“I MOVE TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A CONTRACT WITH RH2
ENGINEERING FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SECONDARY
TREATMENT AND SOLIDS HANDLING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ENGINEERING
REPORT FOR THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $732,400.”

11.2

ATTACHMENT A

EXHIBIT A
Scope of Work

City of Stanwood
Wastewater Treatment Plant Secondary Treatment and
Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report
April 2025

Background
The City of Stanwood (City) is currently updating its General Sewer Plan (GSP), with completion
expected in the second quarter of 2025. As part of the GSP update, an analysis of the wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP), which the City owns and operates, was conducted to identify major capital
improvements to be funded during the planning period. Two significant WWTP Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) projects were identified in the GSP:
•

Increase the capacity of the activated sludge system; and

•

Replace the aging sludge stabilization ponds with a new solids handling system.

The GSP analyzed alternatives to upgrade these systems and recommended the following:
•

Convert the existing oxidation ditches of the activated sludge system into compartmentalized
plug flow reactors (CIP F10).

•

Replace the sludge stabilization ponds with aerobic digesters and associated equipment
(CIP F9).

These improvements will necessitate completion of an Engineering Report in accordance with
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-240-060. These documents further reference the
US Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Guidance for Preparing a Facility Plan
(EPA-430/9-76-015) and 40 Code of Federal Regulations § 35.2030, which identify additional
requirements for facility plans. Additionally, the Washington State Department of Ecology’s (Ecology)
Criteria for Sewage Works Design (Orange Book) summarizes the requirements for Engineering
Reports. The City has requested that RH2 Engineering, Inc., (RH2) prepare the Engineering Report in
accordance with these requirements.
The Engineering Report will thoroughly analyze the recommended improvements from the GSP and
establish the system configuration and design criteria such that design can commence upon
completion of the Engineering Report. The Engineering Report will also develop an implementation
plan to properly coordinate those improvements. In addition to the activated sludge and solids
handling systems, the Engineering Report is expected to analyze and recommend improvements to
other elements of the WWTP, including the following:
•

Influent screening equipment (CIP F2).

•

Addition of grit removal at the Headworks (CIP F8).
1

4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.3

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

•

Effluent disinfection system (CIP F4).

•

Electrical and control systems (CIP F6).

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

In general, the Engineering Report will involve the following tasks:
1) Review and coordinate previous planning documents with new information from WWTP
analyses and information from operators and stakeholders.
2) Review and plan for methods to meet current regulatory requirements and policies.
3) Summarize current and future municipal and industrial flow and loading as estimated in the
GSP.
4) Calculate and establish basic design criteria for current and future WWTP processes.
5) Analyze and recommend improvements in sufficient detail to allow the City to proceed with
the development of construction contract documents for each project without substantial
changes from the Engineering Report.
6) Estimate project capital and life-cycle costs.
7) Coordinate with other local agency planning efforts or documents regarding the Engineering
Report.
The Engineering Report will be submitted to Ecology for review and approval.

General Assumptions
The following general assumptions are guiding this Scope of Work:
•

RH2 will rely upon the accuracy and completeness of data, information, and materials
generated or produced by the City or others in relation to this Scope of Work. RH2 assumes
that the entity providing such information to RH2 is either the owner of such information or
has obtained written authorization from the owner to distribute said information.

•

Deliverables will be submitted in electronic format (PDF) unless otherwise noted.

•

Acceptance of the Engineering Report prepared in this Scope of Work is beyond the control of
RH2 and the City, and no date is warranted or implied for Ecology’s response or approval.

•

Unless otherwise noted, meetings and/or workshops included in this Scope of Work will be
virtual via Microsoft (MS) Teams.

•

The City will be involved in all coordination efforts with Agencies and will be included in all
correspondence and communications.

•

The improvements to the secondary treatment system will be incorporated within the existing
hydraulic profile.

•

The finished floor elevations of any new buildings will be based on the current 100-year flood
elevations plus a reasonable factor of safety.
2

4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.4

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

•

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

The Engineering Report will not evaluate tsunami impacts on the existing or proposed
infrastructure.

Task 1 – Project Management
Objective: Monitor the scope of work, schedule, and budget. Provide monthly invoices and project
updates. Manage the RH2 project team and subconsultants.
Approach:
Prepare, monitor, and update the project schedule monthly.
Review work performed for consistency with this Scope of Work, monitor budget, prepare
monthly invoices, and provide City staff with periodic project status and budget updates via
email.
Maintain and store project records.
Prepare and execute subconsultant contracts.
Manage the RH2 team members and subconsultants.
Prepare a fieldwork health and safety plan.
Assumptions:
•

Project records will be maintained and filed electronically only.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

Monthly invoices documenting the progress of work completed and earned value compared
to contract value.

•

Coordination of RH2 project team and subconsultants.

Task 2 – Periodic Workshops
Objective: Provide coordination of and attend periodic workshops with the City as necessary to
provide dedicated opportunities for City staff engagement throughout the project. A total of six (6)
workshops are estimated in this Scope of Work. A basic approach to the workshops is provided in the
Approach. During the project, specific workshop topics will be mutually determined by RH2 and the
City.
Approach:
Prepare for and attend six (6) 2-hour workshops with City staff. Prepare an agenda and
minutes for each workshop. Workshop topics will generally include, but not be limited to,
project kick-off, review of needs and deficiencies, review of alternatives, review of
recommended improvements, project implementation strategies, and Engineering Report
review.

3
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.5

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

Assumptions:
•

Workshops will be coordinated, scheduled, and led by RH2. Meeting agendas and minutes will
be provided by RH2 for all workshops. Up to three (3) RH2 staff members are assumed to
attend each workshop.

•

Additional meetings or workshops can be accommodated using the Management Reserve if
requested.

Provided by the City:
•

Attendance at workshops listed and meeting location, unless noted otherwise.

•

Coordination with agencies as needed.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

Attendance at workshops listed.

•

One (1) final copy of the agenda or presentation materials for each workshop.

•

One (1) final copy of the meeting minutes or major action items for each workshop.

Task 3 – Geotechnical and Structural Evaluations and Site Survey
Objective: Perform a geotechnical site investigation and develop a geotechnical report summarizing
the findings. Perform a site survey of the WWTP.
Approach:
Coordinate with a geotechnical engineering subconsultant to perform a geotechnical
investigation consisting of soil borings, geophysical testing, and laboratory analyses to
evaluate the subsurface conditions at or adjacent to the existing ponds.
a) Provide geotechnical and structural design criteria and site-specific information to
support construction based on the investigation. The geotechnical analysis will consider
the risks of settlement, liquefaction, and seismic motion on the proposed structure. It is
assumed up to four (4) borings will be drilled by the subconsultant for the investigation.
The findings will be incorporated with those developed from the geotechnical
investigation conducted in 2000 for the WWTP facility structures immediately east of the
proposed site.
b) Assess alternatives for foundation support that may include pre-loading, structural fill,
and/or piles. The actual site footprint will remain flooded and will not be accessible for
direct investigation; assumptions will be made regarding potential construction and
foundation design impacts related to soft organic material and buried logs below the
proposed structures.
c) Prepare a geotechnical report including estimates of potential settlement for various
foundation designs, types of piles and allowable load per pile, lateral capacity for seismic
loading, and pile spacing and geometry.
4
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.6

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

Coordinate with a structural engineering subconsultant to perform a feasibility-level analysis
of the proposed improvements to the oxidation ditches, including the removal of internal
walls and installation of new walls in different locations. Prepare a structural report
summarizing the findings and proposed design recommendations.
Coordinate with a licensed surveyor as a subconsultant to RH2 to acquire up to date survey
data of the project site for design purposes. Attend one (1) site visit to evaluate the utility
locates and survey limits with the City. Review and revise the survey data for the WWTP based
on as-built drawings. No RH2 staff will be on site for the survey work.
Perform two (2) additional site visits during the course of Task 2 to collect additional
information necessary to complete the tasks outlined in this Scope of Work.
Assumptions:
•

It is assumed that three (3) RH2 staff members will attend each investigation unless noted
otherwise.

•

The City will provide site access for all investigations outlined in this Task.

•

No destructive testing or instrument-assisted investigations or excavations will be used during
the limited structural assessment. Assessment will be limited to a desktop review and visual
evaluations of the infrastructure.

•

A detailed conditions assessment of each facility, including specific code review, life, and
safety considerations, is not provided as part of this Scope of Work but can be added by
amendment if mutually agreeable to the City and RH2.

Provided by the City:
•

Attendance at and access for site investigations.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

Attendance at site investigations.

•

Electronic copies of the AutoCAD survey files (AutoCAD and PDF).

•

Geotechnical report.

•

Structural report.

Task 4 – Review Applicable Regulations
Objective: Review regulations as applicable to the existing WWTP and the proposed improvements
for inclusion in the Engineering Report.
Approach:
Coordinate with Ecology via phone calls and email correspondence during the development
of the Engineering Report. Up to ten (10) hours of effort are assumed for this subtask.
5
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.7

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

Review and summarize the City’s current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit. Include a copy of the NPDES permit in the Engineering Report appendices.
Review and summarize current and expected future regulatory requirements related to the
NPDES permit, biosolids permit, and air quality permit (if applicable). Summarize the
regulations for laboratory accreditation that apply to the WWTP.

Task 5 – Review Relevant Background Information
Objective: Collect and review background information as available and required for developing the
Engineering Report.
Approach:
Review previous planning documents as available and applicable, which are expected to
include the following:
a) Relevant portions of the GSP currently in progress.
b) Relevant portions of the 2015 GSP.
c) As-builts from previous projects at the WWTP.
Review previous construction contract documents for pertinent improvement projects
completed at the WWTP.
Assumptions:
•

The City has previously provided relevant background information. Any additional information
necessary, if determined during the course of this Scope of Work, will be requested by the RH2.

Task 6 – Summarize Wastewater Flow and Load
Objective: Summarize the current and projected system flow and loading from the GSP. Evaluate
additional industrial loading to the WWTP that is different from what was analyzed in the GSP.
Establish additional flow and loading conditions for sizing tankage, unit processes, and equipment.
Approach:
Summarize the historical and projected flow and loading from the GSP.
Document infiltration and inflow per the most recent GSP.
Establish flow and loading conditions for sizing and configuring improvements, including
average wet and dry weather conditions, maximum week, maximum day, and peak diurnal
conditions.
RH2 Deliverables:
•

Tables with calculated historical and projected flow and loading values.

6
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.8

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

Task 7 – No Meat Treatment Evaluation
Objective: Evaluate Phase 2 of the No Meat expansion flow and load and whether the WWTP can
accommodate it without pretreatment.
Approach:
Update flow and load from the GSP to account for the Phase 2 expansion of No Meat.
Determine the impact of additional flow on load on planned improvements outlined in the
GSP. This will include an evaluation of tankage sizing, treatment processes, and the associated
cost.
Prepare a technical memorandum summarizing the impact of the additional flow and load on
the planned improvements and incremental construction cost increase. Review the technical
memorandum with the City and finalize a determination of whether to include the No Meat
expansion in the proposed improvements outlined in the Engineering Report.
Provided by the City:
•

Review of the draft technical memorandum.

•

Direction on whether to include the additional flow and load in the improvements outlined
in the Engineering Report.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

No Meat expansion technical memorandum.

Task 8 – Analyze and Configure Improvements to the WWTP
Objective: Configure major improvements recommended by the GSP. Analyze options and
considerations for configuring major systems and processes. Establish required capacity and
performance of systems and unit processes. Identify portions of infrastructure to remain or be
rehabilitated, along with new infrastructure requirements. Engage vendors to size and configure
equipment and devices. Analyze alternatives for equipment, unit processes, and system
configurations, where applicable, to recommend the preferred approach to the improvements. This
work will include, but not be limited to, the following items associated with each of the subtasks:
a. Establish performance and capacity requirements based on guidance of the Orange Book,
Water Environment Federation Manual of Practice (MOP) 8, and other applicable references.
Where applicable, perform hydraulic analyses, solids loading calculations, or other analyses
as requested to evaluate capacity.
b. Establish applicable regulatory criteria or codes that relate to each unit process, such as the
2020 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 820: Fire Protection in Wastewater
Treatment and Collection Facilities (NFPA 820), which establishes fire protection
requirements for processes and areas within WWTPs.
c. Analyze effects to the WWTP hydraulic profile caused by any of the proposed improvements.
7
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.9

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

d. Analyze the hydraulic and solids loading capacity afforded by each improvement and the
effect on the overall WWTP capacity.
e. Perform planning-level BioWin modeling as necessary.
f. List permitting considerations.
g. Summarize environmental considerations and impacts to the public, including odor, noise, or
other parameters associated with each system or process.
h. Review electrical and control system needs and considerations.
i.

Provide planning-level drawings or schematics for use in comparing the footprint and
orientation of each option. Construct simple 3D AutoCAD models of existing structures or
facilities where necessary to analyze alternatives or potential improvements.

j.

Analyze the operational flexibility provided by each improvement for alternate modes of
operation.

k. Consider component and system redundancy.
l.

Evaluate life-cycle costs, including design and soft costs, construction cost, life-cycle costs
related to electrical load, polymer usage, maintenance, and other considerations.

Approach:
Analyze preliminary treatment improvements:
a) Analyze and configure influent screening system improvements that are expected to
include a new mechanical fine screen in the existing channel and new washer/compactor
equipment.
b) Analyze options for implementation of grit removal at the Headworks. Size and configure
grit removal systems and recommend a preferred configuration. Determine major
structural and mechanical improvements for the new system. Determine electrical needs
to support new motor loads associated with the proposed screen and grit removal unit.
c) Analyze and recommend other minor improvements to the Headworks system based on
recommendations from the GSP or as identified during this Scope of Work.
Analyze secondary treatment improvements:
a) Analyze and refine the configuration of the plug flow reactors as proposed in the GSP for
the activated sludge system improvements. Evaluate basin zone configurations and
structural requirements for zone partitions. Engage manufacturers to analyze partition
options. Consider access improvements and other needs related to the new zones.
Consider options for draining the zones.
b) Prepare an initial aeration diffuser system layout with diffuser manufacturers to provide
a configuration meeting the various demand conditions. Review and select material
options and define other criteria for specifying diffusers.
8
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.10

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

c) Evaluate options and recommend configuration for the blower and air piping system,
including the blower type, size, and quantity, modulating type, size, and locations, air
header design, air flow and pressure monitoring, and dissolved oxygen monitoring
equipment. Consider options for outdoor and indoor blower installation and recommend
locations for the new blowers.
d) Evaluate options for mixing equipment in the selector zones and other locations. Engage
manufacturers on equipment options and recommend proposed equipment selections to
the City.
e) Evaluate options and recommend configuration of a wasting system to allow for surface
wasting of mixed liquor from each basin. Engage manufacturers on equipment sizing,
configuration, and options.
f) Determine electrical needs to support proposed motor loads associated with the new
equipment. Coordinate with motor control manufacturers to get preliminary equipment
sizing. Evaluate options and recommend a location for new motor control equipment
installation.
g) Evaluation options and recommend configuration of the control system for automated
control of the equipment associated with the activated sludge system.
Evaluate effluent disinfection improvements:
a) Evaluate options and recommend configuration of new ultraviolet light (UV) system to
replace the existing system. Coordinate with UV manufacturers to get preliminary
equipment sizing. Coordinate with electrical and control system design to support UV
system improvements.
Analyze solids handling improvements:
a) Analyze and configure aerobic digesters with the intent of providing stabilization of waste
activated sludge (WAS) to Class B requirements at the WWTP design loading conditions.
Perform calculations to recommend necessary digester volume and redundancy. Engage
equipment manufacturers on aeration and mixing equipment to detail equipment options
and major considerations for the configuration of the tankage. Recommend quantity, size,
and configuration of digester tankage and associated equipment.
b) Evaluate options and recommend configuration of the blower and air piping system and
air diffusion equipment within the tankage. Recommend blower type, size, and quantity,
air header design, diffusion equipment design, and associated components. Consider
options for outdoor and indoor blower installation and recommend locations for the new
blowers.
c) Evaluate options for mixing equipment for the digesters. Engage manufacturers on
equipment options and recommend proposed equipment selections to the City.

9
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.11

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

d) Evaluate options and recommend configuration of the WAS thickening system. Consider
periodic and continual operation of thickening WAS from the surface wasting system.
Consider the ability to automatically bypass the thickening system.
e) Evaluate options and recommend configuration of the dewatering and load-out
equipment. Consider equipment operational requirements, such as attended versus
unattended operation, and weekly operating duration for sizing the equipment. Consider
energy use, polymer consumption, cake dryness, and other factors to recommend the
preferred dewatering equipment and configuration. Consider truck load-out options.
f) Evaluate options and recommend configuration for return of the dewatering side stream
to the WWTP. This may include a new pump station and other infrastructure. Consider
equalization or other measures to reduce loading to the WWTP if necessitated by the
dewatering equipment selection.
g) Consider odor control needs for the solids handling system, and size and configure the
odor control system if deemed necessary.
h) Consider and recommend ancillary systems associated with the new solids handling
system.
i) Consider including an operations or control room in the new solids handling building.
j) Determine electrical needs to support the proposed motor loads associated with the new
solids handling system. Coordinate with motor control manufacturers to get preliminary
equipment sizing. Evaluate options and recommend location for new motor control
equipment installation.
k) Evaluation options and recommend configuration of the control system for automated
control of the equipment associated with the new solids handling system.
Evaluate electrical and control systems:
a) Provide a basic review of the majority of the WWTP electrical, automatic control, and
telemetry system components that were not otherwise reviewed during the analyses of
individual processes, including the primary electrical service, back-up power supply,
electrical distribution equipment, motor control centers, control panel hardware and
wiring, communications equipment, and instrumentation.
b) Provide a basic review of arc flash considerations for the WWTP and recommend either a
specific or plant-wide arc flash analysis, short circuit, and protective device coordination
study as a CIP project, as necessary.
c) Provide a basic review of the supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) network
configuration, security, hardware, and wiring relative to industry standards.

10
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.12

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

Recommend and size sitework improvements:
a) Recommend an approach to removing sludge, demolishing Stabilization Pond No. 2, and
preparing the subgrade for future improvements based on the geotechnical
recommendations. Recommend a fill material for Stabilization Pond No. 2 based on
material that is locally available.
b) Size and configure interconnecting, below-grade piping between the new solids handling
system and the existing WWTP infrastructure.
c) Configure surfacing, parking, and other site improvements for the proposed
infrastructure.
Assumptions:
•

Some known lesser improvement projects and additional minor projects may be identified
during the WWTP evaluation that are not expected to significantly change this Scope of Work.
Major improvement projects identified during the Engineering Report development beyond
those listed may necessitate an amendment to this Scope of Work as mutually agreed to by
the City and RH2.

•

Where applicable, hydraulic, AutoCAD, or other models will be produced at a planning or
preliminary level of detail for use in comparing alternatives only.

•

Meeting or workshop attendance related to this Task is summarized in Task 2.

•

Review of NFPA 820 is included as it relates to specific processes or areas of concern for the
City. A site-wide review of all spaces within the WWTP with regard to NFPA 820 is not provided
as part of this Scope of Work but can be added by amendment if mutually agreeable to the
City and RH2.

•

Odor control measures will be considered for each potential improvement for inclusion in
applicable CIP projects. A comprehensive site-wide odor control evaluation is not provided as
part of this Scope of Work but can be added by amendment if mutually agreeable to the City
and RH2.

Provided by the City:
•

Review and input on alternatives analyses and recommendations.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

Analyses of alternatives and recommendations.

11
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.13

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

Task 9 – Summarize Recommended Improvements
Objective: Summarize the recommended improvements and identify the design criteria for the major
CIP project(s). Develop a strategy for implementing the recommended improvements. The following
elements will be summarized for each recommend improvement:
a. A list of the considerations for design and construction of each recommended improvement
project.
b. Planning-level site, building, or equipment layout plans or schematics to illustrate each
improvement.
c. Basic process flow diagram for each major improvement.
d. Preliminary hydraulic and solids treatment capacity and pertinent design criteria.
e. Design life of each improvement and summary of considerations for future expansion.
f. Electrical one-line diagram, electrical site plan, and basic control system configuration.
g. Environmental and permitting considerations.
h. Estimated capital and life-cycle costs for each improvement.
i.

Estimated future staffing needs at the WWTP to account for operations and maintenance of
improved facilities.

Approach:
Summarize recommended improvements for the preliminary treatment system.
Summarize recommended improvements for the secondary treatment system.
Summarize recommended improvements for the effluent disinfection system.
Summarize recommended improvements for the solids handling system.
Summarize recommended improvements for the electrical and control system.
Summarize recommended improvements to the WWTP site and Sludge Stabilization Pond
No. 2.
Develop an implementation strategy and schedule for the project(s).
Assumptions:
•

Meeting and workshop attendance related to this Task is summarized in Task 2.

•

All figures are intended for planning-level use to generally illustrate the recommended
improvements.

•

This Scope of Work does not include a full staffing study for the WWTP that is inclusive of all
existing and future staffing needs. If requested, a full staffing study can be completed as an
amendment to this contract.
12

4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.14

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

Provided by the City:
•

Input on recommended improvements and implementation strategy.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

Summary of the recommended improvements and implementation strategy provided via
email.

Task 10 – Environmental Permitting
Objective: Perform an environmental background review and coordinate with local agencies to
confirm anticipated project permits. Prepare a permitting needs assessment to be included in the
Engineering Report. Prepare and submit a non-project State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)
Checklist for the Engineering Report.
Approach:
Review existing environmental background data, including maps, City code, and aerial
imagery to support coordination with regulatory staff. Contact regulatory agencies with
potential jurisdiction over the project, including the City’s Planning Department and Ecology.
Introduce project components, discuss anticipated agency concerns, and confirm permitting
requirements and associated timelines.
Prepare a permitting needs assessment for the project using information collected in subtask
10.1. It is assumed the permitting needs assessment will be incorporated into the Engineering
Report and will outline existing environmental resources in the project area, outline
anticipated permit and approval processes, list permit review costs and timelines, and
summarize other key considerations. Refine and finalize the permitting needs assessment for
the final Engineering Report in cooperation with RH2 design staff.
Prepare a non-project SEPA Checklist, including Supplement D, to accompany the Engineering
Report and coordinate with the City for preliminary review. Finalize and submit materials to
the City to process the SEPA Checklist, issue determination, and complete public and agency
notification for the non-project SEPA review. Include the completed non-project SEPA files
into the final Engineering Report.
Assumptions:
•

Non-project SEPA review will be required to accompany the Engineering Report for Ecology
approval. Additionally, project-level SEPA review will be required to facilitate future land use
and construction related approvals; however, project-level SEPA review will be completed at
the implementation of projects included in the Engineering Report. Project-level SEPA review
is not included in this Scope of Work.

•

Coordination with other agencies or stakeholders, such as other departments within the City
and Ecology, is assumed to be limited to the environmental review process. Significant

13
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.15

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

involvement of groups beyond this list was not assumed for the development of this Scope of
Work.
Provided by the City:
•

Assistance with City and/or Ecology coordination, as needed.

•

SEPA determination, publication, and agency review coordination.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

Email and/or telephone record of agency coordination and input incorporated into the
permitting needs assessment, as warranted.

•

Draft and final permitting needs assessment.

•

Draft and final non-project SEPA Checklist.

Task 11 – Draft Chapters and Appendices
Objective: Prepare initial drafts of chapters, figures, and appendices for review by the City
throughout the development of the Engineering Report.
Approach:
Prepare an Executive Summary of the Engineering Report, including the following:
a) Describe the purpose of the Engineering Report.
b) Describe how the Engineering Report has been coordinated with the City’s most recent
GSP and other relevant planning documents.
c) Summarize the key elements of the Engineering Report, including regulatory
considerations, wastewater flow and loading analyses, facility evaluation and
deficiencies, and capital improvements.
Prepare an introduction chapter of the Engineering Report, including the following:
a) Describe the purpose and goals of the Engineering Report.
b) Describe major changes or improvements to the WWTP in the last 10 years.
c) Summarize the content of each chapter of the Engineering Report.
d) Provide a list of abbreviations used in the Engineering Report.
e) Prepare existing site plan, existing site aerial, existing WWTP design criteria, and existing
process flow diagram figures.
Prepare a chapter and figure(s) describing background information and planning data used
to develop the Engineering Report, including the following:
a) List relevant background information used in developing the Engineering Report.
b) Describe population and planning information from the most recent GSP.
14
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.16

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

c) Prepare a location map of the City’s existing WWTP and surrounding lands.
Prepare applicable chapter(s), figure(s), and appendices related to regulatory and discharge
permit requirements, including the following:
a) Describe the environment at the existing WWTP site and any other sites or utility corridors
proposed for development as part of the improvements presented in the Engineering
Report.
b) Summarize agency and stakeholder involvement during the Engineering Report
development.
c) Summarize current and expected future regulatory requirements related to the NPDES
discharge permit, biosolids permit, and air quality permit (if applicable).
d) List laboratory accreditations.
Prepare applicable chapter(s), figure(s), and appendices related to current and projected flow
and loading conditions, including the following:
a) Summarize applicable information from the current GSP.
b) Describe analyses of WWTP historical and projected flow and loading.
Prepare applicable chapter(s), figure(s), and appendices related to the evaluation of the
existing WWTP and individual processes, including the following:
a) Summarize the site investigations and assessments.
b) Summarize the evaluation of systems and processes to outline performance, current and
future capacity, and applicable regulatory criteria.
Prepare applicable chapter(s), figure(s), and appendices related to the analyses of
improvements, including the following:
a) Summarize the major components, considerations, and criteria for each alternative
considered.
b) Compare the qualitative and quantitative criteria for each alternative analyzed.
Prepare a chapter summarizing the recommended improvements and CIP list, including the
following:
a) List the recommended improvements and associated capital costs.
b) Summarize the major components, considerations, and criteria for each recommended
project.
c) Provide a project implementation schedule to accompany the CIP list.
d) Describe future staffing considerations for the improvements.
Prepare a chapter summarizing implementation, project delivery alternatives, and financing.
15
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.17

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

a) Review options for project delivery. Conventional design-bid-build and alternate delivery
options will be considered. Recommend delivery options for the project(s).
b) Create a simple project implementation plan that summarizes the schedule, major
considerations, and steps in the delivery of the project(s).
Provide individual chapters to the City for review. Collect comments and incorporate them
into the draft chapters.
Assumptions:
•

RH2 will rely on the 2015 GSP and the 2025 GSP that is in development to derive the projected
flow and loading to the WWTP. RH2 will not analyze land use and population trends as part
of this Scope of Work but will incorporate this data from the other relevant planning
documents.

•

RH2 will provide individual or multiple initial drafts of chapters, figures, and appendices for
review at intervals as requested by the City.

•

The non-project SEPA Checklist from Task 10 will be used to prepare the existing environment
description(s).

Provided by the City:
•

Review comments for initial drafts of each chapter and applicable figures in MS Word format.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

Initial drafts of chapters, figures, and appendices in MS Word and PDF formats for City review.

Task 12 – Compile and Present Draft Engineering Report
Objective: Prepare a compiled preliminary draft of the Engineering Report for City review based on
initial review comments. Prepare materials for presentation at meetings with the City Council and
the public. Prepare a compiled Agency review draft of the Engineering Report.
Approach:
Develop a cover, title sheet, and table of contents for the Engineering Report.
Provide a compiled preliminary draft of the Engineering Report with appendices, updated as
required by initial City review comments, to the City for review and comment.
Prepare a final draft of the Engineering Report by revising the preliminary draft of the
Engineering Report to address the City’s review comments. Present the final draft for City
Council and public review. Update the final draft as appropriate with any additional
comments or edits.
Prepare an Agency review draft of the Engineering Report, which has Professional Engineer
stamps and signatures, with appendices. Agency review coordination is completed under
Task 13.
16
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.18

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

Assumptions:
•

Workshop attendance related to this Task is summarized in Task 2.

Provided by the City:
•

Review comments on the compiled preliminary draft Engineering Report via email or in PDF
format.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

Preliminary draft of the Engineering Report and appendices.

•

City Council presentation materials.

•

Agency review draft of the Engineering Report.

Task 13 – Ecology Review of Engineering Report
Objective: Coordinate completion of Ecology’s review of the Engineering Report.
Approach:
Submit electronic copies of the Engineering Report and appendices to Ecology for review and
comment. Meet with Ecology to discuss their review comments.
Prepare a response letter to Ecology summarizing how each comment was addressed and the
location of the associated revisions in the final Engineering Report. Provide a draft of the
response letter to the City for review and comment. Revise the draft response letter to
address the City’s comments. Submit the final response letter to Ecology and provide a copy
to the City.
Revise the Engineering Report to address Ecology’s review comments. Add a copy of Ecology’s
review comments to the Engineering Report appendices.
Prepare the final Engineering Report with Professional Engineer stamps and signatures
following Ecology’s review and approval. Print and bind three (3) sets of the final Engineering
Report in three-ring binders for the City. It is assumed the printed sets will only contain the
chapters. Appendices will be provided in electronic format on a USB drive.
Assumptions:
•

The number of review comments are difficult to predict and highly variable. An initial
allocation of eighteen (18) hours has been included in subtask 13.3 for revisions to the
Engineering Report chapters and figures to address Ecology review comments. This allocation
is based on typical levels of review comments received by Engineering Report efforts. If an
unusual number of comments are received, or the scope of the comments are excessive, RH2
will coordinate with the City to determine the next steps. This may include a Scope of Work
amendment to address the comments or use of the Management Reserve fund.

17
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.19

City of Stanwood
WWTP Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report

Exhibit A
Scope of Work

Provided by the City:
•

Review of the draft response letter to Ecology in email or PDF format.

RH2 Deliverables:
•

Draft response letter to Ecology.

•

Two (2) hard copies of the final response letter to Ecology: one (1) for Ecology and one (1) for
the City.

•

Final Engineering Report for the City and Ecology.

•

Three (3) printed and bound sets of the final Engineering Report in three-ring binders with
appendices on a USB drive for the City.

Task 14 – Management Reserve
Objective: Provide additional services for the project, not currently identified in this Scope of Work,
as requested by the City.
Approach:
Provide additional services for the project. RH2 will develop a budget estimate for additional
services as requested by the City. The City shall provide written authorization to proceed prior
to RH2’s performance of any additional services.
RH2 Deliverables:
•

Budget estimate for additional services.

•

Other deliverables requested by the City under an authorization for additional services.

Project Schedule
RH2 will commence with the work upon written authorization from the City. Tasks 1 through 12 are
expected to require twelve (12) months. The schedule for Task 13 is difficult to predict due to the
review time by Ecology.

18
4/14/2025 10:06:05 AM

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_SOW_WWTP-Engineering Report.docx

11.20

EXHIBIT B
Fee Estimate
City of Stanwood
Wastewater Treatment Plant Secondary Treatment and Solids Handling System Improvements
Engineering Report
Apr-25

Description

Total
Hours

Total
Labor

Total Subconsultant

Total Expense

Total Cost

Task 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6

Project Management
Prepare and Update Project Schedule
Prepare Monthly Invoices and Budget Updates
Maintain Project Records
Prepare Subconsultant Contracts
Manage RH2 Team Members
Prepare a fieldwork health and safety plan

59
8
14
6
7
20
4

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

14,004
2,016
2,880
1,188
1,506
5,568
846

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

466
130
81
39
56
139
21

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

14,470
2,146
2,961
1,227
1,562
5,707
867

Task 2
2.1

Periodic Workshops
Prepare For and Attend Six (6) Workshops with City Staff

82
82

$
$

21,040
21,040

$
$

-

$
$

1,646
1,646

$
$

22,686
22,686

Task 3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4

Geotechnical and Structural Evaluations and Site Survey
Perform Geotechnical Investigation
Perform Structural Feasibility-Level Analysis
Coordinate and Obtain Topographic Survey
Perform Site Visits

90
47
9
10
24

$
$
$
$
$

23,172
12,922
2,442
2,216
5,592

$
$
$
$
$

149,500
92,000
34,500
23,000
-

$
$
$
$
$

1,360
393
131
235
601

$
$
$
$
$

174,032
105,315
37,073
25,451
6,193

Task 4
4.1
4.2
4.3

Review Applicable Regulations
Coordinate with Ecology
Review and Summarize the City's NPDES Permit
Review and Summarize Current and Future Regulatory Requirements

30
10
8
12

$
$
$
$

7,436
2,724
1,824
2,888

$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$

378
68
128
182

$
$
$
$

7,814
2,792
1,952
3,070

Task 5
5.1
5.2

Review Relevant Background Information
Review Previous Planning Documents
Review Previous Construction Contract Documents

16
8
8

$
$
$

3,576
1,788
1,788

$
$
$

-

$
$
$

738
276
462

$
$
$

4,314
2,064
2,250

Task 6
6.1
6.2
6.3

Summarize Wastewater Flow and Load
Summarize Historical and Projected Flow and Loading
Document Infiltration and Inflow
Establish Flow and Loading Conditions for Sizing Improvements

37
7
10
20

$
$
$
$

8,670
1,554
2,328
4,788

$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$

547
121
141
285

$
$
$
$

9,217
1,675
2,469
5,073

Task 7
7.1
7.2
7.3

No Meat Treatment Evaluation
Update Flow and Load from GSP for Phase 2 No Meat Expansion
Determine Impact of Additional Flow and Load
Prepare Technical Memorandum Summarizing the Impacts

63
15
18
30

$
$
$
$

15,164
3,294
5,016
6,854

$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$

697
137
125
435

$
$
$
$

15,861
3,431
5,141
7,289

Task 8
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6

Analyze and Configure Improvements to the WWTP
Analyze Preliminary Treatment Improvements
Analyze Secondary Treatment Improvements
Evaluate Effluent Disinfection Improvements
Analyze Solids Handling Improvements
Evaluate Electrical and Control Systems
Recommend and Size Sitework Improvements

857
87
344
64
228
76
58

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

191,292
19,592
74,866
14,622
51,856
17,056
13,300

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

12,777
1,391
5,166
992
3,491
833
904

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

204,069
20,983
80,032
15,614
55,347
17,889
14,204

Task 9
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7

Summarize Recommended Improvements
Summarize Preliminary Treatment System Improvements
Summarize Secondary Treatment System Improvements
Summarize Effluent Disinfection System Improvements
Summarize Solids Handling System Improvements
Summarize Electrical and Control System Improvements
Summarize Site and Sludge Stabilization Pond Improvements
Develop Implementation Strategy and Schedule

533
29
118
37
116
83
85
65

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

119,938
6,686
26,648
8,774
26,012
18,386
18,366
15,066

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

7,660
464
1,870
516
1,854
921
1,058
976

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

127,598
7,150
28,518
9,290
27,866
19,307
19,424
16,042

Task 10
10.1
10.2
10.3

Environmental Permitting
Review Background Data and Coordinate with Agencies
Prepare and Finalize Permitting Needs Assessment
Prepare and Finalize Non-Project SEPA Checklist

66
12
24
30

$
$
$
$

13,849
2,754
4,965
6,130

$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$

700
178
233
290

$
$
$
$

14,549
2,932
5,198
6,420

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_FEE_WWTP-Engineering Report

11.21

4/2/2025 1:25 PM

Description

Total
Hours

Total
Labor

Total Subconsultant

Total Expense

Total Cost

Task 11
11.1
11.2
11.3
11.4
11.5
11.6
11.7
11.8
11.9
11.10

Draft Chapters and Appendices
Prepare Executive Summary
Prepare Introduction Chapter
Prepare Background Information Chapter and Figures
Prepare Regulatory and Discharge Permit Chapters and Figures
Prepare Flow and Loading Chapters and Figures
Prepare Existing WWTP and Processes Chapters and Figures
Prepare Improvement Analyses Chapters and Figures
Prepare CIP Chapter
Prepare Implementation and Financing Chapter
Provide Chapters to City for Review and Incorporate Comments

342
24
20
20
18
30
59
81
34
30
26

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

77,406
5,524
4,480
4,480
3,976
6,732
13,210
17,528
7,460
6,732
7,284

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

5,589
346
320
360
420
599
925
1,446
505
487
182

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

82,995
5,870
4,800
4,840
4,396
7,331
14,135
18,974
7,965
7,219
7,466

Task 12
12.1
12.2
12.3
12.4

Compile and Present Draft Engineering Report
Develop Cover, Title, and Table of Contents
Prepare Preliminary Draft Engineering Report with Appendices
Prepare Final Draft Engineering Report
Prepare Agency Review Engineering Report

59
4
13
23
19

$
$
$
$
$

13,650
846
2,876
5,468
4,460

$
$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$
$

929
39
182
487
222

$
$
$
$
$

14,579
885
3,058
5,955
4,682

Task 13
13.1
13.2
13.3
13.4

Ecology Review of Engineering Report
Submit Engineering Report to Ecology for Review and Meet
Prepare Response Letter to Ecology
Revise Engineering Report to Address Ecology Comments
Create Final Engineering Report and Print Copies

59
17
16
18
8

$
$
$
$
$

14,170
4,524
3,670
4,274
1,702

$
$
$
$
$

-

$
$
$
$
$

1,358
113
184
217
844

$
$
$
$
$

15,528
4,637
3,854
4,491
2,546

Task 14
14.1

Management Reserve
Provide Additional Services

95
95

$
$

24,030
24,030

$
$

-

$
$

657
657

$
$

24,687
24,687

2388

$

547,397

$

149,500

$

35,503

$

732,400

PROJECT TOTAL

J:\Data\STA\_BusDev\2025 WWTP Improvements\Contract\PSA_FEE_WWTP-Engineering Report

11.22

4/2/2025 1:25 PM

EXHIBIT C
RH2 ENGINEERING, INC.
2025 SCHEDULE OF RATES AND CHARGES
RATE LIST

RATE

UNIT

Professional I
Professional II
Professional III
Professional IV
Professional V
Professional VI
Professional VII
Professional VIII
Professional IX
Technician I
Technician II
Technician III
Technician IV
Technician V
Technician VI
Technician VII
Technician VIII
Administrative I
Administrative II
Administrative III
Administrative IV
Administrative V
CAD/GIS System
CAD Plots - Half Size
CAD Plots - Full Size
CAD Plots - Large
Copies (bw) 8.5" X 11"
Copies (bw) 8.5" X 14"
Copies (bw) 11" X 17"
Copies (color) 8.5" X 11"
Copies (color) 8.5" X 14"
Copies (color) 11" X 17"
Technology Charge
Night Work

$174
$192
$214
$235
$252
$270
$295
$318
$328
$136
$148
$167
$182
$199
$219
$238
$250
$91
$106
$127
$148
$171
$27.50
$2.50
$10.00
$25.00
$0.09
$0.14
$0.20
$0.90
$1.20
$2.00
2.50%
10.00%

Mileage
Subconsultants
Outside Services

$0.7000
15%
at cost

$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
$/hr
price per plot
price per plot
price per plot
price per copy
price per copy
price per copy
price per copy
price per copy
price per copy
% of Direct Labor
% of Direct Labor
price per mile
(or Current IRS Rate)
Cost +

Rates listed are adjusted annually.

11.23

11.24