05/03/2005 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
May 3, 2005
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Marin in the
Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
IX011111111X1XIIalWcyr:11 109:1lDLy1I.1111
Richard Marin, Mayor Pro Tem
Dave Orvis, Council President Pro Tem
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Mauri Moore, Councilmember
Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember
Deanna Dawson, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
Jeff Wilson, Councilmember
Approval
ofagenda 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Cy1lI11W99 ]000l01M1
David Stern, Chief of Police
Duane Bowman, Development Serv. Director
Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Linda Hynd, Deputy City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM
ORVIS, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, FOR
APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
(A) ROLL CALL
Approval
of 4/26/05 (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF APRIL 26, 2005
Minutes
(C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #79099 THROUGH #79264 FOR THE WEEK OF
Approve APRIL 25, 2005, IN THE AMOUNT OF $405,278.53. APPROVAL OF RETROACTIVE
Claim Checks PAYROLL CHECKS #40600 THROUGH #40648 FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN
THE AMOUNT OF $28,925.76.
Ordinance No.
3550— Rezone (D) PROPOSED ORDINANCE APPROVING THE REZONE OF CERTAIN REAL
RS -8 to RM- PROPERTY FRONTING THE SOUTH SIDE OF EDMONDS WAY BETWEEN 97TH
1.5 AVENUE WEST AND 95" PLACE WEST FROM RS -8 (SINGLE - FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL) TO RM -1.5 (MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL).
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
May 3, 2005
Page 1
Bid Report (II) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED APRIL 27, 2005 FOR THE 2004 WATERLINE
on Waterline REPLACEMENT PROGRAM /PHASE 1 — 7 9TH PLACE WEST PROJECT AND AWARD
Replace- OF CONTRACT TO D & G BACKHOE, INC. ($65,415.74)
ment
Program 3. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Natalie Shippen, 1022 Euclid, Edmonds, referred to Councilmember Wilson's comment in the minutes
to forget about specific numbers for heights, all that was necessary was good design. She asked
Councilmember Wilson why gothic cathedrals, which are mt Gennan but are French cathedrals, were
Audience called gothic.
Comments
Ron Wambolt, 530 Dayton Street, Edmonds, explained he was skeptical when he heard the City
planned to hire a consultant to assist the Council with developing design guidelines as the City's past use
of consultants has not been productive because staff was generally more capable of doing what the
consultant was retained to do. However, after listening to the presentation by Mark Hinshaw, LMN
Architects, last week, he was confident the City had retained a consultant who would add significant
value and would tell the Council what they needed to hear, not just what they wanted to hear. He
commended Mayor Pro Tern Marin and others involved in Mr. Hinshaw's selection, noting the Planning
Board could have benefited from hiring Mr. Hinshaw rather than Heartland to perform an economic
analysis more appropriately done by a developer. He suggested the Comprehensive Plan be overhauled
with Mr. Hinshaw's guidance. He noted it was obvious from Mr. Hinshaw's presentation last week that
he had done his homework; he particularly liked Mr. Hinshaw's comments regarding retail supply
matching consumer demand, the need for continuity of shops along the street, not allowing sandwich
boards in the center of the sidewalk, requiring wider sidewalks, investment by developers needing to be
respectful to the City, and change that was needed in the methodology for measuring building heights as
stair- stepped buildings on sloped lots would be preferable to increased height on one end. With regard to
sidewalk widths, although he agreed sidewalks needed to be wider, he was opposed to allowing higher
building height in exchange for a wider sidewalk. He pointed out that no setbacks were required in the
BC zone and lot line to lot line buildings were allowed which should be sufficient to mandate 3 -foot
wider sidewalks that would largely be used by the building's occupants.
4. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor's Mayor Pro Tern Marin explained the difficulty with the recording equipment at last week's Council
comments meeting was apparently caused by unsecured equipment that had been disconnected and not reconnected
properly.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
council Council President Pro Tern Orvis referred to his report last week regarding the Port's Destination
comments Edmonds program that encouraged boaters to visit Edmonds. He advised that an article regarding the
Port also appeared in Norwesting magazine.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
May 3, 2005
Page 2
Proclamation
National Day
of Prayer
Proclamation
(E)
PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF NATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER, THURSDAY, MAY 5,
Native Plant
2005
Appreciation
Week
(F)
PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF NATIVE PLANT APPRECIATION WEEK, MAY 1 -7,
2005
Proclamation
on Days Remembrance
emem
(G)
PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE, "FROM LIBERTY TO
THE PURSUIT OF JUSTICE," MAY 1 - 8, 2005
Bid Report (II) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED APRIL 27, 2005 FOR THE 2004 WATERLINE
on Waterline REPLACEMENT PROGRAM /PHASE 1 — 7 9TH PLACE WEST PROJECT AND AWARD
Replace- OF CONTRACT TO D & G BACKHOE, INC. ($65,415.74)
ment
Program 3. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Natalie Shippen, 1022 Euclid, Edmonds, referred to Councilmember Wilson's comment in the minutes
to forget about specific numbers for heights, all that was necessary was good design. She asked
Councilmember Wilson why gothic cathedrals, which are mt Gennan but are French cathedrals, were
Audience called gothic.
Comments
Ron Wambolt, 530 Dayton Street, Edmonds, explained he was skeptical when he heard the City
planned to hire a consultant to assist the Council with developing design guidelines as the City's past use
of consultants has not been productive because staff was generally more capable of doing what the
consultant was retained to do. However, after listening to the presentation by Mark Hinshaw, LMN
Architects, last week, he was confident the City had retained a consultant who would add significant
value and would tell the Council what they needed to hear, not just what they wanted to hear. He
commended Mayor Pro Tern Marin and others involved in Mr. Hinshaw's selection, noting the Planning
Board could have benefited from hiring Mr. Hinshaw rather than Heartland to perform an economic
analysis more appropriately done by a developer. He suggested the Comprehensive Plan be overhauled
with Mr. Hinshaw's guidance. He noted it was obvious from Mr. Hinshaw's presentation last week that
he had done his homework; he particularly liked Mr. Hinshaw's comments regarding retail supply
matching consumer demand, the need for continuity of shops along the street, not allowing sandwich
boards in the center of the sidewalk, requiring wider sidewalks, investment by developers needing to be
respectful to the City, and change that was needed in the methodology for measuring building heights as
stair- stepped buildings on sloped lots would be preferable to increased height on one end. With regard to
sidewalk widths, although he agreed sidewalks needed to be wider, he was opposed to allowing higher
building height in exchange for a wider sidewalk. He pointed out that no setbacks were required in the
BC zone and lot line to lot line buildings were allowed which should be sufficient to mandate 3 -foot
wider sidewalks that would largely be used by the building's occupants.
4. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor's Mayor Pro Tern Marin explained the difficulty with the recording equipment at last week's Council
comments meeting was apparently caused by unsecured equipment that had been disconnected and not reconnected
properly.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
council Council President Pro Tern Orvis referred to his report last week regarding the Port's Destination
comments Edmonds program that encouraged boaters to visit Edmonds. He advised that an article regarding the
Port also appeared in Norwesting magazine.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
May 3, 2005
Page 2
Because the announcement regarding the Cascade Symphony was not televised last week,
Councilmember Dawson announced the Symphony's "Celebration of Edmonds" event at Benaroya Hall
on May 23. She encouraged the public to attend, noting 25% of the ticket sales would be donated to the
Edmonds Center for the Arts. She advised that tickets were available at Benaroya Hall, Ticketmaster,
Chamber of Commerce, the log cabin, and from Cascade Symphony members.
Work 6. WORK SESSION ON CODE REVISIONS TO SUPPORT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Session on
Code
Revisions Mark Hinshaw, LMN, provided a recap of the discussion at the April 26 workshop due to the technical
difficulties with the video. He recalled a great discussion with the Council where he listed a number of
qualities /characteristics he observed in the City's documents, several under the category of uses /activities
and several under the category of design elements. Before the discussion proceeded, he sought the
confirmation from the Council that those were accurate and reflected the direction the Council wished to
proceed.
Mr. Hinshaw recalled one point of discussion last week was his notion that it was not just a matter of
picking a number for heights, but that issues associated with making downtowns work, particularly
Edmonds' downtown, were more complex than selecting a number. He commented the first horizontal
and vertical 12 -15 foot space, a three- dimensional shared public living room, was the space that most
people related to and was vital to the success of the downtown. He urged the Council to focus their
attention on this area, noting that many communities have found the health of the community suffered
when this space was ignored. He commented on the irony of this, noting that this culture /society has
always known how to build good towns, as evidenced by great cities, towns and streets, and lAhat
happened in the decade or so following the depression and WWII, the time - tested, classic rules of good
places were forgotten and other rules from traffic manuals were instituted. The result over the next 40
years was that cities built streets instead of sidewalks and public spaces. He noted that has occurred long
enough that the result is obvious and many cities now recognize the importance of retuning to earlier,
more classic rules of building good places.
Mayor Pro Tern Marin asked Mr. Hinshaw to comment on stair - stepping buildings on a sloped site. Mr.
Hinshaw explained it was not just a matter of picking a number but also defining how to treat height. He
noted many communities measured heights the same way Edmonds did, the method was not wrong, but
he recommended that the method should reflect the City's topography. The result over time as
development occurred would be to reinforce the topography with stair- stepped, terraced buildings, rather
than flat-topped buildings marching down the hill. He noted this was not occurring now because of the
way the City has measured height, however, a method that could produce that result could be crafted.
At Councilmember Moore's request, Mr. Hinshaw commented on modulation, explaining that Edmonds
was one of 2 -3 communities in the region that had begun using design review early. Now there were 50-
100 communities using design review due to the usefulness of it as a tool for guiding development. He
noted in the early years, when criterion was being developed, the term modulation was developed He
noted modulation presumes a better building would result by jogging buildings in and out, when in fact
older buildings are flat against the back of the sidewalk with no modulation. He noted that that was
where downtown buildings belonged, against the back of the sidewalk, not jogging in and out. He
commented on the relationship of storefronts to passers -by so that they could see the merchandise and
people hside and interact with the goods and services on a personal level. He noted as soon as a
storefront was pushed back more than a few feet, the connection was lost.
With regard to roof modulation, Mr. Hinshaw stated he was not aware of any other communities who use
that design feature. He found that all roof modulation did was to force developers to make notches in the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
May 3, 2005
Page 3
roofline, which also was not a part of classic architecture as evidenced by older buildings that are simply
capped off with a cornice line, parapet, decorative detail, etc. He concluded both the horizontal and roof
modulation made no sense and recommended that be the first thing that is removed from the code. He
found modulation contorted buildings in a manner that was counter - productive to the economic health of
downtown. He noted Edmonds was nearly to a point where damage had been done to the downtown,
several of the modulated buildings downtown created an unfriendly environment for shopkeepers as the
storefronts were too far away from the pedestrian passerby.
Mayor Pro Tem Marin recalled Mr. Hinshaw's comment that the code be reviewed for outdated
regulations. Mr. Hinshaw responded in other communities he has treated the code similar to zero-based
budgeting — assume none of the code is needed and start over, rebuilding and redrafting the code. He
found that by doing that communities found they only needed a fraction of what they thought was needed
and could often get more with less by simplifying the regulations, making regulations clearer and more
focused. Because regulations could not cover everything, he recommended selecting 5 -7 things that were
absolutely important to the community and be ing persistent with regard to those elements. He
recommended the City then let go of the other elements, allowing developers to add their own
idiosyncratic, individualized permutations, so that the unique handprint of a merchant, property owner,
business person is stamped on their building. He noted there were many examples of these individual
touches in the downtown, such as flower pots, signs, displays, etc. He concluded that those were what
made a community a one -of -a -kind place that was unlike a shopping center.
Councilmember Dawson asked Mr. Hinshaw's opinion with regard to providing height incentives in
exchange for design elements. Mr. Hinshaw explained that people doing development want assurances
regarding what they will get; they want to be able to review a document in a fairly short amount of time
and determine the yie 1d. He noted one of the things that frustrated developers wre discretionary
decisions that could not be taken to the bank. He recommended a system that combined ministerial
objective, numerical calculations that established the yield and then standards and guidelines that ensure
character, quality, style, and whatever else the City finds important.
Councilmember Dawson clarified incentives based on aesthetics may not work for developers as it made
it more difficult for them to determine up front whether a project was workable. Mr. Hinshaw answered
that he has crafted codes that include incentives but the incentives must be structured clearly and be
calculable, for example, if the developer does X, he gets Y. He recommended if the City used incentives,
their use should not require review and approval by a board. He explained design review was also
discretionary but it was in regard to the quality and details of a development and it was rare that a project
was denied via the design review process.
Development Services Director Duane Bowman advised Councilmembers Marin and Olson, Community
Services Director Stephen Clifton and he were meeting with a planner in Fairhaven on Friday to tour the
city. He planned to provide photographs of examples of good and bad development in Fairhaven at the
next week's Council meeting.
Mr. Hinshaw provided photographs of several buildings downtown, noting there were some areas where
the storefronts were as good as they could get, where the shop was open to the sidewalk, merchandise and
services were spilled to the sidewalk and storefronts were highly visible. He identified features of these
storefronts were highly visible, with a lot of glass, a sill line below 2'/2 feet, 7 -foot exterior doors, and 10-
foot windows. He identified the ghost of old clear stories in older buildings that had been plastered over.
He noted the increased interior height allowing light to reach the rear of the store.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
May 3, 2005
Page 4
Mr. Hinshaw drew a cross - section of a building front and the area in front of the building, identifying in
the vertical space the optimum sill height, 9 to 10 -foot windows, and horizontal space above the window
for signage. He also identified within the horizontal space the 2 -foot area in front of the building for
window boxes, carts, pots, benches, display racks; then a 5 -foot sidewalk area with adequate space for
passersby to pass and allow for each person's personal space, and then a 3-4 foot area for street trees,
street lights, signs, etc. He pointed out the walking area /zone where the City should prohibit sandwich
boards, tables, etc., noting that sandwich board signs should be in the 3 to 4 -foot area along the street. He
concluded this horizontal and vertical space represented the shared linear outdoor living room.
Mr. Hinshaw displayed examples of mixing commercial and residential uses downtown, noting most
developers either built residential or commercial, but few did both. He noted financing, insurance,
marketing, etc. was even set up to separate the uses. He noted banks may also discount the commercial
space, basing their financing on the residential space alone, requiring the developer to finance the
commercial space. He pointed out the importance of developers following the rules of ground floor retail
that include generous windows, multiple entrances, appropriate sill line heights — all the details that
happen within the outdoor living room that made the space viable. He noted, absent those elements, the
ground level was not conducive to retail.
Mr. Hinshaw pointed out retail could not be on the ground floor everywhere; retail required a lot of
people to support it; therefore, it may be necessary to consider other uses for the ground floor that could
still contribute positively to the downtown. He suggested some streets may be appropriate for ground
level housing. In those areas, the ground level could include stoops, steps, gardens, or other small human
habitation touches that could be equally charming and interesting. Then the retail could be focused in
areas where it made the greatest amount of sense — side -by -side and critical mass that include a wide
variety of choices within a smaller area. He noted ground level office was sometimes not good either
when the blinds are kept closed and there was nothing interesting to look at. He suggested it may be
better to have a nice wall with artwork than offices where the blinds were always closed. He noted one of
the tasks for the Council would be to determine what streets were most appropriate and desirable for
retail, keeping that number low, and not forcing mixed use in areas where it was not appropriate.
Councilmember Dawson asked for examples of ground floor residential in other cities. Mr. Hinshaw
recalled an area in Bellevue on NE 11"' where there was a row of units with stoops that abut the sidewalk.
He noted planners have perhaps oversold the concept of mixed-use so examples of ground floor
residential were somewhat limited. He offered to provide a list of examples to staff. He noted Vancouver
concluded after a decade of forcing mixed -use that people looking for places to live in a downtown were
looking for the same things anyone else looked for in a residence — privacy, security, knowing their
neighbors, and quiet at night. He noted sometimes when active uses were forced adjacent to residential
the uses conflicted. Vancouver has recently begun putting housing in residential districts and then have
retail a few blocks away, within walking distance, but not necessarily adjacent. He noted some people
have a higher tolerance for the noise of a commercial use, therefore, mixed use should not be prohibited,
but forcing it often did not work well. He suggested having the retail a few blocks away was more
beneficial as residents were walking around the neighborhood, giving life to the area. He recalled the
most successful ground floor residential was in Portland, such as the Pearl District, where there are
wonderful ground floor housing units with gardens along the street.
Mr. Hinshaw explained ground floor residential needed to be pushed back a few feet from the sidewalk to
provide privacy. He noted it was worthwhile to have more tailored zoning such as sub - districts within the
downtown, some that emphasize commercial and others that emphasize residential rather than one -size-
fits -all zoning.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
May 3, 2005
Page 5
Councilmember Moore asked whether a developer could build first floor space that was convertible from
commercial to residential. Mr. Hinshaw replied it was usually the residential developer who did not want
to develop commercial space. In his opinion, the environment for a home was much different than for a
business including the plumbing, lighting, security, etc. He recalled an attempt to do that in the
neighborhood where he lives — live /work units — but there was not enough privacy. The result was the
blinds on the residential units were always closed or attempts were made to create privacy, such as
translucent glass, etc. He noted that this was why it was important to determine areas that were
appropriate for residential on the ground floor and areas where ground floor retail was appropriate.
Mr. Hinshaw provided examples of new development versus redevelopment in downtown, noting below
grade space would not work for retail purposes. He commented it would be better to rent /lease below
grade space as inexpensive residential space because it was definitely not retail frontage. He noted the
below grade space would not work for retail because it did not have direct access or direct exposure. He
recalled this was an example of space that was discounted by the bank providing the financing.
Mr. Hinshaw displayed a photograph of what he characterized as a classic pattern for ground floor retail —
generous windows with low sill heights, location at the back of the sidewalk with 1 -2 feet of space for
displays, and slightly recessed doorways. He noted even in this example there was a need for more detail
from the storefront into the area beyond. He displayed a photograph looking down a retail street,
identifying it as an example of a strong retail core that blended the old with the new to create continuity
with the past. He displayed an example of buildings that illustrated the history and scale of a small town
setting such as a turret. He commented that the desire to live a one - size - fits -all, reducing design to a
number, dissuaded developers from doing such elements. He suggested the City encourage new buildings
that reflect historic elements. He hoped the houses in the Art District would develop with commercial
uses within the existing houses.
Mr. Hinshaw provided historic examples of pedestrian scale /human scale buildings that included
generous storefronts, low sill heights, overhangs, slightly recessed entrances, small scale signs directed
toward pedestrians, noting these were elements that had worked in towns and cities of all sizes for
hundreds of years without exception. He noted when design varied from these elements, such as being
crunched down, pushed back, modulated in and out, it stopped working. He noted there were only 5-6
things that made the storefront work, things that most people could understand. He noted there were a
number of good examples in the City of pedestrian/human scale. He cautioned against locating
something next to such a space that would detract from it.
Mr. Hinshaw displayed examples of windows /weather protection, noting he was uncertain whether
weather protection was important enough to be on the list of required design elements. He noted awnings
tended to create an unattractive linear line, as well as shadow the space; perhaps an awning at the entrance
would be appropriate or it could be optional. He pointed out how columns along a storefront, when
viewed from up the street, tended to close up and simulate a solid wall. He recommended spending
money where it counted, on the ground floor, to make it "sparkle" and listed ways to dress up the front of
a building, such as a the inset, a unique light fixture, etc.
Mr. Hinshaw provided examples of good first floor differentiation, pointing out the change in materials,
more textures, more color, more light, etc., a combination that could differ for every storefront. He
recommended design review focus on the first floor space. He provided examples of street walls /edges,
pointing out the contrast between a store at the sidewalk and a space that was set back and usable for
retail. He provided examples of outdoor spaces, commenting that the City needed to nurture privately
provided public spaces and publicly provided public spaces. He pointed out the cornice at the top of a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
May 3, 2005
Page 6
building that created an edge /sense of detail on the building, noting without the cornice it would be a
more severe looking building. He provided examples of modulation versus building detail.
Mr. Hinshaw displayed a page from another community's regulations that contained a photographic
example and a drawing of what was desired. He noted the regulations contained the subject, intent
statement, a set of simple guidelines from which a developer could chose four from a list of ten, the goal
being for a developer to be able to read the City's regulations in a few minutes and "get it" — plain
English that told a verbal and visual story. He reiterated the ideal was 4 -5 pages identifying the 5 -6 things
the City wanted to focus on.
Council President Pro Tem Orvis noted he was intrigued with the focus on businesses and with the
concept of eliminating modulation. He pointed out that Chanterelle's, a restaurant everyone loves, has no
modulation.
Mayor Pro Tem. Marin commented the trim on the Windermere building resembled crown molding. He
described buildings on Hwy. 99, the former United Furniture Warehouse building, where architectural
details have been added to a previously flat, walled building. He also described improvements being
made to a strip mall at the corner of 164" and Hwy. 99, where the front of the building was removed,
stucco work and elevated fronts added to the building, and the recent installation of crown molding that
resulted in a dramatic difference in the appearance of the building.
Council President Pro Tem Orvis asked whether Mr. Hinshaw's intent with regard to ground floor
residential was that the entire floor would be residential. Mr. Hinshaw answered yes. Council. President
Pro Tem Orvis recalled the Council has discussed commercial on the ground floor to a certain depth with
residential uses behind it. Mr. Hinshaw answered that he had not seen that done, anticipating it would be
awkward to put living units behind that could potentially face undesirable uses. He noted the trick to
making ground floor residential more private was to raise the floor level 1 -2 feet above the sidewalk so
that passersby could not look directly into the windows, as well as pushing the building back to provide
privacy and distance. He noted a building with ground floor residential need not be as tall because three
floors of residential could be achieved in less overall height.
Councilmember Moore clarified the areas Mr. Hinshaw highlighted as important included not having
retail everywhere, nurturing the first floor, revising the City's method of measuring height, clarifying and
improving the predictability of the code and encouraging individuality.
Mayor Pro Tem Marin commented the Council would be reviewing the Design Guidelines soon, a
document of which a tremendous amount of work had been invested. He noted Mr. Hinshaw's
recommendation was that the guidelines be shorter rather than longer. He suggested Mr. Hinshaw review
the Design Guidelines and identify key guidelines and guidelines that could be eliminated. Mr. Hinshaw
agreed to review the Design Guidelines, noting that there were likely some that were fine, some that could
be made more clear and illustrated, others that could be standards rather than guidelines, and others that
might be nice but not necessary. He concluded there were many issues that were not important enough to
spend time regulating.
Mr. Hinshaw explained on a Design Review Board that he chairs, their operating rules for the past seven
years have been that no project will take more than three meetings to review and no meeting on a project
will last longer than 90 minutes, including public comment. He noted this rule has only been broken 2 -3
times in the past seven years. He explained the board's review was prefaced by a statement about the
issues the board could consider, inviting participants to pursue other forums that were available to address
other issues, such as zoning, parking, building height, etc., and inviting comments on how to make the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
May 3, 2005
Page 7
building fit more compatibly within the context of the area. He noted the board received great
information from the public that was usually incorporated into the design. He commented that training of
the board's chair was essential to the efficient operation of the board.
Councilmember Plunkett referred to Mr. Hinshaw's comments that heights didn't matter, noting that he
agreed as long as the height was within the existing height limits but would disagree if the intent was for
taller buildings.
Councilmember Dawson commented the buildings the Council liked were the older buildings and none of
the taller/larger buildings Mr. Hinshaw displayed were examples of good development. She noted the
Council could agree on what they wanted the first floor to look like; the disagreement was the building
height. She noted the problem has been with what occurs on the first floor to achieve the overall building
height.
Council President Pro Tern Orvis agreed the issue was height. He preferred to consider entryways
independent of heights.
Councilmember Olson commented that most of the buildings the Council did not like were built that way
because of design regulations, such as modulation and allowing a height of 25 feet, plus 5 feet, in
exchange for modulation. Mr. Hinshaw commented, on a sloping site, the current method of averaging
resulted in a box that was tall on the low side and shorter on the high side. He suggested the City develop
a method that would result in buildings stair-stepping down the slope, which would reduce the building
mass.
111
With no further business,the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:43 p.m.
4111 /
Alt-or-040G. Ai ed€1-d-Q.,
G• ' H• t EN ON,MAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE,CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
May 3,2005
Page 8
AGENDA
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
11=-
Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex
250 5th Avenue North
7:00 - 10:00 p.m.
MAY 3, 2005
7:00 p.m.- Call to Order and Flag Salute
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Consent Agenda Items
(A) Roll Call
(B) Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of April 26, 2005.
(C) Approval of claim checks #79099 through #79264 for the week of April 25, 2005, in
the amount of$405,278.53. Approval of retroactive payroll checks #40600 through
#40648 for the Police Department in the amount of$28,925.76.*
*Information regarding claim checks may be viewed electronically at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us
(D) Proposed Ordinance approving the rezone of certain real property fronting the
south side of Edmonds Way between 97th Avenue West and 95th Place West from
RS-8 (Single-Family Residential) to RM-1.5 (Multi-Family Residential).
(E) Proclamation in honor of National Day of Prayer, Thursday, May 5, 2005.
(F) Proclamation in honor of Native Plant Appreciation Week, May 1-7, 2005.
(G) Proclamation in honor of Days of Remembrance, "From Liberty to the Pursuit of
Justice, "May 1 -8, 2005.
(H) Report on bids opened April 27, 2005 for the 2004 Waterline Replacement
Program/Phase 1 - 79th Place West Project and award of contract to D & G
Backhoe, Inc. ($65,415.74).
3. Audience Comments (3 Minute Limit Per Person).*
*Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings.
4. ( 5 Min.) Mayor's Comments
5. (15 Min.) Council Comments
6. (3 Hours) Work Session on Code revisions to support the Comprehensive Plan.
ADJOURN
Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities.
Please contact the City Clerk at(425) 771-0245 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations.
A delayed telecast of the meeting appears on cable television-Government Access Channel 21.