Loading...
06/16/1992 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FINAL ADOPTED VERSION June 16, 1992 FINAL VERSION ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL JUNE 23, 1992 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Laura Hall at the South County Senior Center, 220 Railroad Avenue, Second Floor, Edmonds. All present joined in,the flag salute. PRESENT Laura Hall, Mayor Jeff Palmer, Council President Steve Dwyer, Councilmember Dave Earling, Councilmember Michael W. Hall, Councilmember John Nordquist, Councilmember Tom Petruzzi, Councilmember ABSENT PiI Kasper, Councilmember (Councilmember Kasper is out of the Country until 6/26/92) Jim Cooper, Student Representative STAFF Art Housler, Admin. Services Supr. Noel Miller, P.W. Superintendent Bob Alberts, City Engineer Wally Tribuzio, Asst. Police Chief Rob Chave, Planning Manager Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor Tom King, Facilities Supervisor Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coord. Robin Hickok, Asst. Police Chief John Wallace, City Attorney Rhonda March, City Clerk Barb Mehlert, Recorder Council President Palmer requested an Executive Session at the end of the meeting to discuss a legal matter. -CONSENT AGENDA Items (G), (I) and (K) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL )0r?F4' v.S (B) CITY COUNCIL MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 1992 (C) APPROVE CLAIMS WARRANTS FROM #921234 TO #922922 FOR WEEKS OF JUNE 4 AND JUNE 11, AND PAYROLL WARRANT FOR JUNE 5, 1992 �t�,t (D) o(E) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM CAROL R. SIMONSON ($262.00) RESOLUTION 748 COMMENDING RETIRING POLICE SERGEANT JOHN R. HOLLEMAN (F) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDA- TION FOR VACATING A PORTION OF THE UNOPENED 184TH STREET S.W. RIGHT-OF-WAY LYING WEST OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND LYING SOUTH OF 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE (APPLICANT: RUSSELL KIM/FILE NO ST-92-38) (H) REJECTION OF BIDS ON CEMETERY STRUCTURE AND AUTHORIZATION TO REBID (J) FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WORK BY ROCK ISLAND SHEET METAL FOR THE FIRE STATION #1 EXTRACTION RAIL SYSTEM AND SETTING THE 30-DAY RETAINAGE PERIOD ` L (L) ORDINANCE 2885 AMENDING CRITICAL AREAS VESTING PROVISIONS (FROM JUNE 9, 1992) REPORT ON AND APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF SWIM LIFT II FOR YOST POOL FROM CROWN AQUATICS, INC. ($2,472.00) (N) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES UNIFORMS AND LAUNDRY SERVICES ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF ADB FINAL APPROVAL FOR A NEW 3-STORY MIXED USE OFFICE/5-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING AT 504 HOLLY DRIVE (APPELLANT: EDMONDS COUNCIL OF CONCERNED CITIZENS/APPLICANT: ROBERT BU E LD A HRI HILLI IL NOS. AP-92- 117/ADB-107-91 Item G on the Consent Agenda Councilmember Nordquist said he would not vote on this item as he was not present at the June 9, 1992 City Council Meeting when the public hearing on this subject took place. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, TO APPROVE AND ADOPT THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF ADB FINAL APPROVAL FOR A NEW 3-STORY MIXED USE OF- FICE/5-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING AT 504 HOLLY DRIVE (APPELLANT: EDMONDS COUNCIL OF CONCERNED CITI- ZENS/APPLICANT: ROBERT BUTTERFIELD/TASO CHRISTOPHILLIS/FILE NOS. AP-92-117/ADB-107-91) MOTION CARRIED WITH Councilmember Nordquist abstaining. aO�;REPORT ON BIDS OPENED JUNE 3 1992 ON THE NORTH MEADOWDALE ROAD WALKWAY PROJECT AND AWARD CON- 4.A0 TRACT TO LAKESIDE 2,947.30, STIES TAX NOT APPLICABLE)Item (I ) -on t o Consent qen a Councilmember Petruzzi asked City Engineer Bob Alberts, if this expenditure would affect the Street Arterial Fund, and Mr. Alberts replied negatively. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, TO AWARD THE CONTRACT TO LAKESIDE INDUSTRIES ($42,947.30, SALES TAX NOT APPLICABLE). MOTION CARRIED. AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSFER WATER SERVICE ACCOUNTS FROM ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT IN THE VICINITY OF 220 H ST. S.W. AND 92ND AVE. W. 8,771.92 Item K on t e onsent Agenda Councilmember Petruzzi asked Noel Miller, Public Works Superintendent, the reason why there is no budgeted funds for this expenditure. Mr. Miller said the City cannot predict when annexations take place. Councilmember Petruzzi asked if the expenditure would materially affect Fund 411, and Mr. Miller replied negatively. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, TO APPROVE THE TRANSFER OF WATER SERVICE ACCOUNTS FROM ALDERWOOD DISTRICT IN THE VICINITY OF 220TH ST. S.W. AND 92ND W. ($8,771.92). MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Dwyer arrived at 7:09 p.m. AUDIENCE PORTION As no member of the audience wished to speak, Mayor Hall closed the audience portion of the meet- ing. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION 748 IN HONOR OF JOHN R. HOLLEMAN, RETIRING POLICE SERGEANT - Mayor Hall presented retiring Police Sergeant Holleman with Resolution 748, which publicly com- mended him for his tong and distinguished service. Wally Tribuzio, Assistant Police Chief thanked Mr. Holleman for his service and said he would be missed by all. The Mayor and City Council wished Mr. Holleman success in the future. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO DESIGNATE ITEM 9 ON THE AGENDA AS ITEM 3A. MOTION CARRIED. APPROVAL OF ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT WITH "MAKERS" TO PROVIDE FOR EXPANDED ECONOMIC SCOPE FOR WATER- , . 1, D N N 0 .00 V Staff Report and Recommendation Rob Chave, Planning Manager, said this was discussed at the June 9 Community Services Committee Meeting. Mr. Chave said it is the desire of the Community Services Committee to replace the eco- nomics portion of the study scope with a new, expanded scope, and add $16,000 to the total con- tract amount to provide the needed supplemental funding. Mr. Chave said the Community Services Committee feels it is important that the City receive a credible economic and fiscal evaluation of the impacts on the business community should the present ferry dock be relocated. This scope would include evaluating alternative ferry location sites based on impacts on retail and service sales, and changes in business and traffic patterns. Mr. Chave said Staff also agrees with expand- ing the scope. Councilmember Earling, Community Services Committee member, encouraged Councilmembers to approve the expanded scope so the City could thoroughly study the effect on the business community, if the ferry dock was relocated. Council President Palmer said he was present at the Community Services Committee meeting when this topic was discussed and said that a representative from the Chamber of Commerce was present and strongly supported the expanded scope. Councilmember Nordquist, Chair of the Community Services Committee, recommended that the Council approve the expanded scope. Councilmember Petruzzi said he has paid particular attention to the discussions held by local business people and said they are concerned about the adequacy of the economics analysis. Council - member Petruzzi said the expanded scope will address those concerns. FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 2 June 16, 1992 W-11 .,.-- - Councilmember Dwyer asked if it was possible to have the economic portion of the Water- front/Downtown Plan finished prior to the entire study. Mr. Chave said a majority of the economic portion of the study will be done immediately. Councilmember Dwyer asked how soon the Council would have the results of the economic portion of the study, so as to help them make a decision on other items as a result of the balance of the Waterfront Study. Mr. Chave said the majority of the survey work would be done in August. However, he said he would get together with the sub -con- sultant to develop a more accurate time line, as well as providing within that time line, key 01-1 decision points or information points out of the economic scope. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER, FOR APPROVAL OF THE ADDENDUM (�1�� TO CONTRACT WITH MAKERS TO SUPPLEMENT THE ECONOMICS SCOPE OF WATERFRONT/DOWNTOWN PLAN AND ALLO- ATE $16,000 FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY TO PAY FOR THE EXPANDED ECONOMICS SCOPE. MOTION CARRIED. Q� �G1EARING ON SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Staff Report rBob Alberts, City Engineer, said each year, the City is required to prepare a Six -Year Transporta- tion Improvement Program, hold a public hearing, and adopt the program by resolution prior to July 31, 1992. uory nyae, tngineering coordinator, reviewed the Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program with the Mayor and City Council. Mr. Hyde said the program, with changes requested by the Council would be incorporated into the Plan, and brought back to Council for final approval prior to July 31, 1992. Mr. Hyde reviewed the Traffic Signalization and Channelization Projects, as well as the Roadway Construction/Restoration Projects and Street Improvement/Walkway Projects. -Councilmember Petruzzi inquired on the entry for a fully actuated traffic signal for 212th and St. S.W. and 72nd Ave. W. Councilmember Petruzzi said it is his understanding the Council did not authorize a traffic signal at that location as of yet. Mr. Hyde said the Council directed Staff to have funding in place, in case an actuated traffic signal is found to be needed. Mr. Hyde clarified that even though the City applies for funding, it would have to come before the Council for authorization before any funds are expended for any project. Councilmember Dwyer clarified that Staff will be reporting back to the Council in the future on the effectiveness of the four-way stop, and the .Council has not yet made a final decision on the subject. Council President Palmer referenced an entry in the Street Improvement/Walkway Projects, to con- struct a walkway on at least one side of roadway on 76th Ave. W on Meadowdale Beach Road to North Meadowdale Road. Council President Palmer said this has been on the list for a few years, and feels it is imperative that this project be afforded a greater priority and acted upon as soon as possible. Mr. Hyde said he has no problem with affording this greater priority on the list. Mayor Hall opened up the public portion of the hearing Public Testimony Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, referenced an entry in the Street Improvement/Walkway Project, specifically, 102nd P1. S.W., Edmonds-Woodway High School to SR-104. The entry calls for widening and construction of a walkway on one side of the road. Mr. Hertrich wants to make sure the neigh- bors are consulted and informed of this proposed project. Mr. Hertrich said in the original plans for the High School, there was an access road proposed on the back side of the school. Mr. Hertrich said there is room for this access road which he feels would relieve traffic congestion in other areas. With no other member of the audience wishing to speak, Mayor Hall closed the audience portion of the hearing. Council Discussion No action was taken on this item. The Six -Year Transportation Improvement Plan will come back before the Council prior to July 31, 1992 for final approval. HEARING ON APPEAL OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD DECISION OF 7-UNIT APARTMENT AT 7801 AND 7807 196TH ST. S.W (APPELLANT: LAWRENCE M LEAN/APPLIC N : B U E GOODNIGHT/FILE AP- 2-53 City Attorney John Wallace suggested the Council discuss the next hearing on the Agenda before this one, because if the Council granted the appeal on the latter hearing, it would render the subject hearing moot. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, TO REVERSE ITEMS 5 AND SIX ON THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Paae 3 June 16. 1992 ON HEARINGEXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING APP OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION City Attorney John Wallace said the.opinion of the Responsible Official is to be afforded substan- tial weight by the City Council. Mr. Wallace said if the Council does not find from all of the evidence, that the Responsible Official has erred, the Council must uphold the decision. Mr.. Wallace said all testimony from interested parties must be made under oath, and Mr. Wallace admin- istered the oath to all parties who were going to be giving testimony on this subject. Mr. Wallace asked the Mayor and Council to reveal any ex-parte communications or appearance of fairness problems. No such revelations were made by Mayor or Council. Councilmember Dwyer referenced the petition given to the City Council and Mayor concerning the subject property. Mr. Wallace asked members of the audience if they had any challenges to any Councilmember partici- pating in the hearing. No challenges were made. Staff Report and Recommendation Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor, said the applicant, Bruce Goodnight, submitted an application to the Architectural Design Board for the construction of a 7-unit multifamily complex at 7801 and 7807 196th Street S.W. As the project contains more than four dwelling units, the project is subject to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and the City must issue an Environmental - Determination. On February 12, 1992, an Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance was issued for the proposed development. On February 24, 1992, an appeal of the Responsible Official's Environmental determination for the Goodnight multi -family development was filed by Lawrence McLean (appellant). The appellant con- tends that the environmental determination did not adequately address the potential impacts of the development on the appellee's/applicant's site to the existing trees located on the appel- lant's property adjacent to the proposed driveway. On May 21, 1992, the .Hearing Examiner held a public hearing to solicit testimony regarding the appeal of the Respohsible Official's determination. Upon review of all written and oral testimony on the matter, the Hearing Examiner issued a recommendation on the .appeal on May 29; 1992, that the determination of Nonsignificance issued by the Responsible Official on February 12, 1992, be upheld. In his recommendation, the Hearing Examiner concluded that the subject permit application had received a thorough review by the.SEPA, the Responsible Official, Staff, and the Architectural Design Board, and that conditions were applied that were designed to preserve and protect the vegetation on the adjacent property which was the subject of this appeal. Mr. Wilson recommended to the Council they they uphold the Hearing Examiner's recommendation issued May 29, 1992. Council Discussion Councilmember Dwyer asked what measures are desired by the appellant that have not been imposed to date. Mr. Wilson said the appellant does not feel there have been adequate studies by appropri- ate qualified personnel as to the effects of the asphalt driveways on the trees. Councilmember Dwyer asked how staff determined that there had been adequate review. Mr. Wilson. said the pro- posed project has been reviewed by the A.D.B, as well as gone through the SEPA process and Staff review. Councilmember Dwyer asked if there was a procedure that the City could impose on the applicant that would guarantee that the proposed project would not harm the trees. Mr. Wilson said bonding is possible, however, noted that this would not serve as a guarantee. Mr. Wilson said there is no way to guarantee that the proposed design would not harm the trees. Councilmember Petruzzi asked how close the trees are to the actual road, and Mr. Wilson said it is his recollection there are two trees within two to three feet from the property line, and the roadway is another three feet. from the property line on the opposite side of the applicant's side of the fence. FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 4 June 16, 1992 Council President Palmer asked Mr. Wilson to show the Council on an overhead projector, exactly where the trees are located, along with their drip lines. Mr. Wilson obliged. Mr. Wilson submit- ted three photos to the City Clerk showing the subject trees. The City Clerk marked the exhibited Exhibit A. Mr. Wilson said the Applicant did have an arborist review the plans. It was noted that although the trees are not on the applicant's property, the roots of the tree extend to the appli- cant's property because of the close proximity to the property line. Council President Palmer asked if the width of the paving is the minimum required, and Mr. Wilson said that appears to be the case. Councilmember Petruzzi asked how close to the property line is a road allowed to be built, and Mr. Wilson replied five feet. Mr. Wilson said, however, the A.D.B. has the authority to make adjustments to the width of the landscape areas between property lines. Testimony of the Applicant Bruce Goodnight, 727 Sprague Street, said he has done everything in his power to mitigate the problems by hiring a licensed arborist to design aeration and a water system that will minimize the impact on the trees by the construction. Testimony of the Appellant Lawrence McLean, 7732 195th S.W., said his concern from the beginning is that the trees in ques- tion were never mentioned in either the environmental checklist of the environmental assessment by the developer. Mr. McLean presented Exhibit B to the City Council which showed the same three pictures earlier submitted by Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson, as well as a Landscape Plan. The City Clerk marked these Exhibit A. Mr. McLean reviewed the Landscape Plan with the Mayor and Council. Mr. McLean said one of the trees has an 18 foot dripline which protrudes on the appli- cant's site, and the other true has a 16 foot dripline which protrudes on the applicant's site. Mr. McLean feels there hasn't been enough done to evaluate the site with respect to the trees. Mr. McLean said he wants to know who would be liable for the trees should they die due to this proposed development. Mr. McLean said the City Standards with regards to drip lines are not being followed in this process. Councilmember Earling asked Mr. McLean if the fence line has been surveyed, and Mr. McLean said to the best of his knowledge it has not been. Councilmember Dwyer asked Mr. McLean to explain how the proposal is inconsistent with the City's standards. Mr. McLean said the Standards indicate that the tree's drip line will be maintained and there will be no clearing, no mounding, or no heavy equipment within the drip line. Mr. McLean said if the developer followed the tree development standards, then they wouldn't be plac- ing the road three feet away from the base of the trees. Mr. Wilson read the section in the code that Mr. McLean described as City Standards with regards to drip lines. The section is entitled "Performance Standards for Land Development Permits", sub paragraph h. Council President Palmer clarified that at present, the Council is only reviewing the appeal of the Hearing Examiner's recommendation regarding the SEPA review. Councilmember Hall asked if the section that Mr. Wilson read applies to the subject property to be cleared or does it apply to neighboring properties as well. Mr. Wilson said generally, the Code is going to applied to the subject property, and the off -site impacts would be looked at through the SEPA process. Continued testimony of the Applicant Bruce Goodnight, Applicant, said he would be willing to mitigate the situation by offering to replant some new trees if the trees in question do die. Mr. Goodnight said he does not believe the trees would die in light of the precautionary measures he is taking to protect them. Public Testimony Brian Goodnight, 727 Sprague Street, said he is the applicant's partner. Mr. Goodnight said the applicant is trying to construct the best possible project for the site in question. Mr. Goodnight said he realizes there is a problem with the trees, however, noted the roots of the tree extend well into the applicant's property. Mr. Goodnight said he feels some middle ground could be reached, as the property owner has rights to develop their property. FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 5 June 16, 1992 Francis McLean, 7732 195th Street, said the trees in question are approximately 70 years old and they cannot be replaced. Ms. McLean said it is upsetting to think that something might happen to the trees. As no other member of the audience wished to come forward, Mayor Hall closed the audience portion of the hearing. Council Discussion and deliberation Councilmember Petruzzi asked the City Attorney if it would be appropriate to table the issue until the next item on the agenda pertaining to the same subject is discussed. Mr. Wallace re- plied affirmatively. Councilmember Dwyer asked Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson, to discuss the litany of requirements that the City has in its power to impose with regard to tree clearing on the lot. Mr. Wilson obliged. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the ADB imposed the required standards on the subject property. Mr. Wilson said he was not in attendance at the ADB hearings, so he could not provide an answer. Council President Palmer said he he was very much involved when the section on tree clearing was written, and he recalls one of the requirements of the section was that it would be applicable and would be used by the ADB for any project that fell under their review. Council President Palmer said unless something has changed in the Code he isn't aware of, the ADB should have applied those standards. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, TO TABLE THE DECISION ON THIS ITEM UNTIL AFTER TESTIMONY IS HEARD ON THE NEXT ITEM. -Under discussion, Councilmember Dwyer said the reason he is making is the motion, is although they are two separate items, the Hearing Examiner does reference the ADB's decision in several - places and Councilmember Dwyer feels the hearing of the next item would help the Council reach a decision. MOTION CARRIED with Councilmember Hall voting no. Mayor Hall and the City recessed for five minutes at 8:55 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 p.m. HEARING ON APPEAL OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD DECISION ON A NEW 7-UNIT APARTMENT AT 7801 Mayor Hall asked the City Council to reveal any ex-parte communications or appearance of fairness revelations. No such revelations were made. Mayor Hall asked members of the audience if they had any challenges to any Councilmember participating in the hearing. No challenges were made. Staff Report and Recommendation Jeff Wilson said the essence of this appeal by the appellant is the concern of the appellant that. the trees on his property were not mentioned in any of the environmental check lists or environ- mental assessments. Councilmember Petruzzi referenced a letter from Mr. McLean to Ed Somers, Associate Planner, list- ed as Exhibit 1 within the Agenda packet. Councilmember Petruzzi said Mr. McLean contends that the ADB ignored his concerns concerning possible damage to the trees, as well as a possible bond to insure the contractor's actions does not kill the trees. Councilmember Petruzzi asked if any action has been taken to date to address those concerns. Mr. Wilson said he was not in attendance at ADB meetings concerning this issue, therefore cannot give an answer. Testimony of the Applicant Bruce Goodnight, 727 Sprague Street, said he has tried to mitigate all of the concerns of the neighbors. Mr. Goodnight said the property in question has been zoned multi -family since the early 1960's, and feels every property owner has the right to develop their property for what it is zoned for. Testimony of the Appellant Lawrence McLean, 7732 195th Street S.W., said he is not opposed to the zoning of the property. Mr. McLean said he is opposed to the specific design, as he does not feel it is compatible with the narrowness of the lot. Mr. McLean said he and the majority of the Copperfield Village Condo- minium dwellers feel the 66 foot wide lot is to narrow for the proposed design. Mr. McLean said the ADB did not do anything to rectify the potential damage to the trees on his property. Mr. McLean feels the arborist's recommendations have not been incorporated into the plan. Mr. McLean FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 6 June 16, 1992 said he and the majority of the Copperfield Condominium owners, by petition, are asking that the City revoke the permit to build, and ask the developer to design a more appropriate structure. Mr. McLean referenced Exhibit B from AP-92-72, which was earlier presented to the City Council. City Attorney John Wallace noted that Exhibit B from AP-92-72 is incorporated as Exhibit B in the present proceeding as well. Public Testimony Alex Muir, 7821 196th Street S.W., resident of Copperfield Village Condominiums, said the pro- posed project will severely impact the privacy of the condominium dwellers. Mr. Muir said the condominium dwellers are not against development on the property, however, they do feel the nar- rowness of the lot makes the design of the project in question incomparable and inappropriate. Councilmember Earling asked Mr. Muir on the number of units contained within Copperfield Village Condominiums, and Mr. Muir replied 12. Brian Goodnight, 727 Sprague Street, said the subject property is actually zoned for a 9-plat, and it has been scaled down to a 7-plat. Mr. Goodnight said the applicant has worked diligently to come up with a good design and at the same time, mitigate potential problems. With no other member of the audience wishing to come forward, Mayor Hall closed the audience portion of the property. Council Discussion and Deliberation -Council President Palmer said the petition refers to an encroachment of roots, chimneys and pati- os into the setback. Council President Palmer said his recollection is that sections of the Code would address those particular items, and asked Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor for confirmation of this statement, and Mr. Wilson confirmed the statement. Council President Palmer said property owners have specific rights to use and enjoy their proper- ty. Council President Palmer said it is the opinion of the licensed arborist that the trees will survive, although they might incur some stress. Council President Palmer said half of the drip line of the largest tree exists on Mr. McLean's property, which represents 50% of the area that the tree can be irrigated from. He said there is a five foot strip designated on the applicant's strip which will also be irrigated so the tree would receive water it might not have other wise received from natural rainfall that would have gone outside the dripline. Council President Palm- er said the proposal states that the asphalt paving area is proposed to be 24', but Staff has stated that normal street width for a two -directional lane is only 22'. Council President Palmer said he would like to see the City reduce the 24' paved area to 22' to provide an even greater degree of natural earth and protection for the trees in question. Council President Palmer said the project encroaches on the appellant's property, however, the appellant's trees encroach on the applicant's property. Council President Palmer said the Council has to weigh both of these issues. Council President Palmer said it appears there is enough pervious surface on both proper- ties so as to guarantee that the trees have a better chance of survival. Councilmember Hall doesn't see how making the strip two feet wider would help the trees at all. He doesn't.think this is a decision the Council should make since they are not experts in this area. Councilmember Petruzzi said he is hearing through testimony, that the corrective measures recom- mended by the arborists have not been fully addressed. Councilmember Dwyer said he does not fault the applicant for not mentioning the two trees for the fact that they are not on his property. Councilmember Dwyer said, however, a property owner has a right not to suffer a direct loss as a result of what happens adjacent to his property. Council - member Dwyer said in this circumstance, he views the situation where in essence, because the trees are so close to the property line, they are trees which are required to remain. Councilmem- ber Dwyer said if the City is not going to interpret the Code to allow one person to destroy what their neighbor owns, then there is in essence a requirement that the trees remain. Councilmember Dwyer said it does not make sense in this case, that there should be any less requirement placed on dealing with trees than if they were on -site. He said there has been less required with regard to preserving the two subject trees than there would have been required if the two trees would have been four feet in a different direction. Councilmember Dwyer said these trees are of the type that the City does require to remain when they choose to. He stated what should have hap- pened is that the arborist's recommendations should have been implemented in their entirety and all of the requirements that would have been imposed and in addition to that, if the trees had been on site and required to remain, it should have been required in this instance. Councilmember Hall said this issue has already been reviewed by the ADB, Hearing Examiner, and by FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 7 June 16, 1992 Staff. Councilmember Hall said the Council should be careful in overturning decisions by these bodies as they are the experts. Councilmember Hall said all of these bodies have said that the trees can be saved, and feels the Council should simply uphold the Hearing Examiner's decision. Councilmember Earling said the Growth Management Act will dictate that cities will have to find ways to deal with mitigation. He stated the subject property is a tough piece of property to develop and feels the developers have made a sincere effort to design an appropriate building, and have also attempted to mitigate certain circumstances. Councilmember Earling agrees with Council President Palmer that the 2' strip should be widened to accommodate the trees. He said he would like the Council to find a way to work with the builder and still recognize the plight of the adjoining residents. Councilmember Petruzzi said Councilmembers are not arborists and by arbitrarily moving a line 2' might not be accomplishing anything. Councilmember Petruzzi said he doesn't feel there is any- thing wrong with upholding the appeal with specific instructions to the ADB to work towards a negotiated mitigation. Councilmember Hall feels the Hearing Examiner and the ADB have taken the testimony of the arborist into consideration when they approved the project, and feels the Council should listen to the experts. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, THAT THE DEVELOPER BE REQUIRED TO REDUCE THE PAVED AREA WITHIN THE DRIP LINE OF THE TREES SUCH THAT THEY WOULD BE PROVIDE A SEVEN FOOT UNPAVED AREA FROM THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY INWARD AND THAT THE UNPAVED AREA BE FULLY IRRIGATED. FROM THAT POINT OUTWARD, THE SYSTEM OF AGGREGATED PAVERS RECOMMENDED BY THE ADB WOULD CONTINUE TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL AREA WHERE WATER CAN REACH THOSE TREES. Under discussion, Councilmember Hall asked Council President Palmer how far the pavers should go, and Council President Palmer said they should go to the full recommendation of the arborist. Councilmember Dwyer said if he voted in favor of the motion, would there be anything that would keep someone from driving a bulldozer within three or four feet of the tree, and Council Presi- dent Palmer said he would be willing to include this language in the motion. Councilmember Dwyer said one of his primary concerns is the City didn't impose any requirements with regard to what happens during construction. Council President Palmer said he is willing to receive input from Staff on whether they feel this could be accomplished. As there was a motion on the floor, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, TO SUSPEND THE RULES TO ALLOW COUNCIL TO RECEIVE INPUT FROM STAFF. MOTION CARRIED. Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor, clarified that Staff cannot determine whether ADB has followed the ar'borist's report, as the applicant has not yet submitted a building plan. Mr. Wilson said Staff will review the site plan when submitted to see if they have followed all of the mitigation measures. Mr. Wilson said it is appropriate to incorporate language stating that best management practices should be followed in terms of methods to control the grading and site work around the trees or to preserve the trees during construction. Mayor Hall asked Mr. Wilson if at any point, did anyone consider having the lot line surveyed. Mr. Wilson said to the best of his knowledge it wasn't, as it isn't normally required. Council President Palmer said he is willing to include in his motion THAT USE OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES DURING CONSTRUCTION AROUND THE TREES AS OVERSEEN BY THE STAFF SHOULD BE UTILIZED. THE SECONDER AGREED. Councilmember Dwyer asked if this is to address his concern that the trees would be protected during construction, as if they were on site. Council President Palmer said he would have to say no to this, as what Councilmember Dwyer is describing could set up a situation where nothing would be allowed within the drip line including the pavers under the existing line. As a procedural matter, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, TO EXTEND THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Dwyer clarified that the pavers that Council President Palmer is describing are the pavers on the ground and not machinery. Council President Palmer replied affirmatively. Council President Palmer said machines may have to do some leveling for the pavers to be installed, but in doing that, they, have to use the best possible management practices to save the trees as over- seen by the staff. Councilmember Hall called for the question. Councilmember Petruzzi said he would like Councilmem- ber Hall to withdraw the question so he could continue discussion. As the question was called FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 8 June 16, 1992 _1J for, and Councilmember Hall did not withdraw the question, Councilmember Dwyer said he would vote no so Councilmember Petruzzi could talk. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEM- BER NORDQUIST VOTED NO, COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER VOTED YES. As there was a tie vote, MAYOR HALL VOTED YES, AND THE MOTION THEN CARRIED. Councilmember Petruzzi said he had asked to be recognized, and the question was still called for. Councilmember Petruzzi said he is offended that he wasn't given the opportunity speak before the question was called for, as he requested. Councilmember Petruzzi believes the Council should not be making decisions that an arborist should make, however, because he was seeing a deadlock of 3 to 3, and because Council President Palmer had put in that the system of aggregate pavers go to the full recommendation of the arborist, that he would would vote yes for the motion. Councilmem- ber Petruzzi said he was going to challenge the staff that the full recommendation of the arborist be carried forward. Council President Palmer asked the City Attorney if the Council now had to make a motion formally upholding the appeal. Mr. Wallace said the motion made by Council President Palmer simply modi- fies the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation, and directs Staff to prepare Findings and Conclusions to bring before the City Council at the next meeting. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER TO REINSTATE THE RULES. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO TAKE ITEM 6 OFF THE TABLE. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ENVIRONMEN- TAL DETERMINATION (SEPA) ISSUED FOR A 7-UNIT APARTMENT AT 7801 and 7807 196TH STREET SOUTHWEST (APPELLANT: LAWRENCE MCLEAN; APPLICANT/APPELLEE: BRUCE GOODNIGHT/FILE N0. AP-92-72) BE DENIED. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING VARIANCE AT 7522 156th STREET SOUTHWEST (APPELLANT: RICK WUR EMAN E /A LIC RIG M E _ _6 _ _ Councilmember Dwyer referenced a letter indicating that the Applicant and Appellant have reached an agreement on this appeal as well as the appeal on the next agenda item. Councilmember Dwyer inquired on the process the Council should follow if the Council decides to let the two parties settle the matter outside the hearing process. City Attorney John Wallace said the hearing process could be adhered to and the letter of agree- ment could act as a modification to the Hearing Examiner decision. Mr. Wallace said the other option is to remand it to the Hearing Examiner so the agreement could be reviewed. Council President Palmer said he is concerned that the agreement may not meet the requirements of City Code, and said that other property owners and potentially other undeveloped properties could be affected by the agreement. Council President Palmer asked Staff for their opinion on the pro- posed agreement. Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor, said Staff hasn't had ample time to review the document and recommended proceeding with the hearing so all questions could be answered. It was noted it was advertised as a public hearing, and citizens had signed up to speak on the issue who were not participants of the proposed agreement. Mr. Wilson recommended both hearings (Items 7 and 8), be combined as they both relate to the same property. Mr. Wallace said if the Council decided to proceed with the hearing including the letter of agree- ment, the City Council would have to find that the agreement between the two parties met the criteria of the Code, and not approve the agreement just because the two parties have agreed. Mr. Wallace said the letter should be treated as a joint request from the applicant and appellant. Mayor Hall said the citizens who have signed up to speak on this issue should be allowed to ad- dress the issue. Mayor Hall said if the Council wishes to remand the issue back to the Hearing Examiner, it should be done so after citizens have a chance to speak. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER, TO REMAND THE PROPOSED SETTLE- MENT AGREEMENT CONTAINED IN THE LETTER OF JUNE 11, 1992 ADDRESSED TO MAYOR LAURA HALL AND EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL, SIGNED BY THE REPRESENTATIVES FOR THE APPLICANT AND APPELLANT, BACK TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR CONSIDERATION. Under discussion, Councilmember Dwyer, said he does not think this is a wrong decision, however, would like to hear the testimony of those people who signed up. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI WITHDREW HIS MOTION, AND THE SECONDER AGREED. FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 9 June 16, 1992 COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO SUSPEND THE RULES FOR THE PUR- POSE OF HEARING THE TESTIMONY FROM THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO SIGNED UP TO SPEAK, WITHOUT IT PROCEED- ING INTO A FULL HEARING. MOTION CARRIED. Public Testimony Keith Dubendorf, 15600 70th Ave. West. said if the variance is allowed, it would encroach on the view corridor. Councilmember Petruzzi said the applicant and appellant have proposed an amicable agreement, and. Mr. Dubendorf said he is not aware of the contents of the agreement. Mark Clark, Attorney with Wurdeman & Tesch, said he is filling in for Rick Wurdeman, who is the representative for the Appellants. Mr. Clark said the applicant and appellants have a reached an amiable agreement which is described in the June 11 letter. Mr. Clark said the agreement appears to allow the view corridor to remain intact. City Attorney John Wallace asked Mr. Clark Attorney for the Appellant, if he objects to remanding the entire matter to the Hearing Examiner, Mr. Clark replied negatively, however, Mr. Clark feels the proposal is consistent with the Hearing Examiner's decision. Mr. Wallace asked Beth Clark, Attorney for Mr. Summers, if she had any objections to remanding the entire matter to the Hearing Examiner. Ms. Clark encouraged the Council to make a decision tonight, in order to avoid further delays. Ms. Clark said the agreement proposal is consistent with the Hearing Examiner's decision. In addition, Ms. Clark said, Mr. Summers has added a cap on the height limit in order to protect the view corridor as well as the pedestrian corridor. Betty Rusnak, 15620 72nd Ave. West, said she lives south of, this property and has not heard any- thing about the proposed agreement. Ms. Rusnak said her concern is that the only open spot where 156th comes straight through the bluff. Ms. Rusnak said this area must remain open so emergency vehicles have access. Craig Summers, 16228 70th Place W., Edmonds, Applicant/Appellant, feels adequate public postings of the hearings would have rectified the lack of information. Mr. Summers said the proposed agree - meet was agreed upon by the three neighbors who are mostly closely affected by the view impact. Mr. Summers said he would like the City Council to make a decision, and not remand it to the Hearing Examiner. Mr. Summers said the City Council does have the capability to make a decision based upon the information provided. Councilmembers discussed the proposed agreement, and decided to proceed with the public hearing and not remand it to the Hearing Examiner. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO REINSTATE THE RULES. MOTION CARRIED. In light of this, COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI WITHDREW HIS MOTION TO REMAND THE ISSUE TO THE HEARING EXAMINER AND PROCEED WITH A PUBLIC HEARING. THE SECONDER AGREED. Under discussion, Council President Palmer said he is uncomfortable with the fact that some mem- bers of the audience are not aware of the contents of the proposed agreement between the appel- lants and the applicant. Council President Palmer said there isn't a Staff report that says the proposed agreement meets with Code requirements 100%. Council President Palmer said Council doesn't know what the Hearing Examiner recommendation would have been to whether he feels the proposed agreement is within the parameters that he set. Council President Palmer said he would vote against the motion for that reason. Mayor Hall said the proposed agreement could be read into the record. Councilmember Dwyer said his concern is that the City is forever asking people to resolve their problems outside of the hearing process. Councilmember Dwyer said in this instance, the applicant and appellants have solved their differences at some expense. Councilmember Dwyer said he is concerned with remanding it to the Hearing Examiner which would essentially undo their work and make them incur additional expenses. MOTION CARRIED with Council President Palmer voting no. Mayor Hall asked the City Council to reveal any ex-parte communications or appearance of fair- ness. Councilmember Petruzzi said Beth Clark, attorney for Mr. Summers, works for a law firm who does approximately 90% of the legal work for his place of employment. No other revelations were made. Mayor Hall asked members of the audience if they challenged the participation of any Councilmem- ber. No challenges were made. FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 10 June 16, 1992 Staff Report and Recommendation Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor, asked the City Council if both hearings (Item 7 and 8) could be combined. City Council replied affirmatively. Mr. Wilson said the Applicant had applied for a variance to allow for a new single family resi- dence to encroach into the street setback adjacent to 156th Street S.W., to reduce the required 25' setback to a 10' setback to allow for the construction of the residence. Mr. Wilson said the Hearing Examiner's decision on the variance application was issued on March 9, 1992, granting a variance to reduce the street setback from the 25-feet to 20-feet. Mr. Wilson said the Applicant appealed that decision, as he contends the Hearing Examiner erred in his Findings and Conclu- sions. Since then, the proposed agreement has been reached, and is before the Council at present for possible resolution to the matter. Mr. Wilson read the letter dated June 11th into the record. The letter outlined the proposed agreement/settlement between the Applicant and the Appel- lants. The letter was addressed to Mayor Hall and Councilmembers, and was signed by the legal representatives of the parties involved. Testimony of the Applicant Beth Clark, attorney for the Applicant, gave a brief description of the property in question. Ms. Clark said there is less than 25% of the site that can be used as a building pad. Ms. Clark said the only relatively level buildable part of the site is adjacent to 156th, and that is why the request for a variance from 156th. Ms. Clark said after the Hearing Examiner issued his decision, the Applicant appealed the decision, as he wanted the original variance request, and the neigh- bors appealed the decision, as they felt even a 5-foot variance would obstruct the view. Ms. -Clark said at that point, they all sat down and came to the proposed agreement/resolution which is presently before the City Council. Ms. Clark for a decision from the City Council. Testimony of the Appellant Mark Clark, attorney for the Appellants, said the agreement/resolution is consistent with the Hearing Examiner's determination. Mr. Clark asked the City Council to approve proposed agreement. Public Testimony Keith Dubendorf, 15600 70th Ave. W., said many people enjoy the view corridor and feels a wall within 10 feet of the right-of-way would be detrimental to the view. Mark Clark, Attorney for the Appellants produced a photo, marked Exhibit 1 by the City Clerk. The photo showed the view looking west on 156th. Craig Summers, 162228 70th Pl. W., Applicant, said Don Carlson, Architecture, is present to show the Mayor, City Council, and interested parties, an overlay of what the footprint looks like of the proposed development. Council President Palmer said the Hearing Examiner states in his deci- sion that the structure on site will have a building envelope of over 6,000 square feet. Mr. Summers clarified his intent is to build a home of approximately 4500 to 5000 square feet. Mr. Summers said the footprint of the proposed strucutre is 3000 square feet, and said the informa- tion cited by the Hearing Examiner is incorrect. Mr. Phillips, citizen of Edmonds, said he is unaware of any agreement that is being proposed. He is pleased to hear, however, that an agreement has been reached. Mr. Phillips said he was under the impression it was a 6000 square foot house, as defined by the Hearing Examiner. Mr. Phillips said he is only concerned that the right-of-way be preserved. Betty Rusnak, 15620 72nd Ave. W., said she has no objection to the structure. Ms Rusnak said she was concerned over the future of the strip of land at the end of 156th. Ms. Rusnak said she feels this should be left open. Council President Palmer said according to the Hearing Examiner's report, there is 11,000 square feet of buildable land, and the Applicant is proposing to build a 3000 square foot footprint for the structure. Council President Palmer asked the Applicant for a reason why he is requesting a setback if he is only utilizing a small portion of the total amount of land. Craig Summers, Appli- cant, cited various reasons including that three out of four sides of the subject property are limited by steep ravines. Council President Palmer asked the Applicant if he is willing to have the agreement be a covenant running with the land. Ms. Clark, Attorney for the Applicant, replied affirmatively. Ms. Clark said the Applicant is also willing to withdraw the street vacation, so it could be taken off the table for the benefit of the neighbors who are worried about the on -going public access. FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Page 11 June 16, 1992 Councilmember Earling said he would like to know where the appellant's homes are located with relation to the applicant. Mr. Summers obliged. Don Carlson, the architect for the Applicant showed the Mayor, City Council, and interested parties three drawings which showed various as- pects of the subject property. These drawings were marked Exhibit 2, 3, and 4 by the City Clerk. Mayor Hall closed the public portion of the hearing Council Discussion and deliberation COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO ACCEPT THE PARTIES MODIFICATION OF THE HEARING EXAMINERS DECISION OF MARCH 9, 1992. Under discussion, Council President Palmer said the Applicant stated his willingness to have the agreement become a covenant running with the land. Council President Palmer said this should be included in the motion. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE HEIGHT RESTRIC- TION BECOME A COVENANT RUNNING WITH THE LAND, THAT THE APPLICANT WILL WITHDRAW THE STREET VACA- TION AS VOLUNTEERED BY THE APPLICANT. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI SECONDED THE MOTION. THE AMENDMENT TO THE MAIN MOTION CARRIED. THE MAIN MOTION, THEN CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER THAT ITEM EIGHT ON THE AGENDA HAVE THE SAME RESOLUTION AS ITEM SEVEN, WHICH IS CONTAINED IN THE MOTIONS OUTLINED ABOVE. MOTION -CARRIED. The Mayor and Council recessed to an Executive Session at 11:26 p.m. to discuss a legal matter and reconvened at 11:50 p.m. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER EARLING, TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY TO NEGOTIATE A PERSONAL SERVICES CONTRACT WITH PETER HAHN. MOTION CARRIED. MAYOR Mayor Hall reminded' everyone of the Community Presentation on the Edmonds Ferry Study, Tuesday, June 30th, 1992 in the Library Plaza Room. C '1 1� K V Mayor Hall said the AWC meetings are going extremely well. Mayor Hall said Mr. Dennis Finch, a citizen of Edmonds missed the audience portion of the hearing, and would now like to make a pre- sentation to the public. ��. Dennis Finch, citizen of Mountlake Terrace, presented the Mayor and City Council containing several thousand signatures from citizens of Edmonds, Mountlake Terrace, with a petition Lynnwood and expressing strong opposition to the introduction of Adult Entertainment businesses in the communi- ty. The petition was given to Rhonda March, City Clerk. COUNCIL Councilmember Earling said the High Capacity Transit Meeting has been scheduled for the City of Edmonds on Monday, June 22nd in Conference Room B of Harbor Square. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER KASPER'S CDLy� ABSENCES OF JUNE 9 AND JUNE 16. MOTION CARRIED. p 6'& Council President Palmer said the City Council has repeatedly narrowed the scope, availability and time period for fire works. Council President Palmer said there are still requests from the community that they be outright banned. Council President Palmer asked the City Attorney if the City is allowed to make a total ban. Mr. Wallace, City Attorney said the City cannot ban the sale, however, the City can ban the ignition or discharge or fireworks because of the fire dan- ger. Mr. Wallace said the Fire Chief could declare an emergency and ban the ignition or discharge of fireworks. Mayor Hall said she would monitor the situation. Councilmember Petruzzi said he feels the City should now take a definitive position on banning the discharge and ignition of fireworks because of the extreme fire danger. tI COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER pLJA, NORDQUIST'S ABSENCE OF JUNE 2, 1992. MOTION CARRIED. l el CL- Q�bS� h no further bu ' s, Mayor Hall adjourned the meeting at 11:58 p.m. rr onda J Ma c it Clerk FINAL COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES au Page 12 June 16,.1992 �,. a ayor AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL 7:00 - 10:00 p.m. JUNE 16, 1992 SPECIAL MEETING - LOCATION: SOUTH COUNTY SENIOR CENTER 220 RAILROAD AVE. (SECOND FLOOR), EDMONDS, WA CALL TO ORDER FLAG SALUTE 1. CONSENT AGENDA (30 MINUTES) (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 9, 1992 (C) APPROVE CLAIMS WARRANTS FROM #921234 TO #922922 FOR WEEKS OF JUNE 4 AND JUNE 11, AND PAYROLL WARRANT FOR JUNE 5, 1992 (D) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM CAROL R. SIMONSON ($262.00) (E) PROPOSED RESOLUTION 748 COMMENDING RETIRING POLICE SERGEANT JOHN R. HOLLEMAN (F) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION FOR VACATING A PORTION OF THE UNOPENED 184TH STREET S.W. RIGHT-OF- WAY LYING WEST OF OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE AND LYING SOUTH OF 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE (APPLICANT: RUSSELL KIM / FILE NO. ST-92-38) (G) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF ADB FINAL APPROVAL FOR A NEW 3-STORY MIXED USE OFFICE/5-UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING AT 504 HOLLY DRIVE (APPELLANT: EDMONDS COUNCIL OF CONCERNED CITIZENS / APPLICANT: ROBERT BUTTERFIELD / TASO CHRISTOPHILIS / FILE NOS. AP-92-117 / ADB-107-91) (H) REJECTION OF BIDS ON CEMETERY STRUCTURE AND AUTHORIZATION TO REBID " (1) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED JUNE 3, 1992 ON THE NORTH MEADOWDALE ROAD WALKWAY PROJECT AND AWARD CONTRACT TO LAKESIDE INDUSTRIES ($42,947.30, SALES TAX NOT APPLICABLE) (J) FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WORK BY ROCK ISLAND SHEET METAL FOR THE FIRE STATION #1 EXTRACTION RAIL SYSTEM AND SETTING THE 30-DAY RETAINAGE PERIOD (K) AUTHORIZATION TO TRANSFER WATER SERVICE ACCOUNTS FROM ALDERWOOD WATER DISTRICT IN THE VICINITY OF 220TH ST. S.W. AND 92ND AVE. W. ($8,771.92) (L) PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2885 AMENDING CRITICAL AREAS VESTING PROVISIONS (FROM JUNE 9, 1992) (M) REPORT ON AND APPROVAL OF PURCHASE OF SWIM LIFT II FOR YOST POOL FROM CROWN AQUATICS, INC. ($2,472.00) (N) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR PUBLIC WORKS EMPLOYEES UNIFORMS AND LAUNDRY SERVICES 2. AUDIENCE - CONTINUED - EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 2 _. JUNE 16 1992 3. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION 748 IN HONOR OF JOHN R. HOLLEMAN, RETIRING POLICE SERGEANT (3 MINUTES) HEARING ON SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (30 MINUTES) 5. HEARING ON APPEAL OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD DECISION OF 7-UNIT APARTMENT AT 7801 AND 7807196TH ST. S.W. (APPELLANT: LAWRENCE MCLEAN / APPLICANT. BRUCE GOODNIGHT / FILE AP-92-53) (30 MINUTES) 6. HEARING ON HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION REGARDING APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION (SEPA) FOR 7-UNIT APARTMENT AT 7801 AND 7807196TH ST. S.W. (APPELLANT; LAWRENCE MCLEAN / APPLICANT. BRUCE GOODNIGHT/ FILE NO. AP-92-72) (20'.MINUTES) 7. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING VARIANCE AT 7222 156TH STREET S.W. (APPELLANT: RICK WURDEMAN, ET AL /. APPLICANT: CRAIG SUMMERS / FILE NOS. AP-92-67 / V-92-4) (20 MINUTES) 8. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING VARIANCE AT 7222156TH STREET S.W. (APPELLANT / APPLICANT: CRAIG SUMMERS % FILE NOS. AP-92-68 / V-92-4) (20 MINUTES) 9. APPROVAL OF ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT WITH "MAKERS' TO PROVIDE FOR EXPANDED ECONOMIC SCOPE FOR WATERFRONT/DOWNTOWN PLAN ($16,000.00) (5 MINUTES) 10. MAYOR (5 MINUTES) COUNCIL (15 MINUTES) w THE PUBLIC 1S INVITED TO ATTEND PARKING AND MEETING ROOMS ARE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE