Loading...
07/05/1988 City CouncilTHESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO JULY 12, 1988 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 5, 1988 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naughten at the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main St., Edmonds. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor Steve Dwyer, Council President Laura Hall Roger Hertrich Jo -Anne Jaech Bill Kasper John Nordquist Jack Wilson STAFF Scott Snyder, City Attorney Peter Hahn, Com. Svs. Dir. Jim Barnes, Parks/Rec. Mgr. Bob Alberts, City Engineer Bobby Mills, Pub. Wks. Supt. Duane Bowman, Asst. City Planner Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Naughten announced that Item (E), Proposed Ordinance 2676 Amending Community Development Code Relating To Street Standards, had been removed from the Consent Agenda and scheduled on the July 12, 1988 agenda. Item (C) was removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 28, 1988 D) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT FOR SEAVIEW PARK (F) RIGHT TOF-WAYANCE FADJACENTQUIT ATO 9105 OLYYMPICIM DEED FROM LVIEW DRDRED RSEN AND MARGARET GOLDSMITH FOR STREET (G) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM ROGER G. JOHNSON ($129) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN CEMETERY EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT [ITEM (C) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA] Councilmember Nordquist said he felt the contract should be discussed as a separate item from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO NOT APPROVE ITEM (C). Councilmember Hertrich said he would vote against the motion. He said he attended several meet- ings in which the contract was discussed very thoroughly and, therefore, felt the contract should be approved. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCIL - MEMBER KASPER, AND COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO DISCUSS ITEM (C) DURING AN EXECUTIVE SESSION THAT EVENING. MOTION CARRIED. AUDIENCE Mayor Naughten opened the audience portion of the meeting. Robert W. Rine II, 8628 Bowdoin Way, implored the Council to help him in seeking relief in the Navy's neglect to keep updated records of enlisted personnel so that they may advance in rank. He read a letter into the record that he had written stating his grievance and submitted it to the City Clerk. Mr. Rine said he had written several letters to governmental officials but has r received no assistance from them to date. Councilmember Hall suggested that Mr. Rine contact Representative John Miller. She said she would be willing to refer him onto other sources if he was unsuccessful with Representative Mill- er. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if Mr. Rine was on active duty. Mr. Rine said he was in the Reserves. Mayor Naughten suggested that Mr. Rine contact Councilmember Hall for assistance. Jeff Palmer, 17510 - 76th Ave. W., felt it was time that the City question the cost to the City and to society of annual property damage, fire, and personal injury caused by the private use of fireworks during the 4th of July celebration. He suggested that the City urge its citizens to contribute the same dollar amount next year that they would normally spend on their own private display fireworks for a grander public fireworks display so that a more entertaining, economical, and safer 4th of July can be celebrated. Mike Cooper, 820 Maple St., suggested: 1) that the City join the Association of Washington Cit- ies, Washington State Fire Chiefs' Association, Washington State Council of Firefighters, Washing- ton State Fire Commissioners' Association, State Fire Marshal's Association, and other local organizations to lobby the State legislature to allow municipalities to control the use of fire- works; 2) that the City adopt a "zero tolerance" policy for the illegal use of fireworks within the bounds of the City and impose a heavy fine to offenders. Councilmember Hertrich said he believed that the use of fireworks by individuals was becoming uncontrolled. He concurred that the City should impose regulations. He suggested that the issue be discussed at a work meeting of the Council. Councilmember Wilson noted that the Public Safety Committee has discussed the issue several times in the past. He said he was in favor of regulating the use of fireworks and was hopeful that the Committee would entertain the idea in the near future. Councilmember Jaech noted that the Council had requested the City Attorney to initiate action in the past to regulate fireworks. She said the file was available for use by the Public Safety Committee if it so desired. * HEARING ON APPEAL OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD DECISION REGARDING SCREENING OF REAR WALLS OF 0'8 BUILDING AT 10012 EDM NDS WAY P- - 8/ DB-3-87; PPELL N : D YID H INLEIN Councilmember Nordquist said his office is located on property adjacent to the subject property. He stepped down from the dais due to that conflict of interest and sat in the audience. Associate City Planner Duane Bowman reported that the Architectural Design Board (ADB) approved a remodel of the commercial complex on the southwest corner of SR 104 and 100th Ave. W. in February 1987. The project has recently been completed. Mr. Bowman said it was discovered near the end of the construction that additional conduits and power meters were placed on the rear walls of the two buildings in the complex, identified as Buildings "A" and "B" on the site plan. Staff contacted David Heinlein and informed him that the conduits and meters must be screened, otherwise the project would be remanded to the ADB for approval of the new equipment. Mr. Bowman said the appellant filed an application to allow the equipment to remain as built. The ADB denied the request on June 1, 1988 and ordered that a fence be erected at the rear of each building to screen the conduits and meters. On June 14, 1988, Mr. Heinlein filed an ap- peal seeking to overturn the ADB decision. Mr. Bowman noted that the appeal letter, the ADB minutes, a site plan, photographs, and a letter from an adjacent property owner were included in the Council packets. Mr. Bowman said the ADB felt that the conduits were unsightly and should be screened. The appel- lant feels that landscaping can screen the rear wall of Building "B" better than a fence, and the neighboring property owner agrees with this concept. This does not, however, address Building "A" . Mr. Bowman submitted six photographs from the file, marked Exhibits 1-6, to the City Clerk. -Councilmember Dwyer inquired if there were any landscaping guidelines in effect for the Council to rely upon in making a determination. City Attorney Scott Snyder said there were no specific landscaping standards contained in the ordinance; consequently, Staff recommended that the issue be referred back to the ADB because of their expertise in landscaping. David Heinlein, project architect, 13201 Bel -Red Road, Bellevue, said a proposal to renovate the Westway Center was presented to the ADB on February 4, 1987. He said the project was well * See Council Minutes of July 12, 1988 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 July 5, 1988 received by the Board and two conditions were imposed: 1) extend the canopy for the full length of the south facade of Building "B", and 2) irrigate the landscaped areas adjacent to the rights - of -way. Mr. Heinlein said the Planning Department notified him that new work must be screened or the project would be remanded to the ADB for further review. Mr. Heinlein said he appeared before the Board and asked them to confirm their initial decision because Building "A" had not received any new construction. Several inoperative conduits were removed from Building "A" prior to paint- ing and deteriorating down spouts were repaired; new meters and panels had been installed on Building "B". He said the ADB reassessed the project and reversed their original decision be- cause some new work had been done. The Board required that a 5 foot high fence be constructed at the rear facade of the buildings to screen the horizontal conduits. He noted that the fence would not screen the meters, only the horizontal conduits. Mr. Heinlein said both rear facades are within eighteen inches of the adjacent property line. The fence which is required by the ADB will impede the servicing of electric meters and panels and hinder access to the wall if repairs are needed. Vehicular circulation on the property adja- cent to and south of Building "A" will be impacted. The property is currently paved continuous to Building "A", and the addition of a fence would further restrict movement and the likelihood of fence damage is eminent. Mr. Heinlein said the owner of the property in question spoke with Mr. Gary Jones, the property owner adjacent to and west of Building "B". Mr. Jones intends to develop his land with an office building and feels that the proposed fence would interfere with his construction activities. He would prefer to screen Building "B" with landscaping to integrate with his overall landscaping and site design. Mr. Heinlein expressed concern that the ADB had imposed a revised decision, which included. treatment to both buildings, based the installation of new items to Building "B" only. Mr. Heinlein requested the Council to modify the ADB's recent decision and allow a landscaped screen to be substituted for fencing at the west facade of Building "B" and not require screening for Building "A", which would be consistent with the original ADB approval. Councilmember Jaech, because of the comment that vehicular circulation will be impacted, inquired on whose property the fence would be located. Mr. Heinlein said it would be located on the Westway Center property. He reiterated that both buildings are located within eighteen inches of the property line. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the owner of the Westway Center would be willing to install an irrigation system if landscaping was permitted. Mr. Heinlein replied affirmatively.' Councilmember Jaech inquired if mature plants would be installed to adequately screen the equipment rather than smaller plantings. Mr. Heinlein said he believed five foot plantings, comparable to the fence height required by the ADB, would be a reasonable request but not full-sized plantings to shield the building. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the electrical work was included as part of the original project. Community Services Director Peter Hahn said the work was annotated on the elevations, but the extent of the work was not readily apparent from those notes. Councilmember Kasper in- quired if the Board members had inspected the property before and after work was done. Mr. Hahn said he was unsure. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the unused electrical equipment on the vertical structures on Building "B" will be utilized in the future. Mr. Heinlein said he did not know. Councilmember Hertrich stated that the electrical equipment was visible to the public and it looked like a "jungle". He said he was surprised that some aesthetic treatment was not given to the vertical structures on which the equipment was located. Mr. Heinlein said he felt that he did a fine job to a building that was in very poor condition. He said landscaping of the building will allow more flexibility in screening the vertical structures than would a five foot fence. Coun- cilmember Hertrich inquired if further aesthetic treatment could be provided to disguise the electrical equipment. Mr. Heinlein pointed out that the building is only eighteen inches away from the property line so sufficient room did not exist for additional treatment. He noted that the fence would have to be taken down if maintenance was required to the building. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. John Nordquist, 10020 Edmonds Way, said the west wall of Building "B" will be even more visible to the public in the future because the adjacent building will be demolished and a parking lot built in its place. He cautioned the Council about approving landscaping as a barrier in this instance and asked them to take into consideration that an architect had once told the Council that landscaping would screen the entire Olson building. He submitted two photographs to the City Clerk, marked Exhibits 7 and 8. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 July 5, 1988 Councilmember Jaech inquired if the Code allows all wiring to be constructed on the exterior surface of a new building. Mr. Bowman said wires could be placed on the exterior as long as the plans met the electrical code. He noted, however, that approval would not be granted by the ADB. Mr. Snyder pointed out that the applicable ADB requirement states, "Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on the roof, grounds, or building should be screened from view". Council - member Kasper inquired if the same rule applied to remodeling projects. Mr. Snyder said the Code states, "No person shall start any development or substantially change any development until the ADB has approved the proposed development or change". Mr. Snyder said if the conduits or two meters were removed, it would not qualify as a substantial development. However, the project is subject to review of the ADB or Staff because of a remodel of the rest of the building. Councilmember Hall expressed concern that the owner was required to screen Building "A" when considering that no substantial work was done on that building. Mr. Snyder said a motion could be made stating that Building "A" was not substantially changed and did not require to be ad- dressed. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, THAT A LANDSCAPED SCREEN BE REQUIRED BEHIND BUILDING "B" WITH AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN PLACE AND THAT BUILDING "A" BE EXCLUDED BECAUSE IT WAS NOT REMODELED. Councilmember Wilson requested that the motion include -that screening be full and complete and submitted to the ADB for review with final approval of the Council. COUN- CILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO ADD TO HER MOTION TO REMAND THE LAND- SCAPING ISSUE TO THE ADB. Councilmember Jaech said she would prefer that the issue was presented to the Council, as well, for approval to insure that proper heights and maintenance of plant material were utilized. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if Councilmember Hall would include a minimum height to cover the horizontal conduit and boxes. Councilmember Hall inquired about the fence height requirement as imposed by the ADB. Mr. Snyder replied six inches above the highest vertical conduit. COUNCILMEMBER HALL SAID SHE WOULD INCORPORATE THE FENCE HEIGHT INTO THE MOTION FOR THE FULL LENGTH OF THE BUILDING. MR. SNYDER CLARIFIED THE MOTION AND AMENDMENT AS FOLLOWS: BUILDING "A" IS NOT SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGED AND WILL NOT BE REQUIRED TO BE LANDSCAPED. BUILDING "B" IS TO BE LANDSCAPED THE FULL LENGTH OF THE BUILDING WITH LANDSCAPING TO BE REVIEWED AND AP- PROVED BY THE ADB, FOR A MINIMUM OF SIX INCHES ABOVE THE HIGHEST HORIZONTAL CONDUIT. ALSO INCLUD- ED IS THE REQUIREMENT FOR AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM AS FIRST STATED IN THE MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER AGREED. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REQUEST STAFF TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL TO ELIMINATE THE EQUIPMENT ON THE ROOF AND REQUIRE IT TO BE INSTALLED IN THE INTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. A TIE VOTE WAS MADE WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, AND COUNCILMEMBER KASPER IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED. MAYOR NAUGHTEN BROKE THE TIE VOTE BY VOTING IN OPPOSITION. MOTION FAILED. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, THAT THE ADB DECISION REGARDING SCREENING OF THE REAR WALLS OF BUILDING "A" AND "B" BE OVERTURNED BASED ON THE FOLLOWING REQUIRE- MENTS: 1) A FULL LENGTH AND COMPLETE LANDSCAPING SCREEN DESIGN FOR BUILDING "B" THAT IS SIX INCHES ABOVE ALL HORIZONTAL CONDUITS AND OBJECTS, INCLUDING AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM AND ONGOING MAINTENANCE, BE RESUBMITTED TO THE ADB WITH FINAL APPROVAL BY THE COUNCIL; 2) BUILDING "A" BE DELETED FROM FURTHER REQUIREMENTS. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER OPPOSED. ON CONTRACT REZONE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21229 - L i un i r nnr+uu� HEARING ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON CONTRACT REZONE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21106 - 21118 SHELL VALLEY RD. FROM RS- /P D TO RM- R- - 8/ PPLIC NTS: T YL UR, MISCHKE, WATSON) Associate City Planner Duane Bowman reported that on May 25, 1988, the Planning Board conducted a public hearing on the contract rezone request of Robert Elder, Joseph Johnston, and Richard Lichtenhagen to rezone the property at 21229 - 21239 Pioneer Way and the contract rezone re- quest of Dealther Taylor, David Mischke, and Donald Watson to rezone property at 21106 - 21118 Shell Valley Road from RS-8/PRD to RM-3. Mr. Bowman said the subject properties each contain three duplex townhouse buildings that were built as part of the planned residential development (PRO) of Shell Park, Division 2. Due to difficulties in obtaining financing, the property owners are seeking rezone requests that will eventually allow each of the properties to be subdivided into three separate lots, each with one townhouse on it. No additional dwelling units will result from the rezone actions. If the re- zones are approved, the applicants intend to complete a new three lot plat/PRD. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 July 5, 1988 Mr. Bowman said the primary concern with these actions is the potential for setting a precedent for future rezones in the Shell Valley area. This is limited due to the fact that the City has reviewed the requests based upon the total planned density for the area. The total number of dwelling units will not exceed those that were originally approved in the Shell Valley PRO. Mr. Bowman said the rezone would essentially be a paper transaction as no new physical develop- ment would occur as a result of the approval of the rezones. Mr. Bowman said if the Council concurs with the Planning Board recommendation to approve the rezone requests, Staff recommends that the City Attorney be directed to prepare the necessary ordinance. The wording of the ordinance should reflect that the City does not view the action as a precedent -setting action and that it will not be considered as a basis to approve any future rezone requests. Adoption of the ordinance should be delayed until the new PRO is approved. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the units were initially intended to be owned individually. Mr. Bowman speculated that to be the case. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the intent of a PRO was designed for rental units or owner -occupied single family residences. Mr. Bowman replied single family residences, some of which may be rented. Peter Bennett, 400 Dayton, representing the applicants, pointed out that the Planning Board recom- mended approval of the rezone requests. He noted that all of the criteria for rezone requests have been met. Mr. Bennett introduced Mark Beales, Pioneer Bank, and the owners of the units. Mr. Bennett said he believed the public would benefit from the 'rezone in that the owners would be able to obtain financing for their balloon payments and the units would not go into foreclosure. He said if the units were foreclosed on, the units would not be well maintained and the value of surrounding property would decline. He said the neighborhood would suffer from the visual blight, and the amount of rent that could be collected would decrease and, therefore, would at- tract less desirable renters. Mr. Bennett emphasized that no new physical development would occur as a result of the approval of the rezone and that only a paper transaction would occur. Jerry Lovell, 19400 - 33rd Ave. W., Lynnwood, said the owners were under the impression that they owned a duplex building on its own individual lot. When they discovered that was not the case, they contacted him and asked him to help them to change the method of ownership. Mr. Lovell said after researching the problem and looking at different solutions, he contacted Mr. Bowman and suggested that the City consider a rezone, which would permit the properties to be subdivided utilizing PRO provisions. Mr. Lovell said the units would then be withdrawn from the condominium status. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the units would continue to be subject to home owners' associa- tion guidelines if withdrawn from the condominium status. Mr. Lovell replied affirmatively. He stated, however, that the association had not met for some time and that no dues were being col- lected. Councilmember Jaech inquired how the common areas were being maintained. Mr. Lovell said the common areas have been left in their native state. He said he asked the president of the association, Andy Jaeger, who was paying the taxes for the common areas but he was unable to answer that question. Mr. Snyder pointed out that the approval to rezone or subdivide would not negate any underlying private covenant that was on the property. Mr. Lovell said a condominium plat was filed on each of the two properties in question, but the condominium plat was faulty in that there were no articles of incorporation filed for the home owners' association. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the developer was still in title of the property. Mr. Bennett replied negatively. He said he believed that the owners possessed deeds of trust with notes. Councilmember Kasper pointed out that a change would occur as a result of the approval of the rezone requests in that the owners, at the present time, do not own the grounds upon which the condominiums are built but would own the entire lot if the units were categorized as duplexes. Mr. Bennett noted that there are two condominiums to each unit and each applicant owns one unit plus the common areas. He said even though each owner would own the unit and surrounding lot, no change would occur in the use. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the City maintained control of the status of the property through the PRD process. Mr. Snyder said the City regulates bulk requ-irements and density, not internal mechanisms, i.e., the home owners' association. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 July 5, 1988 Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the rezone, if granted, would withdraw the properties from the original PRO. Mr. Lovell replied negatively. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if common areas were provided for all of the properties in the PRO. Mr. Lovell replied affirmatively. Council - member Hertrich inquired how, then, the common area for the properties in question could be segre- gated from the PRO. Mr. Lovell said the nearest common area for the properties in question was Tract 100. He said that area would not be eliminated as a common area. Mr. Bennett clarified that the condominiums had a limited common area as well as another common area in which all of the home owners of the PRD shared a common interest. He said the common area for the PRO will remain unchanged but the limited common area will be subdivided. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. Mark Beales, Pioneer Bank, Lynnwood, said he was present to answer any questions of the Council. Councilmember Jaech inquired why the financing of the duplexes was different than that of other condominium units. Mr. Beales said the units were financed approximately ten years ago. He said lenders began to sell theirs loans into the secondary market in the late 1970's. Inves- tors require that condominiums, at the time they are marketed, be sold to at least 80% owner occupants. However, once they are completed, he said they may be as low as 50% owner occupied. Mr. Beales said the subject properties are all rentals and, therefore, do not qualify for fi- nancing. The owners, he said, are faced with finding a lender who has no intention of selling the loans. Councilmember Jaech inquired if financing could be obtained if the owners of the properties in question were each living in one duplex because the units would then be 50% owner occupied. Mr. Beales said agencies do not particularly like to go to a low density because if one homeowner fails to make a monthly assessment payment to the home owners' association, the burden is greatly increased to the other home owners to make up the difference to maintain the exterior of the building. Andy Jaeger, 21332 Pioneer Way, former president of the home owner's association, stated that the association is still in existence, although it has not met on a regular basis. He said dues are collected whenever possible and insurance and taxes are paid. Mr. Jaeger clarified that the units have never been owned as a condominium, duplex, or tri- plex. He said the units are a cluster development of three individual residences within one building on one piece of property. He pointed out that the units cannot be sold individually unless one-third of the property is sold along with the unit. Mr. Jaeger said the association would be opposed to the rezone if the owners of the units do not share equally in the membership dues. Councilmember Dwyer inquired when the home owners' association last met. Mr. Jaeger replied in the early 1980's. Councilmember Dwyer stated that formal action by the association, then, had not taken place with respect to the rezone request. Mr. Jaeger concurred. Councilmember Hall inquired if the treasurer was collecting monies due. Mr. Jaeger said monies had not been collected regularly for approximately seven years. Mike Wiggins, 21021 Pioneer Way, said the residents of Seawood, as well as other adjoining neighborhoods, were not notified of the hearing. He said those properties will be greatly affect- ed if the rezone request is approved because of the limited ingress and egress down the hill. He said that hill is extremely dangerous, and he expressed concern for the school -aged children. He said the rezone may contribute to a heavier traffic flow. Rod Badger, 21221 Pioneer Way, said the public posting was in error in that it included his prop- erty. He said he was not part of the action. Mr. Badger said he was under the impression that the common areas were tax exempt as long as they were undeveloped. Mr. Badger said he was opposed to the rezone request for the following reasons: 1) the PRO was designed for owner occupants; 2) the rezone would set a precedent and affect zoning in general because it would open up loopholes for manipulation of zoning laws by developers who may be inter- ested in developing undeveloped portions of property into high density "condos" which would later be rezoned as apartments; 3) the rezone request threatens the low -density protected residen- tial status of the neighborhood as opposed to investor oriented; 4) the quality of ownership may decline; 5) it is inappropriate for the City Council to grant the rezone request for the finan- cial benefit of the owners.at the expense of the single family residential owners. Mr. Badger said the solution •was not to amend the zoning classification but to allow the free market to define the value of their investment without inducements in the form of zoning enhancements by the City of Edmonds. , EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 July 5, 1988 Christopher Shean, 21127 Shell Valley Road, said he moved to the community in October, and Mr. Jaeger subsequently informed him of the existence of the home owners' association. Mr. Shean said he and his wife moved to the community with the confidence that the City was a responsible city and would not compromise the quality of life. He said he was sickened when he read the notice for the rezone request. Mr. Shean expressed concern for the future. He said his home was not just a financial invest- ment but investment in a shelter, in the community, and in the City. Mr. Shean said he did not feel the rezone would be in the best interest of the community or the City of Edmonds. Mary Gayle Henderson, 21318 Pioneer Way, expressed concern that home owners may be precluded from renting their homes in the future. Mayor Naughten stated that: everyone has a right to rent their homes. Everett Boyd, 21232 Shell Valley Road, inquired if any real difference would occur in the type of tenant who would occupy the units in question if the rezone was or was not granted. Mayor Naughten replied negatively. He said the issue at hand was the legal status of the properties and not the value of the property or occupancy status. Mr. Bennett reiterated that no new physical development would occur as a result of the rezone; that the value of surrounding properties would be decreased if' the rezone was not granted because the owners could not properly maintain their units without financing. Mr. Lovell said notification was published as required by City Code. He said addresses were furnished to the Planning Department within eighty feet of the proposed action. In addition, letters were sent to all of the homeowners in the Shell Valley area informing them of the pro- posed action and hearing. Mr. Lovell pointed out that the hearing was rescheduled several weeks ago to that evening due to an error in the public notice. Councilmember Kasper inquired how the maintenance of the units in question could be integrated into the PRD provisions. Mr. Bennett said he was not prepared to address that aspect that eve- ning but would do so in future proceedings. He said the units, however, would be maintained as well as they currently are under the guidelines of the current home owners' association. Councilmember Jaech inquired if a certain number of lots were established within the PRD. Mr. Bowman replied affirmatively. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the number of lots would increase if the two properties in question were subdivided. Mr. Bowman said the number of lots would increase, not the number of dwelling units. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the open space re- quirements would remain the same. Mr. Bowman replied affirmatively. Councilmember Jaech in- quired if fences would be allowed to be erected if the properties were subdivided. Mr. Bowman said structures, such as fences, would be subject to review during the PRD process. Mr. Snyder stated that ADB approval must first be granted to erect such structures whether the properties are subdivided or not. Councilmember Jaech inquired who owned title of the two properties in question. Mr. Bennett said Pioneer possessed four. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. Because Councilmember Wilson wished to ask a question of the City Attorney, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO REOPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Wilson inquired if a motion by the Council could include language that conditions could be imposed on the PRD at a later date. Mr. Snyder said the action that evening did not authorize any sale of a lot so nothing could take place until the subdivision was presented to the Council. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 July 5, 1988 COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR A CONTRACT REZONE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21106 - 21118 SHELL VALLEY ROAD FROM RS-8/PRD TO RM-3 (R-3-88/APPLICANTS: TAYLOR, MISCHKE, AND WATSON) AND ALSO FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21229 - 21239 PIONEER WAY FROM RS-8/PRD TO RM-3 (R-2-88/APPLICANTS: ELDER, JOHNSTON, AND LICHTENHAGEN); THAT THE ORDINANCE REFLECT THAT THE CITY DOES NOT VIEW THIS AS A PRECEDENT -SETTING ACTION AND THAT IT WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED AS A BASIS TO APPROVE ANY FUTURE REZONE REQUESTS. FURTHER, THAT THE ORDINANCE BE DELAYED UNTIL THE NEW PRO IS APPROVED AND THAT THE NEW SHORT PLAT PRO REQUIRE THOSE INVOLVED IN THE TWO CONTRACT REZONES TO PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OF THE OLD PRO DUES AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS. AND, FURTHER, THAT A NEW INTERLOCKING MAINTE- NANCE AGREEMENT BE ESTABLISHED WITH BOTH LYNN PARK AND LA TERRA TO INSURE THAT THE PROPERTY WILL BE MAINTAINED IN AN ATTRACTIVE MANNER. Councilmember Hall expressed concern that the interlocking maintenance agreement may override the initial PRO. Because Mr. Snyder wished to preserve the Council's ability to review any future appeal without having any prejugdmental bias issue, HE SUGGESTED THAT A MOTION INCLUDE LANGUAGE THAT WHEN A PRO IS BROUGHT BEFORE THE COUNCIL THAT THE PLANNING BOARD CAREFULLY CONSIDER MAIN- TENANCE AGREEMENTS AND INCLUDE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON SAID HE WOULD INCLUDE THAT PROVISION AS PART OF THE MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER CONCURRED. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCIL - MEMBER KASPER, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, AND COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST OPPOSED. The meeting recessed at 9:25 p.m. and reconvened at 9:30 p.m. MAYOR Mayor Naughten said questions had been raised regarding the petition for the liquor license appli- cation on Puget Drive. He said he would keep the Council posted. Mayor Naughten reported that approximately 10,000 people attended the 4th of July parade. He said it was a wonderful celebration with the exception that a house burned down because someone was using illegal fireworks. Mayor Naughten said the ACW conference last week was a good session. Mayor Naughten referred to a memorandum from Parks & Recreation Division Manager Jim Barnes re- garding the interagency grudge match between the City of Edmonds, Lynnwood, and the School District scheduled on August 26 at 6:30 p.m. Mayor Naughten said he would be on vacation next week. Mayor Naughten said a meeting is scheduled by the South Snohomish County Chamber on July 13, 7 p.m., at 3400 - 188th St. S.W., Suite 103, to review the Cultural Arts Stadium and Convention District. Mayor Naughten said he received the resignation of the Personnel Manager Sharon Thatcher. She has been accepted to the law school at the University of Washington and will be officially con- cluding her employment on September 15. COUNCIL Council President Dwyer said several people asked him if the City could offer prizes or induce- ments for bands to appear in the 4th of July parade next year. He said he would research the issue. Councilmember Hall and Councilmember Jaech noted that there are several local bands that would be willing to appear in the parade if given sufficient notice. �J Council President Dwyer said he read in the P.I. last Friday that a staff member of the Puget Sound Council of Governments did not stand with the Subregional Council's recommendation for Paine Field Airport. He said the staff was going to continue to recommend to the Executive Com- mittee that they follow the staff report. He suggested that the Council request the City Attor- ney to prepare a resolution advising the Executive Committee of the COG that if they ignore the Subregional Council that the City will leave the COG. The Council concurred. Councilmember Kasper felt the opinion of professional staff people was important. He said when they make their recommendation, they should not be swayed from it by political pressure. He said the issue was a regional matter, not only a Snohomish County matter, and everyone is aware that an airport is needed but not "in our back yard". Councilmember Hertrich responded that the elected official's (who represent the people) decision should go forth. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO SEND A RESOLUTION THAT THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL RESENTS THE ACTION OF THE SUBREGIONAL COUNCIL TO IGNORE THE VOTE AND IS NOT WILLING TO BE IGNORED. MOTION CARRIED. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 July 5, 1988 Council President Dwyer noted that the Council interviewed two consultants to review the classifi- cation for personnel. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON TO OFFER A CONTRACT TO JANET PADGETT AS PROPOSED TO THE COUNCIL. Council President Dwyer said she will be contacted and the details worked out. MOTION CARRIED. Council President Dwyer announced his resignation as Council President. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO NOMINATE COUNCILMEMBER KASPER TO FULFILL THE REMAINDER OF THE 1988 TERM AND TO SERVE THE TERM 1989. Councilmember Jaech said the Council President for 1989 should be elected at the beginning of the year. She inquired if Councilmember Kasper could fulfill his duties as Council President when considering that his time would be limited because his appointment on the Community Transit Board. Councilmember Kasper replied affirmatively. COUNCILMEMBER HALL WITHDREW THE SECOND. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER WIL- SON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO NOMINATE COUNCILMEMBER KASPER FOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE YEAR. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Hertrich suggested that the Planning Board address the issue of landscaping stan- dards. Council President Dwyer inquired if there were any landscaping standards in existence. Associate City Planner Duane Bowman noted that the ADB does have an adopted policy that they use. He noted, however, that those standards have not been formalized into the Code. Councilmem- ber Jaech suggested that the Planning Board also address the issue of tree heights for new con- struction. Community Services Director Peter Hahn said the Planning Board intends to address that issue in August. Councilmember Hall said discussion took place at the AWC meeting that the Health District may be able to enjoy monies through the utility tax. Councilmember Hall said she enjoyed the 4th of July parade very much. She suggested that the parade start earlier next year because some people waited in town for two hours to see the parade. Councilmember Hall questioned the validity of the petition to deny the liquor license on 196th Street (The Corner Store). She said she noticed signatures from people who did not reside in the p City and children's names. She expressed concern because the petition was not an original docu- ment. She requested the City Attorney review an ordinance regarding petitions. P�dQ Mayor Naughten adjourned the meeting at 10 p.m. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEM- BER KASPER, TO CONTINUE THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Naughten said he requested the presenter of the petition to bring the original document into City Hall and to give the date that the signatures were obtained but that person had not done so. City Attorney Scott Snyder said there are very precise State statutory requirements with regard to certain types of petitions. He said the petition was a "make -way petition", and the City legislative decisions were not governed by that. He advised the Council to continue to act as it had been doing and regard the petition with a "grain of salt". * Councilmember Kasper recommended that the Council not review contracts during work sessions but, rather, during public meetings. Councilmember Wilson said he requested Staff to check into the status of the Pomeroy property several months ago but has not received a report. Mr. Bowman said the City cannot regulate the types of vehicles or activities on Mr. Pomeroy's property because a home occupation permit was not granted which would have permitted the City to regulate and monitor his activities. He noted that the bus or van is not licensed as a commercial vehicle. Councilmember Wilson was quite disconcerted that the Council held a proceeding with regard to the status of Mr. Pomeroy's proper- ty in the recent past and imposed certain requirements only to learn that those requirements cannot be enforced. Mr. Snyder said the vehicles were not in violation of any provision of City ordinance. Mr. Bowman said a number of conditions were imposed in conjunction with the home occupation permit, the Council's decision was appealed, and Mr. Pomeroy did not receive the per- mit. Mayor Naughten inquired how the situation could be resolved. Mr. Hahn said he would review the Pomeroy file to reconstruct the events that took place and report back to the Council. Councilmember Jaech said the parade seemed to cater to commercial advertisements rather than more festive entertainment. She suggested that the category of .commercial vehicles be limited next year and that more entertainment be included. Council President Dwyer reminded the Council that the parade was organized by volunteers. Council discussion ensued regarding organization of the parade next year. The meeting recessed to an Executive Session at 10:12 p.m. to discuss a personnel matter and adjourned thereafter. (THESE MINUTES ARE SUBJECT TO JULY 12, 1988 APPROVAL.) * EDMONDS Y COUNCIUl�i� A ee Council Mi nu s of July 12, 1988 Page 98 /!// JAC ELINE G. PARRETT, City C erk LARRY S. NAUGHTEN, M yor AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL PLAZA MEETING ROOM -LIBRARY BUILDING 7:00 -- 10:00 P.M. JULY 5, 1988 6:15 P.M. - CLASSIFICATION CONSULTANT INTERVIEW - COMMUNITY SERVICES CONFERENCE ROOM CALL TO ORDER rl nr CAA IIrC 1. CONSENT AGENDA (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 28, 1988 (C) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN CEMETERY EMPLOYMENT -CONTRACT (D) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT FOR SEAVIEW PARK (E) PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2676 AMENDING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING TO STREET STANDARDS (F) ACCEPTANCE OF QUIT CLAIM DEED FROM MILDRED LARSEN AND MARGARET GOLDSMITH FOR STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT TO 9105 OLYMPIC VIEW DR. (G) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM ROGER G. JOHNSON ($129) 2. AUDIENCE 3. HEARING ON APPEAL OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD DECISION REGARDING (25 MINUTES) SCREENING OF REAR WALLS OF BUILDING AT 10012 EDMONDS WAY (AP-3-88/ ADB-3-87; APPELLANT: DAVID HEINLEIN) 4. HEARING ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON CONTRACT REZONE FOR (30 MINUTES) PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21229 - 21239 SHELL VALLEY RD. FROM RS-8/PRD TO RM-3 (R-2-88/APPLICANTS: ELDER, JOHNSTON, LICHTENHAGEN) 5. HEARING ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON CONTRACT REZONE FOR (30 MINUTES) PROPERTY LOCATED AT 21106 - 21118 SHELL VALLEY RD. FROM RS-8/PRD TO RM-3 (R-3-88/APPLICANTS: TAYLOR, MISCHKE, WATSON) 6. MAYOR 7. COUNCIL THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND PARKING AND MEETING ROOMS ARE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE