Loading...
10/07/1997 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES OCTOBER 7, 1997 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Mayor Barbara Fahey in the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main Street, followed by the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Barbara Fahey, Mayor Dave Earling, Council President John Nordquist, Councilmember Roger L. Myers, Councilmember Jim White, Councilmember Dick Van Hollebeke, Councilmember Gary Haakenson, Councilmember Thomas A. Miller, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Andy Streit, Student Representative APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Paul Mar, Community Services Director Brent Hunter, Human Resources Director John WestfalL Senior Fire Inspector Al Compaan, Assistant Police Chief James Walker, City Engineer Rob Chave, Planning Manager Phil Olbrechts, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO ADD THE FOLLOWING ITEM TO THE AGENDA AS ITEM NO. 8 AND RENUMBER THE REMAINING ITEMS: "AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD SENIOR CENTER LIBRARY/LOBBY FLOOR STRUCTURAL REPAIR CONTRACT TO LOWEST RESPONSIVE QUOTE AND APPROPRIATE MONEYS NOT -TO -EXCEED $20,000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO COVER REPAIR COSTS". MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT. AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED. The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 30,1997 (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #18973 THRU #20426 FOR THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 29, 1997, IN THE AMOUNT OF $175,968.72; AND APPROVAL OF PAYROLL WARRANTS #18109 THRU #18284 FOR THE PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER 16 THRU SEPTEMBER 30,1997, IN THE AMOUNT OF $341,491.77. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 1 (D) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT POWER TRANSFER IMPROVEMENTS AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO SERVICE ELECTRIC ($36,196.38, Including Sales Tax) (E) APPROVAL OF 1997 -1998 FIRE UNION LABOR AGREEMENT (F) APPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL CUSTODIAL POSITION 3. AUDIENCE Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, said Medic 7 would have a $350,000 shortfall and would be asking cities for additional funds. He reported the Medic 7 service will be relocated to Lynnwood next year and would no longer provide 24 hour service to Edmonds. Mayor Fahey clarified no consideration had been given to eliminating 24 hour service provided by the paramedic response vehicle located at Stevens Hospital. No matter what happens to the Medic 7 program, that vehicle will always be available for 24 hour response. Consideration is being given to expanding the service of a second vehicle (which is housed further north) to 24 hours from the current 12 hours. She reiterated no consideration was being given to eliminating any of the current service. As member of the Medic 7 Board, Councilmember Haakenson agreed there were no plans to cut the service provided to citizens in Edmonds. Further, he was not aware there was a $350,000 shortfall. David Miller, 922 Daley Street, Edmonds, said he represented numerous residents on Daley Street between 9th and Olympic. He requested the City amend its ordinances regarding skateboarding and ease the current restrictions on residential street use. He said children had been stopped by Edmonds Police in recent weeks for riding a skateboard in the parking lane near the curb. He explained the children in this area are well supervised and aware of traffic dangers. He noted their street is extremely wide for a residential street and provides plenty of room for play without interfering with local traffic. He said children should be allowed to play in front of their homes without interference from the police, whether they are riding bicycles or skateboards as regulations for these activities should be similar. He submitted a letter to the Council signed by numerous residents in the area. He indicated they were open to alternatives such as a bicycle lane on their street, speed bumps, or locating a skateboard park nearby. Mayor Fahey explained there are efforts underway for a co -project with Lynnwood for a skateboard park to serve both communities. Unfortunately, she explained the City cannot allow children to play in the street due to the dangers as well as the City's liability. She noted cities are no longer allowed to post "Children At Play" signs as a result of a court case in Tacoma which found such a sign encouraged play in the street. Mr. Miller noted there are no sidewalks in their neighborhood and suggested that option be pursued. Mayor Fahey suggested this issue be referred to the Public Safety Committee. 4. PROCLAMATION REGARDING BIKE PREVENTION WEEK (OCTOBER 5 —11) Mayor Fahey read a Proclamation declaring the week of October 5-11 as Fire Prevention Week and presented the Proclamation to Fire Inspector John Westfall. The proclamation encouraged citizens to participate in fire prevention activities at home, work and school, and to heed the message: "Know when to go: react fast to fire!" Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 2 Fire Inspector Westfall described the need to be aware of fire escape routes in any situation. He commented that people often look around to see what others are doing when the fire alarm goes off in a public place rather than making the necessary decisive decision. He stressed the importance of a home fire escape plan including two ways out of every room, an outside meeting place, and use of a neighbor's phone to call 911. He said the Edmonds Fire Department and the City would be participating in Fire Prevention Week including visiting schools and a fire safety show at Alderwood Mall on Saturday, October 11. He encouraged the public to celebrate Fire Prevention Week with the Fire Department. 5. SECOND HEARING ON THE PROPOSED "CLAY" ANNEXATION LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 99 AND 234TH STREET SOUTHWEST AND THE ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT THE ANNEXATION, ESTABLISH COMPARABLE ZONING FOR THE SUBJECT AREA AND ESTABLISH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANNEXATION (Applicant/Proponent: Diana Clay / File No AX -96-123) Planning Manager Rob Chave explained a conclusion had been reached on this petition -method annexation process. He identified the location of the property, north of 234th Street at Hwy 99 and explained if annexed, the property would be zoned equivalent to the current county zoning (RM 1.5 which is equivalent to the county's MR classification on the western portion of the property, and the Hwy 99 frontage would be zoned general commercial, equivalent to the current Snohomish County zoning of General Commercial). He indicated the property is approximately 7 acres and $2.8 million in assessed valuation. This is the second hearing; if approved, the ordinance would establish an annexation date of December 1, 1997. He referred to a letter from Ms. Diana L. Clay expressing her support of the annexation. Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing. .There were no members of the audience present who wished to address the Council. Mayor. Fahey closed the public participation portion of the hearing and remanded the matter to Council for deliberation and action. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, FOR APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 3163, ACCEPTING THE FORMAL ANNEXATION OF THE AREA COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE "CLAY" ANNEXATION Annexation AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE TIME AND DATE OF 12:01 A.M. ON DECEMBER 1, 1997. MOTION CARRIED. 6. CLOSED RECORD REVIEW ON THE SHORELINE APPLICATION VARIANCE REQUEST BY THE PORT OF EDMONDS Mayor Fahey advised the City Attorney indicated this was a quasi judicial hearing and suggested Councilmembers make any declarations. Councilmember Van Hollebeke stated that he serves on the Board of Directors for the Edmonds Alliance for Economic Development; two of the boardmembers are Port Director Bill Toskey, and Port Commissioner Dan Prinz. They have not discussed this matter. He also recently met and had lunch with Port Commissioner Don Stay, but this issue was not discussed. Councilmember White advised he serves as the Council's liaison to the Port and attends Port meetings. No information that is not otherwise available to the public has been provided to him. Mayor Fahey asked if there were any challenges to the participation of any Councilmember. There were no challenges and she advised all Councilmembers would participate. She explained this was a closed Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 3 record hearing and there would not be an opportunity for the public to provide testimony. The Council would review the Hearing Examiner's decision but no new information would be presented. Councilmember White pointed out a number of the exhibits reviewed by the Hearing Examiner had not been provided in the Council packet; therefore, it appeared the Council did not have the complete record for review. Planning Manager Rob Chave indicated the other exhibits were colored photographs he could circulate to the Council. City Attorney Phil Olbrechts agreed the exhibits should be circulated to the Council; if any Councilmember felt additional time was necessary to review the information, the hearing could be continued. Councilmember White pointed out there were other exhibits such as a memo from Attorney Jones, a memo from the City's Attorney's office, etc. that were not in the Council packet. Mr. Chave noted most of the exhibits were summarized in the Hearing Examiner's report. For Councilmember White, Mr. Olbrechts explained the Council's review was based on the record; the Hearing Examiner's summary could be used to interpret the record. Councilmember White was concerned that without the information provided to the Hearing Examiner, he would be unable to offer an interpretation of the evidence. Mr. Olbrechts suggested Mr. Chave provide the exhibits to the Council and a decision be made whether to continue the hearing. Council President Earling commented, although it was a difficult decision to make, it appeared this item should be continued to another date in view of the information that was not available for Council review. Councilmember Myers agreed, noting although he did not like to delay the Council's consideration of this matter, it appeared the additional material staff was providing was more than the Council could review at this meeting. He also suggested staff provide overheads of the exhibits so the information was visible to the audience as well. Mayor Fahey commented the Port would like to have this issue reviewed in as timely a manner as possible. If a decision was made to delay the closed record review, she suggested it be considered prior to the Committee meetings on Tuesday, October 14. Council President Earling asked what public notification was necessary. City Clerk Sandy Chase answered this was an unusual type of review; no special public notice was required. Council President Earling noted it would be published on the Council agenda. Councilmember Van Hollebeke suggested, due to the large audience, that the Council consider this issue tonight and determine at the end of the hearing whether the information was complete enough to make a decision. If not, the hearing could be continued until next week. Councilmember Miller supported postponing this item until next week as it appeared the additional information staff provided was substantial. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO CONTINUE THE CLOSED RECORD REVIEW TO THE COUNCIL MEETING ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1997, AND CONSIDER IT PRIOR TO THE COMMITTEE MEETINGS. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE OPPOSED. Mayor Fahey indicated staff would prepare the requested information tomorrow and deliver it to the Council by tomorrow evening. She apologized for the delay. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 4 7. HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP, INCLUDING: (A) AREA 1 - CHANGE FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY (Location: Suchert Property in Five Corners Area) Planning Manager Rob Chave explained the property owner requested a change in the Comprehensive Plan designation from single-family to multi -family. He identified the approximately 5.2 acre property on the map. The Planning Board recommended denial of the request based on their concerns with increased traffic, buffers, etc. The Planning Board also recommended the City support the property owner and the neighborhood in working together to examine future development options during a neighborhood -based planning process. Henry Krist 3 Park Place Edmonds, said most people would agree the property is an eyesore. He felt any development would enhance the property as well as the community. Pointing out the property to the east was commercial and the property across the street was multi -family, he felt it was unlikely the property could be retained as a single family use. He urged the City to negotiate with the property owner to reach agreement regarding redevelopment. Mayor Fahey clarified the only action regarding this property was the request for a change in the Comprehensive Plan designation. Mr. Krist asked what the result of the proposed medium density designation would be. Mr. Chave answered there are two zoning classifications for a Comprehensive Plan medium density designation— RM 3 (one unit per 3,000 square feet of lot area) and RM 2.4 (one unit per 2,400 square feet of lot area). At the time of rezone, the surrounding neighborhood would be considered and a determination made regarding appropriate zoning. Due to the adjacent single family uses, the zoning likely would be RM 3. Al Cohen. 20820 Hillcrest Place. Edmonds, stated his opposition -to the proposed rezone was due to his concerns with traffic on Main Street and a change in the character of the neighborhood. He said multi- family was an inappropriate use of the property and it should remain single-family residential. Matthew Douglas, 21021 Pioneer Way Edmonds, identified his property on the map, the "green belt" area, and the dead end street. He explained the zoning of this property was a deciding factor in the purchase of his own property. He explained the only place children have to play is on the dead-end street due to the steep topography in the area. Development of this property as multi -family would detract from the neighborhood. He supported the reasons for the Planning Board's denial and said the negative effect on the quality of life should also be included as a reason for denial. He did not oppose single- family development on the property but said multi -family development would eliminate the nice, quiet, treed area. Mike Monroe 20910 88th Place West Edmonds, said his home, where he has lived for the last 14 years, is approximately 200 yards west of the property proposed to be changed. He recalled when the property was in Snohomish County, Mr. Suchert's application for a rezone of the property was denied—nothing has changed since that time. Although this process is only a change to the Comprehensive Plan designation, approval will make the rezone inevitable. He was opposed to the rezone because a RM 3 zone would result in approximately 75 units on the 5.2 acre property versus approximately 20 single- family or attached/clusiered homes with a single family designation. He felt this was a dramatic change and would result in increased traffic. Although he was not opposed to development, he was opposed to multi -family development because he felt it would be harmful to the single-family character of the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 5 neighborhood and have negative traffic impacts. He urged the Council to support the Planning Board's recommendation to deny the proposal. He submitted a copy of the 1992 rezone request. Brad Bettger, 8417 Main Street, Edmonds, owner of the RM 8 zoned property across the street from Dr. Suchert's property, explained his 5+ acre property had 25 units. He recommended the proposal not exceed RM 8 zoning or 25 units. He agreed the property is an eyesore and encouraged development and beautification of the property. Ron Manger. 21026 Pioneer Way, Edmonds, stated his opposition to the rezone which residents had also done when the rezone was requested in 1992. One of the major considerations when purchasing their home in 1989 was the zoning of the vacant lot which they expected would continue to be single-family. He noted there had never been any attempt by Dr. Suchert to discuss the property's development with the neighbors although it had now been suggested by the Planning Board. He was not personally opposed to Dr. Suchert maximizing his return on his investment but did not want the development subsidized by the adjacent property owners and affecting their quality of life. He said no new information had been submitted to the Planning Board to change the previous denial of the rezone request. Pete Meyer, 8511 Main Street, Edmonds, shared the concerns expressed previously and hoped the proposal would be denied. He pointed out it is already difficult to enter and exit onto Main Street. He expressed concern with the effect of an additional 75 units, possibly resulting in the need for several stop lights. He recommended denial of the proposal as the quality of the neighborhood would decrease and the cost of City operations would increase if it was approved. Robert Suchert. owner of the subject property, said'he acquired the property 35 years ago and has added parcels to it. The property is now the largest undeveloped parcel in Edmonds—a prime piece of property. He identified his office on the map and the nearby multi -family development, and the sewer easement that cannot be built upon. His plan was to have any development occur near the street and leave the valley in a park -like setting. He said Pioneer Way should be extended out to Main Street if only for emergency vehicles. He pointed out Shell Valley was not all single family; there are several duplexes. Regarding a comment made regarding a greenbelt, he pointed out this was private property. He noted a portion of the property had been zoned multi -family for 35+ years but he had not developed it. He favored development near the street that would make a beautiful entrance to the City. Robert P. Suchert, 8526 Main Street, Edmonds, supported the proposal, noting it would make the drive from Five Corners into the City more beautiful. He said the numerous large fir trees could be incorporated into the development which could be a very beautiful setting if the architecture was treated properly. He said consideration is being given to a senior -type multi -family development, possibly one with limited services such as a community clubhouse. He explained the increased density and main services would be located closer to Five Corners behind Dr. Suchert's office with duplexes and four- plexes further down, staying away from the hillside and the valley. He pointed out this type of development would have minimal impact on traffic. He stated the site could not be developed entirely with apartments because much of it is unbuildable. He stressed they wanted to develop a beautiful project the City can be proud of. Mertice Anderson, 20826 88th Place West, Edmonds, a resident for over 12 years, pointed out although the area is a dead-end, there are numerous houses on the dead end which all use the same street. She said perhaps the property needed to be developed but felt it should be developed single-family. Dennis Tessier, 21100 Pioneer Way, Edmonds, said with a RM 2.4 zoning, there could be approximately 566 units on this property, not including the other RM 2 area. According to the parking requirements in Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 6 Edmonds Community Development Code, that would include parking for over 1,000 vehicles on this portion of the site. He was opposed to a through street in this area because a lot of children play on Pioneer Way. In an emergency, the Police and Fire Departments have access from Yost Park and other areas. Gayllynn Beighton, Chiles & Company, 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6701 Seattle, 98104, said they are actively pursuing a sale of the property with plans to redevelop it. She expressed concern with some of the information provided by the public, particularly that over 500 units could be constructed on the site. Interested developers have indicated a maximum of 150-160 units could be constructed on the site. She pointed out GMA identifies South Snohomish County and Edmonds as an urban area; 150 units on the site would be less that 1 % of the City's total population. This one -of -a -kind property, a total of 8.5 acres, could be developed with a beautiful complex; some of the leading developers in Puget Sound are interested in purchasing the property. She pointed out it was not feasible to develop the property with single family homes due to the steep slopes. She stressed further education needs to take place before the Council makes a decision. She reiterated this property was an incredible opportunity for the City to accommodate its mandated growth. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way. Edmonds, said residents should be entitled to meet with the Police and Fire Departments and to determine the effects of increased traffic as well as water/sewer difficulties in the area before development occurs. Gary Marshall; 8718 Main Street Edmonds, two lots west of the subject property, recommended the Council respect the Planning Board's recommendation to deny the proposal. Wanda Stewart, 8419 Main Street. Edmonds (across the street from the subject property), objected to 150 units on the property and felt single-family development was acceptable. Linda B1ossy. 8724 Main Street, Edmonds, was opposed to the proposal, stating there was no room for any more traffic at Five Corners. She described the current congestion which results in many near - accidents. Mayor Fahey advised the Council was in receipt of two letters, 1) from Lois/Ted Spepa, dated September 25, recommending agreement with the Planning Board recommendation to deny the rezone, and 2) from Gary Inwards, 8511 Main Street, who is also opposed to a change in zoning. A letter provided tonight signed by Loren Foss and Joyce Miller, stated their strong support of the Planning Board's preliminary recommendation to deny the request. Councilmember Haakenson .noted the Council packet also contained letters from the Matthews and Taylors who were opposed to the zoning change. Councilmember Van Hollebeke requested clarification of the number of dwelling units that could be constructed on the site. Mr. Chave said, assuming the zoning would be RM 3 and would be combined with the property to the southeast which is already zoned RM 2.4, there could be a total of approximately 150 units, but certainly not 500. In view of the Planning Board's recommendation to deny the request due to their concern with traffic, access, topography, and buffering of uses as well as the input provided by residents, Councilmember Nordquist supported the denial of the request. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, TO UPHOLD DENIAL OF THE REQUEST. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 7 Council President Earling agreed with the suggestion that Dr. Suchert and the neighbors discuss this issue and hoped a meaningful dialogue would take place that would allow Dr. Suchert to develop the property in a way that was amenable to the surrounding property owners. He pointed out the statement that development would result in the potential for 500 units was unfair as it was not possible to accommodate that many units on the site. Councilmember Van Hollebeke echoed Council President Earling's comments, noting the testimony suggested there had not been much discussion other than in the forum of the Planning Board or Council meetings. He observed many of the neighbors were interested in discussing development and hoped a meeting between Dr. Suchert and property owners would result in a win-win situation. He suggested the City facilitate such a meeting if possible. Councilmember Haakenson recalled Mr. Manger's comment that nothing had changed since 1992 and the neighbors had not supported a change in the zoning at that time. He supported Dr. Suchert's discussing the development of the property with the neighborhood to reach a win-win solution. He also supported the Planning Board's decision to deny the proposal. Mr. Olbrechts clarified until the Council voted on the ordinance, this was not a final decision and could be changed prior to adoption of the ordinance. This was only a tentative 'decision to deny the designation change. Councilmember White clarified the motion was a "directive to staff." MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Fahey declared a five minute recess. (B) AREA 4 - CHANGE FROM MULTI -FAMILY HIGH DENSITY TO MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL (Location: Main Street East of 6th Avenue South) Council President Earling disclosed one of the parcels in this area was offered for sale by his firm two years ago and was sold by another company. He advised the City Attorney informed him there was no reason he could not participate. Mr. Chave identified the area on the map that is currently zoned multi -family and developed with a mix of multi-family and office/commercial uses. He noted this property is located to the immediate west of the boundary of the BC zone. The Planning Board recommended approval of the change in designation from multi -family to a mixed use designation as it is consistent with the development of the property and adjoining uses to the west. Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing on Item 7B. There were no members of the audience present who wished to address the Council. Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the hearing and remanded the matter to Council. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, TO ACCEPT THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGE AND DIRECT STAFF TO INCLUDE IT IN THE AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. MOTION CARRIED. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 8 (C) AREA 7 - CHANGE FROM MIXED USE COMMERCIAL TO MULTI -FAMILY HIGH DENSITY (Location: 73rd Place West Near Steven's Hospital) Mr. Chave identified the property on the map and said it was currently zoned for multi -family development. The property owner is interested in increasing the density to the same as the property to the immediate east, RM 1.5. It is currently designated in the Comprehensive Plan as mixed use. The Planning Board recommended denial with the understanding that staff will work on a new mixed use zoning classification to apply to this general area that would allow the property owner more options than RM 1.5. He explained the area is already designated for mixed use; a change to multi -family may undermine mixed use development. Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing on Item 7C. There were no members of the audience present who wished to address the Council. Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the hearing and remanded the matter to Council. Councilmember Van Hollebeke supported the Planning Board's recommendation, noting the area near the hospital is undergoing a great deal of change and obviously will not remain single-family residential. He also supported the concept of reviewing the area and developing options that could be to the property owner's advantage. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILM EMBER HAAKENSON, TO ACCEPT THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION FOR DENIAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. MOTION CARRIED. (D) AREA 8 CHANGE FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY (Location: 238th Street Southwest East of SR -104) Mr. Chave displayed a map of the area, noting this was a unique circumstance due to the existing duplex on this property and to the east. Under Snohomish County zoning, duplexes were allowed within the single family zone; however, Edmonds allows duplexes only in the multi -family zone. Upon annexation, the property was zoned single-family, a zoning equivalent to Snohomish County. The proposal is to change the Comprehensive Plan designation to the lowest level of multi -family with the intent to change the zoning to RM 3 which would enable development of duplexes on the property. He described surrounding uses which include a church on the south, a duplex on the property, single family development on the east and north, and multi-family/commercial on the west. He commented this is a transitional area where duplexes would be appropriate. The Planning Board recommended approval with the Board intending to undertake a comprehensive review of the area around 238th for the next round of Comprehensive Plan amendments. Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing on Item 7D). Dale Hanberg, 500 Paradise Lane. Edmonds, owner of the property across the street from the subject property, said 238th was appropriate for multi -family, but single-family uses were not, due to the established pattern. He recommended the Council approve the requested change. Steven Counter. 8606 238th Street SW. Edmonds, identified his property and the surrounding uses, noting there is a lot of traffic on 238th. Although he might like to see the property developed, as a property owner living in a small cul-de-sac for the past three years, he was concerned with the possibility of construction hours, noise, traffic patterns, the number of units allowed, parking, lights, etc. He was concerned with additional traffic on 238th and the effect this rezone would have on property values. He Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 9 asked how the City would respond to concerns about development and wanted assurance his property would retain its value. Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the hearing and remanded the matter to Council. Councilmember Nordquist commented there were two levels to changing a property's use—the change in the Comprehensive Plan designation and a rezone. Following the Comprehensive Plan change, the Planning Department would take into consideration the surrounding properties to determine the best zoning for the property. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, TO APPROVE THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND THE DESIGNATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember White asked if the impact on surrounding property values was considered during the rezone process. Mr. Chave replied no study is done; however, staff does try to identify surrounding uses and determine if they are consistent and compatible with the rezone. (E) AREA 9 - CHANGE FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (Location: 100th Avenue West at 238th Street Southwest) Mr. Chave said this area is located in a newly annexed area and is currently developed with a service station on the north portion and a dental office on the south with a street bisecting the property. It was brought to the City's attention by the owner that the zoning was still single-family although it had clearly been commercial for many years. The requested change would bring the Comprehensive Plan into compliance with the Zoning Code. He stressed this would not expand the commercial area; the requested designation was Neighborhood Commercial, small scale commercial compatible with the neighborhood. For Councilmember Nordquist, Mr. Chave said if the Comprehensive Plan designation was changed, the existing structures could be removed and something else allowed to be constructed in the Neighborhood Commercial Zone. COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HAAIENSON, TO EXTEND THE HEARING FOR FIVE MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing. Herb Dake, 23828 101st West, Edmonds, a resident of the area for 41 years, said he did not object to the Texaco Station or the transmission shop property being changed to commercial as that was how they were originally constructed. He did object to changing the designation of the dental office property because he built it in 1955 as a residence. The house was sold and the new residents, after living in the house two years, asked the neighbors if a young dentist could open his practice in the house. The neighbors verbally agreed but with the provision it only be operated as a dental office and if that use was discontinued, the house would return to a residence. Subsequently, the dental office was sold to Dr. Neff and then leased to Dr. Cardeff. A request to rezone the property commercial was denied by Snohomish County. Neighbors continue to be opposed to a commercial rezone and want the house used as a residence. Dr. Ed Cardeff lease holder of the property at 10014 238th Street SW, Edmonds, said Ted Neff is the current property owner and Dr. Cardeff has a lease option to purchase the property. The building, which Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 10 was constructed in 1955, is in need of improvements; however, he was told by the City that he could not remodel it until a Comprehensive Plan change was made. He recommended the Council accept the Planning Board's recommendation for Neighborhood Commercial designation. Jim Fawcett, 23808 101st Ave West, Edmonds, said his home is approximately 40 feet west of the dental office. He pointed out that he and a number of residents in the neighborhood had not received notification of this Comprehensive Plan change for either the Planning Board or City Council meetings; there may have been more residents to speak on the change if they had been notified. He said both the Texaco Station and the dental office have been ideal neighbors. He agreed with changing the Comprehensive Plan designation for the Texaco Station but requested the Council either retain the existing dental office or revert it to a single-family residence as was originally intended. Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the hearing. Councilmember White questioned the noticing procedure for this change. City Clerk Sandy Chase advised approximately 90 notices were mailed but she did not see Mr. Fawcett's name on the list. She indicated the list for the Council hearing was obtained from the Planning Department and notices were sent to residents within 300 feet of the Comprehensive Plan change. Mr. 01brechts advised if it was determined a problem existed with noticing, the hearing may need to be renoticed. Councilmember White asked what assurance the City had that the notices were mailed. Ms. Chase advised an Affidavit of Mailing is prepared. COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO EXTEND THE HEARING 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Haakenson said after looking at the property, he was concerned that 238th goes through the property and that single-family uses surround the dental office. In his view, it appeared the dental office should remain single-family residential but questioned how that could be done and allow the dental office to remain. He was in agreement with the proposed Comprehensive Plan change for the Texaco property. Councilmember White asked what uses could occur in the Neighborhood Commercial zone. Mr. Chave answered small scale commercial uses such as Five Corners, Perrinville, etc. Mr. Olbrechts read the permitted uses which include neighborhood oriented retail stores, retail services uses, office and outpatient clinics, dry cleaning, small animal hospitals, etc. Councilmember White asked whether the dental office could be torn down and a convenience store constructed on the property if the Comprehensive Plan designation and subsequently the zoning were changed to Neighborhood Commercial. Mr. Chave answered yes, if there was sufficient lot area, etc. Mayor Fahey asked if notices were sent to this area when this change was considered by the Planning Board. Mr. Chave answered yes. He noted this was the first indication that notices had not been received. Mayor Fahey asked if the Planning Board was aware of the concern regarding the rezone of the dental office when they made the recommendation to approve the change. Mr. Chave recalled concern was expressed to the Planning Board but there had not been any direct testimony against this property. A number of residents spoke to the Planning Board wanting to ensure the Neighborhood Commercial zoning did not extend back into the single-family neighborhood. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 1 I Councilmember White asked if a Conditional Use permit would be available for the dental office. Mr. Chave answered some uses are allowed under Home Occupancy but believed medical/dental was specifically prohibited. Councilmember White asked what the legal status of the dental office would be if the Council denied the Planning Board's recommendation to change the designation for this property. Mr. Chave answered it would be a non -conforming use although he would need to confirm with Snohomish County that it was a legally non -conforming use when in the county. If so, the use could continued unabated but no extensive remodeling could take place (interior remodeling likely would be acceptable but no expansion would be allowed). Councilmember Myers observed the building is older; if the change is not approved and the dental office is not allowed to make renovations, the dentist would be forced out in a few years. Mr. Chave agreed, noting this is the intent of allowing a non -conforming use. Councilmember Myers supported the recommendation to change the property's designation to Neighborhood Commercial. Councilmember Van Hollebeke questioned how the City could allow the present use to continue and allow some modifications. Mr. Chave answered Neighborhood Commercial is the lowest level of commercial activity. With single-family zoning, this use would not be allowed. He explained during the zoning process, the use could be limited via a contract rezone if the property owner was willing. He stressed once the Comprehensive Plan designation was changed, the property owner had the right to compatible zoning. In response to an earlier question, Mr. Olbrechts advised the dental office could not expand under a Conditional Use Permit as the use would not be allowed in a residential zone. Ms. Chase advised she located Mr. Fawcett's address on the list of notices mailed but it was addressed to a Steven R. Lier so the notice was returned. Mr. Fawcett said W. Lier was the previous owner. Mayor Fahey asked how many notices were returned. Ms. Chase answered approximately 5 of the 90 notices had been returned. She noted this information was used for the Planning Board public hearing and subsequently for this public hearing; addresses from which a notice was returned were not included in the mailing for the City Council public hearing. Council President Earling observed there likely were some notices returned for all public hearings. Public hearings could not be renoticed as a result of a few returned notices. If the Council approved the recommendation from the Planning Board to change the Comprehensive Plan designation, there would also be a public process for the zoning change. He noted although the neighbors said the dental office was an asset to the community, it would not remain if the Comprehensive Plan designation is not changed. He supported the Planning Board's recommendation due to the public process available at the rezone. Mr. Olbrechts explained the City's ordinance required the use of the records of the County's assessors office. As no mistakes were made, another public hearing would not be necessary. He pointed out any change to the Comprehensive Plan would also require a change to the Zoning Code to conform with the Comprehensive Plan amendment. The change to the Zoning Code likely would take place within the next six months due to the State's notification that the City must readopt its Zoning Code in its entirety. At that point, the Zoning Code must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 12 Mayor Fahey asked what the ramifications would be if the dental office was not established as a legal use in the county. Mr. Olbrechts answered the City would then have the legal authority to abate the building. He explained the City is not obligated to enforce all the Zoning Code provisions; often such a situation is not enforced. He noted this would affect the marketability of the building. COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, TO ADOPT THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THIS PROPERTY AND INCLUDE IT IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING AND COUNCILMEMBERS MILLER, VAN HOLLEBEKE, MYERS IN FAVOR; AND COUNCILMEMBERS WHITE, NORDQUIST, AND HAAKENSON OPPOSED. Mr. Olbrechts advised four votes would be required to approve the Comprehensive Plan amendment ordinance. 8. AUTHORIZATION TO AWARD SENIOR CENTER LIBRARY/LOBBY FLOOR STRUCTURAL REPAIR CONTRACT TO LOWEST RESPONSIVE QUOTE AND APPROPRIATE MONEYS NOT-TO-EXCEED $20,000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO COVER REPAIR COSTS Mayor Fahey explained in November, 1996, high winds and tides created significant problems at the Senior Center including water under the building. As a result, some exploration of the damage and whether it was attributable to the storm was needed. The insurance provider agreed to do the exploration to determine whether they would cover the costs of the damage. The exploration revealed severe problems with the ground under the Senior Center, caused not by the storm but by a combination of the type of soil (a mixture of sawdust which is decomposing) and the exacerbation caused by tides. The insurance company's findings indicated the cost to truly address the problems and stabilize the floor was estimated at $86,000 for a long term fix that would last 20 years but would only address a small section of the building. It is believed the same conditions exist in the entire structure. The estimated cost to stabilize the floors throughout the Center is $600,000. The City's grant request to cover the $86,000 repair was denied. An existing grant of $75,000 was allocated for furnace replacement and window upgrades. The City has verbal authorization to transfer the use of these funds to the $86,000 permanent floor repair. However, using the grant for the floor would leave the furnace replacement and window upgrades unfunded. Further, an extensive repair could not be accomplished by mid-November and it would probably be January or later before floor replacement could occur which is not acceptable to the Senior Center. Based on discussions with the Senior Center Director, boardmembers and staff, it was decided that it would be in everyone's best interest to do a temporary fix to make the facility usable. In the meantime, a more extensive planning process would be undertaken to determine the Senior Center's needs. This fix would have a 2 - 5 year life expectancy depending on weather conditions and high tides that constantly undermine the subsurface ground and would cost $15,000 - $20,000. The Senior Center also wants the $75,000 grant to be used for the furnaces which are in critical need of replacement. Mayor Fahey advised three construction firms from the Small Works Roster will provide quotes for the job; quotes would be opened at 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 9. The Mayor and staff would like to award a contract to the firm with the lowest quote by Wednesday, October 15 and have the contractor begin work on October 21 with completion by November 2. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 13 COUNCILMEMBER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO AWARD SENIOR CENTER LIBRARY/LOBBY FLOOR STRUCTURAL REPAIR CONTRACT TO LOWEST RESPONSIVE QUOTE AND APPROPRIATE MONEYS NOT -TO -EXCEED $20,000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO COVER REPAIR COSTS. Councilmember Myers said although the Senior Center is very valuable to the community, he was concerned with spending $20,000 on a project with only a 2 - 5 year life expectancy but there did not appear to be much choice. He pointed out the need to determine whether to continue funding such items or determine other ways to fund them. He looked forward to the proposed long term planning process and the future use of the building. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Fahey advised they are actively pursuing a comprehensive plan for the Senior Center. A rough estimate of all the remodeling and repairs necessary for the building is approximately $1.5 million and result in a building with only a 20 year life expectancy. They will continue to develop options for addressing problems. She thanked the Council for their support of this project. 9. MAYOR Mayor Fahey referred to the memo regarding a clarification of street overlay work and explained on September 23, 1997, Councilmember Nordquist pulled Agenda Item E from the Consent Agenda. He desired to read into the record the streets that would be included in this year's overlay project. The original bid proposal contained three schedules --A, B, and C. The bids came in much higher than anticipated due to increasing costs of asphalt and there was only enough money budgeted to cover the streets listed in Schedule A at a cost of $75,889. When Councilmember Nordquist listed the streets in the overlay project, he included the streets in Schedules A, B, and C. The motion approved Consent Item E. The recommendation from staff was to only do the streets included in Schedule A. Staff is now concerned that by reading the streets included in Schedule B and C, there was the impression given that these streets were going to be included in the overlay projects. However, the funds approved only cover Schedule A. Therefore, the minutes of September 23 inaccurately identify the action approved by the passage of Item E. Staff also has concerns that citizens on the other streets mentioned will expect their streets to be done this year since they were made a part of the record. Mayor Fahey requested the Council approve a correction to the minutes of September 23. COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, TO APPROVE A CORRECTION TO THE SEPTEMBER 23 MINUTES WHICH STATES THE APPROVED ACTION AND INDICATES SCHEDULES B AND C WERE NOT FUNDED. MOTION CARRIED. 10. COUNCIL Council President Earling advised Agenda Item 6 on tonight's agenda (Closed Record Hearing on the Shoreline Application Variance Request by the Port of Edmonds) would be considered prior to the Council Committee meetings on October 14, 1997, and reminded Council to save the information packet they received this evening on this matter. Council President Earling reported the RTA had an $18 million appropriation granted for next year. He noted this issue must still go to Congress and to the President. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 14 Councilmember White commented that the bill that included authorization for RTA funding was in jeopardy due to the Campaign Finance Reform Amendment. He urged citizens to call their representative. Councilmember Nordquist referred to a Seattle Times article he asked be included in the Council packet regarding smaller lots and cheaper homes, another interesting approach to the ever-changing zoning and planning in jurisdictions and enhancements to the City. Councilmember Myers advised with the addition of the item for full Council review next week, some items on the Public Safety Committee agenda would need to be postponed to November. He requested staff invite Mr. Miller who spoke regarding skateboarding, as well as Parks and Recreation Manager Arvilla Ohlde to the November Public Safety Committee meeting. Further, he requested the City Attorney provide a legal opinion regarding skateboarding in City streets. Councilmember White requested Councilmembers read in detail the information staff would be providing regarding the Closed Record Review of the Shoreline Application Variance Request by the Port of Edmonds. He pointed out the purpose of the quasi judicial process was to determine whether the Hearing Examiner's decision was correct and questioned how that could be accomplished without the information upon which the Hearing Examiner based his conclusions. Councilmember Miller requested staff provide to him, and any other Councilmembers, a copy of the Strategic Five Year Plan. His intent is to overlay staff s proposed budget with the Strategic Plan. Student Representative Streit announced the Washington Association of Student Council Conference was scheduled for October 11 and 12 and would include discussion of activities and sharing of ideas. He advised a forum was held at Meadowdale High School last night regarding the possible change of the Chief mascot due to cultural awareness and sensitivity. He commented this was a very volatile, emotional issue; many alumni and students attended the forum. He urged citizens to have an open mind about the change. He reported last week was homecoming week at Meadowdale High School and the assembly was reported to the best ever. He thanked everyone involved. Mayor Fahey announced the continued public bearing regarding the Comprehensive Plan map amendment in Area 5-10 (95th Place West and SR 104) was scheduled for October 21. Council action will be requested with final action taking place with the Council's approval of the ordinance on a future agenda. With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:47 p.m. BARBARA S. FAHEY, MAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes October 7, 1997 Page 15 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Plaza Meeting Room - Library Building 650 Main Street 7:00 -10:00 D.m. OCTOBER 7, 1997 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER FLAG SALUTE 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #18973 THRU #20426 FOR THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 29, 1997, IN THE AMOUNT OF $175,968.72; AND APPROVAL OF PAYROLL WARRANTS #18109 THRU #18284 FOR THE PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER 16 THRU SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, IN THE AMOUNT OF $341,491.77. (D) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997, FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT POWER TRANSFER IMPROVEMENTS AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO SERVICE ELECTRIC ($36,196.38, Including Sales Tax) (E) APPROVAL OF 1997 -1998 FIRE UNION LABOR AGREEMENT (F) APPROVAL OF ADDITIONAL CUSTODIAL POSITION 3. AUDIENCE (3 minute limit per person) 4. (10 Min.) PROCLAMATION REGARDING FIRE PREVENTION WEEK (OCTOBER 5 -11) 5. (15 Min.) SECOND HEARING ON THE PROPOSED "CLAY" ANNEXATION LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 99 AND 234TH STREET SOUTHWEST AND THE ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT THE ANNEXATION, ESTABLISH COMPARABLE ZONING FOR THE SUBJECT AREA AND ESTABLISH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANNEXATION. (Applicant/Proponent: Diana Clay / File No. AX -96- 123) 6. (30 Min.) CLOSED RECORD REVIEW ON THE SHORELINE APPLICATION VARIANCE REQUEST BY THE PORT OF EDMONDS 7. (60 Min.) HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP, INCLUDING: (A) AREA 1 - CHANGE FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MULTI -FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY (Location: Suchert Property in Five Corners Area) (B) AREA 4 - CHANGE FROM MULTI -FAMILY HIGH DENSITY TO MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL (Location: Main Street East of 6th Avenue South) (C) AREA 7 - CHANGE FROM MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL TO MULTI -FAMILY HIGH DENSITY (Location: 73rd Place West Near Steven's Hospital) (D) AREA 8 - CHANGE FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO MULTI- FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY (Location: 238th Street Southwest East of SR -104) (E) AREA 9 - CHANGE FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (Location: 100th Avenue West at 238th Street Southwest) 1 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA OCTOBER 7, 1997 PAGE 2 8. (5 Min.) MAYOR 9. (15 Min.) COUNCIL 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, Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 32.