Loading...
09/14/1998 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 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 Gary Haakenson, Council President Dave Earling, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Jim White, Councilmember Dick Van Hollebeke, Councilmember Thomas A. Miller, Councilmember ABSENT John Nordquist, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Robin Hickok, Police Chief Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor James Walker, City Engineer Jamal Mahmoud, Traffic Engineer Brent Hunter, Human Resources Director Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jeannie Dines, Recorder Mayor Fahey explained she had expected to be unable to attend tonight's Council meeting due to a meeting in Washington DC. However, a decision was made to conduct the meeting via a conference call instead. 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Council President Haakenson requested Item B be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON, FOR APPROVAL OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #25676 THROUGH #27307 FOR THE WEEK OF AUGUST 31, 1998, IN THE AMOUNT OF $343,499.02. APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #25679 THROUGH #27447 FOR THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 7, 1998, IN THE AMOUNT OF $366,368.39. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL WARRANTS #21768 THROUGH #21936 FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 16 THROUGH 31, 1998, IN THE AMOUNT OF $376,120.74 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 1 (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM DANIEL A. PETERSEN, DDS ($165.00 + TAX) (E) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR OFFICE SUPPLIES, FURNISHINGS, EQUIPMENT, AND PRINTING SERVICES (F) AUTHORIZATION TO EXTEND LEASE FOR 1996 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AS REPLACEMENT CAR FOR SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER (G) APPROVAL OF COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR JOB DESCRIPTION (H) APPROVAL OF EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT FOR INTERIM FIRE CHIEF (I) ACCEPTANCE OF QUIT CLAIM DEED AT 7118 - 174" STREET SW FROM HENRY M. AND SHERIE D. PELTO Item B: Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of September 1, 1998 Council President Haakenson requested the following statement be added on page 16, end of the second sentence in the first paragraph, under Council Reports: "after listening to tonight's testimony." COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, Amended FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM B. MOTION CARRIED. The item approved is as follows: (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 1,1998 Mayor Fahey announced the Council made a decision approximately a month ago to delay the audience comment portion of the agenda until after any public hearings have been concluded. Audience Comment is listed as Item 7 on the agenda and will take place following the four public hearings scheduled on tonight's agenda (Item 3 -6). 3. PUBLIC HEARING - VACATION OF THE 10 -FOOT BY 25 -FOOT SLOPE EASEMENT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 654 - 5TH AVENUE SOUTH, RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 7905090295 (File No. ST- 98 -74) Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson displayed a transparency showing the location of the slope easement. He explained the property is located on the west side of 5' Avenue South (Lots 7 and 8). He identified the vegetation shown on the map and what the applicant believed were the slope easements on the property. He explained this is an unusual request because it is vacation of an easement granted to the City at the time 5TH Avenue North was constructed for the purpose of the roadway and to provide protection for the slope from the roadway to the adjacent properties. He explained the applicant's drawing shows two slope easements on the property, the first a 10 -foot wide easement on the northern 25 feet of Lot 8. The second easement, which the applicant incorrectly identified as a 10 -foot wide easement on the northern 25 feet of Lot 7, is actually a 10 -foot wide easement that runs the entire length of Lot 7 (from the southern lot line of Lot 7 to the northern property line of Lot 7). The Engineering Division determined the easement is not necessary for further purposes along 5TH Avenue; therefore, staff recommends the Council grant the request to vacate the entire easement across Lot 7. Councilmember Earling questioned whether the title of this item was the same as described in the narrative. Mr. Wilson explained the actual easement is along the east side of Lot 7 adjacent to 5th Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 2 Avenue North. The applicant originally identified the easement as the southern 25 -foot easement on Lot 7, but staff determined the easement actually runs the entire length of Lot 7. Councilmember Earling questioned whether the title of the item versus what was actually taking place provided adequate notice of the Council's action to the public. City Attorney Scott Snyder responded that staffs research indicates this vacation was granted to the City for construction purposes and is similar to a utility easement the City no longer needs. Normally a vacation of this type would be placed on the Council Consent Agenda. It was felt because this affected development rights and was originally obtained as part of the street easement, it should be placed on the Council agenda and noticed as a public hearing to determine if there was any public use for the easement. He summarized the normal strict procedural requirements which apply to street vacations was not applicable to this slope easement and publication on the agenda is sufficient. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said he lives approximately 1 %s blocks from the proposed vacation and is somewhat familiar with the very steep slope from the street. He asked if the proposal was to build up to the eastern property line. Mr. Wilson answered yes, there is no street setback in the BC zone. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said the structural wall of the building would become the retaining wall to support the slope. Mr. Wilson agreed this would be one of the issues addressed in reviewing the plans. Councilmember Van Hollebeke expressed concern the City would have liability for any structural failure if the easement is granted. Mr. Wilson said excavation in that area could not occur until the building permit is issued. This project has been reviewed by the Architectural Design Board, which is one of many steps this project must go through. After all necessary design approvals are obtained, a building permit must be issued for the project which will include final civil drawings which staff will review carefully to ensure the integrity of the 5TH Avenue right -of -way is maintained. Mr. Snyder explained the property owner owes the duty of lateral and adjacent support for neighboring properties; any liability is the responsibility of the person undertaking construction and not the City. Councilmember Miller assumed the applicant did not object to staffs recommendation to vacate the entire easement. Mr. Wilson answered staff is not aware of any objection; Exhibit 3, the preliminary layout of the proposed building, indicates it could not be accommodated unless the entire easement is vacated. Applicant Ken Gregory, 600 Main Street, #C, Edmonds, said they did not originally understand the location of the easement but the entire 10 -foot easement the width of Lot 7 was acceptable to them. He explained the vacation of the easement was necessary to extend the building across the easement. He said the shoring and retaining wall will fulfill the same purpose as the easement and perhaps better. Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing. Julie Sevenich, Management Northwest, 120 West Dayton, Suite C1, Edmonds, representing Dr. Brust, the property owner to the north, wished only to clarify the action being taken. W. Lowell Reed, said he now understood enough from staffs explanation; they previously had difficulty understanding the action proposed in the notice. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED, BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO EXTEND THE HEARING FOR TEN MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 3 Lucian Schmit, 545 - 3" Avenue South, Edmonds, said he struggled to determine what the proposed action would be based on the information in the notice. He displayed a transparency of the notice and a road on 5TH Avenue that provides access to the condominium's garages. He originally believed the vacation of a 10- x 25 -foot slope easement on the south side of the property meant the road currently used to access condominium garages would be removed. In view of this confusion, he urged the City to post better notices so the public would have a better understanding of the proposed action and have an opportunity to respond. He complimented the City for placing the City Council agenda on the Internet. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the hearing and remanded the matter to Council for deliberation. COUNCILMEMBER EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY ORDINANCE FOR COUNCIL'S APPROVAL, GRANTING THE VACATION OF THE SLOPE EASEMENT RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 7905090295 COVERING THE EASTERN 10 -FEET OF LOT SEVEN OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Snyder explained following Council approval of this item, staff requested he prepare an ordinance for Council consideration that would permit an expedited process (eliminating public hearings) for utility-type easements for which the City paid nothing and which do not affect the public right -of -way or access to property. 4. PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO PLACE A THREE-HOUR PARKING RESTRICTION ON SPRAGUE STREET FROM EDMONDS STREET TO 6TH AVENUE NORTH AND THE 400 BLOCK OF 3RD AVENUE NORTH City Engineer Jim Walker explained parking on Sprague Street was discussed during a Council committee meeting last month. Residents in the area were surveyed and indicated the impacts from ferry commuter parking in their neighborhood were significant and wanted to have the three -hour parking restrictions in their neighborhood similar to what has been enacted in other areas of the City. The other area being discussed (the 400 block of 3RD Avenue North) was a result of a petition by the majority of residents on the street (staff was told all but two of the residents signed the petition). The residents in this area also wanted to solve the problem of ferry commuters parking in front of their houses. For Council President Haakensdn, Mr. Walker said of the residents on Sprague Street who responded to the survey, nine were in favor of enacting the parking restrictions that have been used in other areas where long term ferry commuter parking has occurred and only two were opposed. Surveys were also done in other areas, including parts of 3' Avenue North but not the section south of 4' Avenue; those results were submitted via a petition. Councilmember Van Hollebeke inquired about the results of the petition. Traffic Engineer Jamal Mahmoud displayed transparencies of the signed petitions. Mr. Walker said the petitions were submitted after the issue was discussed at the Council committee meeting last month. Eric Adams, 419 - 3RD Avenue North, Edmonds, said he estimated there are 28 parking spaces on their street. Today, there were six cars parking in those spaces, at 6:30 p.m. there were nine cars. He said this is typical of most weekdays. The only day there is a problem with parking in this neighborhood is on Sunday when the Christian College holds church services. He pointed out the proposed parking Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 4 restrictions do not cover Sunday. He said the notice regarding this item did not include information that the parking restrictions did not cover Sundays, which may have misled the residents in the neighborhood to believe it would address the church parking. He said the survey that was sent to other neighborhoods was not sent to their neighborhood. The explanation on the petition includes the statement "of cars being parked all day, overnight, and all weekend." He pointed out all weekend would not be addressed from 3:01 p.m. on Saturday to 2:59 p.m. Monday. He said "all week" is already addressed via the 72 hour parking restriction the City currently enforces. He said there have been several complaints registered against his house by one of their neighbors, who organized the petition and who incorrectly report the amount of time vehicles are parking. He felt erecting signs with this parking restriction would be unsightly, not user friendly, and did not address the issue of complaints. He said the City's Police Department was unable to provide him with the number of tickets that have been issued and the number of times towing was done. William Adams, 419 - 3" Avenue North, Edmonds, indicated Eric Adams spoke on his behalf. Geraldine Sorlie, 421 Sprague, Edmonds, expressed concern with ferry parking in front of her home that has occurred for a long time. She discovered this in October 1997 when she placed notices on cars parked on her street seeking a carpool to Seattle, believing the vehicles belonged to residents of the apartments, but most of the respondents lived in Kingston. At this time she called the City and staff indicated they were aware of this, explained the possibility of a three -hour parking restriction, and invited her to write a letter. In spring 1998, after talking with her neighbors, she wrote a letter to Councilmember Plunkett who viewed the situation. She also spoke with Mr. Mahmoud who distributed a survey to their neighborhood as well as others. She explained residents in her neighborhood are not concerned with parking for special events, only with ferry commuter parking on weekends. She submitted photos to the City Clerk showing Edmonds Street which has the three -hour parking restriction and Sprague Street which does not and indicating the three -hour parking signs are a deterrent to long- term parking. Jane Cobb, 431 - 3"D Avenue North, Edmonds, spoke in favor of the three -hour parking restriction on 3RD Avenue. She stated they are not opposed to parking for the Taste of Edmonds, Arts Festival, etc. because those are temporary events. However, vehicles that remain all weekend, leave litter, cause noise, etc. are annoying. She said these vehicles prevent visitors from parking in front of their house. If the three -hour parking restriction is enacted, she encouraged the City to offer a residential pass. Mayor Fahey asked City Clerk Sandy Chase to describe the residential parking permit. Ms. Chase explained there is a residential parking permit available to residents who reside in a three -hour parking zone. There is an administrative charge of $10 per year. The permit allows residents to park for an extended period of rime. She explained the permit is specific to an automobile, and vehicle registration and proof of residence are required. A visitor's permit, which is placed on a vehicle's dashboard, is also available for $5 per year when a residential parking permit is purchased. Council President Haakenson reported the Council received a letter from Steven Cobb who is also in favor of the three -hour parking restriction. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON, TO EXTEND THE HEARING FOR TEN MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 5 Mary Beth Walsh, 416 Daley, Edmonds, said if the three -hour parking restriction is extended to 3rd Avenue, ferry commuter parking will move to Daley as has happened before. She urged the City to consider the parking problem in Edmonds and not address it one street at a time. Mayor Fahey read a letter from Harold and Arline Jensen, 415 - 3RD Avenue North, Edmonds, which stated the three -hour parking restriction from midnight to 6:00 p.m. would greatly relieve congestion on 3rd Avenue North. The letter stated the rule must apply to not only strangers but also neighbors who make a habit of permanent parking in front of their neighbor's home. The letter referred to constant harassment and "cat and mouse games with cars" that needs to be stopped. Council President Haakenson requested Mr. Mahmoud circulate the petition to the Council. Council President Haakenson agreed with Ms. Walsh's comment regarding ferry commuter parking "creep" and said a parking garage in the City is the only way the parking problem will be solved. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Fahey remanded the matter to Council for deliberation. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, FOR APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED THREE -HOUR PARKING RESTRICTION ON SPRAGUE STREET. Councilmember Earling said the City needs to solve its long -term need for parking but he would support the motion as it would begin to address the issue. MOTION CARRIED, Councilmember Van Hollebeke observed the petition indicates the majority of residents on 3' Avenue are in favor of the three -hour parking restriction. Councilmember Plunkett said he would support the three -hour parking restriction in this area also as all the residents except one or two were in favor of it. Although the petition may not be as clear and concise as some may like, he was hesitant to question the judgment of those signing the petition. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON, TO APPROVE THE THREE -HOUR PARKING RESTRICTION ON THE 400 BLOCK OF 3RD AVENUE NORTH. Council President Haakenson asked if the proposed three -hour parking on 3" Avenue was only in the 400 block. Mr. Walker answered yes, that was the proposal. Council President Haakenson asked if the restriction was seven days per week. Mr. Mahmoud said the sign will read, "from midnight to 6:00 p.m. except Sundays and holidays." Council President Haakenson asked why the restriction would not be seven days per week. Mr. Mahmoud said all three -hour parking restriction signs read this way. Council President Haakenson recalled this issue came up when a three -hour parking restriction was requested on Admiral Way and the restriction was established seven days per week, 24 -hours per day. Mr. Snyder said it was within the Council's legislative discretion to establish that restriction but the City's ability to provide the enforcement should also be considered. Council President Haakenson said he would support the motion if it was a three -hour parking restriction seven days a week. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 6 Councilmember Earling asked if the signs in the other three -hour parking zones would also be changed and questioned having one block with enforcement on Sundays and the rest without. Council President Haakenson said the sign will state the restrictions are in effect seven days a week, whether it is enforced is another matter. Councilmember Earling said if an "illusion" is being created for one street, it should be created for all streets. Mayor Fahey pointed'out there was no parking enforcement personnel on Sundays, although the Police Department is empowered to enforce parking restrictions. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said Sundays and holidays were excluded from the three -hour parking restriction (with the exception of Admiral Way) because it was deemed unnecessary on those days and because there is no enforcement personnel on duty. Although the Police Department is empowered to enforce parking restrictions, he believed they were unlikely to do so unless there were numerous complaints. He said the seven -day per week, three -hour parking restriction signs could be erected with the residents' understanding it would not be enforced on Sundays and holidays and with the intent of revisiting the parking issue in the future including reanalyzing all parking regulations. Councilmember White preferred the three -hour parking restriction should be uniform throughout the City. Council President Haakenson withdrew his suggestion for the seven -day per week, three -hour parking restriction. Mr. Snyder said it was his understanding the parking restriction is to be the same as currently exists on 3RD Avenue. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE OPPOSED. 5. PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON AN APPLICATION BY HARBOR SQUARE ASSOCIATES FOR A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO A CONDITION OF THE APPROVED "CONTRACT REZONE" GRANTED FOR THE HARBOR SQUARE SITE AT 150 WEST DAYTON PURSUANT TO FILE NO. 114-79 (File No. R -98 -107) Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson explained this was an unusual request as most rezones apply to the entire property and entail a change from one land use classification to another. In this instance, the property was rezoned in 1979 through a Contract Rezone. He explained a Contract Rezone is the obligation for the property to meet certain conditions upon development and may limit the full range of uses that might otherwise be allowed by that zoning classification. One of the conditions of this Contract Rezone (Condition B -7) limited buildings in the Harbor Square development to 35 -feet in height and placed a secondary restriction of two stories. Mr. Wilson said there is no true definition of "stories" and it is difficult to measure bulk in terms of stories because they vary depending on the type of development. In this instance, the applicant has requested the condition be amended to strike the two - story limit. He assured the bulk regulation of 35 -feet would be maintained but would allow construction of 1 -3 stories. The Planning Board reviewed the proposed application and after listening to public testimony and reviewing the record, recommend approval of the amendment to the Contract Rezone. Applicant Dick Beselin, 1108 - 12TH Avenue North, Edmonds, agreed this was not an issue of height; no one has been able to determine the reason for the two story restriction. He said there are several other buildings in Harbor Square that are 35 feet in height so they would not exceed the height of existing buildings. He said they plan to construct a 3 -story building within the 35 -foot height limitation. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 7 Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing. GayLynn Beighton, 6307 - 147TH Street SW, Edmonds, Chair of the Edmonds Alliance for Economic Development (EAED), said this issue was discussed by the EAED and was unanimously supported for its positive impact on the vibrancy of the downtown area and on economic development. Walt Sellers, 402 - 5M Avenue South, Edmonds, attorney for the Port of Edmonds, said the Port supports this request for reasons already expressed and has already entered into a lease to make this possible. As there were no other members of the audience who wished to address the Council, Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the hearing and remanded the matter to Council for action. Councilmember Van Hollebeke commented that the proposed action would not change heights and would only clarify a restriction established 19 years ago. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCII.MEMBER MILLER, TO ADOPT THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST SUBJECT TO THE RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS CONTAINED ON PAGE 2 OF THE PLANNING DIVISION STAFF ADVISORY REPORT AND DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AND BRING BACK AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE EXISTING "AGREEMENT AND COVENANT CONSTITUTING A CONTRACT REZONE." Councilmember Earling agreed with Councilmember Van Hollebeke's comments and said this is an opportunity to do something very positive for the City's economy. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Fahey declared a brief recess. 6. PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON AN APPLICATION BY EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT TO REZONE A PORTION OF THE EXISTING CHASE LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE ADJACENT TO 84TH AVENUE WEST FROM "SINGLE FAMILY" TO "PUBLIC P" AND TO REZONE AN ADJOINING PARCEL LOCATED AT 8315 216"' STREET SOUTHWEST FROM "RS -8" TO "PUBLIC - P" IN ORDER TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE SCHOOL SITE (File No. R-98-127). Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson displayed a transparency of the subject property, explaining the application was a request by the Edmonds School District (ESD) for a rezone. The parcels identified in the notice were a portion of the existing Chase Lake Elementary School site adjacent to 84"' Avenue W and an adjoining parcel located at 8315 216'' Street SW (developed with one single family residence) that the ESD is negotiating to purchase. As part of ESD's negotiation process, they sought the rezone from RS -8 to Public - P. The remaining portion of the site, shown in the shaded area on the map, is currently zoned Public - P. Mr. Wilson explained two properties on the eastern side of the property are currently part of the Chase Lake site and are zoned RS -8 but are part of the playground and were not included in the public hearing notice for the Planning Board hearing. It was not determined these properties were part of the school district site until ESD had an updated title report prepared. ESD's Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1.998 Page 8 request is to rezone the property, the playground site, and the property to the north from RS -8 to Public - P. Mr. Wilson displayed a transparency showing the current Comprehensive Plan designations. He pointed out the large area designated "Public - P ", noting this represented the "bubble diagrams" used when the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 to identify land use designations. He explained the reason the "bubble" designation was used was to create soft lines for the boundaries of the land use designation. Since the City did not have complete property ownership information for all parcels in the City, by using the soft lines, the boundaries could be adjusted via rezones to coincide with property ownership. He noted the "bubble" designation was also used in other areas of the City. He explained ESD's request is to consider the soft edge of the Public designation for the Chase Lake Elementary site, consider the ownership of the property by ESD and conform the zoning, via the rezone process, to the property ownership to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation. He explained this is a non - project application; therefore, no specific development is proposed. The action is requested by the applicant to implement the Comprehensive Plan and apply the appropriate land use designations to the'parcels. Mr. Wilson explained the Planning Board held a public hearing on August 19 and received testimony for and against the proposed rezone. After deliberating on the material in the staff report as well as testimony provided at the hearing, the Planning Board recommends the Council approve the rezone of the parcels to Public - P to implement the Comprehensive Plan designation. Councilmember Plunkett asked what the Planning Board's vote was on the proposal. Mr. Wilson answered it was 5 -2. Councilmember Plunkett observed page 6 of the Council packet listed six tests the applicant must meet: the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, surrounding area, changes, suitability, value. Mr. Wilson said these are the rezone criteria in the Edmonds Community Development Code. Councilmember Plunkett observed an applicant must meet all the criteria. Mr. Wilson agreed. Councilmember Earling said page 53 of the Council packet indicated the Planning Board's vote was four votes in favor and two against. Mr. Wilson said the full Planning Board was present at the public hearing; one member, Mr. Cobb stepped down from this item due to a potential Appearance of Fairness conflict. Mr. Grayson, the Chair, abstained from the vote but an abstention usually is counted as a yes vote. Mr. Wilson clarified under the Planning Board's rules and procedures, the Chair does not vote unless it is to break a tie. City Attorney Scott Snyder said one difficulty the Council may have in applying the actions of ESD, as the Planning Board did, is 1) the City is required to give deference to the programmatic decisions of the School Board, and 2) the City's rezone criteria were drafted in 1980 when the Zoning Code prevailed over the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and in the event of conflict, the Zoning Code prevailed. That presumption has now been reversed and in the event of conflict, cities are to look first to the Comprehensive Plan designation. Councilmember Plunkett stated the Council could change the Comprehensive Plan to meet the Zoning Code. He acknowledged the Council could not consider what facilities, reading from the list of facilities allowed in the Public - P zone, could be placed in the property. Mr. Snyder said the Council is required to determine the general suitability of the zoning category and the use. One difficulty the Council will Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 9 have is how to apply the six criteria when the property has been in the current use for an extended period of time. Mr. Wilson clarified since an application has been submitted, the applicants are vested under the current Comprehensive Plan designation. Even if the Comprehensive Plan designation was changed, any application submitted prior to the adoption of the revised Comprehensive Plan designation would have the right to be considered under the Comprehensive Plan designation at the time their application was submitted. Applicant Mark, Quehrn, Counsel for the Edmonds School District, 411 - 108TH Avenue NE, Bellevue, displayed a transparency of a map of the site and explained the proposal is a non - project rezone to bring the underlying zoning designation into consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. He said a SEPA determination was made by the Edmonds School District, the lead agency, and was final on August 31, 1998 and no comments were received and. no appeal filed. He referred to the map, pointing out the Public - P zoning that currently exists over the majority of the site, and RS -8 zone on the eastern boundary of the school site (playground and other school uses). He said ESD has entered into an agreement to acquire an adjacent property from the current owner which was previously a single family residence but has not been used as such for approximately 1 %Z years. In response to why this rezone is appropriate, he said the "bubble" on the Comprehensive Plan map essentially lines up with what is already zoned Public - P but a small area is outside that designation. The interpretation of the "bubble" land use designation is that they are soft boundaries and should be interpreted to reflect the existing use as reflected on the east and west. This is also an appropriate interpretation because the City adopted ESD's Capital Facilities Plan as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan, which shows existing, and future school sites. He said the existing Chase Lake Elementary School is shown as an existing school site, with the exception of the property ESD is acquiring. The Capital Facilities Plan also addresses the expansion of Chase Lake Elementary and a fair interpretation is to include all areas within the Public - P designation. Mr. Quehrn said with the Comprehensive Plan designation, those residential properties cannot be developed for residential purposes any longer. To do so would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the mandate of the current owner, ESD. Mr. Quehrn agreed the rezone criteria in the ECDC were a second level consideration to Comprehensive Plan consistency as a result of the Growth Management Act. However, ESD's rezone request does comply with all the criteria. First, the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as well as mandated by ESD's Capital Facilities Plan adopted as part of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Second, the proposal is consistent with the Zoning Code because the Code is required to implement the Comprehensive Plan. Third, this site has been an active school site since 1965. Fourth, the change justifies the rezone because it is a change in the plan designation. Fifth, the property is economically and physically suited for this site as it has been a school site since 1965. Sixth, this change will not impact surrounding property values, it will recognize the status quo. Mr. Quehm said during the public hearing before the Planning Board, a lot of questions were asked by the public regarding ESD's plans for this site. He said those are project specific questions and are not germane to this request. He said ESD has a public meeting scheduled Thursday, September 17 to share their design for Chase Lake Elementary School at this site. He urged the Council to confirm and adopt the Planning Board's recommendation and approve this rezone. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 10 Councilmember Van Hollebeke acknowledged this is a non - project rezone and a good portion of the people testifying before the Planning Board were asking what will happen on the site. He asked if it was appropriate to ask ESD to divulge their plans, observing they have obviously formulated their plans for the site. Mr. Snyder said ESD has the right to have their application considered as a non - project specific request and the Council can consider the broad range of uses that are allowed in the zone and the suitability of the property for those uses -- a broader consideration than if a project - specific proposal was submitted. The ESD is under no obligation to provide that information and the Council should not speculate what ESD is planning. Mr. Quehm said if project - specific inquiries arise, he would object. Although it may appear ESD was being allusive, this was not the forum for considering a project- specific proposal that has not yet been proposed. He pointed out ESD has had a public process regarding their plans for the school site and is continuing that public process. He stressed approving the rezone will not approve any project; the project must still go through the City process which will include ample opportunity for the public to voice their concerns. Mr. Snyder said in addition to the SEPA process and applicable development permits, the vacation of the right -of -way that runs through the site may also be required, providing two approval processes for the project. Council President Haakenson observed this is currently zoned Public - P and asked if an elementary school was currently on the site. Mr. Quehm answered yes. Council President Haakenson said he received an invitation (in his packet) to an open house at Chase Lake Elementary on September 17 to discuss the new construction of Chase Lake Elementary. He assumed this meant ESD's plans were to build a new elementary school. Mr. Quehm answered yes and said that was reflected in the Capital Facilities Plan in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Plunkett asked if the Council needed to declare any ex -parte contact. Mr. Snyder answered yes. Councilmember Plunkett said he attended approximately 40 minutes of the August 14 Planning Board meeting where this subject was discussed. He heard public and ESD's testimony but did not hear the Planning Board deliberations and was not aware of their decision until several days later. Councilmember Plunkett said he also had a conversation with Lora Petso when she called inquiring about future agendas. He said they discussed this issue (although he did not recall exactly what was said) and the conversation was terminated when they realized they should not be discussing this issue. Mr. Snyder explained the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine requires that ex -parte communication by Councilmembers be revealed so that the parties have an opportunity to address it. He suggested Mayor Fahey determine if other Councilmembers had any ex -parte communication and to give ESD's representative as well as the public an opportunity to address any ex -parte communication. Mayor Fahey asked if any other Councilmembers had ex -parte communication to disclose. There was no response from any other Councilmember. Mr. Quehm said he was not concerned with Councilmember Plunkett's attendance at the Planning Board hearing as that information was part of the record. He said Ms. Petso is on record as opposing this request and said without further disclosure, he would request Councilmember Plunkett excuse himself from further participation in this matter. Mr. Snyder said ex -parte communication does not disqualify a Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 11 member's participation but raises the obligation to remember as much as possible about the ex -parte communication. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine creates a rule but does not create a procedure; therefore, it is up to each Councilmember to make a decision about whether to excuse themselves from the process. Councilmember Plunkett explained most of his conversation with Ms. Petso was her request to be informed if something arose on a future agenda. They also began to discuss permitted uses in a P zone (about 3 -4 sentences) and then they both realized they should not be discussing this. Mr. Snyder asked if Councilmember Plunkett recalled the date of their conversation. Councilmember Plunkett answered it was approximately a month ago. Mr. Snyder said the Council has been engaged in a review of its entire Community Facilities ordinance; part of that review has been a legislative discussion of the uses within the P zone and whether they should be amended. Councilmember Plunkett said he had numerous discussions regarding community facilities when the Council was discussing the ordinance prior to this application. Mr. Quehm said it appeared Councilmember Plunkett's conversation with Ms. Petso was primarily procedural and would not be ex -parte contact. He withdrew his objection. Mayor Fahey asked if there was any challenge to Councilmember Plunkett's participation in the process. Kevin Clarke, 23924 - 107TH Place West, Edmonds, asked if Councilmember Plunkett, other Councilmembers, and Mayor Fahey received the invitation to the open house for the Chase Lake Elementary School. Council President Haakenson explained that everyone on the Council received an invitation, which is not unusual. Mayor Fahey observed there were no objections to Councilmember Plunkett's participation and empowered him to participate in the process. She opened the public participation portion of the hearing. Steven Gunderson, representing his mother who resides at 21524 - 84TH Avenue West, Edmonds, said a question was raised at the August 19 Planning Board meeting regarding why it was necessary to change the zoning from RS -8 to Public - P. According to the Planning Board, it must be rezoned due to Comprehensive Plan criteria. His examination of ESD's proposal for Chase Lake Elementary revealed there is an enormous parking lot proposed, not for staff but for the public. He questioned why it was necessary to build a large parking lot for the public, noting the proposed parking lot is across from 21524 84TH Avenue West, which is currently residential. In response to his question why the parking lot was not placed in back of the school, he was told 84TH is an arterial and the parking lot needed to be in this location. He said there appeared to be a hidden agenda and questioned whether the intent of the large parking lot was a future Park 'n Ride. He also questioned the financing for purchasing the house and land. He understood ESD also plans to purchase another property with two homes that are currently occupied. He said the financing for these purchases did not come from the recently approved bond issue as those funds were designated for construction of the school. He questioned whether the funding was provided by the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) and whether it was in the County's best interest to use those funds to purchase land and homes. He said they were not opposed to building a school but were opposed to a regional transit parking lot. He recommended the property remain residentially zoned and ESD provide the community more information regarding what and where construction will occur. He said the community wants to provide input regarding school construction; the lack of community information results in fear and bewilderment regarding the ESD's real intent. He recalled Mr. Quehm Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 12 informed one of the Planning Boardmembers that "things will stay status quo." He questioned how status quo would be maintained when a parking lot was proposed across the street. Rhondalyn Johnson, 2112 - 80TH Avenue West, #9, Edmonds, objected to the Planning Board recommendation to rezone the area to Public - P on the grounds that such a rezone represented de facto devaluation of the surrounding private property and that this devaluation represented a seizure of property without just compensation. She said the Constitution was written to protect rights to private property and the proposed rezone is an affront to these rights. She said the City has not outlined how property owners contiguous to this area would be compensated and said it was unfair for property owners to absorb a drop in their property values as a result of the City's actions. She said the parking lot should be moved to the back of the school. Kevin Clarke, 23924 - 107TH Place West, Edmonds, said the Comprehensive Plan bubbles can move both ways and questioned why the single family residential bubbles could not move over the Public - P bubbles. He said ESD was requesting the Comprehensive Plan bubbles move to accommodate this rezone. The ESD is requesting a single - family residence (not designated as Public - P in the Comprehensive Plan) be rezoned to Public - P without amending the Comprehensive Plana He said the ESD has indicated in their bond issue that this site will be used as an elementary school. He said the economic life of an elementary school should be 60 years. He pointed out the current zoning permits elementary schools; therefore, ESD can purchase the adjacent property and the new school can be constructed without the rezone. He said it is unfair to the public if ESD is the only one who can move the bubbles. He said the Planning Department was asked what the public could do to amend the Comprehensive Plan and were informed it was almost impossible, it can be done only once a year and you must be a property owner. He said it was unfair for the landowner to be allowed to move the bubbles but not the public. He stressed there was no public need to rezone this property. He pointed out there are schools that share their parking lots with churches and there are churches who use their parking lots for Park 'n Rides which schools are also permitted to do. Council President Haakenson asked Mr. Clarke if he lived in this neighborhood. Mr. Clarke answered statistically speaking he did not, but he lived in the City. Lora Petso, 10616 - 237TH Place West, Edmonds, said she was opposed to the rezone. She recalled last spring it was determined it would be appropriate to revise the City's zoning regulations regarding community facilities, particularly churches and schools, which ESD is trying to prevent with this application for rezone and the one coming before the Council on October 6. She cautioned the Council not to let this happen because ESD had property uses that are not appropriate for residential areas. She urged the City to maintain any zoning that prevents or conditions use of School District property in residential areas. She said Washington Law provides that there is no presumption in favor of a rezone; despite the fact she only gets three minutes and ESD gets more, the law says the application cannot be favored in the decision. She said Washington law also provides a rezone cannot be granted unless there is a change in circumstances justifying the rezone; this is a non - project rezone with no change in circumstances. Washington law also provides a rezone cannot be granted absent a showing of public benefit; ESD has not and cannot show a public benefit by pre - empting the zoning review that is upcoming. She said the City has already determined the Public - P zone is undesirable for churches and schools. COUNCILMEMBER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, TO EXTEND THE HEARING FOR 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 13 Ms. Petso continued stating that Washington law also provided the Council only needed to state the application for rezone is denied because the applicant failed to show any benefit to the public safety, health, morals, and welfare. She said the Planning Board was told they must accept the rezone to conform to the Comprehensive Plan, which is untrue. She read from a Washington Supreme Court case, Citizens v. Mt. Vernon decision made earlier this year, "since the Comprehensive Plan is a guide and not a document designed for making specific land use decisions, conflicts surrounding the appropriate use are resolved in favor of the more specific regulations, usually zoning regulations, 2) a specific zoning ordinance will prevail over an inconsistent Comprehensive Plan, 3) these rules require that conflict between a general Comprehensive Plan and a specific zoning code be resolved in the zoning code's favor." She said the Planning Board was not told this; Mr. Quehrn quoted a passage from the lawyer's manual indicating the Comprehensive Plan controlled. To ensure there was no misunderstanding, she e- mailed the author of the manual and asked whether a land use designation on a Comprehensive Plan map controlled over a local zoning ordinance as stated in the desk book or did the local zoning ordinance control as suggested in Citizens v. Mt. Vernon? The author responded, "obviously Citizens v. Mt. Vernon is authoritative and recent." Ms. Petso said this was not just about the Options program, it was simply not good for the City to create and expand Public - P zones in residential areas as the Council has already determined. She urged the Council to deny the rezone request. Council President Haakenson asked Ms. Petso if she lived in the neighborhood. Ms. Petso answered no. Dennis Flaherty, 21608 - 84TH Avenue West, Edmonds, read from the Planning Board meeting minutes (page 9), "Mr. Bruce Witenberg suggested that rezoning the entire property to "P" would give the district a much greater latitude in terms of what they can develop on the entire site. Mr. Don Bakken inquired whether the Planning Board could impose any conditions as part of the rezone approval. Mr. Wilson said the Board would have to be more specific about what these conditions might be. If the applicant voluntarily steps forward with a contract rezone to include these conditions, a contract rezone would be possible. Mr. Bakken inquired whether this situation would be an opportunity for the Planning Board to reach mitigation on some of the issues by suggesting conditions. Mr. Wilson said this cannot be part of the rezone hearing." Mr. Flaherty said he was opposed to the rezone. He suggested this be a Contract Rezone to allow them to have input which the current process does not allow. He said a Public - P rezone would allow buildings 10 -feet from the street and allow additional driveways. He urged the Council to vote against the rezone. Councilmember White asked Mr. Flaherty if he lived in the white house across from the playground. Mr. Flaherty answered yes. Councilmember White said he represents the Beilkes, the individuals the Flaherty's purchased their home from. Councilmember White asked if Mr. Flaherty had any objection to his participation in the hearing. Mr. Flaherty felt there would be a conflict of interest. Councilmember White excused himself from participation in this decision. Rey Howard, 8431 - 216TH SW, Edmonds (three houses from the Chase Lake playground), said he would like to see ESD's plans before the property is rezoned. He said 84' Street is a thoroughfare now and questioned how ESD would address traffic impacts. He said many of the Block Watch members on his street were unable to attend but voiced their concern about the traffic. Greg Gunderson, 20711 Crawford Road, Lynnwood, representing his mother who lives at 21524 84TH Avenue West, questioned whether there were justifiable reasons to change the zoning. He said there is ample property to construct a new school without acquiring additional land. If the property is rezoned, he questioned whether the benefits outweigh the cost. He stressed this is a residential Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 14 neighborhood; they have the right to participate and determine what will occur in their own neighborhood. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, said he submitted his comments regarding ESD's "terrible" athletic fields and the rezone in response to a letter from Edmonds School District Superintendent asking how she has performed and what was needed. He assumed other citizens also submitted comments. He said the Council was "jumping the gun" by making this decision before ESD's meeting on Thursday. Dexter Wellington, 21505 - 84TH Avenue West, Edmonds, said his daughter attends Chase Lake Elementary and he wants a new school for her but is concerned with the development of the property. He said a non- project application left open the opportunity for development that would more severely affect his quality of life. He said he now sees trees from his window but this view could change to school buses Monday through Friday which he strongly opposed. He would support a rezone of the property if there were appropriate buffers, etc. because it would be in his best interest. He anticipated this rezone represented a declination in his property values and urged the Council to deny the rezone request. No other members of the public were present wishing to address this matter. Mr. Snyder observed the Council heard a great deal of testimony, 90% is relevant to a project development permit application or to a vacation request that may occur in the future. He said an applicant is not required to present a project - specific application. If an applicant does, a Contract Rezone must be freely offered, it cannot be compelled by the City. The Growth Management Act places supremacy in the Comprehensive Plan by State statutory provision. In interpreting zoning codes, the Citizens v. Mt. Vernon case may apply when going from general to specific (which was the focus of that case). He observed there had been a number of comments regarding the need, size of the school, and the demand; Washington law states those are decisions to be made by the School Board. Regarding Mr. Quehrn's reference to the City's adoption of ESD's Capital Facilities Plan in the Comprehensive Plan, he recommended the Council carefully review this and be aware the School Board projects population figures, the need for more schools, and details the statistical basis -- there is nothing in the record to counter balance that testimony and the City has adopted ESD's Capital Facilities Plan. He said citizens need to make their views regarding expansion of the school known to the ESD Board and those views are only relevant in the context of a specific development approval and its SEPA review. He summarized the record is very bare to deny this rezone. Mr. Snyder said Chapter 20.80 of the City's Zoning Code requires the application be reviewed by the Planning Board before an amendment can be approved. He asked Mr. Quehm whether the property to the east was addressed by the Planning Board. Mr. Quehrn said the application was amended to reflect this map before the Planning Board convened, and the issue was called to their attention by Mr. Wilson as well as himself. The Planning Board specifically discussed the area on the east side, and he understood it was part of their recommendation. He said the map was discussed verbally and reference was made to a revised map that was submitted to the record. Mr. Wilson said the original notice and identification of the project did not reference the parcels on the east side of the property. An amendment letter from ESD was received on August 17 and presented to the Planning Board on August 19 at the public hearing but those parcels were not identified in the original public notices. He said it was brought to the Planning Board's attention on August 19 that those Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 15 parcels were owned by ESD and they were seeking similar consideration from them. He said the map was provided to the Planning Board at the August 19 hearing. Mr. Snyder said the City's ordinances require the Planning Board to provide a recommendation. The notice requirements allow a more general description. He said the notice was not fatal if the Planning Board considered the property and the public had an opportunity to address it during the public hearing. Mr. Quehm emphasized the map was included in the Planning Board record and the playground on both sides of the site was discussed before the Planning Board. He addressed questions regarding the need for the rezone, pointing out the need for the rezone: 1) The GMA states the City shall implement development regulations (zoning code) that implement the Comprehensive Plan. He said the Comprehensive Plan designation for this area is Public - P, not residential and Public - P uses are not permitted in a residential zone; 2) The Comprehensive Plan also mandates internal consistency -- the adoption of ESD's Capital Facilities Plan which includes the Chase Lake site. This stretches the boundaries of the Public - P bubble out to the boundaries of the existing school site. He said both these are statutory mandates to bring the underlying zoning into consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Quehm said ESD did not assume their proposal would be granted, they are aware they have the burden of proof. He said testimony they presented to the Planning Board was supplemented with materials included in the Council's packet and ESD has provided testimony to the Council tonight. In response to the requirement for changed circumstances as a necessary component of the rezone, he said there is Supreme Court precedence when the underlying zoning is being brought into consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, that is sufficient for changed circumstances. He referred to the reference to Citizens v. Mt. Vernon, and agreed that was opposite to this proposal; it may be appropriate if ESD was developing a project in residential zone and were relying on the Comprehensive Plan as a basis to do so. He reiterated the application was to bring the underlying zoning into consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and they are relying on a statutory mandate for this request. He requested the Council accept the Planning Board recommendation and grant the rezone. Councilmember Plunkett asked Mr. Quehm if he said the Council was required by statute to accept ESD's application. Mr. Quehm clarified the statute requires the City have development regulations that are consistent with and implement the Comprehensive Plan. The Council has the discretion to determine whether this change is necessary in light of that statutory mandate. ESD believes it is necessary. Councilmember Miller asked if the residents on 84TH had been notified. City Clerk Sandy Chase answered her initial review of the mailing list indicated there were several addresses on 84TH and she was comfortable residents on 84TH had been notified. Mayor Fahey remanded the matter to Council for deliberation. Council President Haakenson observed there had been many comments from the audience regarding financing for the purchase of the residences, where the money came from, whether there was a need to acquire land, and use of the property. He said as this is a non - project rezone; the City cannot require the applicant to divulge how the site will be developed. The decision must be based on whether the rezone is appropriate according to the Comprehensive Plan. He observed the adoption of GMA directed cities to develop Comprehensive Plans consistent with the zoning map. The majority of the existing Chase Lake School site is zoned Public - P except for a small area zoned residential. Although citizens have voiced their concerns regarding the use of the property, he stressed the Council can only consider the non- project rezone. He said an overriding concern of the neighbors appeared to be (as stated in Mr. Flaherty's Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14,1998 Page 16 letter) that there is no formal future development proposal attached to this proposal in order to access impacts to properties and the neighborhood character at large. Mr. Flaherty's letter indicated Mr. Quehm said (at the August 18 Planning Board meeting), it was appropriate for neighbors to want to know how the property would be developed after the rezone and when the School District is prepared to bring a project forward, it will have to go through the required regulatory process which involves a public hearing. The School District is not proposing a specific project at this time. Council President Haakenson understood from the record, and Mr. Quehm has stated, there will be a public hearing when ESD proposes a project. At that time, he hoped residents would be able to address their concerns about the development of the site. Councilmember Miller agreed ESD's non - project rezone met all the requirements of the ECDC and the Comprehensive Plan and the concerns raised by neighbors are beyond the statutory requirements of a non - project application. He said issues regarding ESD's future intent for the facilities should be raised at the appropriate School District forum. He favored approval of the rezone as recommended by staff. In response to concerns raised by neighbors, Councilmember Earling said Community Transit has a Park 'n Ride lot on 212TH 72ND that is only at 75% capacity; the RTA tends to purchase property that will accommodate parking for 600 -1,000 vehicles. He said ESD's proposal will clean up a lot of loose ends; it will zone the property for the use currently taking place -- public use. He acknowledged there were concerns with the long -term use of the site. He supported approval of the proposed rezone. COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO ADOPT THE PLANNING BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED NON - PROJECT REZONE AND DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO BRING BACK AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CITY'S ZONING MAP FOR APPROVAL BY THE COUNCIL. Councilmember Earling observed it was rare for Mr. Snyder to provide direct legal advice and he has always found it to be good advice. Councilmember Earling said the Council is charged with being good stewards of the citizens' money; and involving the City in a legal battle was not something he favored. MOTION CARRIED (4 -1), COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT OPPOSED AND COUNCILMEMBER WHITE DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE VOTE. 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Rachael Martin, 7825 - 227TH Place SW, Edmonds, provided informational packets to the Council regarding the Boo Han Plaza development located at 227TH and Hwy 99. She said an August 4 memo from the Planning Supervisor recommended a Determination of Nonsignificance be issued for the 27'h & 99 project. She included copies of the January 28, 1998 Architectural Design Board meeting in which Sherry Borylla, 22711 -78TH West, asked about the number of trees to be retained. The architect stated it was hoped much of the existing vegetation would be retained for reuse. She said the land has been totally stripped. She referred to the Environmental Checklist and the applicant's indication there were alder trees at the rear of the property and wild grass but no evergreens. The applicant indicated scrub brush and grass would be removed or altered but did not indicate there were any evergreens on the property. Ms. Martin said over 30 -40 evergreens have been logged on the property, some of the logs remain. She has pictures of the stumps showing the proximity to residential property lines, some of which are within ten feet. She said three residences in particular have been adversely affected by the tree removal, although the entire neighborhood has been robbed of the beauty of the trees. She requested the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 17 City require Boo Han Plaza to purchase big trees with a minimum border of 15 -20 feet as was suggested in the Streetscape Improvement guidelines. She said development of Boo Han Plaza should be stopped until they agree to the large tree planting at a depth sufficient to shield traffic sounds and be attractive. She said real estate values in their neighborhood have plummeted and felt Boo Han Plaza should not benefit from the sale of the logs. Mayor Fahey asked Ms. Martin if she had contacted City staff or filed a formal complaint with the City. Ms. Martin answered no. Mayor Fahey thanked her for bringing the matter to the Council's attention and assured her staff will investigate the situation and contact her to determine if anything can be done to mitigate the effects of what has taken place. Kevin Clarke, 23924 - 107TH Place West, Edmonds, said he was grateful for the process, was thankful he lived in Edmonds, and was thankful for the police protection provided by the Police Department. He said everyone sitting near him was offended by Council President Haakenson's question regarding whether he lived in the Chase Lake neighborhood. He said at the Planning Board meeting, Mr. Wilson indicated staff is recommending the single - family residential Comprehensive Plan designation for the old Woodway Elementary School be changed to Public - P. He said ESD already applied for this change and withdrew their request; there were over 300 signatures on petitions to the Council and ESD. He said it was clear from the June 30, 1998, meeting with the Council and ESD, that the School District's objective is to change the Comprehensive Plan designation for every school property in the City, and citizens do not have an opportunity to stop this change. He stressed the old Woodway Elementary School is zoned single family and has not been used as a public school for over 30 years. Its last use, under a Conditional Use Permit applied for in 1984, was a church. He requested the City research the Edmonds - Woodway High School site and determine if there was a swimming pool shown on the site drawings and in the public testimony. He felt ESD was pressuring the City to change the'zoning so the City can get what it wants. He pointed out after the ESD /City Council meeting, the Enterprise made that assertion, and Sally Fabro said they are not putting pressure on the City. He said the City of Lynnwood is pressuring ESD to get Options and Scriber out of Lynnwood and back into Edmonds. He said after every meeting, residents have pleaded with ESD to meet with them, but they refuse although it is required in their Capital Facilities Plan. Lora Petso, 10616 - 237TH Place West, Edmonds, said her telephone call to Councilmember Plunkett after the August 19 Planning Board meeting was to ask him to inform her if any amendments to the Comprehensive Plan appeared on future Council agendas. She said last spring the Council directed staff to revise the zoning regulations to accommodate community facilities as well as the needs of residents. She was appalled to learn that on August 26, staff proposed an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan That would designate Woodway Elements as Public - P. She said at the same meeting, was proposed the cemetery, currently designated residential in the Comprehensive Plan, be zoned Public - P. She requested the Council direct staff to withdraw those proposed amendments, as they are contrary to the direction Council provided last spring, and move forward with consideration of community facilities before it is too late. She pointed out the minutes of the August 26 Planning Board meeting state Mr. Witenberg inquired about the possibility of scheduling a time when a district representative could meet with the board to discuss some issues in the context of the community facilities process. Mr. Carlstad (ESD Property Manager) approached him at the break to suggest that perhaps there were some questions and misperceptions presented by the public. Ms. Petso stated she has never mislead anyone regarding the Options Program. She has a video of every complaint she has raised and repeated her offer to show the video to the Council, the School Board, and/or the Snohomish County Drug Task Force. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 18 Harry Borylla, 22711 - 78TH West, Edmonds, expressed concern with the development of Boo Han Plaza, which has removed approximately 40 trees. He said over two years ago residents expressed their concern to the Council regarding tree removal that would occur with development. At that time, he believed they were assured there would be a 20 -foot setback; then it was a 10 -foot setback; and now there is no setback. He chastised the Planning Board for not viewing the property in person. He said the removal of all the trees on the southern portion of the property significantly affected his view from his home and wildlife has disappeared. He felt the developer lied and purposely mislead the City. He urged the developers to replant trees at least 25 -feet in height that would grow rapidly. Mayor Fahey said staff would investigate the situation. Councilmember White requested the Council be kept informed of staffs investigation of this matter. Mayor Fahey agreed. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, said in 1996, 1997, and now in 1998 he recommended the City establish a salary commission. He said the Council will receive a $50 increase in 2000, which he did not feel was enough. He felt any Councilmember running for Mayor should step down from the Council during their candidacy. He said the American Association of Baseball annual meeting is upcoming and suggested a Councilmember provide tours of ballfields. Mr. Snyder explained a Councilmember is prohibited from increasing his/her salary during the term of office. Therefore, the Council has established pay raises effective for the next elected Council. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 30 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Fahey explained the Council authorized payment of one additional meeting, not an increase in their base salary, in the year 2000. It will be possible for Councilmembers to be paid for a maximum of eight meetings rather than seven. She said in recent years Councilmembers have been attending numerous meetings for which they were not reimbursed. Mr. Snyder said this was authorized in September 1996. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked Mayor Fahey to describe the Council's current salary. Mayor Fahey said the Council currently receives a $350 monthly base salary; if a Councilmember attends seven meetings during a month, they receive an additional $350 for a total of up to $700 per month. She said Councilmembers are expected to work at least 20 hours per month and asserted that the Council worked much more than that. The. Council President receives an additional $200 per month for the additional duties the Council President is responsible for. 8. REPORT ON COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS Public Safety Committee Member White said the first issue the Public Safety committee discussed was a request by Fire Marshal Westfall and Chief Haworth to acquire a four -wheel drive vehicle due to predictions of heavy snowfall this winter. Some surrounding cities have acquired four -wheel drive vehicles for emergency response; Edmonds Fire Department would like to do the same. Councilmember White said this item was referred to the full Council on September 22. The committee discussed the policy related to-stop signs and speed bumps. The Fire Department indicated that speed bumps slow response time, requiring fire vehicles to stop to cross the speed bumps. It was agreed speed bumps were not an option and will not be applied in the City. City Engineer Jim Walker informed the committee of the process of updating the Bikeway and Walkway Plans. The public will be involved in the process via a public hearing. When the Walkway Plan is presented to the Council, it will include a prioritized list of Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 19 walkways. The committee reviewed the loading zone established next to Edmonds Bank a few months ago as a trial measure and recommended it be reviewed after the Parking Committee makes its recommendation. Communitv Service Committee member Plunkett reported City Engineer Jim Walker provided an update on King County's potential North Wastewater Treatment Plant locations,- including a possible site south of the City at Pt. Wells. The actual site will be determined in early 1999. Mr. Walker said the impact on the City's current flow swap agreement with Metro would be impacted. Mr. Walker agreed to keep the committee informed and up -to -date. Mr. Walker also provided an update on 76TH and Olympic View Drive rockeries projects. In the 1998 CIP budget, $550,000 was approved for rockeries /retaining walls. The City's consultant determined that standard construction techniques would be 150 percent of the approved budget and suggested a soil nailing technique be considered. This would require an easement on 8 -10 properties on 7TH Avenue West. The committee recommended staff complete the analysis on the appraisal process for the easements and provide more information on the. soil nailing technique. The committee discussed increases in engineering, building, and planning fees. The committee recommended the Council adopt the new engineering fee schedule. Building Official Jeannine Graf explained all costs for building permit review must be fully recovered. However, as the proposed increases covered an additional staff member, which has not been approved by the Council, the committee recommended the Council consider proposed building fee increases as part of the 1999 budget deliberations. Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson reviewed new planning fees. The committee requested staff analyze past revenue generation compared to the proposed increase and return to the committee. Finance committee Committee Chairperson Earling said the Finance Committee also considered the purchase of a four - wheel drive emergency vehicle. The cost was originally estimated at $42,500, and staff was asked to research the purchase via the state contract for approximately $30,000 and report.to the Council. The committee reviewed the Capital Expenditure projects and requested staff provide a variety of proposals to allow the Council to consider an expanded bikeways /sidewalks program, increasing the yearly expenditure from $25,000 to $100,000 per year for five years. The committee recommended this be considered in the 1999 budget process. 9. 800 MHz RADIO PROJECT Police Chief Robin Hickok explained 800 MHz has been an ongoing project for him and Mayor Fahey for the past two years. He explained the history of 800 MHz, including a bond issue three years ago for a countywide 800 MHz system, which would have cost $25 million. The bond measure failed (primarily because rural fire districts opposed it) but passed in south Snohomish County (Edmonds, Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace). However, the need for 800 MHz still exists, mainly due to the need for radio time. He explained there are currently only two channels (one additional channel is available between 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. for Lynnwood only) to cover all police radio traffic. Officers are continually talking over each other on calls. For example, Mr. Hickok said during a high -speed chase this evening in Mountlake Terrace, the officer's transmission was covered at least twice for approximately two minutes. Officers arriving at the scene discovered the officer had a suspect down at gunpoint. He said the primary reason this occurs is because there are too many people on the two radio channels. Some of the problems with the current 900 MHz system have been alleviated by allowing officers to process warrants via computers in their vehicles. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 20 Two years ago, committees were formed to discuss how to establish an 800 MHz system. Edmonds opted to be a major player in the committees to be able to contain costs and to participate in the design of the system. Originally Everett and Lynnwood assumed the lead for the system and established an estimated cost of $10 million and planned to charge other cities to join. Instead SnoCom and SnoPac became the lead agencies; an extremely qualified 800 MHz manager was hired, and a fairly accurate cost of $20.4 million was established for Phase I (from Everett to south Snohomish County), regardless of what cities /agencies were involved. Mr. Hickok said the committee split into a political and technical group during the past 5 -6 months. Mayor Fahey has been the lead in the political group to determine which cities /agencies would be participating. The committee has been working with ten agencies and August 18 was established as a deadline. He said at this time it appears most of the ten agencies will participate. Snohomish County voted today to participate (their portion is $6 million) and they have agreed to fund the project through a county bond. He said Edmonds' share of the $20.4 million is approximately $1.8 million. He said the Council packet indicated what would be provided for this investment -- the backbone of the system, the portables, and radios for cars. Councilmember Earling asked if the intent of the resolution was to support the concept but not bind the City to a method of financing. Mayor Fahey answered yes, the resolution states that Edmonds desires to become a founding partner in the Phase I development of the 800 MHz system. Councilmember Earling asked whether the bonding for this system would impact the City's ability to bond for another issue. Mayor Fahey answered if the county did the bonding, it would not impact the City's bonding ability. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said four years ago (before he was a Councilmember) he participated on former Police Chief Miller's roundtable, and it was felt at that time that an 800 MHz system was necessary. He was dismayed it took so long to move this forward. He complimented Mayor Fahey and other community representatives who assisted with negotiating this issue. He pointed out the apportionment of this cost was more equitable as it was based on geographic coverage and the number of calls rather than real estate values. Councilmember Miller said this was a fundamental issue that the community needed to support regardless of the funding mechanisms because it is a matter of officer safety. COUNCILMEMBER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, FOR Support 800 PASSAGE OF RESOLUTION 920 IN SUPPORT OF THE 800 MHz SYSTEM. MOTION CARRIED. 10. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Fahey said she will participate in a two -hour conference call tomorrow related to amending the Fair Housing Act instead of attending a meeting in Washington DC. On Wednesday she will be in Portland at the Metropolitan Cascade forum, which addresses transportation issues. On Friday she will attend the AWC Board meeting as she now represents District 8 on the AWC Board. Since the Council meeting will not be aired until Wednesday, she hoped citizens voted on Tuesday. 11. COUNCIL REPORTS Council President Haakenson said his question to Kevin Clarke was not personal. Council President Haakenson explained the Council is sensitive to neighborhood issues and because testimony is provided by many citizens, it assists the Council to know who lives where and what their interests are. He observed Mr. Clarke and Ms. Petso testified this spring regarding their neighborhood and the Options Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 21 Program and their distrust of the School District. During the Audience Comment portion, both addressed the Options program at Woodway Meadows. He apologized if his question offended any Chase Lake resident. Councilmember White (who did not participate in the hearing or decision regarding the rezone of the Chase Lake Elementary School site) acknowledged there are issues the ESD needs to address. He said he was lad to see ESD Superintendent Dr. Torres resent and hoped she took the message back to the School Board that they need to communicate with the public regarding their intentions and that is not adequate to respond to inquires about what ESD plans to do with a site with "none of your business." Councilmember White stressed the lack of information leads to fear as was demonstrated tonight by testimony regarding Park 'n Rides, etc. He agreed the Options Program is a thorny issue and siting it is not, as Ms. Petso has stated, desirable anywhere. He said the Options Program is necessary as are halfway houses, prisons, etc., but he would not want one in his backyard either. He announced there is a meeting in Vancouver on Thursday regarding the closure of 36 state parks. The public is invited to provide comment; written comments are due by noon Tuesday, but citizens may still wish to make their opinions known to the State Park and Recreation Commission. He said the list of proposed state park closures would be available in the Council office. Councilmember White said the consultant selection committee reviewed several proposals for selection of the Architectural Design Board consultant. Four consultants will be interviewed on September 22. Councilmember Earling reported he met yesterday with the US Secretary of Transportation Slater and was delighted with the knowledge Secrets Slater has of the City's project and projects in the Puget Sound Basin. The City's project ranks as one of the three highest in the Unites States and the funding process is underway. Secretary Slater was very interested in commuter rail and the issue of moving people and freight safely. Councilmember Van Hollebeke, who serves on the Employees Self - Insurance Plan committee, reported the plan has experienced unforeseen claims for employees and their dependents this year, which has increased the cost over what was expected. However, with support from the committee, proposals regarding how to proceed are being developed and a presentation will be given at a special Finance Committee meeting later this week and a recommendation brought to the Council soon. Councilmember Plunkett responded to Councilmember White's interpretation of what the School Board would draw from tonight's meeting, and he felt the School Board would believe all they had to do was say they were entitled to a rezone and it would be granted in any neighborhood. Councilmember Plunkett referred to a memo from Mayor Fahey, via Administrative Services Director Art Housler, dated September 2 regarding sales tax revenue, sales tax equalization, and a 6 percent tax increase which included the statement, "when the property tax ordinance is considered in November, your (the Council's) yes vote will be a reaffirmation of the City's Council's position." He asked whether there was an affirmation to increase the property taxes by 6% or if this statement referred to reaffirmation of the previous Council's position. Mayor Fahey said two years ago Mr. Housler made five -year revenue forecasts and how they would be utilized to implement the Human Resources Study, etc. on the basis of a 6 percent increase each year. At that time, the Council agreed with Mr. Housler's recommendations on the basis of the 6 percent increase each year. Mr. Housler is requesting the current Council reaffirm what previous Councils have agreed to. Councilmember Earling clarified the present Council has not taken a position on a tax increase for the next year. With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:43 p.m. BARBARA S. FAHEY, MAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 14, 1998 Page 22 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Plaza Meeting Room - Library Building 650 Main Street 7:00 -10:00 p.m. SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 SPECIAL MONDAY MEETING 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 1, 1998 (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #25676 THROUGH #27307 FOR THE WEEK OF AUGUST 31, 1998, IN THE AMOUNT OF $343,499.02. APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #25679 THROUGH #27447 FOR THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 7, 1998, IN THE AMOUNT OF $366,368.39. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL WARRANTS #21768 THROUGH #21936 FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 16 THROUGH 31, 1998, IN THE AMOUNT OF $376,120.74. (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM DANIEL A. PETERSEN, DDS ($165.00 + TAX) (E) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) FOR OFFICE SUPPLIES, FURNISHINGS, EQUIPMENT, AND PRINTING SERVICES (F) AUTHORIZATION TO EXTEND LEASE FOR 1996 FORD CROWN VICTORIA AS REPLACEMENT CAR FOR SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER (G) APPROVAL OF COMMUNITY SERVICES DIRECTOR JOB DESCRIPTION (H) APPROVAL OF EXTENSION OF AGREEMENT FOR INTERIM FIRE CHIEF (1) ACCEPTANCE OF QUIT CLAIM DEED AT 7118 174TH STREET SW FROM HENRY M. AND SHERIE D. PELTO 3. (15 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING - VACATION OF THE 10 -FOOT BY 25 -FOOT SLOPE EASEMENT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 654 5TH AVENUE SOUTH, RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 7905090295 (File No. ST- 98 -74) 4. (20 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING - PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO PLACE 3 -HOUR PARKING RESTRICTION ON SPRAGUE STREET FROM EDMONDS STREET TO 6- AVENUE NORTH, AND THE 400 BLOCK OF 3- AVENUE NORTH 5. (45 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON AN APPLICATION BY HARBOR SQUARE ASSOCIATES FOR A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO A CONDITION OF THE APPROVED "CONTRACT REZONE" GRANTED FOR THE HARBOR SQUARE SITE AT 150 WEST DAYTON PURSUANT TO FILE NO. R-4 -79 (File No. R -98 -107) 1 LJ CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA SEPTEMBER 14, 1998 Page 2 of 2 6. (45 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING - REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON AN APPLICATION BY EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT TO REZONE A PORTION OF THE EXISTING CHASE LAKE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE ADJACENT TO 84111 AVENUE WEST FROM "SINGLE- FAMILY" TO "PUBLIC - P" AND TO REZONE AN ADJOINING PARCEL LOCATED AT 8315 216TH STREET SOUTHWEST FROM "RS -8" TO "PUBLIC - P" IN ORDER TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THE EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE SCHOOL SITE. (File No. R -98 -127) 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3 Minute Limit Per Person) 8. (15 Min.) REPORT ON COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS 9. (15 Min.) . 800 MHz RADIO PROJECT 10. (5 Min.) MAYOR'S REPORT 11. (15 Min.) COUNCIL REPORTS Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at (425) 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.