Loading...
07/01/2003 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES July 1, 2003 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5d' Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Dave Earling, Council President Jeff Wilson, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Richard Marin, Councilmember Deanna Dawson, Councilmember 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT David Stern, Chief of Police Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director Jim Larson, Assistant Admin. Serv. Director Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Dave Gebert, City Engineer Brian McIntosh, Asst. Parks and Recreation Dir. Frances Chapin, Cultural Resources Coordinator Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Petso requested Items F and G be removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilmembers Wilson and Dawson requested Item F be removed and Councilmember Marin requested Item E be removed. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, FOR APPROVAL OF THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL Approve 6/24/03 Minutes (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 24, 2003 pprove laim (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #63562 THROUGH #63697 FOR THE WEEK OF becks JUNE 23, 2003, IN THE AMOUNT OF $102,502.37. Addendum 4 (D) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN ADDENDUM #4 TO C112M HILL to CH2M ill Agree - PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT. ent Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 1, 2003 Page I J 1 Item E: Reappointment of Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Member James Monroe Councilmember Marin explained he pulled this item to bring to the Council's attention the great work done by the PFD Board, particularly by Board Member James Monroe. Reappoint COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, FOR FD Board Member APPROVAL OF ITEM E. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The item approved is as follows: (E) REAPPOINTMENT OF EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT BOARD MEMBER JAMES MONROE Item F: Approval of Findings of Fact for a Closed Record Review Held before the City Council on May 27, 2003 of an Application by Phoenix Development, Inc. for a Planned Residential Development and Formal Plat. The Site is Zoned Single - Family Residential (RS -8), and is Located at 8512, 8516, 8520 and 8526 Main Street. (File No. PRD- 2002 -171 and P- 2002 -172) Councilmember Petso advised she voted against this item on May 27, 2003 and planned to vote against it again tonight. Councilmember Wilson advised he would abstain from the vote as he did not participate in the public hearing due to his absence from the May 27, 2003 City Council meeting. Councilmember Dawson disqualified herself from this item due to inadvertent ex parte communication she had with a neighbor. Although she did not feel it would influence her vote, upon the advice of the City Attorney, she disqualified herself from the vote. 7ings of hoenix COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, FOR elopment APPROVAL OF ITEM F. MOTION CARRIED (4 -1 -2), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO OPPOSED and AND COUNCILMEMBERS WILSON AND DAWSON ABSTAINING. The item approved is as al Plat follows: (F) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT FOR A CLOSED RECORD REVIEW HELD BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL ON MAY 27, 2003 OF AN APPLICATION BY PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT, INC. FOR A PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND FORMAL PLAT. THE SITE IS ZONED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -8), AND IS LOCATED AT 8512, 8516, 8520 AND 8526 MAIN STREET. (File No. PRD- 2002 -171 and P- 2002 -172). Item G: Proposed Ordinance Amending the Provisions of the Edmonds Communitv Development Code to Repeal and Re -enact Chapter 20.10, Architectural Design Review, in Order to Address Issues Related to Review of Signs; Repealing and Re- enacting Chapter 10.60, Sign Code; Amending Chapter 19.45 Relating to Adoption of the Uniform Sign Code to Add a New Section 19.40.015 Relating to Exemptions: and Fixing a Time When the Same Shall Become Effective. Councilmember Petso explained that the proposed change in the ordinance would result in a number of existing signs being nonconforming and she preferred that consideration be given to other ways of streamlining procedures rather than making existing signs prohibited. She encouraged the Planning Board to consider alternate methods of streamlining the sign approval procedure, such as an easier process for straight - forward signs for which there was general agreement that they were appropriate for downtown, and establishing a less streamlined procedure for signs that were not encouraged in the downtown area. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 1, 2003 Page 2 COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM G. MOTION CARRIED (6 -1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO OPPOSED. The item approved is as follows: (G) ORDINANCE NO. 3461, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE EDMONDS Sign Coode de rd# 3 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO REPEAL AND RE -ENACT CHAPTER 20.10, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW, IN ORDER TO ADDRESS ISSUES RELATED TO REVIEW OF SIGNS; REPEALING AND RE- ENACTING CHAPTER 10.60, SIGN CODE; AMENDING CHAPTER 19.45 RELATING TO ADOPTION OF THE UNIFORM SIGN CODE TO ADD A NEW SECTION 19.40.015 RELATING TO EXEMPTIONS; AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. Recreation 3. PROCLAMATION IN RECOGNITION OF RECREATION AND PARKS MONTH, JULY 2003 and Parks Month Mayor Haakenson read a Proclamation declaring July as Recreation and Parks month in Edmonds and encouraging all citizens to celebrate by participating in their choice of recreational activities. Parks & Recreation Director Arvilla Ohlde commended her staff, including Recreation Coordinator Renee McRae, Cultural Resources Coordinator Frances Chapin, Assistant Parks and Recreation Director Brian McIntosh, and Arts Assistant Chris Gillespie. Ms. Ohlde commented on the numerous recreational activities available throughout the park system. She referred to a brochure, "Exploring Edmonds Parks," developed by intern Kate Gebert, that identified parks throughout the City and the amenities available at each. In Ms. Gebert's absence, her father, City Engineer Dave Gebert, accepted a Certificate of Appreciation on her behalf. 4. ANNUAL REPORT OF THE EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION Arts Commission Annual Arts Commission Chair Julie Toothaker commented it had been an exciting year for the arts in Edmonds. Report As part of its mission statement, the Edmonds Arts Commission was involved in literary, performing, and visual arts. She reported on the 17`h annual Write on the Sound held in fall 2002 which experienced the largest attendance ever. Due to increased interest, the conference will be expanded to a 3 -day conference in partnership with Edmonds Community College. Ms. Toothaker advised the Summer Concerts series would begin in City Park on July 15. She expressed the Commission's appreciation to Lynnwood Honda and Acura of Lynnwood for their sponsorship. She reported on the two concerts in the Winter Performing Art series and four visual art exhibit areas in the City for which the Arts Commission was responsible for selection of the artists and display of artwork. She advised the four display spaces were the two cases in the Frances Anderson Center, the Brackett Room at City Hall, and the library. Ms. Toothaker reported on the "Best Book I Ever Read" poster contest held each year that promoted both visual and literary arts. Ms. Toothaker explained another role of the Arts Commission was to grant funds from the Lodging Tax. From these funds, the Commission sponsored a Board Development Workshop and invited all arts organizations in Edmonds to participate. Their goal was to assist all art organizations and develop networking and communication between art organizations. She noted the common dilemma for all arts organizations and a major strategy of the workshop was sponsorships. On behalf of the Edmonds Art Commission, Ms. Toothaker thanked the Council for their continued support. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 1, 2003 Page 3 Iinned 5. PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENACTING dentiai EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) CHAPTER 20.35 RELATING TO elopment PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (PRD); AMENDING ECDC SECTION 16.20.030, TABLE OF SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS; REPEALING ECDC 20.16.010(A)(4) RELATING TO HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATIONS• AMENDING ECDC 20.20.015 TO ADD A NEW SECTION (D) PROHIBITING CERTAIN HOME OCCUPATIONS IN PRDS; AMENDING ECDC CHAPTER 20.21 TO ADD A NEW SECTION 20.21.010 PROHIBITING ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS IN PRDS. Council President Earling referred to his statement at the last meeting that there had been 40 City Council and Planning Board meetings, correcting this to 20 meetings. City Attorney Scott Snyder explained the public hearing had been advertised as limiting comment to testimony regarding the prohibition of home occupations with outside employees and accessory dwelling units (ADU) in PRDs. He recalled advising the Council previously because as these elements had been added following the close of the public hearing, had not been subject to prior notification, and amended two new sections of the Code, a public hearing on those items would be required. He noted that requirement arose in RCW 36.70A.035 which required an opportunity for public comment prior to approval of a development regulation. He noted other non - substantive changes the Council made following the close of the public hearing were clarification of language such as a request for a cross reference and adding criteria that referenced grasscrete for paving. He noted an additional public hearing was not required on non - substantive changes and referenced RCW 36.70A.035.E1, 2 and 3. Mr. Snyder summarized that the hearing notice was consistent with the Council's minimum obligation. Mr. Snyder noted interest had been expressed by some Councilmembers in expanding the public hearing. At the Mayor's suggestion, he outlined the alternatives available to the Council — hold the public hearing on the subjects that were advertised (as public testimony had been provided previously on the remainder of the ordinance) or, if the Council wished to consider broader testimony, either continue the public hearing to take all testimony at a later date or hold the public hearing on the subject advertised and hold a broader public hearing at a later date. He cautioned against allowing informal broadening of the scope of the hearing tonight by not ruling speakers out of order. Councilmember Dawson reiterated the point she made at last week's Council meeting, that although not legally required to hold a public hearing on the broader topics, her June 3 motion was to hold a public hearing on the entire ordinance, a motion that was approved unanimously by the Council. However, tonight's public hearing was advertised on a more narrow subject matter. She pointed out the Council still needed to hold the public hearing they unanimously voted to hold unless Councilmembers wished to reconsider their vote on that motion. Mr. Snyder recalled his discussion with Council President Earling regarding the issue of limiting testimony at the public hearing; his interpretation was that the intent of the public hearing was to address the two issues raised following the previous public hearing. Councilmember Petso agreed with Councilmember Dawson that the motion was to hold a public hearing on the entire ordinance. She recalled changes were made last week to the manner in which tonight's public hearing was advertised, limiting testimony to specific topics, leaving the public with the impression that a public hearing would still be held on the entire ordinance. She suggested allowing testimony tonight on the specific topics and scheduling another public hearing on the entire ordinance on a future date. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 1, 2003 Page 4 Planning Manager Rob Chave explained this was a public hearing limited to the two provisions that were not considered previously: 1) prohibit ADUs in PRDs, and 2) prohibit home occupations that employ someone outside the resident family in PRDs. He noted other than those two changes, the ordinance remained the same as discussed at previous public hearings and meetings. Councilmember Petso inquired whether the proposed amendments were prospective — whether the proposed change would impact a resident in an existing PRD who had installed an ADU or already operating a home occupation with outside employees. Mr. Chave answered legally established uses would be grandfathered. Councilmember Petso asked whether a subsequent property owner would be bound by the restriction and, for example, could not start a home occupation with outside employees. Mr. Snyder answered yes as home occupations were generally personal to the person operating it. He urged citizens with a home occupation or ADU to obtain a license as the use must be legally established in order for them to enjoy grandfathering rights. Councilmember Petso asked whether any special notice should be provided to PRD residents with a home occupation with outside employees or an ADU. Mr. Snyder answered no, citing a recent Court of Appeals case. Councilmember Petso expressed concern that a PRD resident with a home occupation with outside employees may not be aware that tonight's meeting would include discussion regarding their rights. She inquired whether direct notice could be provided to directly impacted residents. Mr. Snyder answered the City could provide notice if it desired but it was not legally required. He noted this was an issue recently addressed by the Court of Appeals that determined special notice of generalized zoning changes was not required to be given even to non - resident property owners. Councilmember Wilson commented if a PRD resident was operating a home occupation with outside employees or had an ADU, they were either 1) legally established and would be grandfathered, 2) illegally established and there was an enforcement action underway, or 3) unknown to the City. He noted the residents in the third group may be the appropriate ones to notify but that was not possible as they were unknown to the City. Mr. Chave advised notice would be provided when a PRD was approved or a resident inquired about an ADU. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Don Kreiman, 24006 95th Place W, Edmonds, supported Councilmember Orvis' amendment not to allow ADUs or home occupations within a PRD. He displayed an example of what he alleged was a poorly developed PRD at 6th & Bell, six rectangular 2 -story buildings separated by a sidewalk. He recalled on October 15, 2002, the Council supported the Hearing Examiner's decision (via a 5 -2 vote) to approve the PRD. He noted there was no opportunity for public comment or scrutiny as there were no parties of record other than the developer and his attorney. He noted the two attorneys on the Council felt the developer did not comply with the PRD regulations. He quoted Councilmember Dawson's comments at the time, "if this was approved as a PRD, what wouldn't be approved as a PRD in the future ?" He emphasized the need for public involvement to ensure that such development did not occur in neighborhoods. He questioned the ability for a developer to purchase a lot, remove all trees, and "put up as many houses as they can" without any opportunity for public comment to the City Council. He urged the Council not to approve the amended PRD ordinance, in the belief it would lead to more poorly designed developments. He concluded GMA did not require the proposed PRD amendments, the citizens did not want it, and the attorneys on the Council as well as the City Attorney warned Councilmembers that the amendments may not pass legal muster. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 1, 2003 Page 5 Betty Mueller, 209 Casper Street, Edmonds, supported not allowing home occupations or ADUs in PRDs. She was also opposed to the review of PRDs by the Hearing Examiner rather than the City Council and opposed to the appeal to Superior Court. Mr. Snyder noted that although two Councilmembers stated their opinion that a future public hearing should be held, there had not been a motion for a public hearing on the entire ordinance. He noted the testimony was beginning to enter into that broader area and, if the Council allowed it, he recommended advertising for another public hearing on the entire ordinance. He suggested the Council either enforce the limitation on testimony or make a motion to hold a second public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON, TO HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER THAT WAS ADVERTISED AS AN OPEN PUBLIC HEARING ON ALL AREAS OF THE PRD ORDINANCE INCLUDING THE CHANGES BEING DISCUSSED TONIGHT. Councilmember Wilson recalled Mr. Snyder's advice was either not to open tonight's public hearing to the broader issues or advertise for an additional public hearing. Mr. Snyder agreed, noting some members of the public who rely on meeting notice would not be aware that testimony on the broader issue was being accepted tonight. He pointed out that whether the Council opened the public hearing tonight to comment on the entire ordinance or continued the public hearing, if any testimony outside of the issues that were advertised was allowed, a second public hearing would need to be scheduled. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the Planning Board minutes contained in the packet were part of the record and could be considered by the Council. Mr. Snyder answered yes, recalling that the Council requested the Planning Board minutes. He noted this was not a quasi judicial issue and the Council could consider the portion of the minutes that were relevant. Councilmember Dawson clarified if any testimony was allowed on topics outside what was advertised, another public hearing would be required. She noted the last two speakers appeared to have already done that. Mr. Snyder commented that was the reason he raised the issue. Councilmember Dawson concluded since it had already occurred, another public hearing would be required. Mr. Snyder commented that because this was a legislative issue, the Council could exclude the portions of the comments that were not relevant to the topics advertised; however, if allowed to continue, it began to look like a due process violation. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4 -3), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, DAWSON, WILSON, AND COUNCILMEMBER MARIN IN FAVOR, AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, AND COUNCILMEMBERS ORVIS AND PLUNKETT OPPOSED. Mayor Haakenson inquired whether testimony tonight should be limited to the two topics that were advertised. Mr. Snyder answered yes, noting an alternative would be that anyone speaking tonight on the entire ordinance would not have an opportunity to speak at the next public hearing. He concluded it was up to the Council to decide. Councilmember Petso expressed her preference to allow the members of the public present to testify regarding the two issues that were advertised and accept testimony on all issues at the upcoming public hearing. Councilmember Wilson indicated his preference would be to allow those present to speak on all issues as two speakers had already done so. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 1, 2003 Page 6 Councilmember Dawson commented it would be easiest to allow people to decide for themselves whether they wanted to speak tonight or speak at a future public hearing. She noted it may be appropriate to allow the two speakers who already testified to speak at the future public hearing inasmuch as they attempted to limit their testimony to the advertised topics. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO OPEN TESTIMONY TONIGHT AND THOSE WHO CHOSE TO SPEAK TONIGHT UNDER THE OPEN FORMAT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO SPEAK AT THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. As both Mr. Kreiman and Ms. Mueller indicated they limited their comment tonight and would like an opportunity to speak at a public hearing on the entire ordinance, Councilmembers agreed it would be appropriate to allow Mr. Kreiman and Ms. Mueller an opportunity to speak at the future public hearing. July 22 was originally selected as the date of the public hearing on the entire ordinance; at Mr. Kreiman's request, the date of the public hearing was changed to August 5 to allow him an opportunity to speak at the public hearing. Mayor Haakenson also inquired of the audience's availability on August 5. Mayor Haakenson asked the next speaker, Diane Azar, whether she wished to speak tonight or at the future public hearing. Ms. Azar answered if she had only one opportunity to speak, she would wait until the public hearing on the entire ordinance. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, commented that since others would be allowed to speak at both public hearings, he challenged limiting his testimony at the August 5 public hearing. He agreed ADUs and home occupations should not be allowed in PRDs. He noted there had been a great deal of public testimony and a majority of it agreed the review by the City Council should not be changed. He expressed concern that Councilmembers appeared to have their minds made up with the exception of Councilmember Petso and Dawson, regarding the Hearing Examiner versus the City Council making the final decision on PRDs. He expressed concern that the public process had been interfered with, alleging that Council President Earling had "illegally" tampered with the process. He asserted that the Council was ignoring public testimony and determining on its own what was good for the community. Ray Martin, 18704 94th Avenue W, Edmonds, indicated he intended to speak next week also. He commented Council President Earling was intruding into the Mayor and City Clerk's responsibilities by limiting public testimony at the public hearing. He noted there were parking issues associated with ADUs and home occupations in PRDs. He commented the public had had 2 -3 opportunities to speak regarding the Hearing Examiner and the majority were against the Hearing Examiner making the final decision. He objected to the Council going against public sentiment. Sandra Radcliff Beck, 723 Hanna Park Road, Edmonds, asked how many of the 20 meetings Council President Earling referred to accepted public testimony. Mr. Snyder advised the public could testify and ask questions; it was up to the Council whether to respond. She recalled that of the two previous public hearings, one accepted public testimony and one did not. Tonight's public hearing was the third public hearing and the fourth would be the public hearing scheduled for August 5. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, commented the Council should have attended Planning Board meeting regarding the PRD ordinance. He commented that the Council got into trouble this evening due to lack of experience. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 1, 2003 Page 7 Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. For those members of the public planning to return for the next public hearing, Councilmember Petso advised the Council packet included a concise comparison of the City Council versus the Hearing Examiner making the final decision. She requested copies be available at the front desk of City Hall so that the public could direct their testimony to the pros and cons of that issue. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO AUGUST 5. Councilmember Plunkett indicated his intent was that the public hearing be open to testimony from anyone including those who testified this evening. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Snyder advised the City Clerk would re- advertise the August 5 public hearing as a hearing on the entire ordinance rather than the limited notice associated with a continued public hearing. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS vy Lid Lift Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, recommended the campaign in support of the levy lid lift be started sooner than August or September. Don Kreiman, 24006 95th Place W, Edmonds, pointed out the importance of residents having an opportunity to speak to the Council which he felt was not happening now. He indicated his intent to run for a Council position because of his belief in allowing residents an opportunity to speak to the Council. ions He envisioned that if the PRD ordinance passed, the Councilmembers responsible would not be returned ecis . to office. He pointed out the public did not support the Hearing Examiner making the decision on PRDs, but the Council did not appear to be listening. ihzen Finis Tupper, 711 Daly Street, Edmonds, recalled when the Salary Commission held a public hearing articipation on why people don't run for public office, he testified regarding citizen participation and how over the past 15 years, the City had slowly changed the process to limit citizen participation. He cited GMA goals that encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process, indicating that limiting citizen participation was contrary to GMA goals. He recalled when the Community Development Code was being developed, meetings would extend until 1:00 a.m. and they were difficult hearings that did not have a three minute limit on public. testimony. He recalled the original Community Development Code included a Chapter 15 that addressed the policies, goals, and vision of the City but this section was later repealed. He requested the Council clarify their intent and vision. He concluded that what was happening in the City was that the Council was "building the tenements of the future." Peter Beck, 723 Hanna Park Road, Edmonds, accused the Council of hypocrisy, recalling Mayor Haakenson asked Ms. Azar if she wanted to speak and then when she decided to wait to provide her testimony at the next public hearing, the Council changed the rules and allowed everyone to speak again at the August 5 public hearing. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 1, 2003 Page 8 ashington Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, commented the Washington Tea Party, previously Tea Party involved in Brightwater, was campaigning for a group of Council and Port candidates. He questioned why those candidates, who were present in the audience tonight, did not provide testimony. He invited the Washington Tea Party members and candidates to speak on the issues. ashington Ray Martin, 18704 94`h Avenue W, Edmonds, referred to the GMA which encouraged public IT ea Party participation. He commented the Washington Tea Party did a great job with regard to Brightwater and he encouraged that group not to become a political party. Sandra Radcliff Beck, 723 Hanna Park Road, Edmonds, encouraged the Council to think about the citizens of Edmonds and not to make decisions that citizens should be making. She commented the citizens of Edmonds believed in the Council and should be given a reason to continue to believe. 7. MAYOR'S COMMENTS f Mayor Haakenson had no report. 8. COUNCIL COMMENTS ealth Councilmember Marin advised of the availability of a brochure from the Snohomish County Health istnet District, "Health Services for Travelers" that provided information about health precautions when traveling to foreign countries. xcused COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO hsence EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER MARIN FROM THE JUNE 17 AND JUNE 24 COUNCIL MEETINGS. MOTION CARRIED (6 -1 -0), COUNCILMEMBER MARIN ABSTAINED. With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. roI 7MWi ENSON, MAYOR oe SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes July 1, 2003 Page 9 1 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 51h Avenue North 7:00 - 10:00 p.m. JULY 11 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 June 24, 2003. (C) Approval of claim checks #63562 through #63697 for the week of June 23, 2003, in the amount of $102,502.37. (D) Authorization for the Mayor to sign Addendum #4 to CH2M Hill Professional Services Agreement. (E) Reappointment of Edmonds Public Facilities District Board Member James Monroe. (F) Approval of Findings of Fact for a closed record review held before the City Council on May 27, 2003 of an application by Phoenix Development, Inc. for a Planned Residential Development and Formal Plat. The site is zoned Single Family Residential (RS -8), and is located at 8512, 8516, 8520 and 8526 Main Street. (File No. PRD- 2002 -171 and P- 2002 -172). (G) Proposed Ordinance amending the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code to repeal and re -enact Chapter 20.10, Architectural Design Review, in order to address issues related to review of signs; repealing and re- enacting Chapter 10.60, Sign Code; amending Chapter 19.45 relating to adoption of the Uniform Sign Code to add a new Section 19.40.015 relating to exemptions; and fixing a time when the same shall become effective. 3. ( 5 Min.) Proclamation in recognition of Recreation and Parks Month, July 2003. 4. ( 5 Min.) Annual Report of the Edmonds Arts Commission. Page 1 of 2 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA JULY 1, 2003 Paqe 2 of 2 Special Note: The public testimony on the following public hearing regarding a proposed Planned Residential Development Ordinance will be limited to specific topics. The City Council passed a motion on June 24, 2003 to request that testimony be received only related to new sections covering home occupations (20.20.015) and accessory dwelling units (20.21.010). 5. (60 Min.) Public Hearing on a proposed ordinance repealing and reenacting Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) Chapter 20.35 relating to Planned Residential Development (PRD); amending ECDC Section 16.20.030, Table of Site Development Standards; repealing ECDC 20.16.010(A)(4) relating to Hearing Examiner recommendations; amending ECDC 20.20.015 to add a new Section (D) prohibiting certain home occupations in PRDs; amending ECDC Chapter 20.21 to add a new Section 20.21.010 prohibiting accessory dwelling units in PRDs. 6. Audience Comments (3 Minute Limit Per Person)* *Regarding matters not listed as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings. 7. ( 5 Min.) Mayor's Comments 8. (15 Min.) Council Comments ADJOURN r� 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 cable television Government Access Channel 21.