Loading...
05/25/2004 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES May 25, 2004 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Michael Plunkett, Council President Jeff Wilson, Councilmember Mauri Moore, Councilmember Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember (arrived 7:19 p.m.) Richard Marin, Councilmember Deanna Dawson, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Assistant Police Chief Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Brian McIntosh, Acting Parks & Recreation Dir. Noel Miller, Public Works Director Dave Gebert, City Engineer Darrell Smith, Traffic Engineer Rich Lindsay, Parks Maintenance Manager Frances Chapin, Cultural Resources Coordinator Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Orvis was not present for the vote.) 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AS WRITTEN. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Councilmember Orvis was not present for the vote.) The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL Approve 5i18iO4 (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 18, 2004. Minutes Approve (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #71279 THROUGH #71419 FOR THE WEEK OF Claim MAY 17, 2004, IN THE AMOUNT OF $315,588.49. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT Checks DEPOSITS AND CHECKS #38179 THROUGH #38263 FOR THE PAY PERIOD MAY 1 THROUGH MAY 15, 2004, IN THE AMOUNT OF $937,202.54. Liquor Control Board (D) APPROVAL OF LIST OF EDMONDS BUSINESSES APPLYING FOR RENEWAL OF LIQUOR LICENSES WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD. Historic (E) CONFIRMATION OF MAYOR'S REAPPOINTMENT OF TWO HISTORIC Preservation Commission. PRESERVATION COMMISSION MEMBERS, AND CONFIRMATION OF CITY COUNCIL REAPPOINTMENT. 2003 (F) REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 2003 WATERMAIN Watermain REPLACEMENT PROGRAM —PHASE II / BALLINGER AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE Replacement OF PROJECT. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 25, 2004 Page 1 76` Ave w (G) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED APRIL 27, 2004 FOR THE 76TH AVENUE WEST OverlayOVERLAY (SR99 TO 220TH STREET SW) PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO WATSON ASPHALT PAVING ($191,362.80). surplus I (H) AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT WITH JAMES MURPHY AUCTIONEERS TO vehicles I SELL SURPLUS CITY VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT. Arts 3. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION AND PRESENTATION OF Commission PERFORMING ARTS SCHOLARSHIP RECIPIENTS. Cultural Resources Coordinator Frances Chapin introduced Rick Bader, Vice Chair of the Arts Commission, who provided the Edmonds Arts Commission annual report. Mr. Bader explained the Edmonds Arts Commission's vision was to ensure the arts were an integral part of the community, quality of life, economic vitality and central identity. The Commission did this by increasing the visibility of arts in Edmonds to help develop facilities to include performing arts, studio space and retail space for the arts, promote the arts as partners in economic development, to solicit and broaden community involvement in the arts, and encourage the collaboration among arts, business, education and government. He explained the Arts Commission supported and tried to enhance literary arts via the Writers on the Sound annual conference and the youth writing contest. The Arts Commission promotes performing arts via the summer concert series which attracted over 3,400 people to the Concerts in the Park and Family Concerts this summer. He noted the Arts Commission also presents the Winter Performing Arts as well as supported via their participation the Cascade Symphony, Olympic Ballet, Driftwood Players and the Jazz Connection. With regard to visual arts, Mr. Bader noted the Arts Commission helped sponsor and curate four exhibit areas in the City at the Frances Anderson Center, City Hall, Public Safety Building and the Edmonds Library. The Commission also sponsors the Best Book poster contest. He reported on their involvement in public art including installing the Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation artwork gift on the waterfront by Richard Beyer, installed art elements on the waterfront walkway, relocated the family of sea lions sculpture and facilitated a design workshop with artist Steve Jensen for students to develop concepts for a sculpture commemorating the Sister City relationship between Edmonds and Hekinan, Japan. He noted the Arts Commission's most important work was in cooperation with the community — the Evening of the Arts, Art Walk and the cultural tourism poster done in conjunction with the downtown Edmonds business community. He reported the Commission had also begun working with the Edmonds Public Facilities District to secure funding and support the new performing arts center. Mr. Bader expressed the Commission's appreciation to sponsors Acura of Lynnwood, Lynnwood Honda, Windermere Real Estate, AG Edwards, Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation and Washington State Arts Foundation. He concluded the Arts Commission was passionate about the vitality of the City and felt arts contributed significantly to the City's vitality. He acknowledged and thanked the Mayor, City Council, and staff for their support, noting without their support, few of these accomplishments would be possible. Mr. Bader introduced Julie Long, past Chair of the Arts Commission and the Scholarship Committee Chair to present the Arts Scholarship awards. Ms. Long explained the Arts Commission conducted an annual scholarship competition and awarded $3,000 in scholarships. She explained the funding for the scholarships came from Arts Commission program revenues. She noted the Arts Commission also accepted contributions to the Scholarship Program. Ms. Long explained there were two criteria for participation in the scholarship competition, 1) the student must be a resident of Edmonds and 2) he/she must be planning a career in performing or literary arts. She Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 25, 2004 Page 2 introduced two of the three scholarship winners, Patra Jongjitirat and Nathaniel Lanasa. Ms. Long explained Ms. Jongjitirat was an Edmonds Woodway High School Senior who had been studying dance since she was five years old. Ms. Jongjitirat demonstrated a passion and commitment toward a career as a dancer and would receive a $500 scholarship award. Ms. Jongjitirat advised she planned to attend Brown University in the fall due to their strong dance program, especially modern dance. Ms. Long advised David Hendrix, who was not present tonight due to a concert, had been awarded a $1000 scholarship. He had been performing locally since he was a small boy and for the scholarship jury he performed vocally as well as played a complex trombone solo. Mr. Long explained Nathaniel Lanasa, a Senior at Kings High School, was awarded a $1,500 scholarship. His goal was to become a concert pianist as well as teach in the future. Mr. Lanasa advised he planned to attend the Manhattan School of Music in New York City to pursue his goal of becoming a pianist as well as teach. Councilmembers congratulated the scholarship recipients and thanked the Arts Commission members for their efforts. 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Natalie Shippen, 1022 Euclid Avenue, Edmonds, addressed procedures and how particular requests [Appeal reached the Council on appeal using two examples, design plans and Conditional Use Permits (CUP If Procedures pp g p � g p (CUP). an applicant submitted designs for approval, they would be reviewed by the ADB who would hold a public hearing and on appeal, it would come to Council who would also hold a public hearing. This was an open process; anyone could be involved in the discussion even after the ADB process and could submit materials to the Council on appeal. For a CUP, the matter was reviewed by the Hearing Examiner who held a quasi judicial public hearing and on appeal the matter was heard by the Council who holds a public hearing. However, the public must speak at the Hearing Examiner meeting on any issue to be allowed to speak to the Council on appeal. She noted no new evidence could be submitted to the Council on appeal. She found this to be a more closed process than the previously described legislative process. Ms. Shippen explained there is a consolidated permit that an applicant could request that combined the design plans and the CUP into a single request and only one hearing was held. Via this consolidated permit, the applicant made a presentation to the ADB, no public hearing was held and the ADB considered only the design plan. From the ADB, the Hearing Examiner held a quasi judicial public hearing and considered the CUP and the design plan. She noted the Hearing Examiner's decision could be appealed to the Council and only those who spoke at the Hearing Examiner could address the Council on appeal. She noted for the applicant it was preferable to combine the processes as there was only one public hearing and one appeal. Residents who may be interested in the design plan were locked into the quasi judicial process and were often unaware that they had to speak at the Hearing Examiner to become a party of record. Although she understood why a private applicant would pursue a consolidated permit, she questioned whether cutting off public discussion when the applicant was a public body contributed to good public policy. Mayor Haakenson asked whether a member of the public had to speak at the Hearing Examiner meeting or could he/she become a party of record by signing in on the sign -in sheet. Development Services Director Duane Bowman advised to become a party of record, a member of the public needed to testify at the hearing or submit written testimony to the Hearing Examiner. Triad Tree li Rowena Miller, 18711 182na Place SW, Edmonds, expressed concern with the clear cut on the Triad Cutting i i property. She encouraged the public to voice their concerns at the public hearing before the City Council Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 25, 2004 Page 3 on June 1 at 7:00 p.m. As she was unable to attend that meeting, she relayed her concerns with the destruction of the natural forest and the affect on the Edmonds Marsh, birds, wildlife, water quality, wetland, and stability of the steep bank. The reforestation plan should be based on the expert and continuing direction of wildlife biologists and professionals in habitat and forest rehabilitation. According to the newspapers, it seemed the City was ready to accept Triad's settlement proposal. She encouraged the Council as they considered the agreement to consider how badly citizens needed guarantees — at least 20 years rather than three, a $10 million performance bond, and covenants to follow the property to ensure reforestation would continue. She implored the Council not to accept an easy deal as this was a critical area that needed long term healing with guarantees. She asked Council to restore this once beautiful asset of the Edmonds community in a way that would restore trust in government. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, agreed with Ms. Miller, questioning how the loss of the trees on the hillside could be mitigated, particularly for the users of Marina Beach. He asked whether Triad had terminated Ross Wood's employment yet. Mr. Hertrich referred to the next item on the agenda, city Park City Park Access, noting the consultant, Perteet Engineering, developed an alternative that satisfied the Access public. The public did not want any change but were willing to accept reversing the one-way circulation if it was feasible. He urged the Council to eliminate the alternative in the Master Plan that would create a 2-way road in City Park and revise the Master Plan to include a one way road. He noted the Planning Board recommended the Council hold a public hearing and questioned why after the Planning Board's efforts the Council was not at the public hearing stage rather than holding a work meeting. cityxan Michael Young, 20209 83rd Avenue W, Edmonds, referred to a letter in a local paper regarding City customer Hall second floor staff, and disagreed with the letter. He had obtained numerous permits in recent years service including a set last week and had found the second floor staff to be courteous and professional. He noted at times he was frustrated with the process but that was because he did not understand it. He recalled the Council indicated the existence of City government was for the health, safety and welfare of the citizens and it seemed that was exactly what the Council and staff did. He reiterated his opposition to the opinion. stated in the letter and relayed that it was not an opinion held by the local business community. City Park 5. WORK SESSION ON THE CITY PARK ACCESS AND CIRCULATION STUDY Access and Circulation Traffic Engineer Darrell Smith advised participants in the study, included Sherman Goong, Perteet Project Manager; Rich Lindsay, Parks Maintenance Manager; Brian McIntosh, Acting Parks and Recreation Director; Arvilla Ohlde, Parks & Recreation Director (retired); and himself. Mr. Smith explained in 1992, the City Park Master Plan identified a 2-way access preferred option to provide access off 3rd Avenue across from Erben. In 1999, the City Council suggested a study be undertaken by the Planning Board regarding circulation and safety issues in City Park and in 2002, the Engineering and Parks Departments initiated that study. Mr. Smith described existing City Park access across from Erben, noting approximately 450 vehicles entered the park per day, approximately 27 vehicles during the peak hour. Mr. Smith reviewed study objectives and goals which included efficient site access and circulation pattern, vehicular and pedestrian. safety, reduced impacts to trees and vegetation, provide additional on -street parking or clarify the location of parking, and identify the safety alternatives. Mr. Smith explained the scope of the analysis included review of existing studies; development of alternatives and options; identification of evaluation criteria based on transportation, site design and urban design; evaluating and ranking alternatives/options and providing recommendations and documentation. With regard to the transportation criteria, Mr. Smith explained consideration included vehicular and pedestrian conflicts, circulation and connectivity, driveway operations and safety, neighborhood impacts, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 25, 2004 Page 4 future park uses/flexibility, Public Works maintenance access, special events traffic control, and air and noise impacts. Mr. Smith noted there had not been any vehicle/pedestrian accidents in the park. Mr. Smith explained urban design criteria addressed maximizing the parking capacity, park site aesthetics, pedestrian accessibility, tree and vegetation impacts and future site uses/flexibility. Site design criteria addressed emergency vehicle access, City Code compliance, construction costs, stormwater treatment and detention, utility conflicts, impacts to existing structures, and saltwater estuary impacts. Mr. Smith described the public participation process which included two open houses that confirmed the goals and selection criteria with the public as well as brainstorming of issues/solutions. Staff presented alternatives and options and documented public comments. He reviewed a summary of public comments that included saving the trees, minimizing paving/drainage costs, keeping it one way for safety, the Fire Department's desire for two access points, keeping the design simple, visitor/driver education/ reeducation, maintenance facility traffic, the need for ADA accessibility, and leaving it the way it is. Sherman Goong, Project Manager, Perteet Engineering, explained their initial tasks were to develop alternatives for City Park access that included access location variation and addressed community concerns, access and circulation efficiency, maintenance facility and operations, provided flexibility for park improvements, and minimized costs. Perteet developed four primary alternatives with three options on each for a total of 12 concepts. He reviewed the four primary concepts, existing (one-way) circulation, Erben Drive (two-way traffic) access, reverse (one-way) circulation, and Pine Street (two-way traffic) access. He reviewed the alternatives and sub -options: • A-1 — existing one way, • A-2 —egress point out to Pine Street, and • A-3 —separate access to/from maintenance facility with no integration with park. • B-1 Erben Drive (two-way traffic) as depicted in Master Plan, • B-2 — egress only access out to Pine Street from maintenance facility and internal connection to park for inbound vehicles, and • B-3 — separate access. • C-1 — reverse traffic flow (one-way) with vehicle accessing via the existing outbound driveway and exiting at Erben Drive, • C-2 — similar to B-2 with access to Pine Street, and • C-3 - similar to B-3. • D-1 — Pine Street as a primary access utilizing existing access points. Mr. Goong described the evaluation process which included reviewing the concepts/criteria with City staff, ranking the options based on set criteria, reviewing and considering public input. He explained they established three options for detail analysis (traffic operations review, site design, and urban design) and documented their findings and recommendations. Mr. Goong explained that following the evaluation process, options were narrowed to Option A-1 (existing circulation), Option C-1 (reverse flow in existing roadway) and Option A-3/C-3 (Pine Street access). Perteet's recommendation was Option. C-1 for the following reasons: reduces vehicle driveway conflicts at the current exit driveway, improves circulation efficiency and connectivity, retains narrow roadway, has minimal tree and vegetation impacts, addresses community concerns, and has minimal implementation costs. Mr. Goong described other considerations in the study including the safety objectives of the study, the validity of the City Park Master Plan, site design cost estimates, benefit to the park via City presence with maintenance facility, and a recommendation to conduct a maintenance facility feasibility study. Mr. Goong explained that since the Planning Board presentation, Maintenance and Engineering staff have Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 25, 2004 Page 5 been field testing Option C-1 which raised the issue of sight distance at the current entrance. He noted sight distance could be achieved via vacating one parking space at the north side of the current entrance driveway to maintain a sight triangle. Parks Maintenance Manager Rich Lindsay stated his investigation of the reverse direction revealed several concerns including limited sight visibility making it difficult to see children, cyclists, joggers, etc. He noted this was not noticed at first because staff was usually in large trucks but in a small vehicle, the visibility was drastically reduced. He identified other areas of reduced visibility around corners. Once he discovered the reduced sight distance, he invited Mr. Smith to ride with him and he observed the same difficulties as did Acting Parks and Recreation Director Brian McIntosh. Although he wished this had been discovered earlier, Mr. Lindsay assured it was not too late. He recommended reevaluating the reversal of the traffic circulation pattern before proceeding further. Mr. Lindsay noted it would also be very difficult for large trucks, particularly trucks with trailers, to negotiate the turn into the maintenance facility to make deliveries if the traffic flow were reversed. Several arge trees would need to be removed to facilitate turning movements. Trucks may be required to back up to align with the entrance to the facility in an area with very limited sight visibility. He reiterated no accidents had been reported along the drive within City Park in the past. He expressed concern that park visitors driving in the reverse direction may have difficulty seeing pedestrians. He summarized neither he nor his staff supported the proposal to reverse the flow of traffic in City Park. Mr. Smith concluded a great deal was learned via the study; first that two-way access alternative off Erben was probably not the best choice. He acknowledged it could be safe but a one-way circulation. whether or not it was reversed, was the safest. Mr. Smith restated Perteet's recommendation — the reverse one-way access due to reduced conflicts at the existing 5-way intersection. Parks Maintenance recommends retaining the existing circulation pattern due to reduced sight distance with the reversed traffic flow. He noted both one-way circulation patterns were determined to be much safer than the proposed two-way. Regardless of which option was selected, some tweaks needed to be made to the park such as removing vegetation close to the roadway. He concluded Engineering's recommendation was to continue with the existing one-way traffic circulation in City Park because it has been demonstrated to be safer over a long period of time and due to limited available funds. Council President Plunkett inquired whether the reverse circulation recommended by Perteet was safe. Mr. Smith answered it was a very safe option. When Mr. Goong recommended it, it was their understanding that off-street parking would need to be eliminated on 3rd Avenue at the exit and modifications would be required to the turning radius. He noted the cost estimates reflected these revisions. He noted the do- nothing option also included some improvement funds. Council President Plunkett inquired about the amount of the improvement funds. Mr. Smith noted it varied depending on the improvements; the highest would be $50,000-$100,000 in improvements ranging to $5,000-$10,000 for minimal tweaks to landscaping and additional paving. Council President Plunkett inquired whether the reverse circulation could be accomplished for $5,000- $10,000. Mr. Smith clarified that would be for the existing circulation, the reverse would cost $50,000- $100,000. He identified road improvements of approximately $60,000, paving of the southern parking lot to improve accessibility and create a more efficient parking scheme via the painted lines at a cost of $200,000 due to drainage issues. Responding to further questions, Mr. Smith answered the reverse option was safe, the existing was possibly a little safer and both one-way options were safer than the two-way option. Council President Plunkett concluded the existing was less cost and safer. Mr. Smith agreed. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 25, 2004 Page 6 With regard to cost, Councilmember Dawson noted the study indicated A-1 and C-1 cost the same. Mr. Smith explained during the study there were initial conversations with the Fire Department regarding widening the roadway which would require additional cost. The Fire Department has since agreed to retain the narrow roadway with the observation that the narrow roadway keeps speeds down. Councilmember Dawson noted much of the costs appeared to be associated with the road widening and the thought was if those improvements were being done, some other improvements could be done at the same time. She inquired what costs would be required for retaining the existing roadway other than minor landscape changes. Mr. Smith noted the biggest cost was paving the southern parking lot and improving some bad radii in some key locations. Councilmember Dawson inquired about the cost if the parking lot remained unpaved. Mr. Smith answered the cost then would be nearly nothing as the maintenance staff could do the necessary vegetation management. Councilmember Dawson expressed her appreciation for maintenance staff bringing their concerns to the Council. She asked if those concerns had been presented at the Planning Board level. Mr. Smith responded no. Councilmember Dawson observed there had not been a public hearing since those concerns were raised. Mr. Smith agreed, explaining that was the reason a presentation was made to the Council tonight followed by notification to everyone who had been involved in the project of the public hearing before the Council. Councilmember Marin expressed his appreciation for the work done by Perteet Engineering and City staff. He recalled one of the first actions of the Edmonds City Council was to purchase the City Park property, one of the treasures of the City. He appreciated the forethought of the City Council taking that action to provide that park, noting it was a tribute to them that the recommendations have minimal impact on the existing park. Although there were new structures in the park such as restrooms and barbeques, the park had a small town feel. He was pleased the recommendation eliminated the concept of two-way traffic in City Park, a concept he felt would totally change the character of the park. He was anxious to hear from the public at the public hearing to assist the Council in choosing between the options. Councilmember Wilson noted the Executive Summary referred to approximately 71 additional parking stalls in the preferred option. Mr. Smith stated there was a possibility for an additional 20 parking spaces along the existing drive. He referred to the pull -off areas where some visitors park. The disadvantage of these 20 spaces was the potential for vehicles backing onto the drive. It was believed more vehicles could be parked in the currently non -paved area if it were paved and parking spaces delineated. Councilmember Wilson noted all options provided additional parking but option A-1 did not. Mr. Smith agreed, unless the unpaved parking lot were paved. Councilmember Wilson pointed out there would only be an additional 31 parking spaces provided for a project cost of $395,000. He asked whether that cost included widening the drive. Mr. Smith answered that cost included road improvement, paving the parking lot and drainage facilities. Councilmember Wilson suggested there be an option A-4, the existing circulation pattern with additional parking. Mr. Smith agreed the presentation at the public hearing could include a matrix with that option. Mayor Haakenson referred to the study which indicated the selected alternative and primary parking layout would provide an estimated additional 71 paved parking spaces. He asked whether the 71 parking spaces currently existed unpaved. Mr. Smith agreed. Mayor Haakenson observed no parking would be added, it would just be paved. Councilmember Wilson stated the study indicated 71 additional paved parking spaces, 40 of which are currently paved, and 31 new spaces. Mayor Haakenson noted the study indicated 31 supplementary spaces along the southern road perimeter which he assumed already existed. Mr. Smith agreed they Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 25, 2004 Page 7 existed but were poorly defined. He explained there were 52 existing paved spaces, the unpaved southern parking lot as well as miscellaneous wide spots in the road. Councilmember Wilson requested staff identify how many parking spaces existed today and how many new spaces would be added or whether the existing parking would only be improved. Mayor Haakenson clarified the study stated a total of 123 delineated spaces, noting there were 123 spaces now but not all were paved. No additional parking was being added, the existing parking would be paved. Councilmember Wilson concluded it would be helpful to have that issue clarified. Mr. Smith anticipated paving would provide better parking efficiencies and better accessibility, and would address the equity issue of City Park having an unpaved parking lot when businesses were required to have paved parking lots. Councilmember Wilson noted all the options with the exception of A-1 reconfigured the existing paved parking. Mr. Smith did not recommend any changes be made to the north parking lot. Councilmember Wilson inquired about the Fire Department's desire for two access points. Mr. Smith answered the Fire Department felt the one-way circulation pattern provided two access points. Council President Plunkett set a public hearing date of June 15, 2004. He inquired whether staff would provide additional information for the Council and public concerning the Parks recommendation for the public hearing. Mr. Smith agreed staff would provide a summary and mail it to everyone involved. 6. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Haakenson had no report. 7. INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEEBOARD MEETINGS Historic Council President Plunkett reported a brochure produced in great part by the Historic Preservation Preservation Commission Commission Chair Greg Arnold was available on the second floor of City Hall. The brochure cited the advantages of being on the Edmonds Registry of Historic Properties, how to become registered and a guide to historic properties. Health Councilmember Marin commented that in addition to serving on the Snohomish County Health Board, he Board volunteered on the Community Services Advisory Committee and the Policy Advisory Board. He recalled the Community Services Advisory Committee, who administer block grants and the safety net Services Community program in Snohomish County, met to discuss funding priorities and how they fit in with intervention and Advisory being proactive versus reactive. He reflected on how the four organizations he belonged to worked Committee together. First the Health Board who is involved in First Steps and Nurse Family Partnership, programs policy that serve mothers and children in their first few years of life, take a proactive role via prevention. The Advisory Community Services Advisory Committee addresses mental health, short teen shelter case management, Board and abuse intervention, a reactive role. The Policy Advisory Board who via the Technical Advisory Committee at Snohomish County, administer a different set of block grants from the federal government and apply that to programs that help people toward self-sufficiency. He noted he was also involved in. Sno-Home Program in Snohomish County that via a revolving fund assisted people with home ownership. He noted all these programs fit together to provide assistance to young mothers all the way to assisting with self-sufficiency and purchasing a home. He concluded it was an interesting exercise to observe how these organizations fit together, one building on the other, to help return people to self-sufficiency. Cities & Councilmember Wilson commended Perteet Engineering on their work on the City Park Access Study. Towns i He reported at the Cities and Town's dinner, the guest speaker, Snohomish County Executive Aaron Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 25, 2004 Page 8 Reardon, announced he vetoed the Snohomish County Council ordinance that significantly altered and ohomish diminished the role of cities in countywide planning via Snohomish County Tomorrow. He noted this unty was a very sincere effort on Executive Reardon's part to show that cities and the county can work together on planning issues and shared common interests and the importance of a collaborative effort. He expressed his thanks to Executive Reardon for.his efforts. Downtown Councilmember Olson reported the Downtown Parking Advisory Committee discussed the 3-hour zones Parking on 3`a Avenue N and Walnut Streets, residential parking permit fees, potential residential parking permit Advisory area around the Edmonds PerformingArts Center, parking standards for downtown commercial buildings Committee � I� g $ and ways to get more Community Transit bus shelters. She announced the next meeting of the Downtown Parking Advisory Committee was June 8 at 3:30 p.m. seashore Councilmember Olson reported a majority of the discussion at the SeaShore Transportation Forum was Transporta- tion Forum regarding funding priorities for the Regional Transportation Investment District (RTID). She reported it had been decided not to put an RTID issue on the November ballot. SnoCom Councilmember Dawson reported SnoCom had been working on acquiring new SnoCom members or contract agencies. She advised SnoCom would be meeting with Fire District 1 to discuss their returning to SnoCom as a contract agency which would be beneficial for SnoCom as well as Fire District 1 and would reduce the cost to each member. She noted SnoCom was also negotiating with Fire District 7 and the City of Mukilteo as other potential contract agencies. She noted this illustrated that SnoCom was demonstrating fiscal responsibility and provided better customer service than other agencies, a testament to the staff at SnoCom. She reported SnoCom was still working on the Interlocal Agreement; although she had hoped to have it to the Council for approval by now, the Lynnwood City Council may be suggesting some changes. rt Councilmember Orvis reported the Port meeting included discussion regarding improvements to the area between Anthony's and the water's edge which the Commission feels could be put to uses that were better appreciated by the public and improved pedestrian circulation. He noted the Commission recessed their meeting and convened at the site to brainstorm ideas. sound Councilmember Moore reported Sound Transit was preparing to do Phase 2 planning and would be ransit asking cities and towns what they would like to see in Phase 2 of Sound Transit if it were put to a vote. She advised she would be asking Council President Plunkett to schedule a presentation by Sound Transit on a future agenda. With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. G Y ENSON, MAYOR ,4!�_ ANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 25, 2004 Page 9 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5t" Avenue North 7:00 - 10:00 p.m. MAY 25, 2004 7:00 p.m. - Call to Order :i Flan Salute 1. Approval of Agenda 2. Consent Agenda Items (A) Roll Call (B) Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of May 18, 2004. j (C) Approval of claim checks #71279 through #71419 for the week of May 17, 2004, in the amount of $315,588.49. Approval of payroll direct deposits and checks #38179 through #38263 for the pay period May 1 through May 15, 2004, in the amount of $937,202.54.* *Note: Claims information may be viewed electronically at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. (D) Approval of list of Edmonds businesses applying for renewal of their Liquor Licenses with the Washington State Liquor Control Board. (E) Confirmation of Mayor's reappointment of two Historic Preservation Commission Members, and confirmation of City Council reappointment. (F) Report on final construction costs for the 2003 Watermain Replacement Program - Phase 11 / Ballinger and Council acceptance of project. (G) Report on bids opened April 27, 2004, for the 76t' Avenue West Overlay (SR99 to 220t'' Street SW) Project and award of contract to Watson Asphalt Paving ($191,362.80). (H) Authorization to contract with James Murphy Auctioneers to sell surplus City vehicles and equipment. 3. (20 Min.) Annual Report of the Edmonds Arts Commission and Presentation of Performing Arts Scholarship Recipients. Page 1 of 2 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MAY 25, 2004 Page 2 of 2 4. Audience Comments (3 Minute Limit Per Person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings. 5. (45 Min.) Work session on the City Park Access and Circulation Study. 6. ( 5 Min.) Mayor's Comments 7. (15 Min.) Individual Council reports on outside committee/board meetings. 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. The Council Agenda as well as a delayed telecast of the meeting appears on cable television Government Access Channel 21.