02/07/1995 City CouncilApproved City Council Minutes
2121195
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7,1995
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Laura Hall in the Library Plaza
Room, 650 Main Street. The meeting was preceded by the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Laura Hall, Mayor
Tom Petruzzi, Council President
Barbara Fahey, Councilmember
William J. Kasper, Councilmember
Michael Hall, Councilmember
Dave Earling, Councilmember
John Nordquist, Councilmember
Roger L. Myers, Councilmember
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
STAFF PRESENT
Tom Miller, Police Chief
Tim Whitman, Fire Captain
Noel Miller, Superintendent of Public Works
Jim Walker, Acting City Engineer
Steve Bullock, Asst. Planner
Don Feine, Hydraulics Engineer
Chuck Day, Accounting Manager
Christine Weed, Arts Coordinator
Michael Blackburn, DARE Officer
Debbie Dawson, Ord. Enforcement Officer
Rhonda March, City Clerk
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Christine Laws, Recorder
Council President Tom Petruzzi requested changing the amount of time allocated to Item 15 to 20
minutes for the executive session on a real estate matter in order to include two personnel matters.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT TOM PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BARBARA FAHEY, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Bill Kasper pulled Items G and N.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT TOM PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHN
NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED.
The agenda items passed are as follows:
(A) ROLL CALL
(B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 24,1995
(C) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 31,1995
(D) APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 28,1995
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 1
(E) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #950437 THRU #950646 FOR WEEK OF
JANUARY 30, 1995; AND PAYROLL WARRANTS #950274 THRU #950567 FOR THE
PERIOD OF JANUARY 16 THRU JANUARY 30,1995
(I) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM DAVID & MICHELLE
HOPEWELL ($575.00)
• ` (I) AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE ANDERSON PALLET RACKS AND CANTILEVER
1 RACKS FROM EASYUP SHELVING STORAGE SYSTEMS ($6,650.64)
Q (1) AUTHORIZATION TO SURPLUS BALLISTIC VESTS AND DONATE TO U.SJU.K. VEST
PROGRAM
(J) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT
WITH MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE
V" (K) REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 1994 STREET OVERLAY
PROGRAM AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
(L) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT
L& PLANT DECHLORINATION PROJECT
AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN CONTRACT WITH CENTER FOR
� f/ BATTERED WOMEN FOR A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ADVOCATE
Councilmember Kasper pulled Item G because a question had been raised regarding the culdesac which has been
brought to the attention of Staff and the City Attorney. He feels that needs to be resolved before passage of this
• item. He explained that the culdesac is part of the project and that the street vacation only goes to the 45' (15'
• coming off the property). He stated his belief that the City needs the balance of that culdesac.
Mayor Hall indicated there had been some discussion on that regarding the motion on the refinement.
City Attorney Scott Snyder suggested a motion be made to table to a future date so that Staff could respond in
writing to the questions Mr. Kasper raised. He indicated that what Mr. Kasper knows is not on the record on
this, and the record cannot be supplemented without providing notice to the public and the applicant. If the matter
were tabled to a future date, the hearing could be re -noticed so that everyone can be present and have an
opportunity to respond.
Councilmember Mike Hall stated he doesn't want to hold up the project any longer than necessary. He reiterated
his concern over Council continuing a hearing without any request from either party but on its own. He does not
feel Council is in a position to be making any motions as the trier -of --fact. If the appellants or the applicant have a
problem, then there is a process to go through. He doesn't believe the project should be further delayed because
of Council action.
City Attorney Snyder indicated he does not disagree with Councilmember Hall. He repeated that the only two
choices were to pass it or continue it so that something can get to Council in appropriate form. He agreed with
Mr. Hall that there is no way to discuss it at this time.
Councihnember Hall said that without a motion for reconsideration from the Council, he doesn't think there is a
choice other than to pass the item because Council is then, as a trier -of -fact, trying to go back and redo something
it has already done without any of the appellants or applicants making any motions to that effect.
Councilmember Kasper indicated it was not his intention to delay the project. He has talked to the City Attorney,
Staff, and the City Engineer about it being missing. He questioned how it could be picked up after the fact. He
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 2
stated further that he had voted in the negative on the project not because he is against the project, but because it
is incomplete. He questioned how to get that land.
Councilmember Hall indicated that it was not Council's problem to try to fix something at this point. Council has
made a decision based on the facts before it. If any of those facts is incorrect, one of the parties has to come back
to Council and say the facts are incorrect. As it was not Council who made a mistake, it is not up to Council to
attempt to correct something.
Council President Tom Petruzzi agrees with Councilmember Hall that as the trier -of -fact, Council cannot open
the matter again at this point. He stated he also voted in the negative on one of the motions; there were two. One
of the motions was with regard to the project PRD, and the other dealt with the reduction of size of the right-of-
way. Council President Petruzzi indicated he would vote against the motion again tonight. He expressed his
belief that this is an excellent project that is very good for the community. He did not agree with the reduction in
size of the street. He thinks that will cause traffic problems.
COUNCILMEMBER MICHAEL HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BILL
KASPER, TO APPROVE ITEM G. COUNCILMEMBER ROGER MYERS ABSTAINED AS HE
WAS NOT PRESENT AT THE HEARING. COUNCIL ROLL CALL SHOWED: EARLING, YES;
FAHEY, YES; HALL, YES; KASPER, NO; NORDQUIST, YES; PETRUZZI, NO. MOTION
CARRIED. The agenda items passed is as follows:
(G) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A 6-UNIT DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND AMENDMENT OF THE
A OFFICIAL STREET MAP FOR PUGET WAY, EAST OF 9TH AVE. N.
Ir (APPLICANT: EDMONDS BUILDING COMPANY / FILE NOS. PRD-94-16 &
ST-94-102) (from hearing of January 17,1995)
Councilmember Kasper pulled Item N because he is against the item.
COUNCILMEMBER DAVE EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT TOM
PETRUZZI, FOR PASSAGE OF ITEM N. COUNCILMEMBER BILL KASPER VOTED NO.
COUNCILMEMBER ROGER MYERS ABSTAINED AS HE WAS NOT ON THE COUNCIL AT THE
TIME.
City Attorney Scott Snyder indicated since it was not a quasi-judicial matter, Councilmember Myers was free to
vote.
COUNCILMEMBER MYERS VOTED YES. COUNCILMEMBER MICHAEL HALL ABSTAINED.
MOTION CARRIED. The agenda item passed is as follows:
1
N) ORDINANCE 3007 ESTABLISHING THE MAYOR'S SALARY AT $60,000 PER
YEAR
3. AUDIENCE
Syd Locke 110 Pine Street, called the Mayor's and Council's attention to the packet he dropped off on Monday.
He wishes to urge the Council to vote against Item 6 — the rental agreement for the temporary use of the vacated
N1 Public Works building. He said that dating back to May 18, 1992 the Council approved the Park Maintenance
facility be moved to that site as soon as the new Public Works building was completed. He said he had kept in
touch with Arvilla Ohlde and the Architectural Design Board over the years waiting for this to occur. He said
that site was also listed on page 50 of the new Cultural Plan that is coming up tonight. He requested assurance
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL WNITTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 3
by Council that it will live up to its promises to move that facility. It was a promise made to the people of the
south end, and the citizens expect it to happen. In addition to assurance, he requested information as to timing.
Councilmember Kasper indicated his recollection is contrary to that expressed in Mr. Locke's memo. He went on
to state there had been talk about the fire station being there. He suggested the need to go back and look in the
record. Mr. Locke indicated he had the record with him. Councilmember Kasper said Council could not get into
it tonight because it did not have the record of the other side of the issue at the same time.
Mayor Hall indicated Mr. Locke's point is well -taken. As far as the park goes, based on her discussions with Ms.
Ohlde, there is a safety factor. Ms. Ohlde has expressed a willingness to speak on the issue if desired. Mr. Locke
stated that he had last spoken with Ms. Ohlde in September 1994 requesting an update, and to date has not had a
response.
Mr. Locke said this was promised and asked if Council was reneging. Mayor Hall indicated it was not. Mr.
Locke again asked for assurance that if Council is going to study this plan, when will he have his answer as to
where it would be moved.
Councilmember Nordquist responded to Mr. Lockds opening remark regarding voting against Item 6. He
advised Mr. Locke that the duration of that lease was from February 11 to March 18. However, at the Council
retreat in February, there will be a discussion, which he will lead, on the usage of the building being discussed.
Mr. Locke's proposal will be considered. Mr. Locke indicated it was originally Council's proposal; his request is
for Council to see it through. Councilmember Nordquist indicated his belief that this was part of the park
program discussed to improve the park and move that out of there. With the new council members, the retreat is
a good plaice to discuss that subject.
Council President Petruzzi told Mr. Lock that his memo will be in the Council packets for the retreat.
Jim Miller, 19400 - 33rd Avenue West, Suite 200, Lynnwood, proposed shortening the agenda by requesting a
continuance of Item 10. He suggested consideration of the request early in the evening may convenience anyone
present for that item. There has not been much attendance on this hearing previously. The continuance was
requested because his client was out of town. Councilmember Nordquist asked if there was a date requested.
Mr. Miller said they would be available at Council's convenience.
Mayor Hall requested Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor, to respond. Mr. Wilson stated that Staff would
like to have an opportunity to discuss the request for continuation because of the existence of some issues related
to the project that are unresolved. He requested an opportunity to comment on the continuation.
Mayor Hall determined the existence of at least one person in the audience present for Item 10.
Councilmember Hall asked, for the record, who Mr. Miller's client is. He also expressed his desire to hear Staffs
reaction to this. Mr. Miller said that Clay Enterprises is the owner of the property, and Diana Clay is the
applicant/appellant. Councilmember Hall asked if there was anyone present interested in talking about the
continuance.
Mayor Hall asked Staff if it could give Council some reason why this should not be continued. Jeff Wilson said
the issue before Staff is that this particular site has been one that has been on a code enforcement issue for the
City related to the use of a gravel parking lot that has been ongoing for a number of years. Staff has been
working on this for over a year. If the City is continues the use with the issues unresolved according to the City's
standards, he views it as benefitting the applicant/appellant because they can continue to use an unimproved lot
not meeting City standards. He further expressed concern over the delay period. Mr. Wilson suggested Staff
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 4
would have no problem with a continuation, with the placing of a moratorium on the use of the lot until the appeal
was finished. The continued delays and the continued use of the property does present a problem.
Mayor Hall cited two choices: set a date "quite soon certain" or put a moratorium on the use of the property.
Council President Petruzzi confirmed that Mr. Wilson was saying that if Council does grant an extension on the
hearing, since this has been under action by the City, that Mr. Wilson was requesting a moratorium on it. He
indicated his agreement with Mr. Wilson. Addressing Mr. Miller, Council President Petruzzi pointed out that at
the last hearing he had worked diligently to have the owner have the continued use of the property, but said there
was a point at which patience was being stretched.
Mr. Miller remarked that maybe the hearing should be held. He advised Council that the owner is in the process
of seeking another solution on an adjoining site that the parking lot serves. There is a solution actively being
pursued that would allow them to eliminate the use of this parking lot all together, maybe well in advance of the
time limit established by the Council. The applicant is looking for a permanent solution, so there is reluctance to
spend many thousands of dollars on a very short term, temporary solution. That is the issue Council will be
facing when it gets into the hearing on appeal. That works a hardship on the user of the property who is using
this temporary parking lot. The objective is to get the new parking lot built and abandon this one.
Mayor Hall asked why Council had not been notified prior to tonight. She reminded Mr. Miller there were
notices that had to be posted to notify the public. Mr. Miller said they had no idea this had been scheduled for
tonight. When they got the news, he was available, but his client was not. Mayor Hall said hearings are not
automatically scheduled without having confirmation. Mr. Miller said there had been no discussion with
Lovell-Sauerland regarding the scheduling of this meeting; they received the public notice like everyone else.
Mayor Hall asked City Clerk Rhonda March to respond. Ms. March reported that the hearing was scheduled by
the Planning Division, and she does not have personal contact with the applicant or appellant when they are
scheduled. She could not speak for Planning as to whether there had been discussion concerning compatibility of
schedules.
Jeff Wilson interjected that this matter had been on the Extended Agenda since Council was in the middle of
budget sessions in November and December. He is quite certain they made the applicant aware of the fact that
the hearing was put on hold until that process was completed. Given the lengthy agendas during the first of the
year, this date was determined some time ago.
Council President Petruzzi recommended that Council hold the hearing this evening. Councilmember Barbara
Fahey agreed. Since there was not a consensus,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT TOM PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BARBARA FAHEY, TO HOLD THE HEARING THIS EVENING.
Councilmember Michael Hall asked if there was a contention or allegation that there was not notice of the hearing
as it would sway his vote. It was suggested that case, and staffs comments could be made at that time.
MOTION CARRIED.
Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, asked that before Council makes another increase in funds the
Mayor check with the city or cities whose numbers are being compared to Edmonds' on hours worked. He said
n
the Mayor of Mountlake Terrace was not a full week salaried person. He further stated there were other positions
that were not full week jobs.
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 5
Council President Petruzzi asked for clarification of what was being referenced by the term 'increasing funds".
Mr. Rutledge explained that 4% raises had been given to non -union workers, and the Mayor's salary was
increased tonight. All of these wages were being compared with other cities around the area. He recommended
that before this is done again, to check with those people on the amount of hours they work. Mr. Rutledge said he
was not disagreeing with the increases.
Mr. Rutledge stated he had put in proposals to the Lake Ballinger area, Kodiak, Japan, and to the Mayor's Office.
Mr. Rutledge further discussed the placing of an item into the newspaper with regard to candidates for a council
position. He suggested he, or someone else, would get the information and submit it to the newspaper. The City
employees are so busy they don`t have time to do this. He suggested maybe another person was needed in the
City to do this. When Council and Mayor positions come up, there should be an article about all of the
n candidates.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, confirmed with City Attorney Snyder if the findings, as printed, were
approved. He went on to comment about the amount of traffic since the ferry quit running. He believes the
subject of traffic counts has not been dealt with appropriately. He understood that the Mayor, the Council, and
Planning agreed that taking traffic counts was a good idea. He.expressed his hope this would be done while the
ferry is not running.
L, Mr. Hertrich discussed the fact that even though he had been on the Council when the property was purchased for
��.✓ the new Public Works building, he had to read in the paper there had been an open house. He thought invitations
would have been appropriate for those individuals who participated in the project. Mayor Hall apologized to Mr.
Hertrich. She did not know why he had not received an invitation since they were sent to all former City Council
Q1 persons, former City Clerks, and some retirees.
4. RECOGNITION OF POLICE OFFICER AND POLICE SUPPORT EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR
Police Chief Tom Miller said that last year a new tradition was started in the Department when it recognized the
Officer of the Year by awarding them a gold badge that says "Officer of the Year". That was done with Mike
Richardson who was Officer of the Year for 1993. This year the tradition is continuing. It has been expanded to
include Police Support Employee of the Year because the Department has one-third of its employees as support
staffing and non -sworn roles. Chief Miller introduced Animal Control Officer Debbie Dawson and DARE
Officer Mike Blackburn.
DARE Officer Mike Blackburn was recognized because he does such a tremendous job with the DARE Program
itself. This is his third year, and he has taken the DARE Officer position to a new level of professionalism. The
I f'�kids who have taken the program love him. You will often see Officer Blackburn at the schools playing
basketball with the kids, running on the playground, or enjoying a lunch with them. They have come to know him
( as one of their best friends. At DARE graduations, kids are anxious to have their f unily's picture taken with
v Officer Blackburn.
Chief Miller then recognized Debbie Dawson as the 1994 Support Employee of the Year. Debbie has been with
the Department for many years as an Ordinance Enforcement Officer. Most recently, her classification has been
revised to take on two jobs: parking enforcement and animal control ordinance officer. During the last year,
Officer Dawson has revamped the dog licensing program so it is more effective as well as being cost-effective. It
has increased the level of compliance for animal licensing. In addition, she has been very involved in the Parking
Ordinance Advisory Committee for the City in revising and developing a new plan for parking in the downtown
�l p area. Officer Dawson is also very active in the association as far as representing her union and being a field
N steward. She does a great job and is a terrific employee. Chief Miller advised that Officer Dawson had started a
program called ACE (Animal Control Education) which is very similar to the DARE Program taught at the third
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL. MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 6
grade level. She takes stuffed animals into the classes, teaches responsibilities of owning and caring for dogs, and
at the end of the three weeks she gives them a certificate of completion and the stuffed animal.
Chief Miller asked Mayor Hall to pin on the gold badges. Debbie Dawson's parents were introduced, as were
Mike Blackburn's wife, parents, and two children.
Mayor Hall recognized that Bill Blackburn, Michael's father, is also a member of the Lynnwood City Council.
5. RECOGNITION OF MR. AND MRS. BAINBRIDGE BY "DARE" OFFICER BLACKBURN
DARE Officer Mike Blackburn said that the success of the DARE Program which consists of a 17 week
a curriculum provided in all of the elementary schools, both public and private, is largely dependent upon the
support of the community. He recognized Mr. and Mrs. Robert Bainbridge who have done an outstanding job of
,n supporting the program. He mentioned that Mr. and Mrs. Bainbridge have made regular contributions to the
program since 1990. Those contributions go toward purchasing the necessary materials, books, and other
classroom items the students need in order to complete the program. Since that time they have contributed
$5,700. He read and presented to them a placque of gratitude from the City of Edmonds Police Department
DARE Program.
6. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN RENTAL AGREEMENT FOR TEMPORARY USE OF
VACATED PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING
�b Councilmember Fahey prefaced the item with a couple of remarks. She explained that it was her request that got
this proposal started. She is familiar with the King'splayers and the wonderful performances they do that are
very family oriented. When she became aware of the fact they were looking for space on a temporary basis to
build sets for their new performance, she thought it would be a perfect utilization of an empty space. Mayor Hall
had concurred with the proposal and set the wheels in motion. She expressed appreciation for the work Staff has
done in a short time to make this happen for this group.
Noel Miller, Superintendent of Public Works, advised Council he was standing in for Community Services
Director Paul Mar. Mr. Miller's part was to show the facility to the Kings Players and review space available.
Public Works has not entirely moved from the site and is still storing some equipment. It is allowing some
flexibility of setting up the storage yard. The King'splayers are happy to rent basically one full truck bay in the
site. Both sides seem to think this will work out fine on a temporary basis.
COUNCILMEMBER BARBARA FAHEY MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAVE
EARLING, TO APPROVE THE RENTING OF THE SPACE IN THE VACATED PUBLIC WORKS
BUILDING TO THE KING'SPLAYERS ASSOCIATION FOR TEMPORARY USAGE AND
AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THIS AGREEMENT. MOTION CARRIED.
7. HEARING ON THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION ON AN APPLICATION BY
BOB KOO FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY'S "OFFICIAL STREET MAP" TO REDUCE
THE REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8104
242ND ST. SW, FROM 60 FEET TO 50 FEET BY ELIMINATING THE REQUIREMENT FOR
DEDICATION OF 10 FEET ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE 242ND ST. SW RIGHT-OF-
fl���, WAY
0` Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor, said the proposal was a request by Bob Koo to amend its Official Street Map.
He utilized an overhead to describe the vicinity and property and identify the locations as they were discussed
(Exhibit 2 of the Agenda Memo). The property adjacent to the right-of-way is shown with diagonal lines through
it. At the northern end of that property on the South side of 242nd Street is an approximately 10' wide strip that
runs the length of the frontage of the applicant's property at 8104 - 242nd Street SW. The City's Official Street
Map shows the planned line or future right of way widths the City will need at some point in the future so that
APPROVED CITY COUNCII, MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 7
when properties are developed the City can look at requiring additional dedication to meet that planned line right-
of-way. In this instance, across the approximately 112' frontage of the applicant's property, the planned line
right-of-way is for 60'. That currently exists to a portion of the property to the East of the applicant's property.
To the West of the applicant's property, it narrows down to a 40' right-of-way. Their request is to amend the
City's Official Street Map reducing that planned line right-of-way from 60' to 50' by removing that future 10'
dedication on the South side of 242nd Street adjacent to the applicant's property or across the applicant's
property frontage.
Engineering reviewed the proposal and prepared a recommendation to support the request. Included in the
recommendation was the requirement for the applicant to pave a 5' wide sidewalk which would be on the
applicant's side of the right-of-way and would be taken care of in terms of accommodating pedestrian traffic.
That would provide the same level of service that could be taken care of within a dedicated right-of-way, but
providing that additional amenity on private property.
Mr. Wilson further advised that this had gone before the Hearing Examiner whose findings and recommendations
are in Council's packet as Exhibit 3. The Hearing Examiner adopts the recommendation of approval for the
requested street map amendment proposal.
Councilrnember Nordquist asked if Staff had looked at the South property line which is up against the State
highway and whether it had measured against the state maps to see if the lot line is in fact to the point that is on
the record. He had viewed the property and noticed a fence line and sidewalk on the state highway side of the
property. Mr. Wilson said Staff had not surveyed the property. Typically, the applicant submits information and
unless Staff has knowledge that that information is incorrect, they rely on them to provide true and accurate
information. The application identified property dimensions of approximately 165' of depth measured against the
Western property line which is the deepest property line, with a frontage on 242nd Street of approximately 112'.
A survey drawing has not been requested, but can be if Council feels it necessary.
Mayor Hall opened the hearing and called upon Bob Koo or his representative.
- /Bob Koo, 561 - 12th Avenue North, indicated that a survey was done and submitted to the City. The 165' deep is
correct. He thinks the Staff, the Planning Department and the Hearing Examiner have done a fine job. He asked
Council to approve the proposal as recommended by the Hearing Examiner.
Councihnember Kasper confirmed for the record that the width is about 125' and that the front setback will be
15'.
Council President Petruzzi asked how the lots at 8122 and 8114 were developed. Mr. Kcds believes 8122 has
seven units; 8114 is single-family house now but is zoned for multi. Council President Petruzzi confirmed his
understanding that the request really doesn't shrink the road because it goes down to 40' in front of 8122 and 8114
and all the way to the end.
Bill Vlcek, 8001 - 242nd Street S.W., opened the public portion of the hearing. He addressed both the issue of
the variance and the street map amendment. With regard to the variance setback requirements, his main concern
is that when the State came through and put in SR 104 in its current configuration, the property owners received
compensation for the loss of property at the back of their lots. Mr. Koo now has purchased the property and is
asking for a variance based on special circumstance. He suggested this is an existing situation and not a special
circumstance for Mr. Koo, and that the 15' setback should be upheld. He submitted one of the reasons to leave
the 15' setback is that it provides a buffer at the back of the property not only for the future residents of the area
but also those who live across the street. It provides screening from SR 104 and a buffer from noise and air
pollution.
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE
With regard to the street map amendment, he raised further concerns. If you cut back to 40', it parallels the right-
of-way at 8122 and 8114, but if there is going to be an opportunity to put in curb, gutter and sidewalk on this
street, now is the time to start. He expressed his understanding the Engineering Department would condition this
development to have 5' paved shoulders, not paved sidewalk. He suggested if you look at other developments in
the area you will find the 5' paved shoulder becomes an additional parking space and not a refuge for pedestrians.
He also indicated that a review of other developments in the area would show a requirement for curb, gutter and
sidewalk installation.
Mr. Mock said that Mr. Koo had stated that 8122 has 7 units on it and that Mr. Koo is proposing 13 units for
8104. He suggested that if Council would scale the size difference between the two properties, it would see that
perhaps the number of units he is proposing that he can get from these variances is inappropriate for the type of
development in this area.
City Attorney Scott Snyder commented that the only issue before Council tonight is the street map amendment.
The variance is final and was not appealed.
Rick Hagman, 137 N.W. 136th Street, Seattle, spoke as a representative of Debbie Baisch who was ill and
could not be at the hearing. Her residence is at 8026 - 242nd S.W. His concern is that on the North side of the
street there are large bushes and shrubs that are encroaching onto the road. There are also additional trees. There
is no place for pedestrians to walk safely down this road. It is now a fairly quiet road, but if another 20 cars are
put on this dead end street, there is no space for curbing, sidewalks and the like. If there are going to be
apartments added here, let's get a place for people to walls safely.
Mayor Hall closed the public hearing portion.
Jeff Wilson clarified that the condition on the project would require a 5' paved walkway across the length of Mr.
Koo's property which is all the authority the City has with regard to this particular project. It would be placed
behind a raised, thickened edge to operate as a curb to deal with some of the runoff and drainage questions.
Councilmember Kasper asked if the sidewalk would be on Mr. Koo's property or the right-of-way. Mr. Wilson
said it was his understanding from the way the condition is structured (as one of the engineering requirements) it
requires a 5' asphalt walkway to be across the frontage edge of the property. The actually location occurs on the
applicant's property subject to easement granted for public access across that portion to accommodate the
sidewalk or if there is sufficient area, it could be placed in the right-of-way. Those conditions would be made as
part of the development review when they come in for building permits. Councilmember Kasper confirmed that
either one could be required at that time.
Councilmember Fahey clarified her understanding that it is a 12-unit building and not a 13-unit building as
mentioned by one of the speakers. She further confirmed that regardless of whether the variance was given to
redesign the parking, the size of the lot is such that 12 units can legitimately be built on it without a variance. Mr.
Wilson said the variance could not be for density which is based on the net lot area. The variance was for a
surface parking lot. Councilmember Fahey verified that in allowing that variance what has been done is allow for
the parking to be less visual to the back of the unit instead of being imposed on the neighborhood on the side.
Because the parking would have taken place no matter what, the issue is where.
Council President Petruzzi addressed Mr. Vlcek and Mr. Hagman. He said that tonight was not a hearing on the
variance. There was no appeal of the variance, so the only thing Council can do is rule on what is in front of it.
Given the answers to the questions Councilmember Fahey has raised, and what has been told to Council, in
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 9
granting this request, it would not be injuring the public by granting this request because the road is only 40' wide
at 8122 and 8114. He reminded Mr. Hagaman that there will be a Y wide walkway required of the builder.
. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TOM PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNC'II.MEMBER
BARBARA FAHEY, THAT COUNCIL ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE HEARING
EXAMINER AND APPROVE THE REQUESTED AMENDMENT TO THE CrFY'S OFFICIAL
STREET MAP. MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney Scott Snyder explained that while the applicant has the burden of proof in most City proceedings
on matters involving the public interest in right-of-way, the Council has to affirmatively find that there is a public
purpose in retaining the right -of --way. To require a dedication under constitutional principles without that finding
of purpose would be a taking of Mr. Kcds property.
8. CONTINUED HEARING ON PROPOSED STORM WATER ORDINANCE (continued from December
' 6,1"4)
Jain Walker, Acting City Engineer, reminded Council that this is a continuation of an item brought forth on
December 6. At that time Council requested that Staff go back and give developers, engineers, and people in the
development community the opportunity to provide more comments to the ordinance. There was a meeting in
early January which was fairly well attended by engineers. They did get comments from them, most of which are
reflected in Draft No. 2 in Council's packet. Six or seven engineering firms have made comments either at that
meeting or separate from that time. The second copy has been picked up by several engineers. They have also
received some comments on the second by Reid Middleton, but they are relatively minor in nature — language
clean-up, etc.
Councilmember Kasper asked if the changes made were minimal or as much as they could get out of it and still
comply with the State. Mr. Walker indicated they had discussed the changes with the State, and some of them
were minimal. Some are clarifications to try and set things up. There are still some procedures for Staff to do
exemptions in certain cases. There has not been formal approval of the plan by Ecology. They have reviewed the
first draft and discussed the changes in the second. He thinks Ecology is basically in concurrence on those.
There is still concern within the scope of the requirements.
Councilmember Kasper asked for clarification of the maintenance of private property and asked if that is
something in which Council anticipates getting involved. Mr. Walker thinks right now it is treated as totally
their's; they will now start doing inspections. In the City's code they have the ability to do inspections on private
property. In the past those inspections were done only when there was some report of a problem or some reason
to expect a problem. They will probably start a program to monitor all those systems and make sure they are
being cleaned and maintained. Councilmember Kasper asked further if there was a reasonable approach in place
to exempt cases. Mr. Walker says they have something similar to now in that they can waive it in the event there
is no benefits to the public.
Council President Petruzzi confirmed with Mr. Walker that he had received a copy of the letter received from
Lovell-Sauerland. Mr. Walker indicated some of their comments had been addressed in the second draft.
Councilmember Nordquist referred to page 13 and the reference made to the Community Services Director or a
designee thereof. He questioned why this wasn't directly in the hands of the Engineering Department. Because of
the technical aspects of some of the requirements and evaluations, he feels it should be the direct responsibility of
the Engineering Department. Mr. Walker responded they had followed the procedure as set out in the last
ordinance. In almost every case the Engineering Department has been doing that function of reviewing and
waiving as required, though if they are major, the signature of the Community Services Director is on the letters.
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 10
Councilmember Nordquist does not have a problem with the Community Services Director involvement, but
would like to see the designee as the Engineering Department so that it is directly involved. Mayor Hall
commented that Engineering was directly involved, and the Community Services Director is the umbrella. She
suggested there are several portions of the ordinances that were vacillated while she was on the Council, and if
Council wishes to revisit those, they could be placed on the agenda.
City Attorney Scott Snyder agreed with Mayor Hall and added that one of the reasons the Community Services
Director is used is that that position is outlined in detail in the ordinance along with the job description.
Councilmember Nordquist would like to see the designee more defined.
Councilmember Earling commented that from the beginning, he has requested notification of engineers, builders
and developers. For the record, he reiterated there was a hearing in December, and the Council at that time asked
to have an outreach to be sure that these people were contacted and notified of the ordinance. There was a
subsequent meeting on January 9 where invitations were sent out for the engineers, developers and builders to
come. Tonight is the third hearing. He confirmed that, after having gone through this process, the outreach was
as thorough as it can be. Mr. Walker indicated his belief that that was true and added that they had also
attempted to have advertisements in the paper, but for whatever reason they weredt placed. He did not feel that it
would have brought the matter to that many more people, as mailing did go out to about 75-80 firms.
Councilmember Kasper asked City Attorney Snyder if Council has a fair amount of latitude in dealing with the
State to go back and work areas where problems are found. City Attorney Snyder responded that it would
depend upon the section as there are several provisions that are mandated and others where there is more local
discretion. Councilmember Kasper's concern was exemptions and whether the City could clarify situations where
money is being put in without any benefit. City Attorney Snyder said that if making exceptions was being
discussed, that would be in developing criteria that reflected the preservation of the goals and state mandates. ff
the required improvement would not provide a public benefit or substantially move the project toward compliance
with State goals, that could be built into the criteria. -
City Attorney Snyder noted that there had been reference to the Lovell-Sauerland letter, and advised that there
was a copy at the sign-up table for public inspection.
The public portion of the hearing was opened with Steve Hoyt, Capital Projects Administrator for the Edmonds
School District. He indicated the District was involved in ongoing discussions with the City regarding the effect
of the ordinance on the District. A year ago, prior to this ordinance, a bond issue was passed. The District is in
the process of replacing Edmonds Woodway High School and a modernization of Seaview Elementary School, as
well as various site work projects within the city of Edmonds. Those projects will be effected by this ordinance.
This week's meeting with Staff left them with an understanding of how those ordinances will effect the District.
The District wants to acknowledge that the cooperation between the City of Edmonds and the Edmonds School
District is very high. The District supports the intent of the ordinance because stormwater quality is very
important. However, the District did not plan on the entire effect of this ordinance on it. Because of the fact that
the District is very clear with the public on its budgets, each budget is itemized very clearly. The District as to
absorb the additional costs on this ordinance. He wanted to recognize that it is an impact, and public -funded
projects that go to the voters for funding are quite different than development projects that have a chance to
recover revenue.
Council President Petruzzi asked how much of an extra impact this would have on the School District. Mr. Hoyt
stated they had not reached a point where a specific dollar amount could be stated. His understanding is that this
ordinance will increase the quantity of stormwater detention, so Edmonds-Woodway High School will be
effected. His understanding is that this stormwater detention will increase by approximately two times the
amount of stormwater detention. He recognized that the District does not have to retain stormwater for its entire
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 11
sites which is good as that would be a tremendous impact to the District. They are at the point where they know
they will have increased costs, but they also know that there are things that have yet to be developed. The major
projects are in the beginning design phases, so all of the impact is not readily known. They will continue to work
with Staff and their engineers to continue the refinement of the District's needs. Council President Petruzzi
acknowledged that this goes to Mr. Kasper's comments concerning exceptions. He suggested that Mr. Walker
will probably want to hear more about exceptions so that there is a better day-to-day knowledge and
understanding of it and what the impacts the District will have and what the exceptions might be.
Mayor Hall asked Mr. Hoyt for some comparison with this project and the stadium rebuild project. She asked if
this project was more severe than that. Mr. Hoyt indicated he came to the District when that project was well
under construction. He had no history beforehand. He acknowledged they had talked to Staff regarding what
problems there are that are caused by the area that Edmonds High School is in and downstream, and it does not
appear there are major drainage impacts. He went on to state that there is no major problem they are trying to
mitigate. They are trying to take into consideration the downstream effects of new site developments. This drains
into Hall Creek and Lake Ballinger. The District recognizes the sensitivity of the issue. It is not asking for
reconsideration, only that Council recognize that there is an impact:
Rob Michel, 8022 - 212th Street S.W., Edmonds, agreed with Mr. Hoyt that the extra cost for development
would be substantial, especially for the multi -family developments. He estimated that the increase per unit would
be around $2,000 per dwelling unit and feels that cost would be passed on either to the consumer or have to be
decreased from any lot price from the seller. For the last 10 years he has been putting pipes into the ground for a
25-year system and feels that the State didn't take into consideration the fact that these detention systems have
been put in place in Edmonds. He would like to see it somehow credited, so that they don't have to put in the 100-
year system required by the new stormwater ordinance. He feels that to wait 100 years for these pipes to fill
would be an inappropriate use of funds. He asked the City to ask the State if Edmonds could somehow get a
benefit for what it has already done for the development so far.
Jack Bjork, 731 Aloha, Edmonds, is a Civil Engineer with R., W. Beck Intersurface Water Management Group.
At the requesting of the City's engineering staff, they reviewed the draft ordinance and made several
recommendations. He has been a civil engineer for 18 years. In the last 5 years, much of that time has been
working for King County, Snohomish County, and other municipalities fixing urban stormwater problems.
Many times it is quite costly for those municipalities to implement any retrofits. He urged Council to adopt the
final stormwater ordinance.
Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, reminded Council that it withdrew funds from that area back
in 1990 to do work on the lake. He feels that until Council re-establishes funds back to those people in that area,
he doesn't want the people on the lake charged any more money.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.
Jim Walker commented on Mr. Rutledge's statement. The City has continued to provide funds for Lake
Ballinger. Mountlake Terrace had initiated the water quality work on that lake. The City is scheduled to meet
with them next week to discuss forining some sort of committee to look at that. The City has not given up on
doing anything there, but the community that had taken the lead stepped down from that position. The City is
working with them to try to get those programs back together for Lake Ballinger.
Councilmember Hall had questions regarding the exception provisions of the ordinance beginning at page 12 of
the ordinance. Under the exceptions to the minimum requirements, it looks like there are some exceptions that
will give the City some flexibility. He asked if these were all of the exceptions. Mr. Walker indicated they were
the major exceptions. Councilmember Hall had a suggestion on number "B" that would make it better in his
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 12
mind. Where it says that if there are physical circumstances or conditions effecting the property in which the
strict application of the provisions would deprive the applicant of all reasonable use of the property, he would
suggest that read "deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of the property". He does not feel that would be
difficult to prove and would allow Council some comfort zone in maybe getting some more flexibility in the
ordinance. He recognized that some of the other exceptions are well-founded. He desires to have compliance
with the intent of the minimum requirements and have some flexibility. Mr. Walker does not think that would be
a problem and does not think Ecology would have objections to that minor change in wording.
Councilmember Fahey requested clarification on whether this was the minimum the City can do to meet the
requirements of the State. If so, is there relief to be had by these people if they actually go to the State and try to
bring about changes in those requirements. Mr. Walker said the State is trying to allow the control of the release
of stormwater on developed property so that it is similar to a natural condition. In the past the intent was to
control the water for a design -type event which was a 10 year storm. Now they are trying to control water
release rates at a lower rate which is a 2-year event or a storm event that would cause an erosion problem, and
severe flooding events. They are trying to get a closer proximity to what actually occurs off a natural piece of
property. It is the intent that this enforcement will be everywhere in the Puget Sound area.
City Attorney Snyder advised that the origin of the natural conditions rule has to do with Washington water law.
In theory, municipalities are liable if they permit development which causes the flooding of property by increasing
the flow of water from or across property in their approval of developments in a way which damages a
downstream owner. As a city that's closest to the water, with a lot of development upstream from you, in effect
the State's program has great advantages for the City.
Council President Petruzzi asked Mr. Walker if he had spoken to Craig Campbell of Lovell-Sauerland. Mr.
Walker responded that he had not as he had just received his letter tonight. Mr. Campbell was aware of the
process ongoing, but this is the first contact with him since December 6. Some of the things in this letter have
already been addressed in the second revision. Council President Petruzzi confirmed that his questions have been
reasonably answered.
Councilmember Nordquist urged Council to somehow get the Engineering Department designated in Item J. He
would like to add or change it so that Director means Community Services Director and/or Engineering
Department. Mayor Hall suggested if he wanted to be assured, that some of the other ordinances could be edited
rather than just prevail upon this one.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHN NORDQUIST MOVED THAT IN 18.30.010 DEFINITIONS, ITEM J,
THE WORDS "OR HIS" BE CHANGED TO "AND/OR THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT"
MEANING THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR IS THE LEAD, BUT THE ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT WOULD BE THE ALTERNATE.
City Attorney Scott Snyder suggested, with this question and Councihnember Hall's question, it might be
appropriate for Staff to try and answer the questions through DOE and bring back a final version for Council
review. He understands the point about an appropriately qualified designee with an engineering or hydraulics
engineering background. He suggested they might be able to bring back some specific language in the final
version.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHN NORDQUIST WITHDREW HIS MOTION.
Council President Petruzzi questioned the time flame for adoption of the ordinance. Mr. Walker indicated that to
have the new revision, two weeks would probably not be realistic. Council President Petruzzi noted that Staff
would bring it back on a Consent Agenda, with changes highlighted. Mr. Walker thinks realistically this matter
could be brought back by March 7. It is possible, with good response from Ecology, that it could be sooner.
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MMUtES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 13
Council President Petruzzi asked Mr. Walker to advise City Clerk Rhonda March when it was ready to be
placed on the agenda
Councilmember Hall commented that the City in a lot of cases is really under the gun on these mandates from the
State, the federal government, and the Growth Management Act. This is not an unfunded matter as it is expected
the private sector will fund it. He hopes some flexibility can be drafted into the ordinance.
Mayor Hall echoed Councilmember Hall's comments. She has been reading the latest literature on stormwater
ordinance, and there is already discussion of dismantling part of it. She urged the lobbying of legislators to keep
these mandates from encumbering the City's funds and Staff.
Councilmember Earling commented that the public sector in this case is the consumer. He thinks eventually he
will support the ordinance, but there is often times the misconception that this will be passed on to the developer.
In fact, this gets passed on to the consumer. He noted the earlier discussion of approximately $2,000 per unit
costs on multi -family projects. He feels there will be a severe impact on commercial construction. He does not
see this as a way to improve escalating real estate prices. He said he is sensitive to the environment and
acknowledged there has been a couple of 100 year storms in the city in the last 4-5 years. He feels Council needs
to pay attention to this and try to do the best it can with the guidelines given to us.
Superintendent of Public Works Noel Miller added that the City will be faced with increased maintenance costs
for its own system in order to comply.
Councilmember Kasper agreed with Councilmember Earling. The figures he had obtained were $2-5,000 per lot
depending on the situation. He noted that the city has actual pipelines underground with no water in them, and
the plat that is over them has to put in all the underground stone drainage. He doesn't feel that makes sense
unless exceptions could be handled.
Staf'will bring the matter back by consensus at a date to be determined by Stag
Mayor Hall called for a break at 8:45 p.m. The meeting was reconvened at 8:52 p.m.
9. HEARING ON COMMUNITY CULTURAL PLAN
Josephine Fye, 520 Hemlock Way, Edmonds, was present at the hearing as a resident, a business manager, and
as Chair for the Cultural Planning Committee. For the first time, there has been agreement on a shared vision for
the community and committed it to writing. She noted encouragement and support from the Mayor, City
Council, City Staff, business leaders and members of the community, all of whom invested time and energy into
.� the planning process. The challenge of moving from planning to implementation remains ahead. Council's
approval of the plan would be an endorsement of the goals and strategies of the plan. A plan has been created
that is about this community and what we want the community to be. Therefore, it remains the responsibility of.
everyone in their individual and collective power to make it so. She recommended, on behalf of the committee,
that Council endorse the plan and approve it.
The public portion of the hearing was opened with Steve Beck, 520 Alder Street, Edmonds. He has been
involved with a family business for over 40 years, so is concerned with not only the artistic part of the Edmonds,
but the financial part as well. On behalf of the Board of Directors of both the Edmonds Art Festival Museum and
the Edmonds Arts Festival Association, he thanked the Mayor and Council for allowing this plan to come to
fruition by their support of financing through the Edmonds Arts Commission. He also recognized the
contributions of Staff, particularly Paul Mar, Rob Chave, Christine Weed,and Kris Gillespie for hundreds of
hours recording, digesting, compiling and publishing this plan. It .not only fulfills a cultural need, but also
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 14
provides an economic benefit to the city. His boards urge that Council adopt this plan as part of the Master
Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds.
Dave Burrus, President of the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, called Council's attention to the resolution in
their packets. More than a month ago he represented the Chamber when this plan was submitted to the Planning
Board. Tonight he returned with the resolution showing full support of the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce for
endorsing the plan and requested Council to do so. The Chamber feels the plan encourages economic vitality
while enhancing the identity and cultural expression that already exists in Edmonds.
David Strauss, 21414 - 52nd Avenue West, Mountlake Terrace, represented Dayview Theater, a performing
organization for children's theater which has performed as far north as Everett and as far south as Kent and
throughout the Puget Sound. He reported they began three years ago from the ground up. In that regard, they
approached all communities in the area with an equal mind. They were struck by the difference between
Edmonds and most other communities in the level of support that they gave to them. They feel that indicative of
the general interest of Edmonds citizenry in the arts. They believe that all the way from schools, merchants,
service clubs, City Arts Council and the Staff they see a grassroots support for the arts. He emphasized that they
believe it would be mutually beneficial to groups like his and to the community to adopt the cultural plan. He
urged Council to adopt the plan and expressed hope it would be vigorously implemented.
Linda Ransley, 18923 Forest Park Drive N.E., Seattle, represented the Snohomish County Visitor Information
Center. She participated in the development of the plan as a tourism voice. She firmly supports the cultural plan
and feels it enhances the unique character and image of a great community. It provides opportunities to
encourage and develop components of cultural tourism for Edmonds and that it directly compliments countywide
tourism planning initiatives which are designed to promote Snohomish County and its cities as a desirable
Northwest travel destination. She commended the endeavor as an integrated process to foster community image
and pride. She hopes other communities follow the example. She urged adoption of the plan.
Cami Smith, 9228 - 183rd Place, Edmonds, spoke next. She is on the board of the Cascade Symphony which
wholeheartedly supports the Cultural Plan. After 33 seasons, the Cascade Symphony is finding it more difficult
to financially stay afloat. She thinks the Cultural Plan will help them collaborate with local businesses and the
other arts organizations and pool resources so all can stay financially for many more seasons.
Ed Hodson, 8401 Federick Place, Edmonds, heartily endorsed what is being presented because it follows through
the Master Plan right down the line. He gave a pitch for the older citizens of Edmonds who came here because of
what they saw and the type of city they found. He thinks the Cultural Plan as proposed would help to bring more
of these people to the city which he feels the city needs.
Bill Lancaster, 23911 - 74th Avenue West, Edmonds, stated that he and his wife have long been patrons of the
arts and have seen the benefit of art plans in different communities across the Northwest. Large or small, all
communities benefit from such a plan. They think this is a step in the right direction and urged Council to accept
the Cultural Plan.
The public portion of the hearing was closed.
Councilmember Earling asked for those present who were in favor of the Cultural Plan to stand. Almost the
entire room was on its feet. He thinks this is a wonderful opportunity for the city of Edmonds. He acknowledged
his passion for the arts. He thinks the Cultural Plan is the fruition of many people's efforts to bring together the
culture of the city. Edmonds has a diverse arts community and a community that supports the arts. Because of
the involvement of over 200 people in the establishment of this plan, he thinks a couple of things have happened:
1) it gives a good guideline to establish an arts community who can finally thrive together in their endeavors, and
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 15
2) he thinks it will offer many opportunities that haven't been thought of yet. He expressed particular thanks to
Staff, Arts Commission, and the Arts Festival who organized this project. He looks forward to the great
adventure that can be undertaken with a plan like this.
COUNCILMEMBER DAVE EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BARBARA
FAHEY, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE COMMUNITY CULTURAL. PLAN.
n MOTION CARRIED.
Council President Petruzzi noted that what has happened over this year is the culmination of a personal dream of
his. The joining of hands of all of the arts community will give the city a solid foundation for continued growth
and expansion of the arts influence in the community as well as providing economic development.
Mayor Hall commented that the Community Cultural Plan is good for the soul. It is a reflection of what is going
on in society and the country. When it is said that the city has a Community Cultural Plan, we now have a plan
that is made up of all the artistic endeavors. She thanked all who helped to put together a plan in a timely fashion.
Councilmember Roger Myers commented it was his opinion that the nicest thing to him was the amount of citizen
involvement and participation. If this type of involvement could be there for all things Council considered, it
would make Edmonds and even better place.
Councilmember Nordquist spoke again about the words in the document stating that this was to be a gathering
place. He thinks that because someone came from Mountlake Terrace and Lake Forest Park to give comment
speaks well for the Cultural Plan and the efforts that went into it.
Councilmember Hall also liked the term "gathering place". It does not feel it coincidence that Edmonds has a lot
of artists gathered together. He agreed with Councilmember Nordquist that this is a special spot, and he went on
to say that we need to coordinate that to make it even more special in the future. Councilmember Hall mentioned
that the issue of having the Historical Society involved in this is fantastic. Not only are we looking for a future
for our arts, but we need to tie in what we have done in the past.
Councihember Fahey thinks the plan is everything she thinks and dreams about for Edmonds. She wants to see
a complete vision plan for where Edmonds is going in the future, and thinks this an integral part of that plan. She
thinks it a very well thought out plan, including tourism and economic growth. She noted that all of these things
would be discussed at the upcoming Council retreat, and she is happy that there is leadership, guidance, and a
process already in place that can be built on.
Councilmember Kasper said the thing he liked about the plan was that it appears to be the document that brings
many of the different functions in the city together so that they can be dealt with from Council's standpoint
without overlapping. He thinks it will be a very successful plan.
Mayor Hall called for a five minute recess. The meeting was reconvened at 9:18.
10. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION TO DENY AN APPEAL OF THE
ENGINEERING DIVISION'S DECISION REQUIRING A PAVED SURFACE ON A PROPOSED
TEMPORARY PARKING LOT APPLIED FOR BY CLAY ENTERPRISES, AND LOCATED AT 7521
212TH STREET SOUTHWEST (Appellant/Applicant: Lovell-Sauerland; File Na AP-94-203)
Councilmember Hall stated he would like information regarding the issue of a continuance before the hearing
commences. He asked if something were resolved during the break. Mr. Wilson said they had not spoken.
City Attorney Snyder reiterated that until the hearing is formally opened, that prior discussions would be
procedural and not part of the substantive record from which Council could make its decision.
APPROVED CITY COUNCII, MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 16
Councihnember Hall said the specific procedural question that was raised was whether there was enough notice
given to the applicant regarding this hearing date. He again asked for information as to what was done to notify
the applicant. Mr. Wilson responded that he had spoken with City Clerk Rhonda March, and she assured him
that notice of the council meeting was sent out on this item on January 23. The request for continuation was
faxed to the City on the 2nd of February, after Council packets had been distributed and well after advertising for
the hearing. Though he could not provide written verification, Mr. Wilson believes this item has been on the
Extended Agenda for 2% to 3 months.
Councilmember Earling confirmed that the fax was received Thursday, February 2, after Staff was required to
provide information for Council packets to the City Clerk. He questioned whether there was a window in which a
continuance could have been granted. Mr. Wilson indicated there was not because the hearing had already been
advertised.
City Attorney Snyder said his general direction to Staff was that only the Council can grant a continuance. People
may request one, but Staff should not give any indication it will be granted until the request has been made to the
Council and heard.
City Clerk Rhonda March clarified that on the Agenda Memo in Council's packet the Item 10 exhibit (the
continuance request) was an add -on by her before the packet was run so that Council would have it. She had
informed Mr. Miller that afternoon that it would be the Council's decision to go ahead.
Councilmember Hall asked if the applicant was still requesting a continuance.
Jim Miller, 19400 - 33rd Avenue West, Suite 200, Lynnwood, responded that he had been requested by the true
appellant in this case, Clay Enterprises, to request a continuance on their behalf. It is the Clay's project, and they
wish to be here tonight to provide testimony. He declined to get into the nature of the testimony that only they can
give. If the hearing is held, he can simply tell Council what he knows and where the gaps are, and the kind of
testimony they would have provided. If Council decides to go ahead with the hearing, he is ready, but the Clay's
are not.
Councilmember Petruzzi suggested going ahead with the hearing. There was not a consensus of opinion of the
members.
City Attorney Snyder suggested that a motion to continue, like a motion to table, is not debatable. If the Council
wants to get it on the floor, the issue could be dealt with and the meeting could proceed.
COUNCILMEMBER BILL KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAVE
EARLING, TO CONTINUE THE HEARING. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TOM PETRUZZI AND
COUNCILMEMBER DAVE EARLING VOTED NO. MOTION CARRIED.
Council President Petruzzi wished the record to reflect his reason for voting against this motion. This site is
subject to a code enforcement action, and he thinks Staff has been handcuffed. Staff is told to comply with
things, they attempt to do so, they set a hearing in a proper fashion, the owner of the property was well aware of
the fact that this evening there was to be a hearing, and the fact that they are out of town is, to him, not a viable
excuse, particularly when the property is subject to a violation.
Councilmember Hall agrees with Mr. Petruzzi's sentiments on that issue. His question to begin with was that
Council does not have rules as a trier -of -fact regarding continuances. What are the rules for granting a
continuance? What is the deadline to do that? He likened the situation to the courts, where there are local rules to
which you can turn. He suggested this might be an issue to discuss at the retreat. If things are not laid out in a
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 17
formal matter, the City could be caught with some legal liability for denying someone a right they might have that
is not very clear. On this specific case, Councilmember Hall agrees with Council President Petruzzi.
Mayor Hall commented on Staffs frustration with the situation. In addressing Mr. Miller, she suggested maybe
there was a gap in communication between Mr. Miller and his clients. She expressed concern that this is
dispensed with in a proper method. She went on to state that this was an ongoing matter, the property has been
able to be utilized in an improper fashion, so at this time it must be decided if it is moratorium time.
Councilmember Kasper noted a past pattern on these issues to extend them. If rules need to be set, that is fine.
Without them, Council should not abandon the past pattern. He cited the fact that only one person had indicated
they were hear to speak to the issue and his belief that because of past history, it was probably believed it would
be continued.
City Attorney Snyder suggested Council name a date certain so that this matter does not have to be republished.
IF Council President Petruzzi intruded City Clerk March to place this matter on the March 21 agenda for a
20 minute duration.
MAYOR LAURA HALL ANNOUNCED THAT THE HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM 10 WILL BE
CONTINUED TO MARCH 21 FOR A DURATION OF 20 MINUTES. SHE FURTHER ANNOUNCED
ONLY MR. MILLER HAD SIGNED ON THE SIGN-UP SHEET.
11. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISIONS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (FILE NO. CU-94-167) AND A HEIGHT VARIANCE (FILE NO.
V-94-168) APPLIED FOR BY CELLULAR ONE, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 60-FOOT TALL
MONOPOLE CELLULAR TOWER ON A BN ZONED PARCEL LOCATED AT 10030 EDMONDS
WAY (Appellant: Karen Singleton - File No. AP-94-202 / Applicant: Cellular One - File Nos. CU-94-167
& V-94-168)
Councilmember Nordquist called a point of order for disclosure. In speaking with the City Attorney, it had been
recommended that he read into the record:
First of all, I rent store space in a mall of five stores, from the owner of the property. I have
rented this particular space for five or six years. I have no ownership in the building or in the
property. I have a sole proprietorship. We sell equipment.
Secondly, because of the location of the orange stake in the parking lot, I chose to review the
process to see if postings had been done. The day after Thanksgiving I drove up 102nd which is
behind this property. Because of the height of the hillside next to the stake, I thought I would
see if the upper properties had received notification. I found no indication of any signs posted
other than the one that was posted on Edmonds Way at the end off the property. While up on
the property or driving around the area, I stopped my car and made acquaintance with a person
by the name of Kathy Madigan who lives at 23105 - 102nd Place West, and indicated who I
was and what I was looking for. She said she had not received notification of the Hearing
Examiner's hearing. On November 28 1 called Jeff Wilson at his office and asked if this
person's name was on the list of homes that had received notice, and my answer was no. I wrote
her a letter on the 28th indicating my findings.
Councilmember Nordquist also disclosed he has cellular phones, but not one of Cellular Ones.
Councilmember Fahey disclosed that while at a telecommunications conference a few weeks ago, she had a direct
conversation with a person from Cellular One. He had given a presentation at one of the workshops she attended,
and she talked to him briefly about the industry and its needs. At that time she did not realize a hearing was
APPROVED CITY COUNCU, MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 18
upcoming, nor was it her belief that he knew. It was not an exchange of information relating to the Edmonds
facility in any way, but just to the technology. Additionally, as stated last week, Councilmember Fahey was
concerned about the process that took place with the last hearing and the fact that appellants didn't clearly
understand how the process works. She said she was not a friend of Karen Singeton, but she knows her by virtue
of the fact they have children in the same school. She indicated she had since had a conversation with Karen, but
they did not in any way discuss anything related to the issue of the siting of the cellular tower. Councilmember
Fahey had only explained to her in more detail how the process works.
Councilmember Earling and Councilmember Myers disclosed they have cellular phones.
Upon question by Mayor Hall, there were no objections to the participation of either Councilmember Nordquist
or Councihnember Fahey.
Steve Bullock, Associate Planner, utilized the overhead for orientation purposes during his presentation. Before
e�lgetting into the actual facts of the matter, Mr. Bullock addressed some of Councilmember Nordquist's concerns.
He had before him the conditional use permit application file.. On the inside cover, the city map is placed,
highlighted in red to show where they are supposed to have notifications placed. He told whoever was to post,
that one sign was to be posted on Edmonds Way and another on 102nd. He looked into the file for verification,
and an affidavit of posting was there, though it did not state specifically that two were posted. He said he didn't
know if one was placed and somehow taken down, or if it had been neglected. Mr. Bullock spoke to Mrs.
Madigan shortly after Councilmember Nordquist's conversation, and it was unknown precisely why she was not
on the mailing list.
City Attorney Snyder determined, for the record, that Mrs. Madigan was not present.
Mr. Bullock proceeded with his explanation of where the property is and how the proposed cellular tower will be
oriented on the site. The tower is to be located behind the building in which Councilmember Nordquist disclosed
he rented space. It is approximately 130' from Edmonds Way and is over 80' away from the closest property line
to the South. He called Council's attention to the fact that the top of the banks elevation was approximately 375'.
The base where the tower is is 314'. That provides a differential of over 50', and the bank is also covered with
trees and other undergrowth. There is a significant vegetative buffer between the proposed cellular tower and the
single-family neighborhood that is on the top of the bank to the South.
Councilmember Fahey asked for clarification on the height question. She asked for confirmation that with the
height difference, you could look out and be seeing 10' of tower plus the antennas above. Mr. Bullock said that
would be true if there were not vegetation on the slope. The slope is covered with trees that are well over 50' tall.
If you take the height of the slope and the vegetation that is on it, it is well above the proposed height of this
tower.
Responding to questions of Mayor Hall, the City Attorney advised that the applicant always goes first at Council
hearings because of the de novo nature of Council hearings. Mayor Hall asked for clarification on past action.
Mr. Snyder indicated none of that was in the record tonight. The Council's procedure would be unaffected by the
other hearing. They are separate events and anything Council heard in the course of that hearing should be
discounted as far as the record.
Mayor Hall opened the hearing with Laurel Van Eaton who represents Cellular One. She reiterated Mr.
Bullock's presentation of the proposal as being for a 60' galvanized steel monopole with 4 omni-antennas mounted
at the top and a 36 square foot equipment cabinet which will house radio equipment. There has been a slight
change to the antennas. Originally it was proposed that they would be 15' in length, they are now proposing a 4'
antennae. She called Council's attention to the site plan exhibit which explains the height. She said the purpose
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995-
PAGE 19
of the facility is to provide improved cellular service solely within the city of Edmonds. The area is currently
experiencing dropped calls, busy signals, and overall poor call clarity. This site will specifically cover the area
from approximately Highway 99 down to the ferry terminals. They want to improve the service in Edmonds.
Ms. Van Eaton summarized the procedure followed. In September they applied for the Conditional Use Permit
and the variance application. On November 7 an unrequired first community meeting was held, at which no one
appeared. A public hearing was held November 17 where there were no comments on the proposal. A few days
prior to the appeal being filed they received a call indicating some concern over their facility. That was the first
time any concern was known. In December an appeal was filed. A second community meeting was held
January 11, with notification having gone to property owners within 300' of the property boundaries and Karen
Singleton and other members of her group. Two people attended, Mrs. Gail Davis who lives within 300' of the
property, and Karen Singleton.
A primary concern of Cellular One is to find a suitable location where the tower will be compatible with the
existing surroundings. As indicated by Mr. Bullock, the facility will be located a distance off of the road, behind
a one-story commercial building, and will be almost completely buffered by the slope to the South. She showed
and discussed professionally prepared, color, computer -generated drawings showing the facility and including the
utilization of different pole colors. She noted the pictures showed the antennas at 15' and reminded Council they
had been reduced to 4'. The total height of the tower, with antennas, will be about 66.
Ms. Van Eaton gave Council an overview of the Cellular One 30 facilities in the area between Everett to North
Seattle. She explained that technology is now such that the towers only need to be about half as tall as those build
early on.
Councilmember Hall asked how much space was serviced by each of the facilities and was told it was between 2
and 10 miles. Ms. Van Eaton further indicated there should be no overlap because cellular operates on a system
of frequency reuse.
Councihnember Hall asked if this would be the only Cellular One site in Edmonds, if approved. He was advised
Cellular One has no plans at this time to put any additional facilities in Edmonds and that no others presently
exist.
Councilmember Myers asked if there was a requirement for aircraft warning lights on the towers. Ms. Van Eaton
said they have to do an FAA filing, and if they come back and instmet to put a light there because of a nearby
airport, etc., it would have to be lighted. There is no requirement for this site.
Ms. Van Eaton called Council's attention to Exhibit 9 which is non -ionizing electric field computations. The
FCC has adopted Protection Guidelines of American National Standards Institutes. The maximum permitted
power density for a cellular facility is 579.3 microwatts per square centimeter. A report was filed for this facility
which measures a worst case scenario of power density from the facility. Worse case scenario is all 20 channels
operating simultaneously at 40 watts of power which is a total of 800 watts of power. It is the equivalent of eight
100-watt light bulbs on top of the pole. Worse case scenario is very unlikely to occur. At ground level the site
measured .228% of the federal standards; in the Southern slope, it was measured to be 2.3% of the federal
standards.
Karen Singleton, 10605 - 226th Street S.W., gave four minutes to Norm Davis.
Mr. Davis lives at 23019 - 102nd Place West, immediately adjacent to the tower and is a neighbor of Mrs.
Madigan. He called Council's attention to a letter they submitted on February 2. They are asking for a delay
because they did not receive notification of an opportunity to attend a hearing. Their first opportunity to really
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
` FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 20
get into discussion was in January. If they had had any opportunity, they would have submitted testimony from
some of his colleagues at the University of Washington concerning the health risks. They would present
information from the Department of Health regarding its standards. He requested Council consider a delay. He
noted that this tower is outside his children's bedroom. As a hospital adminishator, he has discontinued the use of
cellular phones in the hospital because of what it does to pacemakers and medical equipment.
Karen Singleton was given seven minutes. She is opposed to the cellular tower because it is against the
Comprehensive Plan. She advised she had copies of her speech to give out (Exhibit 1) which has all of the
information and factual data she is going to cover in her presentation. She feels cellular towers are more than just
transmitting and receiving antennas under which they are being categorized by the Planning Department for lack
of a better description currently in the Plan. Lynnwood will not allow them in residential zones or BN zones.
Tumwater has placed setback conditions on these projects. If a plan is developed with restrictions and guidelines,
the cellular companies will comply so they can provide service to their customers. She said Section 15.20.005
Residential Development was a section totally avoided by the Hearing Examiner. She said the neighborhood
should be protected from projects that do not harmonize with the existing structures in the area, minimize views,
and adverse environmental impacts including noise and slides. The tower would be visible when the trees are
leafless. The disruption of the slope to build the tower would compromise the safety of the slope. Appraisers
cannot say what the financial impact would be until after the fact when it is too late.
COUNCILMEMBER ROGER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BARBARA
FAHEY, TO EXTEND THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.
Ms. Singleton went on to say that Section 15.20.010 Commercial Land Use states that future commercial
developments continue to harmonize and enhance the small town character of Edmonds. With regard to Section
15.20.030 Community Facilities and Utilities, cellular phones are not utilities because they are privately owned,
unregulated, and for profit companies that do not fall under the same category as libraries and hospitals. She saes
no section in the plan addressing cellular towers.
Ms. Singleton claimed this is not a universal tower, and each tower is specific to its company. She noted there
were two more cellular companies wanting sites in Edmonds. She called attention to a letter from Onecomm to
Community Services Director Paul Mar. She says the letters applies to the hearing because they are claiming the
ability to house all communication services on one tower. This means Edmonds does not need towers spread all
around the city.
Ms. Singleton stated that Cellular One says there is no effect to health by this tower; she questioned its authority,
and presented published contradicting viewpoints.
Ms. Singleton says she is not opposed to the cellular industry, and she does recognize a need for a tower in
Edmonds. She asks four things of Council: (1) To deny this tower because it is inconsistent with the
Comprehensive Plan as it now exists; (2) Place a moratorium tonight as requested January 17 by many citizens
and also the City of Woodway; (3) Look at the prospect of co -locating these companies instead of spreading
them all around; and (4) Create a thorough plan, without holes, to regulate the towers within Edmonds. She
finther asked that Council not set a precedent by allowing this tower.
Gary Osdund, 22604 - 106th West, complimented Council on the agenda tonight and some of the good comments
that had been made about the city. He then reminded Council that the allowable building height in Edmonds is
25' and that this tower was less than one-third mile from OneComm's proposed 154' tower, both on Edmonds
Way, and both next to single-family residences. He expressed concern over the start of a tower farm in Edmonds.
He fears these hearings will continue to come before Council and use valuable time and resources until the
Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Codes are amended to reflect this new land use. Mr. Ostlund quoted from the
Comment section of Hearing Examiner Driscoll's Findings of Fact the portion stating that cellular towers do not
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 21
appear to be adequately addressed in the Zoning Code and, because of the newness of the cellular industry,
Edmonds, and many other cities, has not had an oPPorturuty to develop a policy regarding poles. By denying the
construction of overhead structures and putting a moratorium in place on communications towers until proper
codes can be written, Council takes the reasonable action.
Jan Ostlund, 22604 - 106th Avenue West, requested Council deny the tower in this location and submitted
documentation to substantiate her comments. She discussed the issues of noise and questioned whether a 2-ton
air conditioner makes minimal noise. She believes that no tower should be allowed until the noise issue has been
regulated with specific allowable decibels. Ms. Ostlund went on to discuss the matter of interference as it related
to medical equipment, cordless phones and TV. She thinks towers should be located in sparsely populated areas
where it will impact the least number of people. Ms. Ostlund thinks to put this industrial project in a BN zone
would be to industrialize the area. She submitted a list of seven towers which surround Edmonds. There is no
tower in this type of setting, but are in a rural residential setting that is well screened or an industrial commercial
area. This one cannot be screened on three sides, and it is not in an industrial commercial area. The proposed
800 megahertz emergency system for Snohomish County will not require the use of any of the three cellular
towers proposed for the Edmonds area. That system is already in place. Two people in charge of the system
have verbally substantiated that fact but were reluctant to submit a written statement.
Peter Hart, 1045 - 228th Street S.W., Edmonds, is opposed to the tower. He thinks the Hearings Examiner and
others have not fully considered the compatibility criteria of the Edmonds code. He submitted a letter from his
attorney David Mann concerning the conditional use permit and variance issues brought up at the OneComm
hearing. His comments are also applicable to this project since this tower is similarly situated in a BN zone with
a 25' height limit adjacent to a residential neighborhood. He also submitted a copy of the OneComm Hearing
Examiner's comments pointing to a lack of sufficient regulation of towers of this kind. Mr. Hart commented that
Cellular One and its competitors are not public utilities, nor is the service they provide a public necessity. He
suggested Council contact Mr. Ed Cline who will advise that the towers are not a part of the current SnoComm
system, nor are they a part of the proposed 800 megahertz system. He hopes the Council will see Cellular One as
a privately operated, unregulated, for profit company. Mr. Hart went on to discuss the fact that the building of
the tower will require the excavation of a foundation on the lower portion of a steep slope which may create slope
instability. He said Cellular One had not provided preliminary recommendations by a qualified professional
engineer to show that the proposed site is suitable for such a tower, or the criteria for excavation and/or shoring of
the hillside, or recommended a foundation system with an earth retention system. He urged the Council to deny
the request and keep the height limit to 25'.
Tony Shapiro, 10609 - 226th Street S.W., also stated opposition to the tower and his belief that the City needs an
ordinance to govern this type of activity. He thinks Council needs to investigate ordinance provisions and what
other cities have done. He asked what happens when this technology becomes obsolete. He suggested the City
issue bonds to be used to dismantle the towers when they become obsolete. He urged Council to deny the
application and set a moratorium until a proper ordinance could be established.
Hope Tuttle, 10047 N.E. 33rd, Bellevue, was present as a spokesperson for the Washington American Red Cross
Chapters. She has experience on large disasters both locally and nationally. The American Red Cross is
mandated by Congress to provide disaster preparedness and relief. They are not a government agency, nor do
they receive funding from them. Cellular technology has become an important part of disaster preparedness and
relief. She cited examples of the varied use of cellular units and the improved speed with which they are able to
get things done. She indicated that gap areas did cause some problems during the fires in Central Washington.
Ms. Tuttle said that Cellular One had been an integral part of Red Cross preparedness planning in both
volunteering time and expertise and providing free phones and air time for disaster victims and the Red Cross.
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 22
Mary Salterelli, 22625 - 105th West, wanted to go on record as a voice for the elderly in the neighborhood. She
is a 32 year resident and would like to remain. If these towers go through, she doesn't feel she will be able to stay
because of medical issues and pacemakers.
Kathy Junglov, 22615 - 106th Avenue West, was here for herself and to represent her mother, Thelma Junglov,
who lives at the same address. Ms. Junglov said her mother was told by the Planning Department that it was
proper procedure that they could request that the information from the January 17 meeting be adopted into this
meeting. She asked if that was accurate. City Attorney Snyder responded that the Council has, on occasion,
permitted portions of records to be included when an individual offers documents or records such as a transcript
or tape. Absent that, there is nothing inherent about being able to include portions of that hearing. The Council
did that during the last year on a conditional use permit application, but required the individual to come forward
with a list of exhibits and the exhibits themselves. Unless that is done, the applicant does not have any
opportunity to see what is going into the record and rebut it because they were not present at that hearing. For the
record, Ms. Junglov stated she is a lifetime resident who would hate to see the gateway to the downtown area
become a cellular farm. She expressed agreement with most of the previous speakers.
Lela Smith, 22628 - 96th Avenue West, lives three doors down from the location of the other proposed tower to
which she also objects. They are in the process of getting tapes and information from universities. She has a
packet to present to the Clerk tonight. She said she and her husband had been to several cellular towers and that
there was a lot of noise almost all of the time. She has letters, copies of which she will provide for consideration.
She suggested people visit the areas of existing towers to see what they would be getting. She also indicated there
is strong evidence there not be a need for cellular towers in five years and questioned what becomes of the towers.
She has quite a bit of evidence concerning the health aspects. She does not want to subject her grandchildren, the
elderly citizens, and others to health hazards. She is concerned because she has a strong heart problem. She
asked that Council table this matter until it is known by absolute evidence that there are no safety problems
whatsoever.
Discussion followed with regard to the next speaker's capacity. He was originally intended as a rebuttal witness,
but no rebuttal time was allowed. City Attorney Snyder noted that during the time the clock was running,
numerous questions had been asked and answered.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT TOM PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEM13ER BILL
KASPER, TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT FOUR MINUTES FOR REBUTTAL. MOTION
CARRIED.
Laurel Van Eaton shared her frustration. They would have liked to have addressed a lot of the questions asked at
one of the two community meetings that were held. She noted the difficulty to notify all of the people present at
this hearing because they do not fall within the 300' of the property boundaries. There are significant buffers for
this facility. From her visit to the Davis home, she is confident they will not be impacted because of a fir tree
buffer. Concerning the Comprehensive Plan, she agreed the Plan was about 15 years old and this business is
relatively young. She feels it clear that the Hearing Examiner and the Planning Staff have indicated that cellular
is a communications facility and also a utility which is utilized by nearly 1,300 customers solely within Edmonds.
With regard to noise, the 2-ton generators are about 60.4 db level which is the equivalent to the noise associated
with a conversation 10 feet away. Regarding interference, she said that cellular operates at a high frequency and
low power which eliminates almost any possibility for interference. She said the FCC mandates that they control
any interference issues that arise. On the slope issue, they will have a qualified engineer secure the wall even
more than it is presently. Since they have not gone through the building process, they don't have an engineering
design. The new technology issues are hard to time, but any towers will be removed when no longer needed. She
suggested that if there is an action to be taken other than approval of this facility, she agrees with Mr. Davis who
is within the 300' boundary that the project should be delayed so he has some fiuther time to do some research
and learn about the facility.
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 23
Discussion followed as to whether Karen Singleton would be allowed to say anything further. City Attorney
Scott Snyder advised that there is a sound reason why she should not. Under Council's procedures, the applicant
bears the burden of proof in the de novo proceeding. Typically the person who has that burden of persuasion has
the last opportunity to speak.
Mr. Snyder pointed out that in 1989 the City learned that issues relating to interference are particularly within the
province of the FCC and the City's regulatory body should stick to its zoning criteria and not attempt to regulate
interference. He also thinks that many of the speakers were on target in asking Council to deny the permit and
then think of a moratorium. He was not urging Council to grant or deny the request. He was pointing out that
with their application Cellular One vested a right to have their application considered and disposed of this
evening, and it must be considered on the merits of both the variance and the Conditional Use Permit request.
Mr. Snyder suggested that Council carefully address the zoning criteria regarding compatibility and variance.
Council is given a great deal of deference by the courts in the application of its zoning criteria and its
Comprehensive Plan and none at all when you get into more esoteric, scientific issues. The City's Comprehensive
Plan Noise Ordinance as contained in Chapter 5.30 addresses permissible noise levels generated by businesses
and generally provides that the receiving property will not receive in excess of 60 db so that issue is already
substantively regulated. The same is true with the steep slope environments. The Landslide Hazard Ordinance
would impose extensive requirements in order to achieve a building permit.
Council President Petruzzi commented that these towers are not a registered utility. In order to grant a variance,
there are six criteria. He sees the applicant failing is in three areas. This project is speaking of 440 square feet of
land on a 37,000 square foot of property, so he is having trouble dealing with the Hearing Examiner's decision.
He cited specific examples.
/2COUNCIL PRESIDENT TOM PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MIKE
HALL, TO OVERRULE THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION, DENY THE APPLICATION
AND UPHOLD THE APPEAL. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY AS DETERMINED BY ROLL
CALL OF COUNCIL.
j
City Attorney Snyder asked if there were any comments by Council on the Conditional Use Permit for his use in
the findings. Council President Petruzzi thought that became moot because they need the variance to get the
Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Snyder suggested that it be disposed of. Unless instructed otherwise, he will
assume that Council is relying on the compatibility issue as he prepares the findings.
After Comprehensive Plan concerns brought up by Councilmember Hall, Mr. Snyder suggested as he does that
findings that since there was no testimony presented indicating that others had been approved and the record
having been closed with the matter hanging, that the record does not reveal the presence of other towers within the
area.
Regarding the issues of a moratorium, Council President Petruzzi suggested to Council that this matter be placed
on the work meeting agenda for March 28 for 45 minutes. Councilmember Fahey questioned Council's ability to
establish a moratorium while hearings were still pending. City Attorney Snyder answered that any paid
application becomes vested until a moratorium is in place. Anyone who applies prior to the moratorium would
have the right to have that application heard. If a moratorium were established, Council would have to hold a
hearing within 60 days. It was confirmed that the sooner a moratorium was established, the fewer applications
Council will have to consider.
12. APPOINTMENT BY MAYOR TO ARTS COMMISSION
COUNCILMEMBER DAVE EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ROGER
MYERS, THAT THE APPOINTMENT OF PROVIDENCE CICERO TO POSITION NO. 6 ON THE
ARTS COMMISSION FOR THE TERM OF 2/7/95 TO 12/31/98 BE CONFIRMED. MOTION
CARRIED.
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 24
13. MAYOR
The Mayor reported that she had attended a meeting at which there was a large cross-section of citizens at the
County Auditor's office and had a brainstorming session on annexation. Another will be held in July. It has not
yet been decided as to the method with which the vote will be taken in the September primary. At the request of
Mayor Hall, Jeff Wilson reported that the earliest date for annexation votes would probably be in September.
Mayor Hall also reported she had attended the DARE graduations.
From United Way of Snohomish County notification was received that indicated the City exceeded monies raised
in past years. Mayor Hall thanked all who took part in that effort. Further, she called attention to her memo
thanking Council for the increase in salary.
Another issue is the press release the Chief sent regarding the Edmonds officers entering the Blue Lagoon
Therapy Parlor to conduct a business check and ended up closing it down. It had been in the County, but after
the annexation process, it didn't take long to go in and close it down. She expressed pride in the two officers who
did this with such dispatch.
14. COUNCIL
Council President Petruzzi asked Mayor Hall, in order to give Staff sufficient time to prepare anything Council
desires from them for presentation at Council retreat, that she call Barb Mehlert to let her know for coordination
purposes. Mr. Petruzzi informed that the February 14 meeting is likely to be one of the heaviest committee
meetings Council has had. Added under the Finance Committee was a review of a long-term lease request for the
Boys' and Girls' Club.
Council President Petruzzi further called Council attention to their packet for a follow-up item on Council
requests. He asked that if the information desired has been received and was completed, that Councilmembers
advise Barb Mehlert so they could be removed from the list.
Mr. Petruzzi further reported that he had gone on the train ride Monday, and it was great, with a great ridership.
Mayor Hall announced that there is a laughter session they could all go to. It is at the Wade James Theater and
sponsored by the Edmonds Arts Commission in conjunction with the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce.
Councilmember Earling mentioned that Don Stay's name had come up in one of the last couple of meetings as it
regards his service with the Paine Field Issue. Mr. Stay wanted to clarify that that position was appointed by the
1 County Council. There were five citizens from Southwest Snohomish County that were appointed to that.
Following up on the commuter rail, the first run on Monday had total ridership of around 360. By last Friday,
the total was up to 774, and a fourth car needed to be added. He invited the Council members to a press
conference at the Edmonds train station at 4:40 on Friday as the 4:10 from Seattle pulls in. He called Council
attention that he had placed before it brochures that the Regional Transit Authority was charged with putting out
as part of its legislative mandate. It will be going to all registered voter households in the three -county RTA
district. Roughly 770,000 of these pieces will be sent. He further indicated that the cost of $211,000 works out
to be the cost 11 cents apiece per voting household. That includes mail and printing costs.
Mayor Hall asked to interject so that Jeff Wilson could speak briefly on annexation status. Monday was the
expiration time for comments to the Boundary Review Board on both the Snoline and Forshee annexations. At
about 4:30 the Fire District's attorney delivered their request for hearings on both of those proposals. Now the
earliest election date is September for those two areas. He also reported on further meetings that have been held
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 25
with area citizens, and the fact that another area that has not yet requested annexation has scheduled a meeting to
discuss the issue.
Councilmember Earling again brought up the retreat. With regard to discussion on the Cultural Arts Plan, he
feels it would be a benefit to invite a couple of the citizens actively involved in this process to attend that one
YVsession. Councilmember Hall expressed his desire to also invite them to dinner as the subject was scheduled for
2:30. Council President Petruzzi asked Mr. Earling when he extended the invitation to please tell Barbara for
purposes of making reservations.
Councilmember Fahey brought up the subject of a land use training session and its scheduling. She discussed
some of the dates that are workable for her to attend. It was thought it may have to be the week of March 20.
• Telephone discussions will determine. Councilmember Fahey confirmed that it had been asked, with at least
some Council consensus, to have a traffic study done, and she has received information from an additional source
that because of the nature of the study done by Bell Walker, it was redundant and would not be done.
Councilmember Petruzzi said that the whole issue was to do one when the ferry was shut down to determine
exactly what the difference was. Mayor Hall asked Jeff Wilson if he knew where that issue is. It was his belief
there are counts being done presently. He suggested that could be confirmed with Mr.
Walker.
Councihnember Fahey then brought up the subject of the recently approved 4% across-the-board salary
increases. She was of the opinion that once this raise was given, Council could then go back and revisit some of
the positions thought to warrant larger increases than others based on concrete analysis of job description. She
has not seen any projection for that type of consideration being projected on the extended agenda and asked that
(� such be scheduled. Council President Petruzzi stated that there was an additional $10,000 given as a
discretionary salary pool for the Mayor to make adjustments in the categories as she sees fit. He went on to state
that there were three effected positions, and this money was set aside to work on those compressions. Brent
Hunter, Personnel Manager, stated they would be prepared on the 14th of February to bring recommendations
before Council as to how that $10,000 should be allocated.
Councilmember Myers thanked the Council, Mayor, and Staff for the assistance they have given him. Mayor
Hall expressed appreciation for his attendance at a Think Tank Committee meeting.
Councilmember Hall seconded Councilmember Fahey's concerns about the compression factor with assistant
chiefs and that type of personnel. He would like to have some discussion when this matter comes back to Council
as to whether $10,000 is enough to cover all of the compression factors. Councilmember Earling clarified his
intent in recommending the $10,000 as not being for any particular job but in recognition there were perhaps
/Wj
some inequities. Councilmember Hall's concern then is that if Staff is dealing with a $10,000 cap, if that is not
enough to satisfy the concerns, the whole issue will need to be addressed again. Councilmember Nordquist
expressed his understanding of the motion to indicate that Mayor Hall would be making those adjustments and
not Staff.
There being no further business to come before the meeting, the meeting was recessed to an executive session on
real estate and personnel matters at 11:10 p.m. to adjourn from there.
THE ORIGINAL SIGNED COPY OF THESE MINUTES, AS WELL AS A TAPED RECORDING OF ALL
COUNCIL MEETINGS, CAN BE UOCATED IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE.
�ONDA�JMARC , CI I Y CLERK
APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 7;-4995
PAGE 26
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
SPECIAL MEETING
6:45 P.M. - INTERVIEW CANDIDATE FOR ARTS COMMISSION
CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M.
FLAG SALUTE
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
2. (10 Min.) CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
(A) ROLL CALL
(B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 24, 1995
(C) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 31, 1995
(D) APPROVAL OF SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 28, 1995
(E) APPROVAL OF CLAIMS WARRANTS #950437 THRU #950646 FOR WEEK OF JANUARY 30, 1995; AND
PAYROLL WARRANTS #950274 THRU #950567 FOR THE PERIOD OF JANUARY 16 THRU JANUARY 30,
1995
(F) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM DAVID & MICHELLE HOPEWELL ($575.00)
(G) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW ON PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF A
6-UNIT DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND AMENDMENT OF
THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP FOR PUGET WAY, EAST OF 9TH AVE. N. (APPLICANT: EDMONDS
BUILDING COMPANY I FILE NOS. PRD-94-16 & ST-94-102) (from hearing of January 17, 1995)
(H) AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE ANDERSON PALLET RACKS AND CANTILEVER RACKS FROM
EASYUP SHELVING STORAGE SYSTEMS ($6,650.64)
(1) AUTHORIZATION TO SURPLUS BALLISTIC VESTS AND DONATE TO U.SJU.K. VEST PROGRAM
(J) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH MUNICIPAL
COURT JUDGE
(K) REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 1994 STREET OVERLAY PROGRAM AND
COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT
(L) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT DECHLORINATION
PROJECT
(M) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN CONTRACT WITH CENTER FOR BATTERED WOMEN FOR A
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ADVOCATE
(N) PROPOSED ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING THE MAYOR'S SALARY AT $60,000 PER YEAR
3. AUDIENCE
4. (5 Min.) RECOGNITION OF POLICE OFFICER AND POLICE SUPPORT EMPLOYEE OF THE YEAR
5. (5 Min.) RECOGNITION OF MR. AND MRS. BAINBRIDGE BY "DARE" --OFFICER BLACKBURN
- continued -
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
FEBRUARY 7, 1995
PAGE 2
6. (10 Min.) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN RENTAL AGREEMENT FOR TEMPORARY USE OF VACATED
PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING
7. (20 Min.) HEARING ON THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION ON AN APPLICATION BY BOB KOO
FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY'S "OFFICIAL STREET MAP" TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED RIGHT-
OF-WAY WIDTH ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8104 242ND ST. SW, FROM 60 FEET TO
50 FEET BY ELIMINATING THE REQUIREMENT FOR DEDICATION OF 10 FEET ADJACENT TO THE
SOUTH SIDE OF THE 242ND ST. S.W. RIGHT-OF-WAY (File No. ST-94-118)
8. (20 Min.) CONTINUED HEARING ON PROPOSED STORM WATER ORDINANCE (cont'd from December 6, 1994)
9. (30 Min.) HEARING ON COMMUNITY CULTURAL PLAN
10. (15 Min.) HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION TO DENY AN APPEAL OF THE
ENGINEERING DIVISION'S DECISION REQUIRING A PAVED SURFACE ON A PROPOSED TEMPORARY
PARKING LOT APPLIED FOR BY CLAY ENTERPRISES, AND LOCATED AT 7521 212TH STREET
SOUTHWEST (Appellant/Applicant: Lovell-Sauerland - File No. AP-94-203)
11. (40 Min.) HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISIONS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (FILE NO. CU-94-167) AND A HEIGHT VARIANCE (FILE NO. V-94-168)
APPLIED FOR BY CELLULAR ONE, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 60-FOOT TALL MONOPOLE
CELLULAR TOWER ON A BN ZONED PARCEL LOCATED AT 10030 EDMONDS WAY (Appellant: Karen
Singleton - File No. AP-94-202 i Applicant: Cellular One - File Nos. CU-94-167 & V-94-168)
12. (5 Min.)
APPOINTMENT BY MAYOR TO ARTS COMMISSION
13. (5 Min.)
MAYOR
14. (15 Min.)
COUNCIL
15. (15 Min.)
EXECUTIVE SESSION ON A REAL ESTATE MATTER
Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at 771-0245 with 24 hours
advance notice for special accommodations.
The Council Agenda appears on Chambers Cable, Channel 32. Delayed telecast of this Meeting appears the following
Wednesday evening at 7.00 p.m. on Channel 36, and the following Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 32.