Loading...
09/26/2000 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Gary Haakenson in the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main Street, followed by the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Jim White, Council President Pro Tem (arrived 7:03 p.m.) Dave Earling, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Christopher Davis, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Thomas A. Miller, Council President 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Robin Hickok, Police Chief Duane Bowman, Development Serv. Director Peggy Hetzler, Administrative Services Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Arvilla_Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Director Frances Chapin, Cultural Program Coordinator Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Council President Pro Tem White was not present for the vote.) 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Council President Pro Tem White was not present for the vote.) The agenda items approved are as follows: SEPTEMBER 15, 2000, IN THE AMOUNT OF $429,639.31. Claim for (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM. FOR DAMAGES FROM LYNNWOOD Damages DISPOSAL ($4,257.28) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 1 (A) ROLL CALL Approve (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2000 9/18/00 Minutes (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #43553 THROUGH #43717 FOR THE WEEK OF pprove SEPTEMBER 18, 2000, IN THE AMOUNT OF $248,709.92. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL them Checks CHECKS #31274 THROUGH #31067 FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 15, 2000, IN THE AMOUNT OF $429,639.31. Claim for (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM. FOR DAMAGES FROM LYNNWOOD Damages DISPOSAL ($4,257.28) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 1 General (E) REPORT ON THE GENERAL FUND AND OTHER SELECTED FUNDS FINANCIAL Hl POSITION FOR THE MONTH ENDED AUGUST 2000 of cem for (F) PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF "DAY OF CONCERN FOR THE HUNGRY," Hungry SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 3. AUDIENCE COMMENT Linda Carter, 10531 2401h Place SW, Edmonds, said she was unable to attend the previous Council Cara Rooms meeting when gambling had been discussed. She indicated she had worked in card rooms from Everett to Shoreline and was opposed to allowing gambling in Edmonds. She said gambling was an addiction that may cause people to do desperate things as well as many other problems that go along with gambling. She disputed information provided at a previous Council meeting by a citizen, allegedly a summary of Ms. Carter's comments regarding card rooms. She said the comments provided by that citizen exaggerated Ms. Carter's comments regarding guns, knives, and the serving of free food by card rooms. Ms. Carter reiterated her opinion that card rooms would not be good for Edmonds. siting of I Elaine Yard, 9209 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, representing St. Peters by the Sea, said she Churches I attended two Planning Board meetings regarding siting of churches. She pointed out there was some confusion regarding the recommended parking ratio; some information indicated it was one parking space per four pew seats and in other documentation it was described as one space per five pew seats. She recalled an ordinance that had been revoked because it was not adopted properly. de of Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, said he provided information to the City Clerk auct regarding a Code of Conduct and recommended the City adopt a Code of Conduct for the Council. He referred to a Council vote last week to transfer funds from Parks and Recreation to make repairs to the Frances Anderson building and the library. He said the capital project managers for the Frances Anderson Center and the library should have adequate funds in their own budgets for those repairs. Parks Fund Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, was disappointed with the Council discussion on the parks fund at the last Council meeting. He said there was a fund for building repairs and that was not the proper use of the parks fund. He pointed out unless the City had adequate matching funds, they would not receive grants. He suggested staff re- evaluate the projects and seek estimates regarding the cost of the improvements that need to be made. He suggested consideration be given to doing the projects over a two year period rather than in one year. community I Gordy Lindstrom, Calvary Chapel of Edmonds, 7821 224"' Street SW, Edmonds (located in the Facilities former Esperance school building), said he forwarded a memo to Planning Manager Rob Chave regarding their concerns and seeking solutions regarding community facilities. He said the legal direction provided to the Planning Board recommended they be flexible in siting churches in residential zones including reasonable accommodations. He said their concern was due to a site they were considering that they believe would be an appropriate site for a church. He said Calvary Chapel was interested in establishing siting for churches that was reasonable as well as ensuring public school facilities were available for church use. He commented a church with less than 250 seats had much less impact than an elementary school. ks Fund Councilmember Plunkett commented that at last week's Council meeting, the Council voted to send the issue about the parks fund to committee for review. He pointed out the Frances Anderson Center was identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a park. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 2 4. PROCLAMATION IN RECOGNITION OF NATIONAL ARTS & HUMANITIES MONTH Arts & Humanities Month Recognizing that arts and humanities enhance and enrich the lives of all citzens, Mayor Haakenson read a proclamation in recognition of October as National Arts and Humanities month. The proclamation urged all citizens of Edmonds to participate in the cultural riches the community has to offer to celebrate the arts. 5. MAYOR'S SPECIAL PRESENTATION Recognition Darlene McLellan, Chair of the Edmonds Art Festival Foundation, recognized Cultural Resources of Frances Coordinator Frances Chapin for her exceptional service to the local arts community and the residents of Chapin, Cultural Edmonds. She listed Ms. Chapin's numerous accomplishments including efforts to enhance vital visual Resources arts, networking of arts entities in the community, as well as efforts on behalf of the literary and various Coordinator performing arts. The Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation presented Ms. Chapin a vase with the Foundation logo. Cultural Resources Coordinator Frances Chapin said she was honored to work with arts in the community and privileged to live in a community with strong support for arts. Councilmembers each congratulated Ms. Chapin. Mayor Haakenson thanked Ms. Chapin for the work she does and said it was an honor and privilege to have her on the City's staff. Ferry 6. PRESENTATION BY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ON FERRY TERMINAL Terminal ACCESS STUDY Access Study Dawn McIntosh, Assistant Area Traffic Engineer for the Snohomish County area, Washington State Department of Transportation ( WSDOT), introduced Jeff Lundstrom, Project Engineer and. Leonard Smith, Washington State Ferries (WSF). Ms. McIntosh said the project under discussion was the SR104 interface with the Edmonds ferry terminal. Ms. McIntosh explained approximately 1' /2 years ago, WSDOT and WSF met to discuss problems that occur at the 18 ferry terminals in the Puget Sound region including how to develop uniform, consistent strategies for all ferry terminals regardless of the site. This discussion resulted in a system -wide highway ferry connection study that was completed in May 2000. In the meantime, WSDOT qualified for Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) funding from the Federal Highway Administration. She explained ITS funding strategies included variable message signs on the highway, signs for highway advisory radio, camera views on the WSDOT homepage, etc. Ms. McIntosh stated that the study revealed that while other ferry terminals have multiple problems, the ferry terminal in Edmonds had all the problems and was therefore selected as the ferry terminal case study. Ms. McIntosh described the purpose and need for the project including rising demand, service capacity and constraints, operational problems, and unfamiliar users. She explained the project proposal included: ■ Installing a variable message sign (VMS) in the traffic island between 100' Avenue W and 102nd Place W with in -route information. ■ Installing a changeable message sign (CMS) at SR104 and Paradise Lane intersection. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 3 • Installing two video cameras on a pole at Pine Street and at the 5th Avenue W undercrossing to provide pre -trip information. • Removing the queue lane gate to improve vehicle storage to shorten lines (funding dependent). ■ Improving /replacing the temporary right turn restriction at SR104 and Dayton. • Cul -de -sac the east leg of SR104/Pine Street. Ms. McIntosh commented the east leg of Pine Street was currently closed on weekends, holidays and special events. By creating a cul -de -sac on the east leg of Pine Street, most local traffic would use their current route; Hwy. 99 would be signed as an alternate route rerouting traffic to 238"' and signage on SR524 would be removed. She said creating a cul -de -sac on Pine Street would reduce road rage, improve safety and operations and eliminate queue jumping. Extending the closure of Pine Street from weekends and holidays to a permanent basis would improve consistency and meet driver expectations. Traffic counts indicate weekday volumes of 101 vehicles per peak hour and 98 vehicles on weekends. She said the City Police, who manage ferry traffic, sponsored the cul -de -sac of Pine Street and WSDOT supports the concept. She said the proposed project includes sufficient funds to cul -de -sac Pine Street, an opportunity that may not arise in the future. She said if the cul -de -sac of Pine Street was not supported by the community, the funds would be used for another ITS strategy. Ms. McIntosh said the construction budget for the project was $585,000. The schedule indicated design work would be completed by the end of December, the contract ad date would be February 26, 2001 with construction complete by December 2001. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the traffic volumes Ms. McIntosh indicated at Pine Street of 100 vehicles per hour. Ms. McIntosh explained this was peak hour volume and not all vehicles turned right from Pine Street into the ferry holding line. Turning movement traffic counts were scheduled but had not yet been conducted. Councilmember Plunkett inquired about traffic volumes throughout the day. Ms. McIntosh said that information was not available. Councilmember Plunkett asked if Ms. McIntosh had been onsite at 238`h. Ms. McIntosh answered yes, photographs had been taken, a traffic engineer did a site review of the intersection, the records were reviewed for public complaints, and accident history data reviewed to determine how well the intersection functioned. Councilmember Plunkett pointed out this was a nearly blind turn with vehicles moving very fast. He expressed concern with diverting appreciably more traffic into that area. Ms. McIntosh said the community would likely not divert to 238`h and would use whatever route they currently use when Pine Street was closed. She said only drivers following the signs to reach the ferry terminal would actually use 238`'', therefore, the amount of traffic diverted would be small. Councilmember Earling observed the only variable funding was the extra holding lane at the intersection at SR104 and Dayton. Ms. McIntosh agreed the improvement at SR104 and Dayton was contingent on funding. Councilmember Earling said this was actually a three -stage proposal with the first step being presented to the Council to determine if the Council was interested in proceeding. The second step was an open house on October 12, followed by a public hearing. Mr. Earling commented the proposal addressed a number of issues the City had struggled with for a long time. Ms. McIntosh agreed there were numerous operational problems due to competition between ferry traffic and local traffic. She said a pre - construction survey and evaluation, would be conducted by the Federal Highway Administration followed by another study once the improvements have been made to measure the success of the project. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 4 Councilmember Earling pointed out the importance of public input, particularly from residents on 238` and on Pine Street. Ms. McIntosh agreed public input was an important part of the process. She said routing traffic from Hwy. 99 to 230 was one alternative, another could be routing traffic from I -5 to SR104, thereby eliminating 238`'. Councilmember Earling recalled a few years ago, a study indicated total truck traffic at the SR104 crossing exceeded totals for Bainbridge Island and Bremerton. He requested Ms. McIntosh provide information regarding the amount of truck traffic. Ms. McIntosh agreed. Councilmember Petso inquired about the public notice for the October 12 open house and subsequent public hearing. She asked whether there were any plans for direct notification of residents on 238`x. Ms. McIntosh said the legislature and elected officials had been notified; depending on the decision of the Council, the open house would be advertised in the local newspaper and flyers would be distributed. Jeff Lindstrom said elected officials were typically notified 3 -5 days prior to notifying the public. Pending the Council's decision regarding moving forward with the open house, the public would begin to be notified. He said newsletters would be mailed using a mailing list provided by staff and he would ensure 238' was included in that mailing. The open house would be advertised over the next two weeks. Signs would also be posted on Pine, Street to inform users. Councilmember Petso commented the flyer did not indicate the cul -de -sac of Pine Street would divert traffic to 238[ ; therefore, residents on 238`h would not necessarily be aware of the potential impacts. She requested the notification clearly inform residents on 238"' of the potential impacts. COUNCILMEMBER EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM WHITE, TO AUTHORIZE THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ADVERTISE AND HOLD BOTH A PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING AND A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE SR104 IMPROVEMENTS SUGGESTED TONIGHT. Mayor Haakenson pointed out the recommended action requested the Council give support to the closure of Pine Street. Councilmember Earling said he was agreeable to considering the closure of Pine Street. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Cost options 7. REPORT ON COST OPTIONS FOR DEVELOPING SHORELINE AMENDMENTS for Developin Shoreline Amendments planning Manager Rob Chave explained this issue arose when the Council considered amendments to the Shoreline Master Program. At that time there was some discussion of the two paths the State Department of Ecology was developing to meet the anticipated Shoreline Master Program rules that would be adopted by the State. The rules require jurisdictions within the State to readopt their Shoreline Master Programs within the next two years. Mr. Chave explained the existing Shoreline Master Program was adopted in 1972. In 1999, the State found a substantial overhaul of the existing rules would be necessary and after an extended process, developed this new approach. Another factor was rules and regulations being developed by the federal government regarding ESA. Therefore, when the DOE considered the shoreline regulations, their goal was to make the shoreline regulations consistent with ESA. To accomplish this, DOE developed two paths, A and B. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 5 Path B has been approved by National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and US Fish and Wildlife Service and cities adopting Path B would be protected from liability under the ESA. Path B describes a specific set of regulations /requirements that would be necessary for a jurisdiction to meet that standard. Path A provides more opportunity to tailor programs /regulations to the local circumstances; however, Path A does not guarantee any exemption from liability and is therefore a riskier path. Path A is also likely more expensive due to best -of- science studies that would be required for all programs /projects to prove the approach meets or exceeds ESA. Mr. Chave said all jurisdictions are trying to determine the path to follow as the specific requirements, studies, expenses, etc. are yet unknown. Mr. Chave explained approximately $70,000 was identified in the preliminary 2001 budget to do baseline studies such as a consultant to inventory shorelines. He commented although the City did not have any streams with chinook, all streams flow into the shoreline. If the City selected Path B, the requirements are outlined and when completed, the City would be protected from liability under ESA. If the City selected Path A, a number of inventories would be required and the risk, programs and impacts would need to be assessed, thus a more lengthy and expensive process. Under Path A, once the City identifies programs and regulations it planned to implement, the City would be required to justify each one. A recent workshop indicated the federal government would very closely scrutinize any programs /regulations under Path A. Mr. Chave explained the $70,000 for inventories would also include assessing the City's shoreline and building regulations to ensure they comply with ESA. Depending on the findings of those inventories and assessments, a total modification of the shoreline regulations and other existing regulations would be necessary to ensure they comply. Comparing Path A and B, Mr. Chave explained Path B requires regulations that encourage natural vegetation. For example, when the ADB considered buffer landscaping, they would need to consider whether the vegetation was natural, included species that minimized watering, etc. He said a checklist for Path B lists nearly all activities done by a city, from the Wastewater Treatment Plant to maintenance activities. He said it appeared routine maintenance would be exempt. However, maintenance activities related to stormwater control would not be exempt. He said over the next two years, staff would be considering not only development regulations but also programmatic activities to ensure they comply. Mr. Chave said staff also needed to work with other jurisdictions to determine what steps they were taking. He said due to several unknowns, he was unable to provide hard numbers regarding costs. He said under Path A, in addition to the inventory, approximately 3 -5 times as much funding would be necessary for scientific studies. Mr. Chave said a more detailed analysis, comparing Path A and B to existing regulations and identifying significant changes would be provided at a work session with the Council scheduled in October. He said Path B would also include specific buffer criteria which staff plans to compare with the City's existing Critical Area buffers. Council President Pro Tern White asked if the City could implement Path A at a later date. Mr. Chave said it was previously either A or B. Once the City considered the differences between Path A and B and if a determination is made that Path B was acceptable for the time being, Path B could be adopted while the City assessed Path A more completely. Council President Pro Tern White asked whether any variation in Path B equated to Path A. Mr. Chave answered yes. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 6 Council President Pro Tern White asked if Path B could be used as a template and adapted to be appropriate to Edmonds. Mr. Chave answered that may be a possibility but more certainty would need to be provided by DOE before the City chose that path. Councilmember Earling asked how this differed from the work being done by the Tri- County group. Mr. Chave explained the Tri - County effort was an attempt by several counties to develop a reasonable approach to meet federal requirements and provide some certainty regarding meeting the 4(d) rule. Unfortunately, a solid conclusion had not been reached through the Tri - County efforts and they have not reached agreement with the federal government. He said many jurisdictions have indicated they do not plan to wait for Tri - County to reach an agreement. Fco­--u-nit-yl 8. WORK SESSION ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION REGARDING COMMUNITY Facilities FACILITIES Planning Manager Rob Chave explained this work began two years ago. By way of background, Mr. Chave explained the City had had a Public Use zone for some time. Within the City limits, all public facilities such as schools, parks, etc. were zoned "P" for Public Use. The "P" zone allowed a variety of public uses on a property. When areas were annexed, they were zoned consistent with Snohomish County zoning, primarily residential zoning. When public zoning was considered for those areas, several neighborhoods became concerned over other types of public uses that could occur on property zoned for Public Use, either a more intensive public use or an entirely different public use. The Council requested the Planning Board consider how community facilities and public uses were permitted and implemented in the code. The Planning Board found the code did not clearly separate how different uses were permitted. The Planning Board developed a scheme that attempted to distinguish between locally oriented public uses and facilities versus more regional public uses. The Planning Board presumed a local use could appropriately be sited in a neighborhood and the secondary impacts addressed and mitigated rather than prohibit the use. For example, the scheme for schools indicated elementary schools (K -8) could be located in a residential zone but within specific parameters such as access, height, setbacks, etc. More regional facilities, such as high schools, would have more limits. As a result, local facilities have more flexibility regarding where they could locate but regional facilities would be targeted for P zoning. He pointed out that if the Council agreed with this concept, some P zones may need to be rezoned to the underlying residential zoning. This would address some neighborhood concerns as well as school district concerns. He said the school district was primarily concerned with their ability to site facilities and avoid the City's involvement in their operation. Under the Planning Board proposal, the "P" zone would apply to regional facilities such as treatment plants, regional aquatic centers, etc. versus facilities with a local attraction. Mr. Chave said Exhibit 1 of the Council packet was legal background provided to the Planning Board. Exhibit 2 was a Fact Sheet issued at a public hearing that identified parameters and issues the Planning Board would address. He pointed out Exhibit 2, a Fact Sheet for the July 20, 2000 meeting, highlighted several issues. The first issue was whether elementary schools should be- K -6 or K -8. At one time, the Planning Board considered establishing three school classifications, K -6, 7`'' and 8`'' grade, and high school. During the hearing process, the Planning Board found no evidence that middle schools (grades 7 and 8) had any significantly different impacts compared to an elementary school. Therefore, the Planning Board allowed K -8 as one category. The evidence did indicate a significant difference in the impacts of a high school, therefore, the location of a high school had more restrictions and mitigations. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 7 The second issue the Planning Board considered was size of the facility and ultimately decided an elementary school with 600 students or less or 60,000 square feet or less could be located without a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Elementary schools with more than 600 students or greater than 60,000 square feet would require a CUP due to potential impacts that may be greater than a smaller facility. The third issue the Planning Board highlighted for testimony at the July 20 public hearing related to churches. The code currently requires one parking space for every five seats. The Planning Board initially proposed one parking space for every three seats if the church was located in a residential neighborhood. The Planning Board's reasoning was a church located in a residential neighborhood had less capacity for overflow parking. Testimony from churches and the community indicated there were no problems created by the existing parking standards; therefore, the Planning Board agreed the one parking space for every five spaces was acceptable at this time. Mr. Chave referred to testimony provided during the audience participation portion, indicating the issue raised was addressed in Exhibit 5 of the Council packet (letter from Gordy Lindstrom). Mr. Lindstrom's concern was the threshold established for churches by the Planning Board. Churches with a seating capacity of less than 100 seats may be located upon a local (non - arterial) street; churches with a seating capacity of less than 250 (seats greater than 100) shall be located within 1,200 feet of a principle or minor arterial or a collector street; churches with a seating capacity of more than 250 shall be located adjacent to a minor arterial street or within 1,200 feet of a principle arterial street. The concern expressed by Mr. Lindstrom was the site the Calvary Chapel was considering, a former school, did not meet the distance or street criteria that would allow a church to be located at that school. Several possible solutions were suggested such as increasing the distance requirement or changing the threshold. The Planning Board considered the suggestions and affirmed their original recommendation. Mr. Chave said staff's intent was to determine the Council's willingness to proceed with a public hearing and whether the Council wished to have additional information gathered for the public hearing. Councilmember Plunkett referred to a letter from City Attorney Michael Karber dated September 21, 2000, pointing out it appeared to be an entirely different proposal. Mr. Chave said the date was incorrect and did not reflect the current proposal. He said the letter outlined a former proposal and had been generated following Mr. Karber's May 1999 memo. He emphasized this was not an alternative proposal. Councilmembef Plunkett asked if the issues raised in a letter from the Edmonds School District regarding the proposed Community Facilities ordinance had been resolved. Mr. Chave answered most issues had been resolved in the current draft of the ordinance. He said the minutes of the last Planning Board meeting outlined how each item was addressed. Councilmember Plunkett asked how many students attended an average junior high school. A representative of the Edmonds School District answered a middle school had approximately 700 -750 students. Councilmember Petso asked a question submitted by a citizen; if a church leased surplus school property where there was already a park arrangement for use of the playfields, how would the City continue the park use of the property or would 'the church have use of the fields? Mr. Chave replied that would depend on the specifics of the lease agreement. However, a church seeking to locate on a school property would need to meet the seating capacity and distance criteria. Councilmember Petso asked if a church with a seating capacity under 100 could automatically locate in a residential zone. Mr. Chave agreed there were limited restrictions for a church with a seating capacity Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 8 under 100. Councilmember Petso observed churches with a seat capacity of over 250 had more requirements. Mr. Chave agreed, pointing out the most significant was where they could locate. Churches with a seating capacity under 100 could be located on a local street; churches with seating capacity over 100 would need to be on a more significant street. Councilmember Petso asked how growth of a church would be addressed. Mr. Chave said once the threshold was reached, they could have a problem. Since the City's enforcement was complaint- driven, a complaint would trigger enforcement. Typically, a church that increased in size would need permits for building expansion. Councilmember Petso said a church located in a former school could increase in size simply by leasing additional space from the school district. Councilmember Petso asked when enforcement could occur if a church grew and began impacting the neighborhood. Mr. Chave said enforcement could occur once seating exceeded 100. Councilmember Petso asked if there was a seven -year waiting period. Mr. Chave said the normal civil enforcement procedures would be followed. Councilmember Petso said in the first draft, schools were in a separate category but now were included as local public facilities. Mr. Chave said schools were considered local facilities but were such a significant, unique type of local facility that they had specific criteria such as height, location, etc. Other local public facilities were grouped together due to the difficulty in determining the impacts or mitigation. Councilmember Petso said she was familiar with a number of school uses that were not local such as a bus barn or a program that served students from outside the area, particularly since the school district served five cities. She said those uses would appear to be regional uses versus local uses. She said a school site could be a traditional neighborhood school but also could be a bus barn or a district -wide storage facility serving five cities. Mr. Chave said the Planning Board identified uses that would be allowed in residential zones such as primary schools but not high schools. Councilmember Petso pointed out permitted primary uses also included "local public facilities that are planned, designated, and sited in the capital improvement plan" which could include high schools, bus barns, etc. Mr. Chave said a bus barn would not be a local public facility. Councilmember Petso referred to the definition of schools in ECDC Section 21.90.008.1 "schools are considered to include all school buildings, structures, .ballfelds, stadiums, and other grounds or facilities that are primarily dedicated for educational uses, or to the support of educational uses." She said a bus barn or a storage facility could be considered a facility that supported an educational use and therefore could be located in a residential zone. Mr. Chave agreed the way the ordinance was written may be subject to interpretation. He said staff would consider a bus barn a regional facility. He suggested certain regional facilities be identified in the code such as a bus barn. Councilmember Petso asked whether the City could make that distinction. Mr. Chave agreed to research that prior to the public hearing. Councilmember Petso feared there were other examples that could become problematic. Councilmember Petso inquired about the significance of a local public facility having been sited in the capital improvement plan. Mr. Chave answered if a public siting process had been undertaken to include a site in the capital improvement plan, site selection had already been through a public process. Councilmember Orvis asked for clarification whether a church that was annexed to the City and was now a legal non - conforming use could continue that use. Mr. Chave answered yes. Councilmember Orvis said if the parking ratio was increased from 1:5 to 1:3, the church would not be required to immediately Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 9 add parking stalls, only if there was an expansion. Mr. Chave agreed that expansion would trigger the increased parking ratio. Mr. Chave referred to draft ECDC section 17.40.050(A), which states "existing legal nonconforming church uses, buildings, lots and /or signs may be expanded, enlarged, altered, or modified subject to conditional use permit approval provided that (1) the proposed expansion, enlargement, alternation, or modification does not increase the degree of nonconformity in any significant manner. For example, a proposed expansion of a nonconforming church use shall conform with the parking requirements of ECDC 16.65.020C for an additional seating capacity created in excess of that which existed immediately prior to the expansion." Councilmember Orvis asked how the size of a church was determined. Mr. Chave answered by the number of pews. Councilmember Orvis observed the addition, of a Sunday School room would not constitute an expansion. Councilmember Orvis asked how the height limit for_ schools was addressed in the regulations. Mr. Chave said the height was regulated' by the underlying zone. He explained churches and schools have historically. applied for and obtained height variances without generating any neighborhood concern. He said the Planning Board determined it was appropriate to allow the opportunity for increased height for certain parts of the facility. Councilmember Petso asked how other nonconforming uses were addressed, such as a recreational club. Mr. Chave referred to draft ECDC Section 17.40.050(B)(2) which described other local public facilities that may be expanded, enlarged, altered, or modified subject to conditional use permit approval. Councilmember Petso pointed out that section required the use be owned and /or operated by local, state or federal government. Councilmember Petso inquired about a private swim club. Mr. Chave said the facility could also be owned and/or operated by a public service corporations or common carriers. If the facility did not fit into a category addressed in the ordinance, it was not covered. At Councilmember Earling's request, Council President Pro Tern White scheduled a public hearing regarding community facilities on November 6. 9. MAYOR'S REPORT edic 7 Mayor Haakenson explained over the. past few years, fire consolidation discussions in South Snohomish County have failed twice. The City of Lynnwood's attempt to absorb Medic 7 into their fire department had failed twice. This. week he learned the limited consolidation talks between Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace to provide advance life support and fire suppression had also failed. He said when consolidation talks failed, it was because no one knew what to do with the unique, free - standing paramedic system in South Snohomish County. He said consolidation talks have proven. that Medic 7 should be part of one or multiple fire departments but how that occurred seemed to be the difficulty. Mayor Haakenson said on Thursday, September 28, 2000, as Chair of the Medic 7 Board, he planned to present an option to the Medic 7 Board in an attempt to solve many of the problems the Board has failed to resolve in the past four years. His proposal would be to dissolve the Board as a governing body and split paramedics into two groups, half becoming employees of the City of Lynnwood and half becoming employees of the City Edmonds, still providing the same Medic 7 service they currently provide. The proposal would be a discussion item only at Thursday's meeting. All City Councils , in the Medic 7 consortium will be given a presentation in coming weeks in order for them to instruct their Medic 7 representative how to vote their interest. He said the action required a unanimous vote of the Medic 7 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 10 Board; therefore, Councils would be provided adequate time to study the proposal. He indicated Councilmembers had a copy of the proposal in their packet. 10. INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL REPORTS/UPDATES ON RESPECTIVE BOARD MEETINGS Economic Councilmember Earling recalled last year the City was forced to consider dropping membership in Develop- county and regional associations. He requested Mayor Haakenson reconsider the City's membership in ent Council of the Economic Development Council of Snohomish County, commenting it would be beneficial to the Snohomish City as the second largest city in Snohomish County, to participate and assist in establishing priorities for County the Economic Development Council. Edmonds Councilmember Plunkett referred to an article in the Seattle Times regarding establishing a ferry Alliance for reservations stem in Edmonds. He explained the Edmonds Alliance for Economic Development Economic y p p Develop- (EAED) did preliminary research of a ferry reservation system; the question now was whether it would ment be effective on a commuter trip versus a tourist trip. The EAED was gathering information regarding that issue that would possibly be forwarded to the State. The Chamber of Commerce planned to survey ferry commuters next spring regarding their interest in a ferry reservation system. The ferry reservation system would allow riders to visit downtown while waiting for the ferry. He said a directory/kiosk, funded by the EAED, was erected at the Bank of Edmonds that includes a map of businesses downtown. The directory was the first of what could be several helpful guides for shoppers in Edmonds. Councilmember Plunkett said the EAED planned to continue its contribution to holiday lighting in downtown Edmonds. The EAED made a public presentation yesterday regarding accomplishments in the past 18 months and future plans. The EAED was also interested in a new committee that was considering downtown for a convention/hotel /performing arts center. Councilmember Plunkett said the EAED sought to maintain the charm of Edmonds as well as its economic viability because, without economic viability, downtown would not remain charming and unique. Lodging TaxCouncilmember Petso reported the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee developed a preliminary budget. advisory The most significant change from the 2000 budget was shifting $2,000 from the Sister City's Committee Commission to funding maintenance on the log cabin. The intent of the Committee was to ensure the log cabin continued to operate independently as a tourist center without a contribution from the General Fund or the Building Fund. Following five budget meetings, staff has begun preparing a preliminary 2001 budget. She emphasized it was a preliminary budget and subject to change. Councilmember Petso congratulated Cultural Resources Coordinator Frances Chapin for the recognition she received from the Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation. With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. 1 //OATY RE SON, PnAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes September 26, 2000 Page 1 l LJ AGENDA - EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Plaza Meeting Room - Library Building 650 Main Street 7:00 -10:00 D.M. SEPTEMBER 26, 2000 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 18, 2000 (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #43553 THROUGH #43717 FOR THE WEEK OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2000, IN THE AMOUNT OF $248,709.92. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL CHECKS #31274 THROUGH #31067 FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 15, 2000, IN THE AMOUNT OF $429,639.31. (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM LYNNWOOD DISPOSAL ($4,257.28) (E) REPORT ON THE GENERAL FUND AND OTHER SELECTED FUNDS FINANCIAL POSITION FOR THE MONTH ENDED AUGUST 2000 (F) PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF "DAY OF CONCERN FOR THE HUNGRY," SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 3. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3 Minute Limit Per Person) 4. .(10 Min.) PROCLAMATION IN RECOGNITION OF NATIONAL ARTS & HUMANITIES MONTH 5. (10 Min.) MAYOR'S SPECIAL PRESENTATION 6. (30 Min.) PRESENTATION BY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ON FERRY TERMINAL ACCESS STUDY 7. (20 Min.) REPORT ON COST OPTIONS FOR DEVELOPING SHORELINE AMENDMENTS 8. (45 Min.) WORK SESSION ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION REGARDING COMMUNITY FACILITIES 9. ( 5 Min.) MAYOR'S REPORT 10. (15 Min.) INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL REPORTS /UPDATES ON RESPECTIVE BOARD MEETINGS 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 46 Delayed telecast of this meeting appear: the following Wednesday at noon and 7: 00 p.m., as well as, Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 46