Loading...
01/19/1988 City CouncilTHESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO FEBRUARY 2, 1988 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 19, 1988 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naughten at the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main St, Edmonds. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF Larry Naughten, Mayor John Nordquist Mary Lou Block, Planning Div. Mgr. Steve Dwyer, Council President Peter Hahn, Comm. Svc. Director Laura Hall Art Housler, Admin. Svc. Director Jo -Anne Jaech Dan Prinz, Police Chief Bill Kasper Jack Weinz, Fire Chief Roger Hertrich Chris Beckman, Eng. Coordinator Jack Wilson Bobby Mills, Public Works Supt. Martha Dubick, Student Rept. Bob Alberts, City Engineer Scott Snyder, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder CONSENT AGENDA Item (B) was removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEM- BER KASPER, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL ,q_v `'"-�— ��0�` (C) APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL AND REPLACEMENT RADIOS ($6,040) AUTHORIZATION COUNTYFOR PUBLIC AGENCY MAYOR IC AMENDMENT OYINTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR SOUTHWEST SNO (E) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR GENERAL BANKING SERVICES (F) ADOPTED ORDINANCE 2654 AMENDING TITLE 5 OF EDMONDS CITY CODE TO MAKE THE PROVISIONS OF �d G '� S SUCH TITLE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAWS APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 12, 1988 [ITEM (B) ON TILE CONSENT AGENDA] Councilmember Kasper referred to the memorandum from the City Clerk regarding an amendment to the minutes as follows: page 4, fourth paragraph from the bottom, to state that Councilmember Kasper has been appointed to the PSCOG Technical Services Policy Committee, Councilmember Hertrich is the 1988 Subregional Council voting member, and Mayor Naughten is the 1988 Subregional Coun- f5 60 cil alternate. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO SO AMEND THE MINUTES. MOTION'CAR- RIED. Councilmember Hertrich said it was brought to his attention that the minute taker was unable to hear all of his comments at the last meeting because his microphone was not on. He requested that the following information be included in the minutes: page 4, paragraph 2, "Councilmember Hertrich expressed concern regarding extension of the pathway, color of the roof line not blend- .%�ing in with the trees, and high visibility of the administration building". COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS CORRECT- ED. MOTION CARRIED.. PROPOSED RESOLUTION 669 COMMENDING EDWARD J. HUNTLEY Mayor Naughten read the resolution into the record commending Edward J: Huntley for his long and distinguished service to the City. P� Mayor Naughten presented Mr. Huntley with the resolution. PROPOSED RESOLUTION 670 COMMENDING PAST COUNCIL PRESIDENT JACK WILSON AND PRESENTATION OF PLAQUE Councilmember Hall read the resolution into the record commending Jack Wilson for his services to the City. Council President Dwyer presented Councilmember Wilson with a plaque. He noted that Councilmem- ber Wilson did a particularly good job as Council President during a particularly difficult year. The meeting recessed at 7:14 p.m. for refreshments and reconvened at 7:30 p.m. AUDIENCE Mayor Naughten opened the audience portion of the meeting. Viola Erickson, Camelot Apartment, said the owner has notified the tenants that the building will be converted to condominiums. She said she called the Planning Department and was surprised n„ to learn that Edmonds does not have any ordinance regulating the conversion of an apartment com- plex to condominiums. Ms. Erickson submitted copies of a Seattle code to the City Clerk regarding conversion of apart- ments to condominiums . She requested the Council to review that ordinance. Ms. Erickson said tenants of the apartments are upset. She said some of the amenities that the tenants used in the past are no longer available to them, noting there has been no reduction in rent. Ms. Erickson pointed out that the Seattle ordinance requires that buildings that are converted to condominiums must be repaired and the tenants given a moving allowance. She said the Camelot Apartment is an older building and is in a.state of disrepair. Mayor Naughten said Staff would review the Seattle ordinance and investigate the matter. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if there was a procedure by which the issue would be addressed. Community Services Director Peter Hahn said issues relating to the development code are reviewed by the Planning Board and Staff. Jack Fritz, Camelot Apartment, said the building and appliances are in a state of disrepair. Ile said the apartment he and his wife reside in will sell for $71,000. However, the owner has made no mention of bringing the building up to standards.. Natalie Shippen, 1022 Euclid, referred to item #10 on the agenda, Request From City of Lynnwood for City Participation in 208th St. Urban Arterial Board Project. She pointed out that the Street Inventory Program identified improvements to 208th Street as a low priority and only referenced $13,000 for those improvements. Ms. Shippen said a request from Lynnwood to partici- pate in the improvements at a cost to the City of $80,000 did not seem appropriate. She suggest- ed that Lynnwood fund the entire project as a form of reciprocity to the City, which has support- ed a major project in Lynnwood and also pays a larger share of many regional projects. Jeff Palmer, 17510 - 76th Ave. W., said a public hearing regarding item #10 was appropriate be- cause of the potential impact that the project would have on home owners. Albert Richard, 1506 - 10th P1. N., spoke in support of a traffic light at the intersection of SR 524 and 80th Ave. W. He suggested that the blinking traffic signal at Olympic View Drive and Puget Drive be used at SR 524 and 80th Ave. W. and replaced with a red and green light. Mayor Naughten closed the audience portion of the meeting. REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF SEWER TREATMENT PLANT Sarah Barton, representing CWC-HDR and the Citizens Advisory Committee, said the Committee is working on the aesthetic quality of the treatment plant, wishes to use it to promote a pedestrian link between the waterfront and downtown area, and wants the plant to be reasonable in terms of 14 cost and maintenance. Ms. Barton reviewed the chronology of meetings of the Citizens Advisory Committee, Arts Commis- sion, and the Architectural Design Board. She said the Arts Commission met on January 18, 1988 and formalized votes on specific design features and recommendations to bring to the Council.• EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 JANUARY 19, 1988 Chris Matt, Chairman of the Citizens Advisory Committee; reported that the configuration of the site plan remains as was approved by the Council on September 15, 1987. The pergola on Dayton and Second will be omitted and the area designated as an open space area, but the pergola over the central clarifier will be retained. Mr. Matt said the buildings will be constructed of cement with horizontal reveals or indentations with gray -blue granite tile accents. The administration building will be constructed of blue gray. tinted non -reflective glass and white trim. A water feature is proposed at Dayton Street and SR 104. It will be designed to require only minimal maintenance. Mr. Matt said the site will be handicap accessible from two locations on the east and west cor- ners of the north elevation of the site. Don Hogan submitted copies of the proposed glass and the samples to the Council. Ms. Barton noted that the design recommendations were unanimously approved by the Citizens Advi- soryCommittee and Arts Commission. Jerry Ward, Arts Commission, 1125 Vista Pl., in response to a question by Councilmember Wilson, clarified that 1% of the project budget was not allocated for artistic treatment. He said the Commission is utilizing mitigated funds instead. Mr. Ward said three artists have been selected and were requested to present a full proposal for the water feature. Mr. Ward said the water feature will be located at the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104. The water feature is proposed to be constructed of natural exposed concrete and, possibly, porce- lain. Mr..Ward reviewed slides of public art water features in the Northwest region. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the Commission may request the full 1% for arts in the future. Mr. Ward replied negatively. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the wall adjacent to SR 104 can be treated so that graffiti can be easily washed off. Mr. Ward said there are protective coatings that can be applied. He said, however, that issue has not yet been discussed with the artists. Councilmember Kasper inquired if a five foot sidewalk is proposed along the entire length of Dayton Street. Ms. Barton replied affirmatively. Councilmember Kasper inquired about the height limit of all landscaping. Ms. Barton said the landscaping will conform to Code requirements. Councilmember Dwyer expressed his appreciation to the members of the Citizens Advisory Committee for the endeavors. Mayor Naughten also expressed his appreciation, noting that the meetings that have been held to date were a good example of community involvement. Councilmember Hall said she was pleased with the artistic treatment and, in particular, the water feature. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO APPROVE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE TO THE COUNCIL TO DATE. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER OPPOSED BECAUSE HE SAID HE HAD NOT REVIEWED ALL OF THE DOCUMENTATION. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING SIDEWALKS AT 172ND S.W./72ND. W. Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block reported that in 1981, the City approved a two-phase planned residential development (PRD)/subdivision between Meadowdale Beach Road and 172nd St. S.W. One of the conditions of approval for Division 1, which is located on the northwest corner of 172nd St. S.W. and 72nd Ave. W., was the construction of a sidewalk along the 172nd St. frontage. The property owner made a request to delete that requirement as part of an application for an extension of the PRD approval. Staff denied the request. The property owner then filed an appeal of the Staff decision on the sidewalk requirement. The Hearing Examiner held a public hearing on the request on November 5, 1987. On December 18, 1987, the Hearing Examiner upheld the extension of time and approved a modified walkway design. The key issues in this case are: 1) Tree impacts - There are a number of large evergreen trees located along the north side of 172nd St. The requirement to install sidewalks along that frontage would result in the removal of most of the trees. Many of the surrounding property owners are opposed to cutting the trees; 2) Pedestrian and Traffic Safety - The appellants have EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 JANUARY 19, 1988 alleged that there are potential conflicts between children and cars at the 172nd St. S.W. and 72nd Ave. W. intersection. They believe that the most appropriate location for a sidewalk is on the north side of the street. The property owner submitted a plan that would provide an area for pedestrians on the south side of 172nd St. and would provide street marking and other im- provements to upgrade traffic safety at the intersection. The Hearing Examiner accepted the plan. Staff initially believed the compromise plan for providing an improved shoulder on the south side of 172nd St. S.W. worked well and recommended that the Hearing Examiner's decision be upheld. However, Staff made a site inspection of the property located at the intersection of 172nd and 72nd on January 18, 1988 to resolve any questions in regard to the sidewalk solution. During the course of the field inspection, City Engineer Bob Alberts developed a solution which would be more in keeping with the original intent of the subdivision requirement than the proposed compro- mise, while not necessitating the removal of an excessive number of trees. The proposal also appears to be more fair to the neighbors on the south side of 172nd St. S.W. The proposal entails the following: construct the sidewalk, as originally proposed, along the north side of 172nd from its current terminus at 72nd Ave. W. to 73rd Pl. W. The installation would require the construction of a retaining wall or rockery and the removal of approximately two to three trees in the right-of-way. For the portion of 172nd west of 73rd P1., Staff agrees that the original proposal would require the removal of a significant number of large evergreen trees. To reduce that impact, a smaller walkway, two feet in width behind the curb, could be constructed, which would allow pedestrians to step up off the roadway for safety, while preserv- ing the trees. Implicit in the recommendation is the removal of the additional paving require- ment along the south side of 172nd St. S.W. Safety improvements at the 72nd Ave. intersec- tion would still be required. Mr. Alberts reviewed transparencies of the existing situation, original proposal, modified propos- al, and Staff's recommendation and described the construction options. Ms. Block submitted Polaroid photographs of the existing situation to the Council. Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the number of trees that exist in the path of the proposed walkway as recommended by Staff. Ms. Block replied two to three trees. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the remainder of the trees are within 15 feet of the walkway. Ms. Block replied affirmatively. Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the rationale for constructing only a 2 foot sidewalk. Ms. Block said a wider sidewalk would require that the hillside was cut farther back which, in turn, would expose the roots of mature trees. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the hillside could be cut by hand, rather than large equipment, to preserve the root systems. Mr. Alberts said any further cutting would endanger the root systems of those trees. Councilmember Dwyer inquired what standards the Council should consider in determining whether or not to change the PRD requirements and to extend the PRO. City Attorney Scott Snyder said the Council is required to make two findings in order to extend a PRO under Section 20.35.080 (E): 1) there are no substantial changes in the proposal, and 2) the Findings and Conclusions of the original approval still apply. Mr. Snyder said if the Council believed that the changes were substantial or affected the original findings, then those changes would not be proper within the current application for extension, and the PRO approval should lapse and the extension be de- nied. He said the two findings that relate under general criteria are review of whether a provi- sion is required of substantial additional public use facilities and, in accordance with 20.75.080, provision for adequate sidewalks (Chapter 18). Mr. Snyder pointed out that the under- lying zoning for the tract was not stated in the record. Ms. Block said the zoning of the proper- ty in question was RS-12. Mr. Snyder said if the Council finds that adequate provisions for sidewalks have been made that meet the criteria regarding the environment, then they may permit the amendment as not a substantial amendment. Councilmember Kasper inquired when the project was originally approved. Ms. Block replied 1981. Councilmember Kasper inquired about the time limit for extensions. Ms. Block said an application for subdivision of the property was made in 1984. She said the time limit for extensions was 3 years. Councilmember Kasper inquired if another extension could be applied for if the proposal was approved. Ms. Block replied affirmatively. She pointed out that no objection had been noted with respect to an extension, and Staff's recommendation was for an extension, subject to condi- tions of retaining the sidewalk requirement. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the meeting. Walter Dastis, 7202 - 172nd St. S.W., spoke in favor of a sidewalk but was opposed to the asphalt pathway. He said the number of neighborhood children has increased and a sidewalk would provide safety for those children, as well as other pedestrians. Mr. Dastis submitted a letter to the City Clerk, supporting his position, signed by residents of the area, which was marked as Exhibit 1. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 JANUARY 19, 1988 Councilmember Wilson asked Mr. Dastis how much property he owned along the south side of the street. Mr. Dastis said the dimensions of his property are 150'x8O'.. Councilmember Wilson inquired if Mr. Dastis would object to a sidewalk on the south side of the street. Mr. Dastis said he was not a part of that development. Lee Dastis said the residents of the area were opposed to a sidewalk on the south side of the street. Councilmember Wilson inquired if Mrs. Dastis was opposed to removal of the trees in the path of the proposed two foot pathway. Mrs. Dastis replied negatively, noting that a majority of those trees have already been removed. Richard Nord, 11809 N.E. 74th, Kirkland, said any alteration of the sidewalk in the depression or on the mound would affect the trees dramatically. Mr. Nord said the disposition of existing trees has always been a consideration. He said he worked very closely with the City when the second phase was being developed. He said because a strong interest of preservation of the trees was voiced, elimination of the sidewalk was thought to be a good idea. Mr. Nord said because objections were voiced regarding elimination of the sidewalk, an alternative design was submitted to the Hearing Examiner and Staff which saved the trees and provided a pedestrian walkway. He contended that the Staff's recommendation was a shotgun approach to the alternative design, noting that no reasoning has been stated regarding the rejection of the alternative design. Mr. Nord added that potential buyers are wondering if the trees will be removed and are concerned that the aesthetic value of the development will be dramatically affected if the trees are removed. Because Councilmember Dwyer wanted to insure that Mr. Nord had an opportunity to state his case and not feel that he was treated unfairly, Councilmember Dwyer inquired which, if any, of the proposals was not a substantial change from the originally -approved plan. He said it appeared to him that all of the proposals presented a substantial change. Mr. Nord said. he did not believe construction of a sidewalk was a significant change because the development was entirely complet- ed at the present time. Councilmember Dwyer said he was of the opinion that the appellants' posi- tion was that shifting of the sidewalk from Phase I to Phase II was a substantial change. He noted that an extension would not be permitted if a substantial change existed. Councilmember Jaech inquired if her assumption that Staff's proposal to construct a sidewalk along the north side of 172nd would not constitute a substantial change from the original pro- posal was correct. Ms. Block said Staff's recommendation was part of the original proposal. Councilmember Jaech inquired if Staff's proposal, then, would meet the criteria. Ms. Block re- quested Mr. Snyder to research the definition of "substantial change". Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the width of the band of existing trees. Mr. Nord re- plied approximately 40 feet. In response to Ms. Block's request, Mr. Snyder stated that the Community Development Director is given authority to approve certain minor changes of an approved preliminary plat. He quoted, "if the proposal involves additional lots, rearrangement of lots, additional impacts to surrounding property or other major changes, the proposal should be reviewed in the same manner as the origi- nal application". He said the Council must make a conclusion of law regarding whether or not the proposal constitutes a substantial change. Michael Chambers, 17129 - 72nd W., said he was opposed to construction of a sidewalk. He said he moved into his neighborhood because it is a rural area and he prefers that it remain a rural area. Mr. Chambers said there were no small children residing in the neighborhood. Ile noted that there are no sidewalks within the immediate vicinity other than within the PRD. Ken Astrof, 7311 - 172nd St., spoke against a sidewalk and was strongly opposed to removal of any of the trees. Mr. Astrof said hazardous pedestrian conditions only existed on the inside corner of the inter- section and only in one location which, he said, was due to an obstruction of weeds and rocks on the Dastis' property. He said traffic concerns would not be addressed by any of the solutions except by construction of a sidewalk on the south side of the street. Bruce Knowlton, Triad Associates, 11415 N.E. 128th St., Kirkland, said the firm has been involved with the project since 1984. Ile said the area is fully developed but there are no side- walks within a half a mile of the property in question. Mr. Knowlton said lie did not believe 172nd Street would be extended in the future. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 JANUARY 19, 1988 Mr. Knowlton said Ire was puzzled by Staff's position with respect to sidewalks, noting that a short plat was approved immediately west of the subject property and sidewalks were not made to be a condition of approval of that project. Mr. Knowlton said the modified proposal was not a substantial change. He said one could argue that placing the sidewalk on the north side of the road (Staff's recommendation) which would eliminate the buffer would result in a greater change than construction of a sidewalk on the south side of the road because a major element of the original PRO was a common open space tract along the southern boundary of the project to retain the existing coniferous trees within a buf- fer. Shawn Parsons, 7603 - 218th St. S.W., submitted an evaluation of Tree Impact with Sidewalk Construction, which was marked as Exhibit 2 by the City Clerk. Mr. Parsons said he has worked with the developer on the project. He noted that Ire serves on the Architectural Design Board (ADO) and is very concerned with aesthetic treatment. Mr. Parsons expressed concern regarding Staff's recommendation. He said approximately 50% of the buffer area would be destroyed and the remaining trees could suffer secondary problems related to windfall damage. He said jute matting would lessen the damage of additional cutting and damage to the root systems. Councilmember Jaech inquired if Mr. Parsons presently serves on the ADB. Mr. Parsons replied affirmatively. Fie noted that the project has not been reviewed by the ADB but he would step down if it was presented to the Board. Mr. Parsons reviewed slides of the property in question and surrounding area. Councilmember Jaech inquired about the life span of the jute matting. Mr. Parsons replied approximately one year, noting that the purpose of the fabric was to hold the soil in place until groundcover rooted. Dennis Olsen, 7517 - 172nd, was opposed to construction of a sidewalk and removal of any trees. Mr. Dastis said the obstruction on his property that was referred to earlier were weeds and trees. He said the area in which he resides is rural. He expressed concern that the trees on the subject property will eventually die if the sidewalk is constructed. Councilmember Kasper inquired if Mr. Dastis objected to a sidewalk on the opposite side of the street. Mr. Dastis replied negatively. Mr. Nord said he was not initially aware that the trees would be affected by construction of a sidewalk until an arborist studied the site and indicated that all of the trees would be eliminat- ed. Mr. Nord said he believed the modified proposal was in the best interest of tine neighbor- hood. Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the width of the roadway. Mr. Alberts said it is approxi- mately 20 feet. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if it is anticipated that 172nd will be made a through street in the future. Mr. Alberts replied negatively. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the sidewalk and rockery, as proposed by Staff, are designed to be constructed within the City's right-of-way. Mr. Alberts said the construction would not necessarily occur within the right-of-way, although there is sufficient space available. Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the width of the right-of-way. Mr. Alberts replied 60 feet. Councilmember Wilson asked what the sidewalk would accomplish, as proposed in the original PRO. Ms. Block said that was a good question because it was apparent that it would not extend a long distance. She said a sidewalk would provide safety for pedestrian near the intersection. Mr. Snyder pointed out that no requirement exists for sidewalks in the RS zone. Councilmember Wilson inquired: 1) what the scenario would be with respect to the location of the sidewalk if the appeal was upheld; 2) if the original PRD process must be considered if the path- way was considered a substantial change. Mr. Snyder said the Council must determine: 1) if elimination of the sidewalk was a substantial change; 2) if any of the alternatives were substan- tial changes, and 3) which of the alternatives meets the original Findings and Conclusions or criteria of the subdivision or PRO Code. He said if the Council finds that the alternative it believes meets the intent is not a substantial change, then the Council can impose that alterna- tive as a condition in approving an extension of both subdivision and the PRO. However, if the Council finds that it does not meet the criteria of original approval or it is substantial, then the Council's finding would be to uphold the appeal and deny the application for extension. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 JANUARY 19, 1988 Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. COUNCILMEM13ER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO ELIMINATE 111E SIDEWALK ON EITHER SIDE OF TIIE ROAD, NOTING THAT WOULD NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE BECAUSE THE GEOGRAPHY AND TREE CUTTING THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO CONSTRUCT A SIDEWALK WOULD BE MORE OF AN ADVERSE IMPACT. Councilmember Hall said the sidewalk was not a significant issue. She noted there was room for flexibility and creativity, as is the intent of a PRO. Councilmember Hertrich said he would be comfortable eliminating the sidewalk if the Council was assured that a safety problem would not be created. Mayor Naughten adjourned the meeting at 10 p.m. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEM- BER JAECH, TO REOPEN THE MEETING. Councilmember Dwyer said there was a possibility that moving the sidewalk to an area that was not originally part of the PRO may constitute a substantial change but elimination of the sidewalk would not constitute a substantial change. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO INSTALL BOLLARDS OR A GUARD RAIL BETWEEN 1.72ND AND 173RD ADJACENT TO THE CURB, AS WELL AS VEGETATION TO RETAIN THE SLOPE. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO EXTEND THE PRO FOR ONE YEAR. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting recessed at 10:05 p.m. and reconvened at 10:12 p.m. HEARING ON REQUEST TO CHANGE NAME OF DAYTON ST., BETWEEN SR 104 AND ADMIRAL WAY, TO HARBOR SQUARE BLVD. Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block reported that the proposal to change the name of Dayton Q Street, between SR 104 and Admiral Way, to Harbor Square Boulevard was the result of a letter of request from Bill McLaughlin on behalf of the Main Streets Board. She said Mr. McLaughlin 0 made the point that this action would highlight a shopping area of Edmonds as the designations of Alderwood Mall Boulevard, Northgate Way, and Everett Mall Way do for those areas. Ms. Block said the roadway between SR 104 and Admiral Way is a short stretch of street, and a driver can easily see from one end to the other so that location of the destination is not partic- ularly difficult. However, it may be of some benefit in identifying the location from the high- way. Ms. Block said several City departments have expressed a concern with the request as a potential precedent setting action. She noted that a name change would require all businesses along the street to modify all of their communications material. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if Dayton Street was named after anyone. Ms. Block said she did not know. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. Charles Rezba, Boat & Brass, 111 W. Dayton St., said he has spent a considerable amount of money in advertising and business communications. He requested the Council to consider not chang- ing the name until April 30, 1989 in order to lessen the impact of advertising expenses on him- self., as well as other business people in the area. Alex Webber, 170 W. Dayton St., said he owns a wholesale business. He said he had no objec- tion to a name change so long as business people had adequate notification to adapt to that change. Dick hill, 1242 Coronado PI., objected to a name change. He said two names for the same street was impractical and confusing to people unfamiliar to the area, and a bad precedent would be set by creating a policy in which any person wishing to advance his/her own interests could expect citizens of Edmonds to change the name of a street. Norma Bruns, 186 Walnut, requested the Council to deny the name change. She said the name change would confuse people who were unfamiliar with the area. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 JANUARY 19, 1988 COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO REJECT THE PROPOSAL TO CHANGE THE NAME OF DAYTON STREET. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT SR 524/80TH AVE. W. INTERSECTION City Engineer Bob Alberts reported that discussion of installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of SR 524 and 80th Ave S.W. has been ongoing for many years and has been reflected in numerous City Six -Year Transportation Plans. � Jv Mr. Alberts said the future need for a signal was first identified in the 1971 Topics Inventory prepared by EISI Consulting Traffic Engineers. In 1980, a P-50 Traffic Planning Study was prepared by the Northwest Engineering Company. The study identified the intersection meeting the MUTCD accident experience and system warrants. The study was presented to the Council on Febru- ary 10, 1981 with the recommendation for the installation of a signal at the intersection. On March 29, 1984, the City received a letter from the State reporting that the intersection rated high enough to be considered for grant funding through the Hazard Elimination Safety Program. In May 1984, a City/County Agreement was executed between the State and the City for 906 grant fund- ing of the project. In June 1984, the Council approved $8,900 for the purchase of signal poles for the installation of a signal system. On August 7, 1984, the Council approved the acceptance of a right-of-way quit claim deed predicated on the inclusion of certain improvements in the signal system design and that Community Transit Route 140 be rerouted to Dellwood Drive until after installation of the signal system. On December 16, 1986, the Council approved a $10,000 agreement with TRANSPO Group, Inc. to complete the signal system design. At the December 15, 1987 Council meeting, Staff requested authorization to call for bids and amend the TRANSPO Group, Inc. agreement but no action was taken and the Council scheduled a public hearing for January 19, 1988. Mr. Alberts said a ten year summary of the accident history shows there is an average of five to six accidents per year, with nine accidents occurring in 1984. He noted that both the Engineer- ing Division and Police Department recommend proceeding with installation of the signal system. Councilmember Kasper inquired if four lanes would be provided at the intersection of SR 524 and 80th Ave. Engineering Coordinator Chris Beckman replied affirmatively. He reviewed the configu- ration of that intersection on the overhead projector. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. Jeff Palmer, 17510 - 76th Ave. W., said he did not believe there was a lot of public desire for a traffic signal. He said he did not support the proposal and felt channelization would be a bet- ter alternative. Alex Webber, 7921 - 196th, said there have been numerous accidents and very serious injuries at that intersection. He said people are interested in a traffic signal at that intersection to control the traffic flow. He supported the proposal. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if Mr. Webber thought that the intersection would be improved if visibility was improved. Mr. Webber said signalization would alert drivers that the inter- section was approaching. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if Mr. Webber believed that 80th would be more travelled if signalization was installed. Mr. Webber replied affirmatively. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember Hertrich said he felt funding would be better utilized for channelization, widening the intersection, and improving sight distance. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO NOT INSTALL A TRAFFIC SIGNAL BUT MAKE OTHER IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF SR 524 AND 80TIl AVE. S.W. Mayor Naughten requested the Council to consider the history of accidents that have occurred at that intersection and that both the City and State feel that signalization was warranted. Counc ilmember Dwyer pointed out that accidents have occurred at that intersection but that many near misses and unreported collisions have also occurred. He noted that approximately every eight weeks a collision is reported and one out of four of those collisions involves a reported injury. Councilmember Kasper said the traffic volume is increasing at a rapid rate in the vicinity. He felt a traffic light was necessary at the intersection. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 JANUARY 19, 1988 Councilmember Jaech noted, for the record, that the Council had received a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Hugh Bechtold speaking in favor of a traffic signal. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. A TIE VOTE WAS MADE WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, AND COUNCILMEMBER KASPER OPPOSED. MAYOR NAUGHTEN VOTED AGAINST THE MOTION TO BREAK THE TIE VOTE. MOTION FAILED. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO AUTHORIZE A BID TO INSTALL A TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF SR 524 AND 80TH AVE. S.W. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. A TIE VOTE WAS MADE WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, AND COUNCILMEMBER KASPER IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED. The Council questioned the Mayor's ability to vote on the motion. City Attorney Scott Snyder stated that the statute prohibits the Mayor from voting on resolutions for the payment of mon- ies. Ile said, however, the motion was a preliminary motion to let a bid; the bid would have to be accepted, at which time the City would incur the monetary obligation. He said he viewed the issue as an administrative matter which the Mayor could vote on. MAYOR NAUGHTEN VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION, BREAKING THE TIE VOTE. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON PROPOSED SEWER RATE INCREASE Administrative Services Direct Art Housler reported that public hearings on this subject occurred on 4/21/87 and 7/21/87. A total of five citizens provided input during the two meetings. Mr. Housler said Exhibit IV to the Council packet includes presentation material which shows specific rake increases for each customer category over the next three years. These increases are required to meet debt payment and legal requirements for bond issues of $5 million in 1988 and approximately $7 million in 1989. A final undetermined rate increase will be required on March 1, 1991 to pay the additional debt payment on the $7 million bond issue. At the present time, the ultimate monthly rate is projected to be in the range of $18-22 for residential custom- ers. By March 1, 1991, the City should know the exact cost of construction and have refined figures on the cost of operation. Administrative Services Director Art Housler reported that notification was sent to Edmonds cus- tomers on 12/22/87 regarding the building and construction of the treatment plant and a newslet- ter was sent regarding the proposed sewer rates. Ile noted that the report from Culp/Wesner/Culp has been reviewed by the Council and Staff and publicized in the newspapers. Mr. Ilousler said that the last rate increase occurred on May 1, 1983. Mr. Ilousler provided the proposed rate schedule for those receiving water service as follows: CUSTOMER CATEGORY CURRENT 3/1/88 3/1 89 3/1/90 Single family $14.91 $20.00 $28.00 $32.60 Multi-family/unit 14.91 20.00 28.00 32.60 All other cust/ .92 1.23 1.73 2.00 100 cu.ft. Unconnected to sewer 5.96 8.00 11.20 13.04 Mr. Housler also provided rates for those not receiving water service from the City of Edmonds. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. No input was offered. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. Jz REQUEST FROM CITY OF LYNNWOOD FOR CITY PARTICIPATION IN 208TH ST. URBAN ARTERIAL BOARD PROJECT ���P� '/J� The City of Lynnwood has been offered an 80% Urban Arterial grant to widen 208th St. S.W., % between 68th Ave. W. and 76th Ave. W., and install traffic signals at the intersection of 76th Ave W. and 208th St. S.W. Since approximately 30% of the improved frontage and a portion of the signal system lies within the City of Edmonds, the City of Lynnwood is requesting that the City of Edmonds participate in the project based on the front footage share, with an anticipated cost to the City of $80,000. The project is similar to the project identified in Figure 12 of the College Place Traffic Study that was prepared for the City of Edmonds in April 1987. The installation of a signal system at 76th Ave. W. and 208th St. S.W. is identical to the project the City discontinued in May 1987. Both Engineering and Police still believe there is a need for the signal system for vehicles and pedestrians based on the existing warrants and continued growth in the College Place area. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9 JANUARY 19, 1988 Staff recommends approval of the project, authorizing the Mayor to negotiate an agreement with the City of Lynnwood. City Engineer Bob Alberts reminded the Council that the purpose of the Street Inventory Program was to bring streets to a level of standard to maintain. Loren Sands, City of Lynnwood, stated that 208th and 76th St. are shared by the cities of Lynnwood and Edmonds, with approximately 30% of 208th Street lying in the City of Edmonds. He said the total project cost is estimated to be $1.5 million, with Edmonds share at approximately $80,000 to $90,000. Mr. Sands said benefits of the project would include pedestrian safety, improved traffic safety, completion of the arterial link between SR 524 and 76th, and available UAB funding. Mr. Sands said the proposed action is to form an interlocal agreement between the two cities. Councilmember Wilson said he did not believe the project was necessary and that the City should not be expending funds the project. He said the traffic at the intersection of 208th and 76th Ave. W. flows smoothly even during peak hours. Ile suggested that the City of Lynnwood focus on the traffic problems within their jurisdiction, especially around the post office, and if the city proceeded with the project to utilize their own funds. Councilmember Hertrich inquired what classification the City of Lynnwood has designated the area in question. Mr. Sands said it is designated as a collector arterial. Councilmember Hertrich said the City of Edmonds has designated that area as a residential collector, noting that lie did not: believe that UAB funding was available for that classification. Mr. Sands said staff was well aware that the project crosses over city boundaries and would have rejected the project if it did not qualify for UAB funding. Councilmember Hertrich added that there was no indication of a desire to widen 208th Street in the Street Inventory Program. Ile suggested that Lynnwood consider funding the project to a greater degree. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, TO REJECT THE REQUEST AND ENCOUR- AGE LYNNWOOD TO LOOK ELSEWHERE TO EXPEND THEIR TIME AND MONEY AND DROP THE PROJECT. MOTION CAR- RIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER OPPOSED. COUNCIL Council President Dwyer noted that the deadline to register for the NLC conference on March 19th through the 22nd was February 12; the deadline to register for the Association of Snohomish County Cities and Towns meeting on January 28th was January 22nd. Council President Dwyer reminded the Council of the Saturday morning meeting on January 23, 8:30, at Sailor's. Council President Dwyer said he received a note from the Council Assistant inquiring what condo- lences the Council wished to send to Jim Haines. He felt a card would be appropriate. The Council concurred. Council President Dwyer recommended that the ordinance regarding the meetings between the Plan- ning Board and Council be discussed on February 9: Because scheduling of the Council retreat in February and March conflicted with time schedules of several Councilmembers and because reservations were not available in April, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO SCHEDULE THE COUNCIL RETREAT ON MAY 6 and 7 AT PORT LUDLOW. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Hertrich requested that an inventory of Staff involvement in the Sister City Pro- gram be made available to the Council. Mayor Naughten said his secretary was designated as a liaison and the Arts Commission is involved in the program. Councilmember Hertrich said he inadvertently omitted a correction to the minutes and requested that the following correction be made: page 6, paragraph 3, "...acquisition cost for property at Five Corners..." rather than "Perrinvi1le. ..". COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL - MEMBER JAECH, TO AMEND THE MINUTES TO REFLECT THE CORRECTION. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Wilson thanked the Council for the plaque, the resolution, and the cake. He said lie has enjoyed working with the Council and hopes to continue to do so in the future. Council President Dwyer inquired if the Council wished to cancel the Executive Session due to the lateness of the hour. Mayor Naughten suggested that it be rescheduled on January 23, 1988. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10 JANUARY 19, 1988 Councilmember Jaech noted that the topic of discussion was not appropriate during an Executive Session because it was previously discussed during an Executive Session and should be discussed during a public meeting. Council President Dwyer noted that the Council received a confidential memorandum from the Mayor and suggested that the Executive Session be rescheduled and Mr. Snyder provided a copy of the memo to determine if discussion of the issue was appropriate during an Executive Session. The meeting adjourned at 11:18 p.m. These minutes are subject to February 2, 1988 approval JACQUELINE G. PARRETT, City Clerk 40p, LARRY S. NAUGHTEN, Mayor EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11 JANUARY 19, 1988 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL PLAZA MEETING ROOM -LIBRARY BUILDING 7:00 - 10:00 P.M. JANUARY 19, 1988 CALL TO ORDER FLAG SALUTE 1. CONSENT AGENDA (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 12, 1988 (C) APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL AND REPLACEMENT RADIOS ($6,040) (D) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AMENDMENT TO INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR SOUTHWEST SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC COMMUNICA- TIONS AGENCY (E) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR GENERAL BANKING SERVICES (F) PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2654 AMENDING TITLE 5 OF EDMONDS CITY CODE TO MAKE THE PROVISIONS OF SUCH TITLE CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAWS 2. PROPOSED RESOLUTION 669 COMMENDING EDWARD J. HUNTLEY ( 5 MINUTES) 3. PROPOSED RESOLUTION 670 COMMENDING PAST COUNCIL PRESIDENT ( 5 MINUTES) JACK WILSON AND PRESENTATION OF PLAQUE RECESS --REFRESHMENTS (10 MINUTES) 4. AUDIENCE 5. REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF SEWER TREATMENT PLANT (50 MINUTES) 6. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING SIDEWALKS (20 MINUTES) AT 172ND S.W./72ND W. (AP-13-87/APPELLANT: WALTER & KOLETA DASTIS) 7. HEARING ON REQUEST TO CHANGE NAME OF DAYTON ST., BETWEEN SR 104 (20 MINUTES) AND ADMIRAL WAY, TO HARBOR SQUARE BLVD. 8. HEARING ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT SR524/80TH AVE. W. INTERSECTION (15 MINUTES) 9. HEARING ON PROPOSED SEWER RATE INCREASE (45 MINUTES) 10. REQUEST FROM CITY'OF LYNNWOOD FOR CITY PARTICIPATION IN (30 MINUTES) 208TIl ST. URBAN ARTERIAL BOARD PROJECT 11. MAYOR 12. COUNCIL 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION - LABOR NEGOTIATIONS THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND PARKING AND MEETING, ROOMS ARE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE