City Council - Regular Meeting

To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Okay, I'll call roll call. Rob Toyer here. Licia Novak here. Michelle Glide here. Heather Watlin here. Nathan Sim here. Tim Abrahamson present. And I think Yavon is going to try to connect with us online. If not, she she has a does have an excused absence. Mayor Vanny, I move for approval of the agenda.

Second. Discussion. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? None heard. Motion carries. Okay, we'll move right on to our first item of the workshop, the compensation proposal and easement approval for PUB transmission lines. Marty Sure.

Yeah. If you want to have some members from PUD here to do a presentation too on the project so that we can kind of take a look at the project as a whole. So I I failed to ask which one of them was going to come up and do the presentation, but um I'll I'll let him self introduce now. Sure.

There's a green light on. Okay, you're good. Got it. Good evening, council members. Uh, my name is Jessica Spar. I'm from Snowomish PUD. I'm a program manager in the energy storage and emerging technologies department and I'm here with my colleague.

Hello. I'm Andrew Flity. I'm the senior manager of transmission and distribution engineering design. It's a nice long title. And we're here to talk a little bit about the property that we have um in Arlington that is related to the crosswind transmission line that is proposed for construction. Um, we also have the Arlington Clean Energy Campus, which you'll see here on this map. It's a 26 acre parcel that PUD has owned since 2012. It includes our North County office just completed last year. a um the Arlington micro grid which was completed back in 2022, a crew training area line training facility, um pole storage, the crosswind substation which is nearly complete and the battery energy storage system which is under construction right now. So that's taking up almost the entire 26 acres there. A little timeline of the what has gone on at our clean energy campus over time. Um, as I mentioned, we purchased the site back in 2012. Um, in 2016, the equipment yard and line training area was installed. In 2019, we completed the solar array which is which includes a community solar project which uh members of the community could purchase shares and they get build credits for that. In 2022, the micro grid and clean energy center was completed. Um, last year the north county community office was completed. The sub the crosswind sub substation was under construction in 2024 and 25 and then 26 and beyond is the battery energy storage system. Um over time this site has evolved into an area where the PUD does a lot of community engagement. So as you can see from the picture we involved the Arlington Fire Department and that's ongoing training for battery safety. Uh

they're actually doing a training exercise there this week starting tomorrow again. Um and the crosswind substation that is under construction there nearly complete is it was already planned before the battery energy storage system was in place uh to support a large amount of growth in this area in the Cascade Industrial Center. So we were able to pivot the design and the purpose of that substation for the battery energy storage system. So, um, it's really a hub of reliability, innovation, and clean energy education for the area. Um, like I mentioned, in 2022, the Arlington Micro Grid was commissioned. We had a ribbon cutting ceremony, which some of you may have been there for. Um, this is a photo of the site from last year. The solar array was moved across the street. Right in the middle there is 63rd Avenue. um part of the solar array was moved to that location in the middle of the photo to make room for the battery energy storage system. And this is what it looks like right now uh as of last week. The top right picture is the crosswind substation and the bottom left picture is the battery energy storage system uh concrete pads that are ready to receive the batteries um probably in the next couple months or so. And neither of those projects are able to be energized without the crosswind transmission line that is being proposed right now. So they're kind of just waiting for that to be ready. Um a little timeline of the battery storage project just as an FYI. Um we started scoping that project back in 2022. Met with the city first in 2023 with the meeting with the mayor at the time. Um, we did an energy storage agreement with the vendor that's constructing the project for us. And during 2024, we

worked with the city and city council to amend the development code to allow that project to be built to be permitted. Um, and in June 2025, last year, the permit for the battery project was issued. Right now, as I mentioned, it's under construction with the items there listed. Um, almost ready to go. And if we stay on schedule with the transmission line, we'll be able to energize that project later this year in September. Uh, Andrew is going to talk a little bit about the transmission alignment that's necessary to energize the crosswind substation and battery energy storage system. I'm stepping on cords. So, yeah. So, this is the the transmission line that I'm going to talk about. Uh it's kind of why we're here. So, just a few design considerations. You know that we are a public utility. Safety for the public and our crews number one to us. Um that's one of the very first things we look at. Um you know, because of the proximity to the airport. That was something else we wanted to look closely at with height structure um and just the number of structures involved. So, we went, we've talked to the city, uh, we've talked to, uh, the airport, we've talked to the FAA and the Cascade Business Park, uh, multiple meetings throughout the last couple years trying to kind of come up with a a good route. Uh, we've looked at how to go through SEPHA, uh, cultural resource assessment. We did an FAA obstruction review. We did FAA environmental and land use review. Um, and we even did an open house for the public. Uh, we held that at the Arlington airport. I think we had about 25 people show up. Um, a lot of them were pilots. Uh, and we sat down and we listened to their concerns. Um, a few different things came out of it that we'll talk about here in a second. Um, but yeah, it was a pretty good meeting. Um, I think there were probably

I don't know quite a few that came up afterwards and thanked us for that the opportunity to be able to to kind of express some of their concerns. That was last year already. Um, so, okay, I do want to say, is there a laser on this thing? Oh, perfect. So, there were five different route routes that we looked at originally. Um, when we're looking at at route studies, kind of there's a few things that go into it, including feasibility, cost, timeline. Um, so here you can see the five different routes that we looked at. Uh, this was the original one that we wanted, but we ran into both. There's a Burlington Northern crossing, which I'm sure you've had to work with Burlington Northern. They are not the easiest to work with. Uh we do have an existing crossing, but this would be a new crossing. Their standards have changed. Now there are rental agreements in place. Um so we tried to avoid that. They're also almost impossible to get on the phone um a lot of the time. There's also a customer up here that informed us that he would not give an easement no matter what we did. So we looked elsewhere. Um then we started looking along here. Is this 67th I believe? Um but we didn't have clearance there. There would have been I think three or four buildings we would have had to demo which we didn't want to do. Um both for cost and just because it's someone's business, someone's livelihoods. That wasn't really an option if we could help it. So then we looked at 63rd and that was kind of similar where we ran into clearance issues. Um, we right in here is a section where we would kind of be pinned between the mobile home park and I'm not sure what that business is right there.

Yes. And uh and so we were trying to go on either side. We didn't have the clearance that we needed without having to either demo or go over the top. And we're not going to put high voltage lines over the top of an occupied building. That's also a bad idea. So, um, that kind of left these two here. We can come down um 59th and over or down 63rd over 188th. This is what we brought to the airport originally in the city and said this is kind of what we're looking at. What do you think? Um and that's where we landed on trying to do the fewest amount of structures in front of the airport. And so we cut over at 188 and then up um 63rd. So did that make sense? Hopefully. So, here's a little more of a clearcut version of the selected alignment. Um, this along here, all of the structures are about 20 feet off of the edge of the pavement. Um, from that meeting that I mentioned at the airport with the the public, one of the things that some of the pilots requested were um lights on top of some of the structures. Um, they're not required by the FAA, but just to be a good neighbor, that was something that we're like, absolutely, let's go ahead and do that for you. Um, we also offered marker balls, but that was they didn't feel like they needed them, so those won't be going up. So, here's kind of a visual of what it will look like. You can see existing right now. You've got the trees. Um, we took a laser out there. They're almost all about the same height, about 100 feet plus or minus a few feet. Um, it's kind of hard to reach the very top where it's spinly, so maybe 105 ft. Uh, the current distribution poles out there are about 50 feet tall. Um, extra set a little bit. So, they might go like 45. So, what we plan to do is we're going to cut out these trees here. Um, cut them all down. Um, my understanding is that they already pose a problem for the airport and they're pretty happy to get

rid of them. Uh, but then we're going to put up the the 70 to 80 foot transmission and distribution combined. So, take the existing line and then just go a little bit taller. Um, these be mostly ductal iron poles. Those are the brown metal poles. They're about the same size as a wood. You normally can't tell the difference. And then the corner poles will be steel where you have to make the turn. It was either that or very long guys that reached out with a big yellow thing and frankly that just looks ugly and people trip on them. So that's kind of what it'll look like. You can see the the wires along there that um from our modeling software. Um so hopefully you can see that okay on that light. And then in addition to that, the path that runs along there, I've heard it called a couple of different things. Um, maintenance path, airport path, I don't know what the official name is. Um, but we are are contracting with tool design, who is someone with the city's used before. Um, these are not actual renderings of what the path will look like. This is what they did for Monroe in a kind of a similar situation. They don't have a rendering for us yet, but we plan to take what's there. We know we're have to close it temporarily, and we might kind of disrupt some of the the asphalt and the concrete. So, anything that we disrupt, we we will come back and repair better than what's there currently. We want to make it really nice. Um, we've talked about different trees that we can put in that won't interfere with the lines. Um, things that'll stay a little bit shorter and then have a new clear paved pathway. So, that's all I've got for you. I had to run through it fast.

So, are we allowed questions? I don't know how this works. Sorry. Happy to take questions if we can. Does anybody have any questions? Tim? Yeah. The the question I had was uh the submitting of the 7460-1. You worked with the airport on on that narrative that was sent to FAA for the OE the obstruction. The FAA has a form on their website to fill out for each individual poll and that was sent to the FAA.

So one for each individual poll. Yes. that was sent out and those polls each one of those actually not only the edge issue but also discussion of the turn the round flight patterns that p uh that planes or gliders would be taking dur in that area. So I believe that section of the FAA review is only for heights and then they reviewed it separately for the rest of it. That's my understanding. That is also we are not FAA experts by any means. We submitted the required forms, had them review it, and then they came back with no adverse effect. Okay, Rob, did you have a question?

Probably a dumb question, but I'm going to ask it. Um, how come it can't be buried? That's my question. Dumb question. It's not a dumb question. It's one we get a lot. So, this is 115 KV. Um, we don't typically bury Actually, we have one tiny little like 300 foot section that we bury. Um, and that's somewhere down south of Everett that someone else paid for, frankly. Uh, burying transmission is very, very expensive. Uh, it causes a whole host of issues. Nobody actually really likes buried transmission. Um, it's about it ranges, but it can be anywhere from 10 to 100 times more than going overhead. So, we tend to not do it. Distribution we do.

Distribution we do. Absolutely. Okay. Any others? Heather. So, um, the current poles you said are 50 feet. Is that 50 from the ground up or is that the total height of the pole? It varies a little bit. Um, I think there are some 55s. So, if you're looking at those, they're buried. We say 10% plus two. So, if it's a 55, it would be 7 and a half. But it's from the ground up, right? So, it would be that would be the whole length of the pole. Okay? So, above ground, you're looking at 43ish usually. So, even though these new ones um are about 70 to 80 feet, they won't be that tall from the ground up. They'll also be buried a little further down as well.

Uh again, that varies depending on the poll, but I believe that's about 70 above grade to 80 above grade. Okay, thank you. Y questions. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Okay, Marty.

Okay. Um so the this this uh item agenda is easement for the PUD transmission line compensation proposal and easement approval. Uh just a basic description PUD is proposing a transmission and distribution line that will require approximately 30 uh 27 237 633 square ft of easement area belonging to the airport. Um FAA grant assurances require any easement to be compensated at current market value. Uh locations are on 59th Street to the east of the airport on the west side of the street. The FAA has conducted obstruction surveys of the locations and deemed a determination of no significance. Uh the plan will include tree removal and compensations considered at current market value as well. You can see the attachment. Um the compensation amount is $1,425,798 and it to be additional uh timber value compensation is $7,920. I can answer any questions you might have.

Any questions, Tim? Yes. So again, the fair market value, I I I'm okay with with with that piece. I'm still just concerned about the safety risks that this could pose. again understanding with all the the the pieces and I think I just want to make sure we understand that you know it's it's safety over money

when it comes to when it comes to making decisions like this. So I I think that's my biggest concern is from your perspective. Marty, does placing these transmission/distribution lines in this area would that cause further issues of safety for our air our airport?

Yeah. Now the the you know the position of the airport is in general we don't like poles around airports, but the reality is there's already poles there with with power lines. We have not had an accident in that area for as long as I'm aware of. Um the other aspect that we're looking at is when you go to the FAA and and have a 7 7460 um obstruction survey done, they they can't they take into account distance, height of the obstruction, the area of the obstruction and how it might affect other aspects, operating aspects of the of the airfield. So there are you know there are glider operations that that operate predominantly on that side of the airport. The rest of the the pattern work is on the other side of the airport on the west side most primarily. You'll have planes occasionally crossing over. So when they look at those things they they take all that into account and I'm more I'm inclined to go along with what the FAA says. They won't allow it if they felt it was it was a it was a danger. Um and again we we we were bound by uh FA grant asurances and that some of those things are are safety but most importantly is that we're getting highest best use of anything that we're selling and that's what this is about is that the easements the obstruction survey has already been completed the 7460 indicates that there's no uh significance that's what they've come up with. Michelle.

Um, so Marty, thank you for your time the other day. Um, I know that you gave several tours um to us because we really um paid attention and listened um when we had speakers um last week and we were concerned. I was concerned. I'll leave it at me. I was concerned and so wanted to come out and um look at the project. Um actually like there's already polls there and um Right. Right. So um you're not you're condensing. You're not I mean the polls are already there.

Right. Right. And and again, you know, we're we're polls aren't a great thing around airports. However, we're realists and there's polls there. Um the project will be reducing the the overall obstruction because there's currently there's poles there, but there's trees that are quite a bit higher. Yeah.

Uh and the FAA hasn't asked us specifically to take those trees down yet because they hadn't grown into the the the slope, the 7 to1 slope on that side of things. They're approaching that and I think in some cases they could be penetrating that couple trees, but the end result is we have to take those trees down at some point. this uh accomplishes that and reduces the overall um obstruction that we currently have. Does that make sense? Yeah, because I saw it. So now it all makes sense. Right.

Right. So nothing actually interferes the new project. Nothing actually interferes with any planes coming in or uh maybe potentially gliders depending if they had to take another path for some reason. Um but um as far as um aircraft planes um there's nothing that's going to be blocking the plane from coming in or anything like that. Well, the current situation if they cleared the poles, it more than likely would hit trees. So if we reduce that down to where the trees are lower than the poles, then the poles would be the obstruction point. But again, that it's the height of those poles doesn't interfere with with a typical

slope 71 71 slope that that the FAA approves or disapproves based on the amount of traffic and where it is. Thank you. Yeah. And thank you for your time. Yeah, you bet. Any other Heather? Um I just wanted to say first off, thank you for taking us um on the tour because all of us have different schedules and you accommodated so that was greatly appreciated. Um, so my first question is the hangers that are close to the current polls. How tall are those hangers?

Uh, probably I'm not sure exactly. Uh, but I would say they're between 27 and 36 feet. We also have our our beacon is there which comes rises up over that and that's that's about that's about a 65 foot 70 foot beacon. Okay. because I know that when you took us on the tour from the couple points that you showed us, it did look like the hangers were taller than the poles. Definitely the trees are very tall. And then um my other question is, has there been any recorded incidents of anybody crashing in that area specifically? Not that I'm aware of. Thank you.

Any Tim? And uh Marty, one more question. looking at where the stakes were because I I'm assuming the white stakes that I see on the outsiders like where they're looking at possibly putting those poles or at least the direction. Are any of the buildings in danger of being, you know, having to be removed because of going, you know, the transmission lines going over them because I think I heard them say,

"Yeah." No, no, not that I'm aware of. I I'm not sure exactly where the where they are with in relationship to the stakes that are out there, but they're, you know, they're inside the u the rideway. That's the whole point of the easement. But, um, we haven't been notified of any, you know, encroachment with with and there's a taxi there's taxi lanes between those from there's the the pole, the fence line, taxi lane buildings on on that whole side of the airport. Yeah. Thanks. No, I was just looking at one of the buildings that's really close to like 188th. That's that's pretty close to the the trail already. And just seeing that the it looks like the state bisects that. Is that that older building that kind of runs parallel to it?

I think the helping hands building or or whatnot. Yeah. Wondering if that MATA is operating that building. That was one of the buildings that might be in the way. And again, having heard PUD talk about they don't like their transmission lines to go over structures. No, that hasn't come up. Great. Lisha, my question is is um by putting these there, we're not jeopardizing any future plans that we have for the airport. Correct. Any growth that could be

No. No. That that's why we had a field review of the appraisal was to to determine if that was going to be an issue. Um our master plan has t you know, we're doing the master plan now and I u I brought that to the attention of the engineering firm and asked that question. and they said no, not not currently. It wouldn't be a wouldn't be an issue. They're overhead. So, thank you. Mhm. Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Not seeing. Thank you, Marty. Okay. We'll move on to our next item, the ordinance amending Arlington Municipal Code Chapter 20.04. Emaricia, welcome.

Thank you. Uh, good evening, Mayor Vany and members of council. Uh tonight I'm going to start off with presenting the AMC 20.04 general provisions code amendment. Um the this amendment was proposed uh for regulating subdivisions, updating the list of supplemental documents um and creating a new section regarding historical designations. So for new language, we put in additional information for the purpose and intent around um administrative lot splits which are a regulation that um the state is putting on. So just to kind of prepare ourselves and make sure that we are properly protected as that comes through. Um and then as well as historic landmark designations. This was just some language from the RCW stating that um they have to follow the state regulations and that it will be regulated by the state, not by us. Uh for those designations, we also put um some additional supporting documents in there for the Cascade Industrial Center Planned Action. Um there's also now additional sub areas. So we removed Cascade Industrial specifically and just made those more broad statements. And that is all I have for that.

Any questions, Tim? Want to give you a bad time, Emry? No, I I appreciate I appreciate the work that you guys are putting in this to make sure that our codes are staying up to date with the RCW. So, again, great work. Thank you. Great work for the planning commission. Thank you,

Nathan. Also from being on the planning commission before, this is a a whole lot easier language to read instead of having language that me personally being on planning commission go that is not layman's terms because there's so many growth and development things happening right now um that I think our community gets lost in a lot of translation. Um, so it was m very much uh appreciated to see all of the layman's terms especially with sub area plans making everything like tidy and and uh all complimentary of each other. So thank you. Thank you. Any other questions?

None seen. Thank you. We'll move on to your next one. Uh the ordinance amending Arlington Municipal Code Chapter 20.20.

Thank you, Mayor Vanny. So this next section um is primarily regarding um administrative interpretations. We did add some clarifications for split zoning within a lot. We also removed um references to the design review board now that uh title 2 has been changed for that. Um but the primary focus was the administrative interpretations which the reason for that is if we have some sort of ambiguous code um that it allows the community and economic development director to make an interpretation saying this is what that intent of that code is or this is what's missing from that code. Um then that is posted online for the public to see. It also provides a um starting list for our next year's docket. So that administrative interpretation does not become code, but it does kind of provide a placeholder until we're able to get that code in place. Uh so it just kind of fills in those gaps in the code that we may have between years. Um, and then we did remove some, uh, like I said, uh, sorry, I lost my place there. We did not remove, um, anything here. We, um, added language to clarify the appeals process because we were missing some of it. Um, and then we provided more concise language, um, which is the intent of a lot of the code amendments we're doing this year is to clarify some language as well. And that is all.

Thank you. Any questions? None seen. Okay, we'll move on to your next one. Ordinance amending Arlington Municipal Code Chapter 20.46.

Thank you, Maya. Uh, Mayor Banny. All right. So with the um design code chapter 2046 um we wanted to go through and or change uh the language regarding design review board um update supplemental documents remove some language that was duplicated uh because of some of those supplemental documents. So with that, uh, the primary parts to look at are it looks like there's a lot of removed language for section 2 and three because we did remove those. However, it's not that that language doesn't exist anymore. They have their own documents. So the old town business district and residential have their own standards. All of that language that was removed is already existing in there. So it's just simplifying this document so people only have one place to look rather than two. Uh same thing with some of the mixed use um and commercial corridor, we now have a separate section for that commercial corridor and that mixed use language. So instead of having it in two places, condense it into one. Um just make it easier for people to understand what's going on and where things are at. Um we did remove all of the design review board because it is no longer um the process and made everything administrative. So there was a lot of language clean up with that as well. Thank you. Any questions, Nathan?

So, just for community sake, um this is the design review requirements were from the state legislators, correct? That's why there's no design review board anymore. So, we we removed the design review board with the title two changes. Um I was not the state is moving in that way. Yes. Um, but as far as this actual code, it was because we've removed it from our design review or from our title 2. So, it's no longer established in our for the city of Arlington. Okay. Thank you. Y,

any other questions? Seen, thank you. Okay, we'll move on to our next item. Change order number one for Jensen Park project. Jim Kelly. Thank you very much, Mayor Vanny and council members. This item coming before you is a change order uh requested change order for the Jensen Park improvements in the amount of $35,240.33. There are three items that were included on that. One of them was for um some internal plumbing that was needed for the new bathroom that was installed. Uh another one was for miscellaneous site improvement uh site changes. And then the third one was for pedestrian pathway and asphalt removal for ADA compliance. Um are there any questions about these change orders?

Any questions? Tim?

Yeah, Jim. Just looking over this and I notice you have the the change order proposals and I noticed that each one of those has your signatures approving one on COP1 on 123, COP2 on 1215 and then COP3 uh this year on January 15th. So, what are we actually approving here? If you're able to approve those change proposals in the individuals and now you're asking for the change order, number one, that's my first part of the question. And two, is this money coming out of the contingency that goes with the project or is this also coming out of one of our our emergency funds piece?

That that's two great questions. the uh the the what I'm coming for right now is a change order to a change to the budget to the budget amount for this project to ask for another $35,000 be put on the budget. Um and the amount budgeted for this project was $560,000. And if you take a look at our change order, um this project will be coming in at 231417. There's still one other change order pending. They're putting uh power service over to the bathroom that was not never included on the drawings. Okay. So, your approval on the uh change order proposals doesn't obligate the funds to those projects. No.

Okay. That's the piece I was trying to understand is your it authorizes them to do the work. However, if we don't get a budget amendment, then we'll just we won't be we'll have to cut things off the project like not pave the parking lot or something. But there's sufficient budget in the parking lot. I appreciate that because that's that's what I was trying to understand what it was exactly we were approving if you're if you had the ability to approve the funding already. So this is it's set up that way so that we can keep the projects going because if you can imagine every change order proposal that came forward if we had to say hold on it'll only take us two weeks to get approval on that and the contractor pulls off the job.

I agree. I agree. No, I just wanted to make sure I just want to make sure what I'm understanding what it is that we're actually approving. So, so again, it looks like we're still under budget so far other than waiting for change order, too. A and you know, I I come here a lot and a lot of times I always come here for a change order. So, um I I will be coming with another change order for the elector. So, it will be in the in the 101,000 range. So, any other questions? and see. Thank you, Jim. Okay. Thank you. Paul, do you have anything to report tonight? Uh, nothing else this evening.

Okay. I have nothing. Does any of the council have any reports or comments, Licia? Yeah. Um, so on Friday, I was able to go on a ride along with Officer Kid Zimmerman. And um, I am happy to say it was very boring. That was absolutely wonderful for city of Arlington. So, that was a good thing. But our our she is so intelligent and she was such an incredible um officer to ride along with and I've got a lot of great stories that I'm glad things that her and I were able to talk about and she could show me and it was well worth the time and I recommend anyone doing it. It was it was wonderful. So I just want to say thank you.

Good. Thank you Michelle. Oh Nathan.

Um my uh week this week I got to uh do a lot of things at the airport. I was at the airport Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. Wednesday, we took a tour, Michelle and Tim and I, and and the braved all the worms on the tarmac and the runways. Um, lots of uh fun, interesting ideas for design for the future of our airport, which was great to hear and see and to visually see uh for those pilots that came to visit uh on Monday, last week. So, we got to see all the visuals for the projects. And so, I had a great time with Marty and Monroe and having a good connection with them that I've haven't been able to talk to for a while. And then I did airport commission interviews for two days and uh got to meet some great candidates. And then I also um just kind of enjoyed the the week around town with our winter um I think it was our winter pop-up market at the innovation center and that was fun to see all the different u pop-up shops that usually you don't see very often because they're out of their making their things out of their own homes. So, it was a great opportunity and space for them to come in, get their voices heard and their uh product and merchandise sold. So, that's pretty much been my my week around town. So,

any other comments or reports? Okay. Okay. None seen at this time. Then, I'd like to open it up for public comment for members of the public who wish to speak to the council. Um, please limit your remarks to three minutes. State your name and address. and I'll go off of those that have signed up first on our list. Um, looks like first one is Kevin Duncan. Okay. Uh, next one, Neil.

Sure. And if you got handouts you want to pass around.

Okay. My name is Neil Carman and I've been in aviation all my life. So I am very interested in uh safety for these power lines. Uh tonight I want to educate you on the traffic patterns that are used in in your area. The first uh pattern that is being used is the glider pattern. And you're familiar with the airplane pattern, but the glider pattern is on the east side of the airport and it is at 700 ft or lower depending because they're gliding. The also the helicopter pattern is supposed to be contrary to the airplane pattern. So, it is also on the east side of the airport and it is supposed to be 500 ft above the ground to keep it away from other traffic. If airplanes are shooting in instrument approach and they miss on the approach because the weather is bad, the pattern goes to the right because the the pilot sits on the left side of the airplane. So the missed approach is going to go right over those power lines. And if airplanes make uh a pattern and there's somebody on the runway and they have to go around, they alter their course to the right, which is the the east of the airport. So my interest is is that it is not safe to have power lines. Airplane uh trees you can see the trees should be removed. power

lines. You can't I also flew the Columbia River many, many, many times on a bird survey when I had a flying service. And you can barely see the poles, but you cannot see the power lines. And these are, as far as I'm concerned, a very big hazard to a to anybody that is flying. So, a vote for these power lines is a vote against safety for pilots. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, it looks like our next one, Connor. Thank you everyone. Thank you councel. Uh my name is Connor. I am the FBO manager over at the Arlington airport. Uh we are uh the fix base operator focusing on uh servicing any jets, pilots, anyone who comes into the airport, flies in. Um again I'm here to talk about the power lines. just give my view uh my two cents on it. Um being at the FBO gives me a unique opportunity. I see many different pilots come in from large jets down to little homebuilts, everything in between. Uh so we get a variety of uh I get to talk to different experiences, what they're expecting, what they see. Um and then now working at such a great airport, the Arlington airport, it has a lot of potential to grow. Um we've seen that in the master plan as that's continued being developed. Um so my concern uh besides safety of course that's number one uh with all pilots. I'm a pilot myself. Um but I also want to make sure we protect airports. Uh no one's

building airports really anymore. They're going away unfortunately. Um and this is such a great airport. I want to make sure that maintains that and continues to grow. Um it I believe is a great source of revenue for the city. Not everything's about money, but it's important to look at. Um, and with what the future plans hold for this airport, um, I think there could be a lot more financial benefit both to the community, uh, airport tenants, all that good stuff. Um, I'm not against growth by any means, but I want to make sure it's done correctly and safely. Um, growth in this community means hopefully potential more pilots, right? They'll come to RFBO, learn to fly, all that good stuff. Um, but if safety is a risk, uh, that's going to discourage people from showing up from flying. Um, like Neil was saying, power lines, you can't see them. Poles, you can't really see. Um, and they're deadly. You hit them, it's like a knife in the air. You you fly right through them, you're going to get tangled up, or worst case, your plane gets sliced up and you're no longer around. Um, I've heard comments about the FAA. They do their best, but the FA is not 100% right all the time. They do their best to give guidance, but um, they also leave a lot of space there for us to make our own interpretations and best judgment. Um, and I also want to say that I think the master plan, if I understand correctly, part of it would include removal of those streets and also potentially burying those power lines or removing them. So, there could be a potential for no obstructions along 15th. I don't know if that's solid in the plan, but just if there's potential for no obstructions, I mean, best case scenario, but um, anyways, again, that's further down the road, but that's all I got. So, thank you. Thank

you. Okay, at this time, do we have anybody else in the Okay, come on up. Thank you, Mayor. Um, my name is Dan Tarvich. I spoke last Monday. Um, I had a nice discussion with uh an NTSB gentleman uh just the other day and power line incidents and aircraft happen quite a bit. Uh, one issue that nobody has brought up yet is leaving runway 11 one. And if you have a engine out as you're departing, you could end up having those power lines straight in your face. They use alum they use electricity to melt aluminum. And 99.99% of these airplanes are made of aluminum. And I think these power lines are extremely dangerous and should something like that happen, the lawsuits going to PUB into the city would be horrendous. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have anybody else that would like to speak? Okay.

Okay. None seen. Okay, then we'll move on. Oh, what's that?

Oh, Kevin, did you Oh, okay. I'm Kevin Duncan. I've been around the airport for a long time and I appreciate the airport and the city tremendously. I hate always been in opposition to Spence the the I feel my mother the PUD where I spent a tremendous amount of my time and they gave me the opportunity to grow. But I can't support this power line. It's 80 to 85 feet tall. The FAA does not look at the wires that interconnect from pole to pole. It's published that they don't. It's It's a shame, but they don't. There is alternate routes that are um should be looked at. I don't believe buying giving a rightaway or an easement or the property to the PUD is falls within the standards of the FAA. That's not an aeronautical use. And I believe it does violate the grant as assurances um the original uh covenant deed that the city received for the airport from the US government and the airport operations manual. It would be no different than Peter Paul coming up and asking to buy a big chunk of the airport. It's not for airport nautical use. You can't do that. The FAA tries their best to govern. You can't even park a vehicle in your hanger unless you take your airplane out. I mean, that's what it gets down to. So, I'm opposed to this. I hope the council when it takes time to vote is looking at that. You're adding an incredible risk to pilots and I've flown many times in IMC conditions trying to come down there

and Neil was right. You you veer off to the right. You don't need another structure or wires that are going to impede you. you're hard having a hard enough time flying the airplane and to put these wires in the pole. The poles aren't the issue, it's the wires. Um, and most of us have wanted to get rid of those trees for years. We're on the record for it. They grow four to six feet a year. 20 years ago when I learned to fly, they weren't substantially shorter. So, that's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Hey, no one else at this time. Okay, I think we'll then move on to our consent agenda.

Um, I just I was looking at two, three, and four. Leave the other two. You got a lot more to put next week. I got more. I was I was going to say I'm good with two, three, four, and five, but if somebody's not good with five, Jim, I'm good with five. Put five. Go ahead. Go ahead. Okay, we'll put five on there. Okay. Okay. You give Jim and I. Okay, I think that's all we've got tonight. Are we ready for adjournment? Move to adjourn. Second. Discussion. All those in favor?

I. Any oppose? We're journ Thank you.