01/28/2003 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
January 28, 2003
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council President Earling in the
Council Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds, followed by the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
STAFF PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor (arrived 8:15 p.m.)
Al Compaan, Assistant Police Chief
Dave Earling, Council President
Duane Bowman, Development Serv. Director
Jeff Wilson, Councilmember
Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Peggy Hetzler, Administrative Services Director
Lora Petso, Councilmember
Dave Gebert, City Engineer
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Stephen Koho, Treatment Plant Manager
Richard Marin, Councilmember
Steve Bullock, Senior Planner
Deanna Dawson, Councilmember
Frances Chapin, Cultural Resources Coordinator
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
hang. to COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO ADD
genda TO AGENDA ITEM #7 (EXECUTIVE SESSION) A 10- MINUTE DISCUSSION REGARDING AN
ADDITIONAL REAL ESTATE MATTER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO ADD
"AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE DISINFECTION
CONVERSION PROJECT AT THE TREATMENT PLANT" AS CONSENT AGENDA ITEM E.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, FOR
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, FOR
APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 1
(A)
ROLL CALL
f
(B)
APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 21 2003
�
(C)
APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #60448 THROUGH #60602 FOR THE WEEK OF
JANUARY 20, 2003, IN THE AMOUNT OF $966,069.52.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 1
Sewer
utfall — (D) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN ADDENDUM NO. 2 FOR THE
Cathodic PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH COSMOPOLITAN ENGINEERING
Projection GROUP FOR THE SEWER OUTFALL — CATHODIC PROJECTION PROJECT.
Disinfection
Conversion (E) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE
Project at DISINFECTION CONVERSION PROJECT AT THE TREATMENT PLANT.
Treatment
]ant 3. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF ARTS DAY. FEBRUARY 11. 2003
Proclama-
tion in Council President Earling read a Proclamation declaring February 11, 2003 as Arts Day in Edmonds.
honor of Julie Toothaker, Edmonds Arts Commission, and Darlene McLellan, Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation,
Arts Day
were present to receive the proclamation.
4. UPDATE ON COMMUNITY TRANSIT SERVICE EXPANSION
Community
Transit
Service Todd Morrow, Community Transit (CT), expressed his appreciation to Council President Earling for
Expansion his leadership on the CT Board and to Councilmember Marin, the City's alternate on the CT Board.
Mr. Morrow explained the service expansion planned to begin February 2, 2003 was CT's biggest in ten
years and part of their ongoing effort to make the bus a convenient, reliable, and safe alternative to
driving. These service improvements were the result of a September 2002 ballot measure passed in the
service area by area voters. When the Board asked the public for their support for a .03% sales tax
increase, the Board assured the funds would be used to provide a 15% service increase. He noted the
ballot measure subsequently passed in the service area and passed in the Edmonds area by 60 %, an
indication of Edmonds citizens' support for public transit.
Mr. Morrow explained the planned improvements were developed via input from the community and
would restore and enhance bus service in the CT service area. The planned improvements will occur in
February 2003 in the north and south county areas, and east county communities in September 2003. He
highlighted service improvements including earlier and later service to many areas, more frequent and
more direct routes to key destinations resulting in fewer stops and transfers for many riders, doubling of
service frequency in many areas, new and more frequent express bus service from Marysville and
Arlington to Lynnwood and Edmonds eliminating 15 -30 minutes from a regional bus ride.
Mr. Morrow explained these changes would result in revised route numbers and routes for approximately
half of the local routes. In Edmonds, a new route 406 will restore commuter service from the Seaview
neighborhood and add a new route to the Edmonds Park & Ride, and later weekend service from the
Lynwood Park & Ride. New routes 151 and 116 will provide new and direct service from Edmonds
Community College, Alderwood Mall and Mill Creek. One of the most important service enhancements
in Edmonds was an increase in service frequencies from every 30 minutes to every 15 minutes weekdays
and from every 60 minutes to every 30 minutes on Saturday. Edmonds Community College would have
60% more service to its campus, important because more than one -third of the students use CT. Mr.
Morrow briefly outlined service enhancements in Everett that would restore and enhance local service to
residents in that area.
Mr. Morrow described their outreach effort to ensure riders were informed of changes including
television and radio ads, signs at every effected bus route advising riders of the changes, and information
available on their website (www.communitytransit.org), via their customer information hotline (425-353 -
RIDE), and a service- change booklet. He left information with the City Clerk regarding service changes.
Mr. Morrow thanked Edmonds for its support of CT and citizens who use the transit system. He
concluded CT was committed to providing safe and reliable transit service for Edmonds citizens.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 2
Council President Earling advised bus schedules were available at City Hall and the Chamber of
Commerce.
Councilmember Plunkett expressed appreciation for the effort to increase /improve transit service. He
remarked public transit was the answer to the region's traffic problems.
Council President Earling expressed his appreciation to CT staff who developed the improvements which
equate to a 15% increase in service, an enormous increase in service. He encouraged Councilmembers to
visit the transit center at Edmonds Community College.
Permit 5. REPORT ON PERMIT STREAMLINING BY THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY ECONOMIC
Stream-
lining DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
Diane Dollar, Snohomish County Economic Development Council ( SCEDC), provided a presentation
describing a Model Permit System developed via a 12 -month effort by a public /private committee. She
noted Development Services Director Duane Bowman was an active participant in that process.
Ms. Dollar explained in April 2001, the SCEDC adopted four of the Washington Competitive Council's
main issues, 1) transportation, infrastructure; 2) education, workforce development; 3) taxes and fees,
and 4) permit streamlining, regulatory reform. As many of the issues identified by the Competitive
Council were state issues, SCEDC Board wanted to take the lead in localizing some of the issues
identified by the Competitive Council.
Ms. Dollar explained a public /private partnership was assembled comprised of government, business,
development professionals and community groups. The committee considered and incorporated the
model of best practices from municipalities such as Kent, Tacoma, Renton and Silicon Valley. The
committee also incorporated feedback from developers, builders and architects in the model. She
explained the model was developed with a phased approach and the initial effort was only to design a
framework of a model permit process (guiding principles). She described the project framework which
promotes a customer service ethic with a straightforward, predictable and timely permit process;
considers the administrative review process; focuses on process for large, complex commercial /industrial
projects; worked within existing state laws affecting local regulations and permit systems; remained
within the framework of existing state and federal environmental laws; focus of work limited to
jurisdictions within UGAs; and with heavy emphasis on promoting positive attitude and professionalism.
Ms. Dollar reviewed key issues that were addressed included consistency (clear and consistent
interpretation of codes); predictability /timeliness (review process is efficient in that both jurisdictions
and applicant are communicating effectively from start to end of process); and problem solving approach
(developers/builders may not be familiar with jurisdiction process and need education and support). The
basic principles of the model system are clear definition of jurisdiction and applicant responsibilities,
emphasis on early public involvement, team - oriented review process with pre- application and application
review (single point of contact), and separating the model system into the six key components.
Ms. Dollar reviewed the six step approach in the model design, 1) submittal information, 2) pre -
application process, 3) application intake, 4) application review, 5) permit decision, and 6) promote use
of Hearing Examiner appeals process.
Ms. Dollar explained the next step was implementation of a pilot program; Mountlake Terrace and Sultan
have volunteered to implement a pilot program and 3 -4 other jurisdictions have expressed interest in a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 3
pilot program. She explained a loaned executive would be conducting an internal audit of the
jurisdiction's existing permit system, distilling down the pilot program to an implementation level, and
working with the jurisdiction to develop an implementation plan and ways to promote efficiency in the
review process. At the conclusion of a 12 -month pilot program, a final report will be issued.
Councilmember Petso inquired about the citizen input in this process. Ms. Dollar answered the citizen
representative was from Thousand Friends of Washington, an individual who was involved in a number
of neighborhood groups prior to joining Thousand Friends and the network of community representatives
was her sounding board during this process. She noted they also had input from other community
activists who have been involved at the county level.
Councilmember Petso inquired whether funding and operation of Thousand Friends was primarily from
the development industry. Ms. Dollar answered Thousand Friends of Washington was a non - profit
environmental organization. She was uncertain of their funding sources. Councilmember Petso
commented the funding sources listed on their website indicated a great deal of developer involvement as
well as citizens.
Councilmember Petso asked whether the recommendation with regard to the Hearing Examiner was for
an appeal of smaller development or only for large, complex projects. Ms. Dollar answered the example
in other jurisdictions was the Hearing Examiner was used for all projects. She noted it was up to the
jurisdiction how to address the issue of efficiency. She noted other jurisdictions that have had success
use the Hearing Examiner process for all projects.
Councilmember Petso recalled citizens have expressed concern with the Hearing Examiner process,
specifically, that the Hearing Examiner meets while they are at work. Further, an appeal from the
Hearing Examiner to the City Council is less expensive than an appeal from the Hearing Examiner to
Superior Court. She noted that from a citizen's viewpoint, the Hearing Examiner system did not always
work, and the Council has found, as recently as last week, that a modification to a Hearing Examiner
ruling may improve the outcome for citizens, making it beneficial for citizens to appeal to the City
Council. Councilmember Petso asked whether the model could be revised to reflect that. Ms. Dollar
advised jurisdictions were encouraged to consider the model in its entirety; however, the process will
include those who want to implement the entire model or participate in discussions with the pilot and
learn from what the jurisdictions learn via implementation. She noted at this point it was preferable for
jurisdictions to implement the model in its entirety rather than change the model.
Councilmember Petso referred to the recommendation for simultaneous review, questioning whether that
could result in inefficiencies such as if a fatal flaw was identified by one department while other
departments were reviewing the project. Ms. Dollar explained the intent would be to have all
departments who would be involved in the review participate as part of the pre- application team.
Councilmember Petso referred to early public involvement, noting the flowchart appeared to indicate
public involvement would occur after the final application intake, a stage when everyone has a big
investment in the status quo of the project and often not interested in making changes. She asked
whether there were opportunities for earlier public involvement. Ms. Dollar answered the flowchart
should reflect that outreach to the public by the developer as well as the jurisdiction was encouraged
before application intake occurred. She noted it was particularly important for a jurisdiction to alert an
applicant to potential issues such as an active neighborhood association in the area. She recognized the
benefits of early public involvement, suggesting jurisdictions include information on their website
regarding how to prepare for the pre - application process such as outreach to the community.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 4
Councilmember Orvis referred to the recommendation for the Hearing Examiner to make final decisions,
questioning whether this would be for Comprehensive Plan changes, rezones, etc. Development Services
Director Duane Bowman explained the committee did not address legislative issues such as the
Comprehensive Plan, they were only considering development/land use permit applications. He pointed
out the model did not go into a great deal of detail as the intent was to develop a framework. The pilot
program would allow jurisdictions to work with and test the model. He explained the intent of the model
was to develop a process that all jurisdictions could potentially use so that there would be a more
consistent process in Snohomish County.
Councilmember Orvis recalled the Council's consideration of a Hearing Examiner decision last week.
Mr. Bowman responded in that instance, it was a legislative decision and required Council review. With
regard to the comment that it was more costly to appeal to Superior Court than the City Council, Mr.
Bowman explained if the City chose to use the Hearing Examiner process, the Hearing Examiner
regulations would need to be strengthened to include a reconsideration process so that a citizen who
disagreed with a decision could request that the Hearing Examiner reconsider the decision before
appealing to Superior Court.
Councilmember Plunkett asked whether Thousand Friends endorsed the model. Ms. Dollar answered
that by participating on the committee, Thousand Friends supported the product that was produced. She
explained one of the key reasons Thousand Friends participated was they were interested in smart- growth
and, realizing that development will occur, want to ensure adequate standards are in place. She
acknowledged Thousand Friends did not officially endorse the SCEDC model permit system.
Councilmember Plunkett asked why the Hearing Examiner could not occasionally hold hearings in the
evening. Mr. Bowman answered that was a policy/budget decision.
Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the issue of expedited permits was discussed. Mr. Bowman
answered expedited permits was not factored into the model although it could be via the pilot programs.
He pointed out expedited permit review was a budget issue. Ms. Dollar advised during the
implementation process, permits that take a considerable amount of time may be segmented from less
complex permits that staff feel could be handled much more quickly.
Councilmember Orvis observed the City's Municipal Court held court at night. He encouraged staff to
consider evening Hearing Examiner hearings. Council President Earling advised that was an issue
separate from the model permit system.
Council President Earling commented figures available for Snohomish County indicated there were 4%
fewer sales during 2002 compared to 2001 with nearly all of the 4% reduction in new construction
applications. He acknowledged there were a variety of reasons for this decrease, but consideration must
be given to how to help make housing more affordable by making the permit process smoother and more
predicable.
Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the vision was for the model to be used by all jurisdictions. Ms.
Dollar explained the intent was to provide guidance to jurisdictions on providing efficiencies in their
review process. She acknowledged that at the end of the pilot program, the model for Mountlake Terrace
would be different than Sultan's; however, the basic principles of customer service, emphasizing the pre -
application process, etc. would be similar. She noted resources would also dictate what the model looked
like in each jurisdiction. She clarified it was not the intent to have one system throughout Snohomish
County; it was to assist jurisdictions in identifying efficiencies and learn from other jurisdictions.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 5
Councilmember Wilson commented this was a great start, raising the issue for discussion of how to
effectively serve the community. He noted discussion of model permit systems was occurring in other
cities and counties in other states. The intent was not necessarily to make the process easier but to make
it more user friendly. He referred to a statement in the handout that indicated Washington State's permit
process was one of the most cumbersome in the United States, assuring although it may have faults, it
was not as cumbersome as some other states.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Edmonds Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, referred to the community meeting regarding the
rossing Edmonds Crossing, a proposal to relocate the planned relocation of the ferry terminal. He expressed
concern with the proposed new location, pointing out neither the original relocation nor the revised
relocation provided access for emergency vehicles to the west side of the railroad tracks. He concluded
Ds Sign that was the biggest flaw in the proposal. With regard to Agenda Item #9, Mr. Hertrich disagreed with
Review
eliminating sign review by the Architectural Design Board (ADB), at least on their consent agenda.
Alliance for Ray Martin, 18704 94th Avenue W, Edmonds, commented with regard to the Edmonds Alliance for
Economic Economic Development, stating the State Constitution forbids the use of public money for non - public
Develop- purposes. The preliminary and final 2003 budget violated this statement and included funding for the
ent Alliance despite public opposition while cutting funding to public services such as the Police and Fire
Departments. The funding for the Alliance in the budget was passed by supporters of the Alliance,
Council President Earling, Councilmember Plunkett, and Councilmember Marin. He noted no real
purpose for the Alliance was identified and no quantifiable public benefit has occurred despite over
$100,000 in City funding. He recommended citizens vote against any additional city tax proposals until
Session this was rectified.
Executive 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING A REAL ESTATE MATTER
City Attorney Scott Snyder advised that after speaking with Public Facilities District (PFD) Chair Terry
Public Vehrs about the subject of the Executive Session, the issue did not qualify for the real estate exception to
Facilities the Open Meetings Law. He explained the PFD entered into a binding real estate contract for the sale of
District
two parcels. Because the PFD was a public entity, that document was a public document. The PFD
wants to convey the offers to the Council so that the Council can determine whether to exercise its right
of first refusal, also a public document and the Council must act in public. Thus he suggested to Mr.
Vehrs that the PFD convey the written offers to the Council in advance of next week's meeting to allow
the Council to determine whether to exercise the right of first refusal.
At 8:10 p.m., Council President Earling recessed the Council to a 10- minute Executive Session regarding
a real estate matter. The Executive Session was extended five minutes and the meeting reconvened at
8:27 p.m.
164h Street 8. DISCUSSION ON FUNDING 164th STREET RIGHT -OF -WAY PROJECT
ght -of -way
roject Development Services Director Duane Bowman explained since mid -2002 he has been working with
neighbors on 164h Street between 72"d Avenue West and 75t1i Place West to resolve the location of the
160 Street right -of -way. He recalled in mid -2002, he conducted a neighborhood meeting and reached
concurrence with the neighborhood regarding how to address the problem.
Mr. Bowman explained costs have been identified for the project and an equitable share for the City
would be approximately $6,000 of the total cost, estimated at $13,000. The remainder would be paid
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 6
from private funds. He sought Council authorization to appropriate $6,000 from the Council
Contingency Fund to complete this project in 2003. The funds would not be expended until a written
agreement was procured from all parties regarding the resolution. The benefits of the project were
agreement on the location of the right -of -way and setting monuments. He clarified this would not resolve
any east -west boundary lines; those were boundaries that private property owners must resolve between
themselves.
Councilmember Dawson observed that although it made sense to do this, she questioned why the
expenditure was not included in the 2003 budget. Mr. Bowman explained the Council was in budget
discussions when the estimate was received; by the time the costs were finalized and meetings held with
the neighbors, the budget had been finalized.
Councilmember Plunkett observed the City could not function along this right -of -way because of the lack
of clear identification of the right -of -way. Mr. Bowman clarified there was no adverse possession of
public right -of -way; the issue was the location of the right -of -way. He explained although a number of
different surveys had been done of the area, none of them agreed. Councilmember Plunkett advised that
until the right -of -way location was established, the City's ability to grant permits was impaired. Mr.
Bowman explained permits could be issued as long as a survey was provided, however, the survey could
be disputed. He acknowledged there was a lot line adjustment that did not match up and the application
was rejected due to the discrepancy.
Mr. Bowman advised another potential solution would be to expend the funds from his department's
Professional Services budget with the understanding that if he encountered funding difficulties, he could
recover those funds by the end of the year.
Councilmember Plunkett noted this was being addressed as a.legislative issue but appeared to also be a
land use issue. City Attorney Scott Snyder answered this was an effort to resolve issues via the City's
role as a property owner rather than a decision maker. He noted the City had no ability to designate
property lines; it was a function of negotiation and transfer of rights by deed or referenced to Superior
Court. He noted this was the non - litigation approach and it was not a quasi judicial matter.
For Councilmember Orvis, Mr. Bowman explained the centerline of the right -of -way would be declared
and the City would declare its right to possession to the area 20 feet north of the centerline and the area
20 feet south of the centerline and then exchange quit claim deeds with property owners releasing the
City's interest in any rights to the property outside the described line. Mr. Snyder explained a quit claim
deed transferred whatever title a property owner may have, did not warrant the property owner had any
interest, but simply released any interest they may have.
Mr. Bowman emphasized this required that all property owners agree; if not, the project ceased.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO
APPROPRIATE $6,000 FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND FOR THE 164TH
STREET RIGHT -OF -WAY PROJECT.
Councilmember Plunkett complimented Mr. Bowman and Mayor Haakenson for their extra effort in
resolving this situation.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 7
Signage 9. DISCUSSION OF THE SIGNAGE ELEMENT OF THE PROPOSED REVISED PROCESS AND
Element of GUIDELINES FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW
Revised
Process and
Guidelines - Senior Planner Steve Bullock explained the purpose of the code amendment was to streamline the
Architectural process for reviewing the design for signs and issuing the building permits to allow construction of those
Design
eview signs. To accomplish that, additional language was proposed in the sign code, Chapter 20.60 to provide
direction to staff and applicants regarding the appearance of signs in different areas of the City. He noted
the Architectural Design Board (ADB), when reviewing signs in the past, used different criteria for signs
in different areas. That criteria was included in the Design Guidelines previously reviewed by the
Council and because the Council expressed support for that portion, staff inserted the table of criteria
into the sign code. Along with the table, modification to code language would also be required to allow
staff in some instances to review signs and make administrative approvals. Further, minor changes were
required to Chapter 19.45 regarding sign permits as they relate to building permits. He advised that in
some instances, the code required ADB review of certain signs.
Councilmember Dawson observed much of the revisions were not controversial other than whether signs
should be reviewed by staff or the ADB and the sign height change. She noted the action required of the
Council tonight was only to set a public hearing. Mr. Bullock agreed, noting that if the Council had a
unified position on revising the draft ordinance for the public hearing and wanted to direct staff with
regard to specific code language, that could also be done tonight.
Councilmember Petso asked whether the ordinance addressed the problem that Firdale merchants have
with A -board signs. Mr. Bullock answered A- boards were addressed via a lengthy code amendment
process in the past and the proposed revisions did not address that issue. As an aside, Mr. Bullock
explained the Development Services Division was working with the property manager and tenants of
Firdale Village to address their concerns and assist them in acquiring signage that met their needs. He
clarified the proposed revised process would not allow Firdale Village tenants to display A -board signs.
With regard to staff review of signs versus ADB review, Councilmember Petso asked whether staff's
review would be purely technical based on dimensions, etc., or would staff have the ability to reject a
sign that was in bad taste. Mr. Bullock stated the provisions contained specific language indicating if
staff had concern regarding a sign such as if it was deemed garish or incompatible with a neighborhood,
it could be denied or forwarded to the ADB for review.
Councilmember Petso referred to the matrix and inquired whether all signs complied with the matrix or
would some be grandfathered in. Mr. Bullock answered there would be signs that would be non-
conforming based on the matrix. He noted the matrix was never put in writing until the design review
process when the Planning Board and ADB had a joint meeting to discuss how the ADB reviewed signs.
He noted the matrix was the ADB's written description of how they judge signs.
Councilmember Petso referred to the matrix, observing internal illumination signs were not allowed in
the Westgate corner. She inquired whether that would result in most of the signs in that area becoming
non - conforming. Mr. Bullock agreed it would.
Councilmember Petso observed neon signs were allowed in the Westgate corner but internally
illuminated signs were not. Mr. Bullock agreed. Councilmember Petso asked staff to provide a list of
what signs would become non - conforming with the adoption of the matrix to assist in possibly changing
"not permitted" to "conditionally permitted through design review." Mr. Bullock agreed. He asked for
clarification if Councilmember Petso wanted the list prior to the public hearing. Councilmember Petso
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 8
advised having the list in the packet for the hearing was acceptable. She was also hopeful staff would
provide sufficient notice so that those affected by the change would attend the public hearing.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO
SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 4 REGARDING THE PROPOSED REVISED
PROCESS AND GUIDELINES FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW OF SIGNAGE
ELEMENTS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Haakenson had no report.
11. INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEEBOARD MEETINGS
ouncil Council President Earling announced the Council retreat would be held February 7 -8 in the Brackett
Retreat Room of City Hall, 10:00 a.m. — 5:30 p.m. on February 7 and 9:00 a.m. — 3:00 p.m. on February 8. He
advised the Council would address financial issues as well as growth management issues at the retreat.
Community Council President Earling reiterated the service upgrades planned by Community Transit were an
ransit exciting enhancement for the citizens of Snohomish County.
Buildable Council President Earling recalled a conflict over the Buildable Lands Report between Snohomish
Lands County Tomorrow and the Snohomish County Council, advising the two reached consensus on a
Report compromise and adopted one plan to be forwarded to the State.
Council President Earling advised the Medic
member as Medic 7 winds down its operations.
Re—di7cT--1
Board
7 Board requested Mayor Haakenson be appointed as a
COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO
APPOINT MAYOR HAAKENSON TO THE MEDIC 7 BOARD AND COUNCILMEMBER
DAWSON AS AN ALTERNATE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Historic Councilmember Plunkett reported the Historic Preservation Commission completed its application to
Preservation become a Certified Local Government and hoped to be recognized as such in 3 -4 weeks. Once
Commission recognized as a Certified Local Government, a grant would be submitted to fund a professional inventory
of historic properties. Once the inventory was developed, the Commission would have the tools to
designate properties, in cooperation with the property owners, and provide incentives to property owners
for preserving historic buildings /sites and ultimately preserve the character of the community.
Shoreline Councilmember Petso requested staff update the Council on a resident's comment last week regarding a
Permit for Shoreline permit the ferry was to obtain as well as a sign on SR -104. Development Services Director
he Ferry Duane Bowman advised information regarding the sign was being finalized and would be included in the
Council packet. With regard to the Shoreline permit, Mr. Bowman advised he reviewed the Shoreline
decision and determined WSDOT let their permit expire and must, under the terms of the permit, file for
an extension, file a new application, or file a permanent application. Representatives from WSDOT have
indicated they will apply for a new Shoreline permit to reinstate their former permit by February 7. Mr.
Bowman advised he informed WSDOT that if the application was not submitted by February 7,
enforcement action would begin on February 8.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 9
monds I Councilmember Dawson advised she also attended the Edmonds Crossing open house last week where
rossmg there were many different points of view expressed, both positive and negative. She suggested
Community Services Director Stephen Clifton provide the same presentation to the Council and the
Council take public comment.
Health Councilmember Marin reported on the activities of the Snohomish County Health District. He referred
District to newspaper articles that have indicated reluctance by some healthcare providers throughout the nation
to receive the smallpox vaccination, reporting the Snohomish County Health District has 40 volunteers
willing to be vaccinated. The Health District also discussed policies for assisting those individuals
should they have any complications as a result of the vaccination. Councilmember Marin indicated he
requested Edmonds be one of the first to receive the West Nile Virus protection presentation when it
became available.
ort
IC ommission Councilmember Wilson reported he attended the Port Commission meeting on January 27.
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
GARY H NSON, MAYOR
SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 28, 2003
Page 10
J
Revised 1124103 at 2:00 p.m.
Agenda
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex
250 5t" Avenue North
7:00 - 10:00 p.m.
January 28, 2003
7:00 p.m. - Call to Order
Flag Salute
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Consent Agenda Items
(A) Roll Call
(B) Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of January 21, 2003.
(C) Approval of claim checks #60448 through #60602 for the week of January 20,
2003, in the amount of $966,069.52.
(D) Authorization for Mayor to sign Addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services
Agreement with Cosmopolitan Engineering Group for the Sewer Outfall -
Cathodic Protection Project.
3. ( 5 Min.) Proclamation in honor of Arts Day, February 11, 2003.
4. ( 5 Min.) Update on Community Transit service expansion.
S. (20 Min.) Report on Permit Streamlining by the Snohomish County Economic
Development Council.
6. Audience Comments (3 Minute Limit Per Person)*
*Regarding matters not listed as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings.
7. (15 Min.) Executive Session regarding a real estate matter.
8. (10 Min.) Discussion on funding 164th Street right -of -way project.
9. (30 Min.) Discussion of the signage element of the proposed revised process and
guidelines for architectural design review.
Page 1 of 2
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
January 28, 2003
Page 2 of 2
10. ( 5 Min.) Mayor's Comments '
11. (15 Min.) Individual Council reports on outside committee /board meetings.
ADJOURN
Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities.
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 AT &T Cable, Channel 21.