08/03/1999 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
AUGUST 3, 1999
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
John Nordquist, Councilmember
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember (arrived 7:30 p.m.)
Jim White, Councilmember
Dick Van Hollebeke, Councilmember
Thomas A. Miller, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Christie Lee, Student Representative
STAFF PRESENT
Al Compaan, Assistant Police Chief
Ray Miller, Development Services Director
Peggy Hetzler, Administrative Services Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor
James Walker, City Engineer
Michael Karber, City Attorney
Jana Spellman, Senior Exec. Council Assistant
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
Mayor Fahey welcomed Pat Notter, a Commissioner and candidate for Mayor in Wenatchee, who was
present to observe the Council meeting.
Councilmember Earling also welcomed Ms. Notter and commented that they have worked together as
members of the Governor's Blue Ribbon Panel on transportation. He pointed out that Ms. Notter is a
hard working individual.
Council President Haakenson stated that two Councilmembers have filed for the position of Mayor. It
has been the tradition on the Council if a Councilmember is running for an elected office, he /she should
not serve in the position of Council President. Therefore, he made a decision to step down as Council
President as tradition demands and out of respect to the Council. He said he has enjoyed serving as
Council President for the past 19 months and believes Edmonds Council is a very hardworking and
underpaid group of individuals. He also enjoyed working with Mayor Fahey and her staff. He
commented election years make for difficult working relationships and thanked the Mayor for her
professionalism in continuing their relationship. He expressed thanks to City Clerk Sandy Chase and
Senior Executive Council Assistant Jana Spellman for their help to him in his position as Council
President and said the City was lucky to have such employees.
Council President Haakenson advised following a lengthy discussion with Councilmember Van
Hollebeke, who is Council President Pro Tem, Mr. Van Hollebeke indicated he could not undertake the
position of Council President due to work demands. The City Attorney advised that if neither the
Council President nor the Council President Pro Tem can perform the duties of Council President, the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 1
Council President may appoint a Councilmember to fill out the term. However, Council President
Haakenson believed the Council should elect a Council President rather than having him appoint one and
stated that he would abstain from such a vote. He thanked the Council for their confidence in him during
the past '19 months as Council President. He requested the addition of an agenda item to take place at
8:00 p.m. or as soon as feasible following Councilmember Plunkett's arrival.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke said he was honored and privileged to be selected and to serve in the role
of Council President Pro Tem. Due to the same reasons he decided not to seek re- election, business and
family needs, he would be unable to serve in an efficient and effective manner as Council President for
the remainder of this year. He was confident the Council would continue to serve in the manner it has,
with honor and respect for the betterment of its citizenry.
1.. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
HOLLEBEKE, TO ADD AGENDA ITEM 4A, CONSIDERATION OF A MOTION TO HOLD A
SPECIAL ELECTION TO ELECT A COUNCIL PRESIDENT. MOTION CARRIED.
(Councilmember Plunkett was not present for the vote.)
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
MILLER, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED.
(Councilmember Plunkett was not present for the vote.)
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Mayor Fahey requested Item F (Authorization for Mayor to Sign a Lease Agreement for Parking Stalls at
"Old Public Works" Site) be removed from the Consent Agenda as further work was needed. She
anticipated this item would be placed on the August 17 Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Nordquist pulled Items G and H from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
MILLER, FOR APPROVAL OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION
CARRIED. (Councilmember Plunkett was not present for the vote.) The agenda items approved are
as follows:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 2
(A)
ROLL CALL
Approve
(B)
APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 27,1999
/27/99
Minutes
(C)
APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #34841 THROUGH #34983 FOR THE WEEK OF
Approve
Claim
JULY 26, 1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $207,737.97
Wan-ants
Update on
(D)
UPDATE ON HIGHWAY 99 PROJECT
Hwy 99
Approve
5-Lot Plat
( E )
APPROVAL OF MAPLEWOOD PLACE, A FIVE -LOT FORMAL PLAT
Councilmember Nordquist asked that both Consent Agenda Items G and H be discussed at the same
time.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 2
ids for Items G: Report on Bids Received for the Edmonds Historical Museum Window Replacement and
useum Award of Contract to Vela Brothers, Inc. ($86,786.60 Including Tax)
indow
ds for Item H: Report on Bids Received for the Public Safety Building Asbestos Removal/Phase H and
bestos Award of Contract to Crown Delta Environment, Inc. ($53,658.40, Including Tax)
Removal
For Councilmember Nordquist, City Engineer Jim Walker explained the window replacement
represented a shift in priorities. He said there have been phases of windows completed at Anderson
Center in the past but some window replacements remain. The intent was to have the remainder of the
windows replaced next year although the cost would need to be re- estimated as the cost of this window
replacement was higher than originally estimated. _
Councilmember Nordquist pointed out there was no information provided regarding the number of
windows, etc. He asked if prevailing wages were requested. Mr. Walker answered yes; all contracts
have prevailing wages.
COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN
HOLLEBEKE, FOR PASSAGE OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS G AND H. MOTION CARRIED.
( Councilmember Plunkett was not present for the vote.) The agenda items approved are as follows:
(G) REPORT ON BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE EDMONDS HISTORICAL MUSEUM
WINDOW REPLACEMENT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO VELA BROTHERS,
INC. ($86,786.60, INCLUDING TAX)
(H) REPORT ON BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING ASBESTOS
REMOVAL/PHASE It AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO CROWN DELTA
ENVIRONMENT, INC. ($53,648.40, INCLUDING TAX)
Mayor Fahey passed the gavel to Council President Haakenson so that she could attend National Night
Out at City Park.
3. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF THE 216TH
STREET SOUTHWEST RIGHT -OF -WAY IMMEDIATELY EAST OF - 84TH AVENUE WEST
(Applicant: Edmonds School District / File No. ST- 99 -25)
H ROW Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson explained that the Council :requested this item be continued to allow the
Vacation
T -99 -2s a PP raiser from the school district to provide an explanation regarding the methodology used to determine
the value of the proposed vacation.
Applicant
Rick McCartell, Shockey, Brent, 2924 Colby, Everett (representing the school district), introduced the
appraiser, Jack Dinniene, who was unable to attend the July 20 Council meeting.
Jack Dinniene, NW of Northwest Valuation Services, 15817 25`h Drive SE, Mill Creek, explained
that with agreement of Edmonds School District, the appraisal of the Chase Lake School property was
limited to a land appraisal, assuming the highest and best use was in the land. He said the school
property, without the vacation, is 10.1 acres in size. Although lots in Edmonds sell for more, there were
no 10 -acre sites to use as comparables; therefore, sites in Snohomish County were used, which he felt
were appropriate comparables. He explained the area to be vacated is 20 feet x 225 feet and is the site of
an existing road. This represents 4,500 square feet, or 1 /100' of the entire school site. Assuming the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 3
highest and best use would be single family residential, the question is what a residential purchaser
would pay for the property with and without the vacation of 4,500 square feet. He stressed the existence
of the school on the property must be considered because a developer would have to demolish it. The
four comparables ranged from $25,000 per raw lot to $34,000 per raw lot (no development or pre -
application meetings held, etc.). He felt $34,000 was high and $25,000 was closer to the typical range
per lot in Snohomish County. Therefore the value was estimated at $32,500 taking into consideration
higher lot prices in Edmonds.
Mr. Dinniene said the property was previously zoned RS -8 (8,000 square foot lots) and the school district
requested the zoning be changed to Public. He assumed RS -8 was a logical use for this property.
Dividing 8,000 into 440,000 (10.1 acres) results in 55 lots. He said the value of the entire property was
determined by multiplying 55 lots by $32,500 per lot, less the cost of demolishing the school building
(estimated to be $550,000). This results in a value for the entire site of $1,237,500. To determine how
much a developer would pay for this 20 x 225 area that is currently a street, he considered that 216' is
directly across the street so this would be a logical location for a street and a developer may not seek a
vacation. He also considered that the 20 x 225 area adds 4,500 square feet increasing the site to 10.2
acres but does not result in an additional lot.
Mr. Dinniene said he discussed the possibility of a PRD with the City's Planning Department and was
told since there are no environmental issues on the site, it was unlikely the property would be developed
under a PRD. His conclusion was the value of this area was nominal. To determine a value for the
property, he used 10 percent of the value of a raw lot ($22,500) which resulted in a value of $2,250.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke said his focus when considering vacations has been how the vacated
portion enhances the value of the property to the property owner. He said the vacated portion enhances
the value of the property to the school district. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said the property to be
vacated represents approximately half of an RS -8 lot and felt it was logical to consider the value of a
typical 8,000 square foot lot in that neighborhood. The advantage of the vacation to the school district is
that they will be able to realign their property in a more advantageous configuration. Councilmember
Van Hollebeke said he also considered that the process is between two public agencies that are owned by
the taxpayers. However, the property proposed to be vacated is owned by the taxpayers of Edmonds
rather than the school district. He felt it was important to get fair market value for the property in order
to do service to the community.
Mr. Dinniene said appraisals seek fair market value and do not consider that two public agencies are
involved. He said this is not an independently developable lot; therefore, it must be considered from a
market perspective, how much more a typical buyer would pay for the vacated property. The area
proposed to be vacated does. not provide an additional lot; it only provides some flexibility. He pointed
out the existing road would be a logical location for a road in a subdivision. He reiterated his conclusion
was the value of the property was nominal.
Mayor Pro Tem Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Ray Albano, 20916 76" Avenue West, Edmonds, agreed with Councilmember Van Hollebeke,
commenting the price of an RS -8 lot in Edmonds was closer to $100,000, a fact he felt Councilmember
Earling would likely agree with. He said comparables should be in the local area. Councilmember
Earling clarified he and Mr. Albano have not discussed this matter.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 4
Kevin Clarke, 29324 107 " Place W, Edmonds, said he attended the rezone hearings when the school
district requested a change in the zoning to Public, which they indicated was more valuable to them and
would provide greater flexibility. If the highest and best use of property is considered, it should be
valued recognizing the Public zone. He felt the adjacent single - family lot purchased by the school
district for inclusion into the school property represented the best comparable but had not been
mentioned during this process. He agreed there should be a substantial discount for the lack of utility for
the property since it is only 4,500 square feet and said the 10 percent discount was typical of what
appraisers use in the marketplace. Although he supported the vacation as it would allow the school
district to utilize the property in a more functional manner and make ingress /egress safer, he stressed the
importance of applying the proper methodology. He said using raw land may not be the best comparable
because the site is a finished site with all utilities and grading and construction of a single - family
residence could begin if the site were 9,000 square feet. He reiterated the recently purchased single -
family lot should be considered in addition to commercially zoned land. He pointed out when land was
sought for an aquatic center, it was estimated at $13 - $20 per square foot, land that was comparable to
the Public zone. He pointed out the Public zone was not considered and the property was appraised as
single - family residential, which does not represent its current zoning.
Hearing no further comment Mayor Pro Tern Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the
public hearing.
Mayor Pro Tern Haakenson asked if the Council could consider the school district's purchase of the
adjacent single family residence. City Attorney Michael Karber said the Council could consider that
information but recommended expert testimony be provided regarding how that evidence should be used.
If the Council believed the appraisal as prepared by the school district is not accurate, the Council could
request an independent appraiser to evaluate the appraisal and provide a report to the Council.
Acknowledging the difficulty in identifying a 10.1 -acre property in the City to be used as a comparable,
Councilmember Earling said the value of property in Edmonds must be considered and, therefore, felt
the value. of the property to be vacated should be higher. However, spending more money to have
another appraiser review Mr. Dinniene's appraisal may result in as much as the difference in value. He
was inclined to ask for a review of the appraisal because it was due diligence the Council needed to
undertake. He pointed out substantial comparables exist that would increase the value considerably
higher than $2,250.
Councilmember White referred to the map of the school site and the area proposed to be vacated, which
is surrounded by school district property and questioned anyone purchasing the property. He felt the
appraisal was appropriate and it was not, necessary to have the appraisal reviewed to determine if there
was a higher fair market value. He pointed out fair market value represented someone willing to
purchase the property. He said the review of the appraisal would likely cost more than any increased
value of the property.
Councilmember Miller observed Mr. Dinniene indicated the parties could negotiate the price of the
property; however, the City is obligated by law to accept 50 percent of the appraised value. He pointed
out the City has a fiduciary responsibility to get the best price for the property and agreed with
Councilmember Earling's suggestion to have the appraisal reviewed.
COUNCILMEMBER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, TO
HIRE A CONSULTANT TO REVIEW THE APPRAISAL THAT HAS BEEN PRESENTED,
TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE $2.81 PER SQUARE FOOT VALUE.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 5
Mr. Karber said the appraisal in the packet estimated the unit value of the land within the City at the
present time as $2.81 per square foot. Although that was not the assumption the appraiser ultimately
arrived at, that information was presented in the appraisal. This would result in a value of $12,645
(4,500 multiplied by $2.81). He said there is sufficient evidence in the record for the Council to utilize
that as an option to remand the appraisal for an independent review.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if the Council is obligated to base their decision on the appraisal
and accept 50 percent of that value. Mr. Karber said the Council can negotiate the price but due to the
fiduciary responsibility to the City, an accurate portrayal of the fair market value must be determined.
Although the price can be adjusted upward or downward, the Council should establish a solid record if
the fair market value is varied from. Councilmember Van Hollebeke indicated he would not support the
motion as presented.
Councilmember Miller asked if staff could review the appraisal based on the $2.81 square foot data.
Mr. Karber said the appraisal could be remanded to staff to have an independent appraiser review the
appraisal based on the information contained in the record.
UPON ROLL CALL VOTE, THE MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBERS EARLING,
NORDQUIST, AND MILLER IN FAVOR, COUNCILMEMBERS WHITE AND VAN
HOLLEBEKE OPPOSED, AND MAYOR PRO T.EM HAAKENSON AND COUNCILMEMBER
PLUNKETT ABSTAINED FROM THE VOTE.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
EARLING, TO MOVE ITEM 4A, CONSIDERATION OF A MOTION TO HOLD A SPECIAL
ELECTION TO ELECT A COUNCIL PRESIDENT, TO ITEM 3A. MOTION CARRIED.
3A. CONSIDERATION OF A MOTION TO HOLD A SPECIAL ELECTION TO ELECT A COUNCIL
PRESIDENT
section Councilmember Van Hollebeke explained his decision not to serve as Council President led him to
(Council consider which Councilmembers were available to serve, as the consensus was those up for election are
resident not available for that position. He contacted Councilmember Miller to inquire if nominated whether he
would be willing to serve as Council President.
City Attorney Michael Karber asked Councilmember Van Hollebeke if he planned to remain in his
position as Council President Pro Tem; if not, the special election would include election of a Council
President Pro Tem as well as a Council President. Councilmember Van Hollebeke answered he was
willing to continue to serve as Council President Pro Tem for the remainder of this year.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
NORDQUIST, TO HOLD A SPECIAL ELECTION TO ELECT A NEW COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke said Councilmember Miller indicated he was willing to serve as Council
President for the remainder of the term.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE NOMINATED COUNCILMEMBER MILLER AS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT. COUNCILMEMBER EARLING SECONDED THE NOMINATION.
THE VOTE ON THE NOMINATION CARRIED, 'COUNCILMEMBER MILLER AND MAYOR
PRO TEM HAAKENSON ABSTAINED FROM THE VOTE.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 6
Councilmember Earling requested Council President Haakenson remain as Council President for the
remainder of the meeting. He commended Council President Haakenson for his decision and said he has
done a great job as Council President by always being fair minded and trying to do the right thing.
4. SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED "HALEY/KLEIN" ANNEXATION
GENERALLY LOCATED IN THE PLAT OF ESPERANCE LANE, WEST OF 76TH AVENUE
WEST AND NORTH OF 224'$ STREET SOUTHWEST, AND THE ADOPTION OF AN
ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT THE ANNEXATION, ESTABLISH THE ASSUMPTION OF THE
EXISTING BONDED INDEBTEDNESS OF THE CITY, ESTABLISH COMPARABLE ZOMNG
FOR THE SUBJECT AREA, AND ESTABLISH AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANNEXATION
(Applicant/Proponent: Marie Haley / File No. AX- 92 -62)
aley/ Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson displayed a map of the area under consideration, identifying the City
Klein boundaries and annexation area. He explained the area under consideration is one small, fully developed
Annexadon
cul -de -sac that was developed in Snohomish County under a PRD. The total land area is approximately
103,000 square feet or 2.4 acres. When the City originally received the 60 percent petition and
forwarded the request to the Boundary Review Board, property owners representing 71 percent of the
assessed valuation in the area signed the petition in favor of the annexation (one parcel that is open space
and one property owner did not sign the petition). Snohomish County received no objections during the
review period, with the exception of one request for clarification from Olympic View Water and Sewer
District, which was answered to their satisfaction. Therefore, the annexation request was approved and
forwarded to the City. The final action for the Council is to hold the required second hearing and take
action on the request for annexation. If the Council approves the annexation, a November 1 effective
date is recommended, which would allow sufficient time for the necessary census and notification of
necessary service agencies to allow a smooth transition.
Councilmember Earling recalled when this issue was presented to the Council in 1998, a question was
raised regarding whether residents in the area were willing to assume the bonded indebtedness.
Mr. Wilson answered when the Council approved the 60 percent petition, it was approved with the
adoption of the existing indebtedness of the City and, by signing the petition, residents accepted
assumption of the existing indebtedness as a condition of annexation.
Applicant
Marie Haley, 7705 223rd SW, Edmonds, thanked the Council for considering the request for
annexation. When she purchased the property in 1981, they believed the property was in Edmonds
because their mailing address was Edmonds. She referred to problems with law enforcement provided
by Snohomish County in their neighborhood.
Mayor Pro Tem Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the hearing.
Steve Dozenroth, 1109 NE 181", Shoreline, said he was interested in a property near the area to be
annexed. He. said the posted signage did not indicate the area as shown on the map. He asked if the
remainder of area might be annexed in the future. Mayor Pro Tem Haakenson pointed out, based on past
history, that may not occur. Mr. Dozenroth asked the tax difference between Snohomish County and
Edmonds.
Case Vandernanden, 22118 78 " Place W, Edmonds, said the small poster placed on the corner of 222nd
Street and 761 Avenue West identifies the area to be annexed in words only (between 224' up to 220''
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 7
and from 76" West up to 841) and does not have a map of the annexation area. He requested a
clarification of the area to be annexed.
Shirley Homatic, 22322 76`h Avenue W, Edmonds, said she did not receive notification for the first
hearing or for this hearing however, the residents of 22406 224`' did receive a letter. There are only two
houses on 223`d on the west side (22304 and 22322) which have apparently not been included in the
mailing list. She became aware of the annexation as a result of the poster, which she noted indicated the
area to be annexed as north of 2241 on 76t''. As this is the approximate location of her property, she was
unsure if she was included in the annexed area. She indicated she was opposed to the annexation.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Pro Tem Haakenson closed the public portion of the hearing.
Regarding the tax difference, Mr. Wilson said Edmonds' taxes were approximately $1.30 less per $1,000
of assessed valuation compared to Snohomish County residents' taxes.
City Clerk Sandy Chase said the hearing notice that was posted had the same title as the agenda item.
Mr. Wilson explained the mailing list represents property within 300 feet of the boundary of the area. He
said the mailing labels were obtained from Snohomish County Assessor's Office, which have not been
100 percent infallible in the past.
Councilmember Miller asked if the City had met its legal obligation for notification of the hearing. City
Attorney Michael Karber answered the annexation statute requires public notice but not individual public
notice as this is a legislative matter. The City goes beyond the minimum requirements by mailing
individual notices to properties within 300 feet. The statute only requires posting, advertising in the
newspaper, and on the agenda.
Mayor Pro Tem Haakenson remanded the matter to the Council for action.
COUNCILMEMBER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO
DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE FOR
APPROVAL BY COUNCIL ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE CONSENT AGENDA; APPROVING
THE ANNEXATION AND ESTABLISHING 12:00 AM ON NOVEMBER 1, 1999 AS THE
EFFECTIVE DATE; DIRECT THE CITY CLERK TO NOTIFY ALL AFFECTED AGENCIES;
AND DIRECT THE CITY CLERK TO UNDERTAKE A CENSUS OF THE ANNEXATION AREA.
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Fahey returned at 8:05 p.m.
5. PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE NO. 3265 - ADOPTING AS AN INTERIM ZONING
REGULATION AMENDMENTS TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 17.70 REGARDING
TEMPORARY USES TO ADD A NEW SECTION 17.70.040 BISTRO AND OUTDOOR DINING,
AND AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECDC 18.70.030(B) RELATING TO REVIEW OF
STREET USE PERMITS
rd. 3265 Planning Manager Rob Chave explained the interim ordinance adopted by the Council on July 6
ntdoor regarding this matter requires a public hearing. The ordinance enables licensed and permitted restaurants
sales and dining /drinking facilities to have bistro dining on the sidewalks immediately adjacent to their
businesses. He advised the Planning Board is reviewing the issue, has set a public hearing and will be
forwarding a final recommendation to the Council in the future.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 8
Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, said although the idea was good, he was concerned with
how it would be policed. He pointed out policing of many of the City's regulations is done on a
complaint basis, which he did not believe would work for this issue. He suggested a staff person(s) be
appointed to educate business owners, to periodically police the situation, to check for valid permits, to
inform violators of the rules, to distribute the rules, to be courteous, to be helpful, and to smile so that
business owners would happily comply with the new ordinance. He said if this was done on a proactive
basis, it would create a feeling of working together with the City. He anticipated once there is bistro
dining and /or merchandise /displays on the sidewalk, no one will complain but they will grumble if it is in
the way, and it will not be as good a public thing as expected. He said the City could make this work
with the information person addressing the issue and providing a warning if necessary and a fine if
businesses repeatedly did not comply with the ordinance. Without this, it would likely get out of hand
and never be under control.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Fahey closed the public portion of the hearing and remanded the
matter to Council for deliberation.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke said this issue has been reviewed by the Community
Services /Development Services Committee on which Councilmember Nordquist and he serve, and they
too considered how to control it. This was addressed by having the interim zoning measure. expire 180
days following its adoption to allow adequate time to determine if the regulations are working or need to
be fine- tuned.
Councilmember White asked Councilmember Van Hollebeke what was contemplated by the Community
Services/Development Services Committee for "mobile vending services." Councilmember Van
Hollebeke said they visualized vending carts such as are commonly seen in other areas.
Councilmember White pointed out the language in the ordinance; which indicates that this use shall not
interfere with vehicular or pedestrian traffic, must be strictly adhered to. He said enforcement of this
regulation should not necessarily be on a complaint basis, but staff should be looking for problems to
address them before they become a nuisance. With that provision, he would support the ordinance.
Mayor Fahey clarified the Planning Board will review this matter, including a public hearing, prior to
official action by the Council. The purpose of this public hearing was to determine if modifications were
necessary before the ordinance is reviewed by the Planning Board.
Council President Haakenson asked if the Community Services/Development Services Committee
forwarded this matter to the full Council for discussion or if a recommendation had been made.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke answered the Committee discussed the ordinance at length, followed by
review by the City Attorney and then forwarded to the Council.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Foodway Rob Nelson, 10619 240" Place SW, Edmonds, distributed a map of the area proposed for a fire lane
e,elop- from Woodway. He explained the map identifies a 20 -foot area that encompasses Woodway Meadows
on r the west and south side, and on the east side in front of the old Woodway Elementary School and the
cemetery. He said this map was brought to the attention of Snohomish County's Land Specialist who
ent
indicated that land was owned by Snohomish County. He was concerned with the right -of -way and fire
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 9
lane between their homes. He asked the Council to slow deliberation on this property, as he understood
from the previous Council meeting that a permit was granted for a fire lane. He asked where residents go
from here.
ermit Ray Albano, 20916 76 "' Avenue W, Edmonds, described delays Noah would have experienced when
Delays building the ark (in the City) such as permit delays, requirements for variances, the ADB process, animal
rights, the IRS, etc. resulting in a 5 -6 year delay. He referred to recent comments in the newspaper, and
stated that Councilmember White represented Edmonds' safety, health and welfare and he planned to
support him in his re- election effort. However, Mr. Albano expressed concern with the idea of
appointing a Councilmember without seeking candidates as he felt this would set a dangerous
precedence.
ooaway Kevin Clarke, 23924 107" Place W, Edmonds, said upon reviewing the construction drawings for the
Develop_ emergency access road, he learned the developer is required to build the road according to City standards
ent but it was left off the drawing as the existing road does not meet the City's standards. He said although
the construction permit was issued based on these plans, he questioned whether anyone walked the
property. The existing pavement is only 10 feet and the City requires a 16 -foot wide paved strip with
edging and proper drainage. He questioned how a permit could be approved without a public process
that allowed input into construction of the right -of -way. As an adjacent property owner, he felt it was
important to have input into how the construction of the 20 -foot strip for right -of -way would impact his
property, particularly given the flooding issue he has experienced. He requested when the City received
title to the 20 -foot strip, that the 36 residents who live on the strip be allowed to provide input regarding
that 20 -foot strip. He was astonished that development occurring outside the City, did not include a
public hearing to allow residents of the area to provide input regarding how this would impact them. He
observed Edmonds provides fire service to Woodway, noting there is an existing, paved, 50 -foot fire
access to this property.
Wendy Norcross, 8615187"' Place SW, Edmonds, said she respected and admired all Councilmembers.
She referred to what was in the newspaper recently and expressed disappointment with the
characterization in the newspaper by the Mayor. Ms. Norcross said it was unfortunate, if there was a
misunderstanding that Mayor Fahey did not approach the individuals involved but instead involved the
City, which makes everyone look bad. She respected the job Mayor Fahey has done but wished she had
chosen another route.
Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, thanked Mayor Fahey for her letter which provided
information to the public that may not have been possible otherwise. Although it would not have been
his choice to do this, he understood Mayor Fahey's passion as indicated in the letter. He said sometimes
when wrong is observed, you have to speak out and let the public know what is really going on which he
appreciated. The question many are asking is how a suggestion can be made, as Councilmember White
indicated, without some concurrence of other Councilmembers with regard to an appointment. He said
that is the portion of this process that does not sit well with residents of the City. He said few residents
liked the letter or what was proposed. He said any action the Council takes, particularly on any major
issue, will make people wonder what is going on behind closed doors.
Woodway In response to questions raised, City Engineer Jim Walker explained that a letter was sent to the
Develop- developer of Woodway Highlands) requesting information related to the right -of -way or the permit that
ent was issued would be pulled. As the developer has not .provided that information, the permit is now
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 10
invalid. Snohomish County is reviewing how this strip came to be and what steps may be required to
resolve the issue.
Mr. Walker said although the plat drawings for Woodway Meadows show the 20 -foot strip within the
plat, it does not appear it was done that way, leaving a 20 -foot strip along the west side of Woodway
Meadows that is part of a separate tract and not owned by those property owners. Once Snohomish
County makes a decision, staff will work with the City Attorney to develop a strategy.
7. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES REGULATING SEASONAL SALES AND ESTABLISH-
ING ADDITIONAL STREET VENDOR REOUMEMENTS, AND DISCUSSION OF THE
REGULATION OF OUTDOOR DISPLAYS AND SALE OF MERCHANDISE
Seasonal Mayor Fahey explained this item is a follow -up to action that has transpired related to this issue over the
Sales / past few months. She recalled the Council discussed how to address seasonal sales when it came to
Outdoor staff s attention that there were no provisions in the code for the sale of seasonal merchandise. The issue
Displays
was also raised that a solicitor's license would allow a solicitor to sell their wares on an ongoing basis on
a lot that was made available to them. Although this would not be in violation of the code, it was not
within the spirit or the intent of the code. The City Attorney was asked to draft an ordinance to address
seasonal sales, which was presented to the Council at a public hearing on June 29. At that time, the
Council was supportive of the ordinance but requested the Community Services /Development Services
Committee give further consideration to the time period for the display /sale of seasonal merchandise.
The Committee's recommendation was to increase the time period in the ordinance from two 30 -day
periods not to exceed 60 days in one calendar year, to two 45 -day periods not to exceed 90 days in a
calendar year. The language in the ordinance was revised to reflect the Committee's recommendation.
Further, an amendment to City Code. Chapter 4.12 is necessary to add paragraph D to Section 4.12.055
Street Vendor Requirements (which does not require a public hearing) to require solicitors to remove all
goods and products from the site each night.
Within the context of this discussion, Mayor Fahey explained that businesses in the downtown area were
prevented from displaying merchandise outside their stores but several are doing it on a continual basis,
essentially in violation of the City's code. The Council expressed a desire to consider that issue to
determine if modifications could be made to the code to address this problem. She referred to ECDC
Section 16.50.030 which provides a general prohibition on outdoor uses in the downtown area,
"Operating restrictions. A. Enclosed Building. All uses shall be carried on entirely within a completely
enclosed building except: 1) Public utilities and parks, 2) Off-street parking and loading areas, and
commercial parking lots, 3) Drive -in businesses, 4) Plant nurseries, and 5) Seasonal farmers' markets."
Mayor Fahey stressed this only pertained to businesses in the downtown area and any merchandise
displayed outside was in violation of the existing ordinance. After reviewing this with City Attorney
Scott Snyder, it was determined almost anything done to address this issue created new problems. It was
determined the outside display of merchandise requires an extensive discussion in the context of the
visioning plan to determine how to enhance the display capabilities in the downtown area without
eroding the beauty and charm of the area. As Mr. Snyder indicated, it can also become a way by which
merchants can bypass issues in the sign code or issues the Architectural Design Board would consider.
Mayor Fahey advised a letter was submitted expressing concern with the outdoor displays and requesting
the ordinance be enforced by taking action against merchants who are displaying merchandise outside
their buildings. She acknowledged she and the Council swore to enforce the codes and ordinances of the
City; therefore, it is necessary to notify merchants who are in violation of the code to remove outdoor
displays. She said the alternative, should the Council choose to take a less oppressive approach in the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 11
interim, would be to adopt a moratorium on that section of the code until the issue can be researched
more completely.
Mayor Fahey asked for clarification whether the seasonal sales ordinance addressed the issue of outdoor
display of merchandise. City Attorney Michael Karber answered it does not address outdoor display of
merchandise, explaining the prohibition of outdoor sales is stated in the Community Business as well as
the Neighborhood Business section and would, therefore, apply citywide in those zones. He said the
seasonal sales amendment allows outdoor sales of certain types of merchandise within a certain time
period but does not address the businesses that display non - seasonal merchandise outside and for longer
than two 45 -day periods. Mr. Chave clarified although the discussion focused on the downtown area, the
same prohibition applied to Neighborhood Businesses.
In view of the number of changes that occurred since this issue was reviewed by the Community
Services /Development Services Committee, Councilmember Plunkett questioned whether the ordinances
have been drafted as the Committee anticipated. He suggested the ordinances be returned to the
Committee for further review.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke was satisfied with staff and the City Attorney's response to management
and regulation of these issues. He pointed out the sunset clause in the ordinance was intended to allow
the ordinance to be enacted and allow review in one year.
COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
NORDQUIST, FOR APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 3269 AND ORDINANCE NO. 3270.
MOTION CARRIED. The ordinances are approved as follows:
ORDINANCE NO. 3269: AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 16.45.010(B) BY THE ADDITION OF A SUB - PARAGRAPH
(5), AND SECTION 16.50.010(B) BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SUB - PARAGRAPH (4), TO
PROVIDE FOR LIMITED DISPLAY AND SALES ACTIVITIES OF A SEASONAL NATURE SO
LONG AS LOT COVERAGE AND OUTSIDE STORAGE PROHIBITIONS ARE COMPLIED
WITH, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
ORDINANCE NO. 3270: AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC SECTION 4.12.055 STREET
VENDOR REQUIREMENTS, PARAGRAPH (D) TO PROHIBIT THE OVERNIGHT STORAGE
OF INVENTORY 'OR OTHER SALES RELATED MATERIAL ON ANY PUBLIC STREET,
PUBLIC PLACE OR PUBLIC LOT, EXCEPT AS PROVIDED HEREIN, AND FIXING A TIME
WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON, MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE,
TO CREATE A MORATORIUM ON ENFORCEMENT OF ECDC 16.50.030 AND 16.45.030 FOR
A PERIOD OF 180 DAYS WHILE STAFF RESEARCHES A SOLUTION.
Following Councilmember Van Hollebeke's suggestion that the moratorium be for one year, Mr. Karber
advised the City is limited to 180 days. He pointed out this action will also require a public hearing
within 30 days.
MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Fahey advised a public hearing would be held August 17 when the City Attorney would present
the appropriate documentation.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 12
8. MAYOR'S REPORT
T Inslee Mayor Fahey announced that Congressman Jay Inslee will visit the City on August 16 and invited the
isit— public to participate. She explained the City has been working on obtaining stateside funding from the
Stateside Land and Water Conservation Futures Fund. This fund was established via enabling legislation from
Funding
continental shelf gas and oil leases and was to be allocated to both federal and stateside projects for
purchase and preservation of open space and parks. Approximately six years ago, Congress made a
decision to eliminate stateside funding and retain designated monies for federal projects. Congressman
Inslee is a strong proponent of stateside funding and wants to make a public statement in the form of
paddles and parks. He will leave Meadowdale Beach in a kayak and will arrive at Olympic Beach at
approximately 1:00 p.m. where a light lunch will be provided.
Mayor Fahey reported upcoming events at City Park on Sunday, August 8 will include the Old Settler's
Picnic, Edmonds in Bloom's award ceremony at 1:00 p.m., and a concert at 3:00 p.m.
ational Mayor Fahey expressed her appreciation to Crime Prevention Officer Robin Heslop who coordinates the
ight out Blockwatch program and who coordinated National Night Out in City Park. She explained National
Night Out is an opportunity for the public to leave their porch lights on as a symbol of the community's
response to fighting crime block by block and to join together at a designated location to express their
support for keeping neighborhoods safe.
9. COUNCIL REPORTS
Council President Haakenson thanked the Council for allowing him to serve as Council President for the
past 19 months. He congratulated Councilmember Miller on his selection as Council President and
offered to assist in any way he could. He suggested Councilmember Miller appoint him to the
committees he previously served on.
Councilmember Van Hollebeke thanked Council President Haakenson for the excellent job he did as
Council President. He congratulated Councilmember Miller and said he looked forward to a productive
remaining portion of the year. He reminded residents that Edmonds has been voted the Friendliest City
in Puget Sound for the past 6 -7 years.
Councilmember Plunkett thanked Council President Haakenson for working with the Council as Council
President and looked forward to working with Councilmember Miller.
Councilmember Nordquist thanked Council President Haakenson for serving as Council President,
observing it was a job well done.
COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
HAAKENSON, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER MILLER FROM THE JULY 24 MEETING. .
MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBER MILLER ABSTAINED FROM THE VOTE.
Councilmember Miller advised applications for the second half of the Community Grants were available
ommunity at the City's Clerk's office and would be accepted until August 27 at 5:00 p.m. A total amount of $5,000
l; cations is available. He thanked Council President Haakenson for the fine job he did during the past 19 months
and expressed his appreciation for the leadership and wisdom he brought to the Council. He observed
there were four people running for Mayor and nine people running for four Council positions. As
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 13
Council President, he pledged to do everything to ensure there is a professional and stable Council for
the remainder of the year.
Boo Han Mayor Fahey referred to a memo in the packet from a citizen regarding the height of the retaining wall
Plaza for Boo Han Plaza, noting the wall was appropriate and the City could not make further demands
regarding what is required based on the site's topography. She said she brought this to the Council's
attention in the event they were contacted by the citizen.
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m.
= FBOR A� R B A R A S. F: A H TEF;�,M ;.
SAINUKA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 3, 1999
Page 14
1
1
n
AGENDA
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
Plaza Meeting Room - Library Building
650 Main Street
7:00 -10:00 mm.
AUGUST 3, 1999
7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER
FLAG SALUTE
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
(A) ROLL CALL
(B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 27, 1999
(C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #34841 THROUGH #34983 FOR THE WEEK OF JULY 26, 1999, IN
THE AMOUNT OF $207,737.97.
(D) UPDATE ON HIGHWAY 99 PROJECT
(E) APPROVAL OF MAPLEWOOD PLACE, A FIVE -LOT FORMAL PLAT
(F) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A LEASE AGREEMENT FOR PARKING STALLS AT "OLD
PUBLIC WORKS" SITE
(G) REPORT ON BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE EDMONDS HISTORICAL MUSEUM WINDOW REPLACEMENT
AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO VELA BROTHERS, INC. ($86,786.60, INCLUDING TAX)
(H) REPORT ON BIDS RECEIVED FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING ASBESTOS REMOVAL/PHASE 11
AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO CROWN DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. ($53,648.40, INCLUDING
TAX)
3. (30 Min.) CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF THE 216TH STREET
SOUTHWEST RIGHT -OF -WAY IMMEDIATELY EAST OF 84TH AVENUE WEST (Applicant: Edmonds
School District / File No. ST- 99 -25)
4. (30 Min.) SECOND PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED "HALEY /KLEIN" ANNEXATION GENERALLY
LOCATED IN THE PLAT OF ESPERANCE LANE, WEST OF 76TH AVENUE WEST AND NORTH OF
224TH STREET SOUTHWEST, AND THE ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT THE
ANNEXATION, ESTABLISH THE ASSUMPTION OF THE EXISTING BONDED INDEBTEDNESS OF THE
CITY, ESTABLISH COMPARABLE ZONING FOR THE SUBJECT AREA, AND ESTABLISH AN
EFFECTIVE DATE OF ANNEXATION (Applicant/Proponent: Marie Haley / File No. AX- 92 -62)
5. (15 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING ON ORDINANCE NO. 3265 —ADOPTING AS AN INTERIM ZONING REGULATION
AMENDMENTS TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 17.70 REGARDING TEMPORARY USES TO ADD
A NEW SECTION 17.70.040, BISTRO AND OUTDOOR DINING, AND AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF
ECDC 18.70.030(B) RELATING TO REVIEW OF STREET USE PERMITS
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3 Minute Limit Per Person)
7. (30 Min.) CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES REGULATING SEASONAL SALES AND ESTABLISHING
ADDITIONAL STREET VENDOR REQUIREMENTS, AND DISCUSSION OF THE REGULATION OF
OUTDOOR DISPLAYS AND SALE OF MERCHANDISE.
8. (5 Min.) MAYOR'S REPORT
9. (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 or 46 Delayed telecast of this
meeting appears the following Wednesday, Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 32 or 46