Loading...
02/06/1996 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES FEBRUARY 6, 1996 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Barbara Fahey in the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main Street, followed by the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Barbara Fahey, Mayor Dave Earling, Council President Tom Petruzzi, Councilmember Roger L. Myers, Councilmember Jim White, Councilmember Dick Van Hollebeke, Councilmember Gary Haakenson, Councilinember ABSENT John Nordquist, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Nick Zitzmarm, Student Representative 1. APPROVAL OF AGEND STAFFPRESENT Michael Springer, Fire Chief Tom Miller, Police Chief Paul Mar, Community Services Director Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Manager Art Housler, Administrative Services Director Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor James Walker, City Engineer Larry Hard, Acting City Attorney Scott Snyder, City Attorney (9:05 p.m.) Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jeannie Dines, Recorder Mayor Fahey requested a 15 minute Executive Session be added to the end of the meeting for discussion of a legal matter. PC P P COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER. CY0 - MYERS, TO ADD AN EXECUTIVE SESSION ON A LEGAL MATTER TO THE END OF THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Council President Earling requested a 15 minute agenda item be added as Item 6a for discussion of the Ferry Terminal Overhead Loading Project's Determination of Non -significance. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, TO f e0:1 ADD ITEM 6A TO THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION OF THE FERRY TERMINAL OVERHEAD LOADING PROJECT'S DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Petruzzi pulled Item D and Councilmember Myers pulled Item 1. City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page I I I I I COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, FOR PASSAGE OF THE REMAINDER'OF THE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS. The agenda items passed are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 30,1996 ro (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #3298S THRU #7138F FOR THE WEEK OF A JANUARY 29,1996 IN THE AMOUNT OF $382,429.20 $4AAR (E) APPROVAL OF 1996 TAXI LICENSE RENEWAL FOR NORTH END TAXI (I) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT WITH po-r THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR 'q4x0r OBLIGATION OF FEDERAL FUNDING FOR REHABILITATION OF 76TH AVENUE WEST FROM 196TH STREET SW TO 212TH STREET SW (G) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR OBLIGATION OF FEDERAL FUNDING FOR REHABILITATION OF 9TH AVENUE NORTH FROM CASPERS STREET TO MAIN STREET (H) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT WITH b 0-f C14r THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR OBLIGATION OF FEDERAL FUNDING FOR REHABILITATION OF 100TH AVENUE WEST FROM 224TH STREET TO 238TH STREET SW sorf 6,*LL (J) AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE NINETY-EIGHT (98) DOZEN SOFTBALLS FOR ? tpq 50 THE RECREATION DIVISION SOFTBALL LEAGUES FROM A. D. STARR ($2,641.10) (K) RESOLUTION NO. 836 EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF LID 214 (L) RESOLUTION NO. 837 SETTING A NEW HEARING DATE FOR LID 214 Councilmember Petruzzi pulled Item D as he did not attend the January 16, 1996 meeting and noted he would need to abstain from voting on this item. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, FOR PASSAGE OF ITEM D OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI ABSTAINING. The item approved is as follows: (D) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING of THE APPLICATION OF CARL PEARSON FOR SHORT SUBDIVISION (File Nos. S-8-87 and AP-93-110) Regarding Item 1, Councilmember Myers requested this item be discussed by the Finance Committee and returned to the Council the following week. City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 2 COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI, TO PLACE ITEM I ON THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AGENDA FOR NEXT WEEK. MOTION CARRIED. The item deferred is as follows: (1) AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE ONE PICK-UP TRUCK FOR THE PARK MAINTENANCE SECTION AND ONE FLAT BED TRUCK FOR THE STREET SECTION FROM THE WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT ($37,000) 3. AUDIENCE Jack L. Patterson, 3104 176th Street S`W, Lynnwood, described his near -accident with a train in .ff,f,114 Edmonds on October 13, 1995 near the ferry landing. While attempting to turn onto Railroad Avenue from Main Street, ferry traffic prohibited him from completing his turn and his vehicle was stopped on the tracks when the train crossing warning signs activated. He was scarcely able to pull out of the way of the tracks to allow the train to pass. He has talked with Burlington Northern, the former and present Mayor and feels something should be done to control traffic in this area. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, said the State will close the comment period of the foAq Determination of Non -Significance for the overhead loading and widening of the ferry dock on February Dve,K 9, 1996. He asked the Council to offer comments to the State indicating the Determination of Non - Significance should be revised and considered a significant effect to citizens. Carl Pearson, 8227 229th SW, Edmonds, asked the status of Consent Item D. Mayor Fahey advised it was pulled so one member could abstain and then passed. Mr. Pearson referred to a memo he distributed A ft this evening to the Council and noted the recommendation passed tonight had nothing to do with what he 06004 asked Council to consider which was the Hearing Examiner recommendation of July 15, 1993; the recommendation passed by the Council this evening was from July 19, 1994. He pointed out the UBC D allows the Council to interpret local provisions of the Code, specifically extensions of new building permits which was not considered in the Findings. He asked the Council to consider the Hearing Examiner's recommendation of July 15, 1993. Mel Critchley, 705 Driftwood Place, Edmonds, a member of the Citizens for Waterfront Access and Railroad Safety, reported Edmonds' image is being damaged by City officials who are more interested in making Edmonds a tourist destination and the Council's concern with the economic development as a result of the RTA. He reiterated the dangers of trains and urged the Council to protest the negligence of the railroad and the Department of Transportation who has allowed speed increases in spite of the obvious hazards. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, expressed concern with the possibility of increased y6op jS accidents as a result of the speed limit increases on the freeway. In addition, he suggested the Council 1 /10(.6 pass an ordinance prohibiting children from playing in the street. Estella Radu, 8629 238th Street SW, Edmonds, urged the City to consider the rezone of the annexations as she is attempting to sell her property and would like to have the property zoned multi- family as it is surrounded by apartments. She requested assistance in enforcement of the speed limit as speeding continues despite the 25 mph speed limit and the flags. Further, Ms. Radu expressed concern that women were not represented on the Council now that all Councilmembers were men. City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 3 Bill Kasper, 657 9th Avenue N, Edmoiridg, ieferred to the 4 No's set forth previously by Council and' A$1 reconfirmed by the City Councils and felt the 4 No's should be restated. He urged the Council to respond to the Determination of Non -Significance regarding the total blockage of views from the NW section, glare lights at night, and increased traffic. He noted there are three sections of the State Highway Commission - highways, marine, and railroads and felt an underpass could be provided through the National Railroad Safety Act. 4. HEARJNG -ON AN APPEAL BY WATERFRONT PARK ASSOCIATES, INC. OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISJON APPROVING A SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT F _S PARKS & RECREATION DIVISION FOR THE OR THE CITY OF EDMOND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPOSED BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH PARK LOCATED AT 100 RAILROAD AVENUE. UNDER FILE NO. SW-93-196 (Appellant: Waterfront Park Associates, Inc. / File No. AP-95-109 / Applicant/Appell�e: City of Edmonds Parks and Recreation Division) Mayor Fahey explained this matter is quasi judicial and introduced Larry Hard who is acting as counsel for the City because Scott Snyder, City Attorney, has functioned as a witness and cannot fill his role as the City's attorney. Council President Earling explained when this matter came before the Council previously, one of the partners of Waterfront Park Associates, Inc. had properties listed with his company. He no longer has any business affiliation with this individual; therefore he did not feel a conflict existed. Mayor Fahey described the procedures and time limits for each participant in the hearing. There were no conflicts disclosed by Councilmembers or challenge by the audience. Acting City Attorney Hard administered an oath to individuals participating in the hearing. Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor, displayed an overhead identifying the proposed site and surrounding properties. He explained the proposed project is Shoreline Substantial Development of approximately 2.36 acres into a passive use park. Development of the site would include grass areas, picnic tables, benches, signage, and paved walking areas. This project began in October 1993 and a Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS) was issued by the City on December 7, 1993. On January 7, 1994, the City received an appeal of the MDNS from Waterfront Park Associates. The appeal was heard by the Hearing Examiner who made a recommendation to the Council. After holding a public hearing on the MDNS, the Council upheld the appeal and required a limited scope Environmental Impact State m*ent (EIS) limited to traffic and parking issues. Following the issuance of the final EIS, the City undertook the processing of the underlying Shoreline Permit which was revised to reflect the preparation of the EIS and the mitigation measure required by the EIS to address the issues regarding parking. Following a hearing, the Hearing Examiner issued approval of the Shoreline Substantial Development permit. An appeal of the Hearing Examiner's issuance of the Shoreline Substantial Development permit was submitted by Waterfront Park Associates with four primary issues. First, the Hearing Examiner did not properly apply the provisions of ECDS § 17.50.030(D), in determining the number of required parking . spaces. The appellant believes the Hearing Examiner effed in that no specific analysis was provided or made by the Community Development Director under ECDS § 17.50.020(D) to determine the most closely similar use for purposes of parking calculations. Mr. Wilson explained if there are no specific uses cited under the parking standards, the provision allows the Community Development Director to analyze the proposed development and its most similar use to determine the parking standard. The City followed this process in more detail than the staff analysis as it was addressed as part of the EIS. The second issue addressed by the appeal —the Hearing Examiner relied on an erroneous statement indicating that the subject property is connected to the Existing Brackett's Landing North Park by a City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 4 pedestrian trail. Even if this were the case, existing parking located on the Brackett's Landing North Park site is not adequate for both sites. Staff analysis of the appeal issue is that the appellant raised this issue as part of their earlier appeals in the environmental appeal process, challenging the parking standards for the project and requiring more detailed analysis of the project to determine the mitigation measures for potential impacts from the project. The final EIS analyzed the amount of available parking on the City's shoreline property, Brackett's Landing North, the Senior Center and the Fishing Pier parking lots, which the City has identified as part of a linear park system. The EIS found that adequate parking existed to serve all the park sites and identified mitigation measures to encourage alternative forms of transportation. Third, the Hearing Examiner's Finding of Fact D(4)b is in error because of the adverse impact which would be caused to the adjacent property to the south, owned by the appellant. Staff analysis indicates the EIS prepared for this proposed project, at the appellant' s request, does not support this conclusion — that the existing parking facilities are adequate to handle the proposed development. Fourth, the last issue addressed in the appeal, is that throughout the course of this application, the City of Edmonds Parks and Recreation Division has consistently relied upon other sites for the development of the proposed park. This development, like any other development, should be able to stand on its own two feet. Mr. Wilson explained the City treats the Parks Division like any other applicant. In the downtown waterfront area, there are a number of alternatives for meeting parking standards and parking is not required on -site. In response to Councilmember Petruzzi, Mr. Wilson advised the appellant did not appeal the adequacy of the EIS. The appellant did comment on the draft EIS and those comments were evaluated and responded to in the final EIS. Scott Snyder, Attorney with Ogden, Murphy and Wallace, 1601 Fifth Ave, Seattle, explained his presentation and testimony provided was acquired during representation of the City during two administrative appeals which resulted in his acquiring extensive knowledge of properties in the area as well as analysis of the various accidents on the train tracks. Due to time limitations, he did not address the staff report or EIS. He referred to a pre -hearing memorandum, noting the park is a step in the culmination of the Citys vision for the downtown waterfront as described in the Comprehensive Plan and the City's Downtown Waterfront Plan. He anticipated there would be questions raised regarding safety of the access and reserved comments for rebuttal to those concerns. He pointed out the City is taking a former boatyard operation with vehicular traffic out of the commercial inventory and questioned what safer, less intense use could be made of this property. The City and Councils have repeatedly expressed concern with the confluence and congestion of traffic. If the Shoreline Management Park for a passive use park is not approved, what other uses could the property have? He stressed the City is proposing to remove a commercial activity which is a magnet for traffic, and replace it with a passive use park which is partially served by existing parking that is separated from the park by the ferry dock. The proposed project is an attempt by the City to follow through on its commitment of alternative means of transportation —the Comprehensive Plan includes a bike and walkway plan. Mr. Snyder identified several other plans which discourage impervious service, encourage alternative forms of transportation, and encourage passive recreational use in the area. The proposed project complies with the Comprehensive Plan by 1) relieving the existing burden on the waterfront, 2) reducing impervious surface and 3) reducing congestion in the area thereby providing some degree of safety. It also complies with the City's vision for the area and fulfills the Council purpose for the area by limiting the use of that property to discourage expansion of the commercial -like use of the property to the south. City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 5 Arvilla Oblde, Parks and Recreation Manager, explained the site is the former site of Anderson Marine, 1.0 acre of tidelands and 1.3 acres of upland/shoreland and 267 feet of waterfront. The Brackett's Landing South site is the largest last parcel of saltwater shoreline available within the developed area of Edmonds that can be used for passive waterfront access and is a missing link in the linear waterfront park system. Of the 26,000 linear feet of saltwater shoreline in Edmonds, only 10% is available for public access. Tile development of this site allows for the continuation of the existing public waterfront sites—Brackett's Landing North, the Senior Center, the Olympic Beach, the Public Fishing Pier, the Port's public boat access and Marina Beach. The Brackett's Landing South site is flat with a panoramic view of the Puget Sound and minimal grading and beach disturbance will be necessary for the development of the site. She described the passive park amenities, noting they do not include buildings or parking. The intertidal beaches are protected by City ordinances as marine sanctuaries and the Beach Ranger program will use the area for on -site education of the inter -tidal life of Puget Sound. The site is along the City's bike and pathway route and is served by Community Transit, vehicular traffic will be accommodated in the three City lots located west of Railroad Avenue—Bracketes Landing North, the Senior Center and the Fishing Pier Parking lot. She concluded the proposed site is a vital link in providing waterfront access to the public. Kevin Hanchett, 1111 Daley Place, Edmonds, a shareholder in the corporation which owns the commercial property south of the proposed site (Waterfront Park Associates, Inc.) reiterated they had no objection to a park on the site but requested the City develop the site responsibly, consistent with the type of requirements imposed on other developers in the City. He pointed out the reference throughout the process of park development to the parking lots off -site servicing this site, with primary emphasis on the Brackett's Landing North site and access via the pedestrian trail. He pointed out the connecting pedestrian trail between Bracketf s Landing North and South does not exist and described the route for park users to access the site. He stressed the City's development of this site must comply with ECDS § 17.50.030(D) which requires the City's development of recreation facilities not interfere with the public rights of adjacent property owners. He referred to the memorandum submitted to the City in support of the applicant's position states (page 4) that parking is indisputably a problem in the waterfront area, a fact he agrees with. A traffic study submitted to the Hearing Examiner, conducted by Gibson Traffic Consultants, concluded that the Brackett' s Landing North parking lot is at full capacity as it currently exists. The Senior Center testified at the Hearing Examiner's hearing and indicated their concern with limited parking for seniors. The Senior Center lease prohibits the City's use of that lot if it interferes with the regular activities and programs of the Senior Center —the record indicates the existing uses of the parks interfere with the Center's activities. Mr. Hanchett stated that Don Stay, on behalf of the Port, was in support of the park as it would shift the traffic problem from the port side to this side. The EIS determined a LOS of B for Main Street, Railroad Avenue and SR 104 during non -peak time (non ferry loading and unloading times). The Gibson Traffic Study determined, at best, a LOS of C which they indicate will continue to worsen as ferry traffic increases. The EIS states the peak demand for this park will be 23 spaces and will generate 665 weekday trips and 680 weekend trips. He noted the memo in support of the applicant's position emphasized the City's encouragement of alternative means of transportation to the park but the EIS states that 79% of park users will use cars to access the park. The Washington State Ferry System raised its own concerns with the EIS and expressed concern with pedestrians walking across SR 104 due to the 5,500-6,500 vehicular trips across that intersection on a daily basis. He stressed the City would not allow a commercial use of this site that did not provide for on -site parking. He concluded that accommodations should be made in the park to accommodate the anticipated use as specified in the EIS. City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 6 Councilmember Petruzzi referred to page 264 of the Council packet which described mitigation measures to reduce traffic congestion and encouraged travel by other modes and noted the EIS determined there were no significant impacts that could not be mitigated. Mr. Hanchett pointed out that mitigation means there is an issue to be addressed. He referred to page 269 which indicates an anticipated peak parking requirement of 23 spaces for Bracketts Landing South and on page 270, the EIS indicates it is anticipated that 79% of the park users will utilize vehicles. He noted it was unclear whether the 23 spaces were necessary with the mitigation factors in place or whether it is the situation that will exist without mitigation. Councilmember White asked Mr. Hanchett to specifically describe the adverse impacts to the adjacent site. Mr. Hanchett described the access to the site via Brackett's Landing North which includes crossing SR 104. An alternative would be to park next door to the site, adjacent to the beach in their underground facility and walk quickly and safely to the park. He pointed out park visitors will use the closest, most convenient and safest parking lot which is located at the building owned by Waterfront Park Associates. Parking constraints already exist at that building and a clear detrimental impact will occur due to the likelihood the parking facility will be used by people patronizing the park. In response to Councilmember Petruzzi, Mr. Hanchett said there is not currently a problem with non - customers using their parking area. Councilmember Petruzzi suggested appropriate signage, possibly paid for by the City, be provided to prohibit parking for the park. Mr. Hanchett said this was explored but anticipation of enforcement difficulties did not make it feasible. City Clerk Chase advised Mr. Hanchett had four minutes to set aside for rebuttal. Mayor Fahey opened the public portion of the hearing. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, explained he has been involved and interested in the waterfront area since the first shoreline designation was set up and has a feel for the natural areas which can be saved. He agreed with Councilmember Petruzzi's suggestion for signage. He felt a conflict currently exists with customers for the Waterfront Park and the Senior Center and Waterfront Park is apprehensive they will lose the ability to use the Senior Center for business parking. He suggested an agreement be made between the City and the property owned by Waterfront Park Associates to provide a shoreline walkway to connect the Senior Center parking to this park and eventually a walkway along the waterfront. Parks on the waterfront are used by individuals who like the outdoors and want to walk. He noted parking is not a primary use on the waterfront according to the Code and the area is too valuable for additional paving. He recommended a widened drop-off area be provided for unloading. He believed parking on this site would likely equal the intrusion of the overhead walkway on the westward side, intrusion into a natural public area with similar impacts. Francis Murphy, 5804 168th SW, Lynnwood, Chair of the Brackett's Landing Foundation, advised there are young otters in the proposed park site. She agreed finding a parking space can sometimes be difficult but she is always able to find one. She objected to paving an "irreplaceable resource". She did not feel it was possible to satisfy the parking needs but felt this was acceptable as it indicated people liked the waterfront. Susie Schafer, 1055 Edmonds Street, Edmonds, identified herself as a walker and said no additional parking is needed in the waterfront area and this would encourage walking and preservation of wildlife. City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 7 Liz Sears, 9512 216th SW, Edmonds, recalled when she was a member of the Shoreline Advisory Committee years ago, citizens felt the waterfront was a very valuable asset to the community. She said she and a class from Edmonds Community College saw a baby seal on the site last summer and felt this site was too precious for an impervious surface that could possibly leach contaminants into the water. Paige Crutcher, 2623 NW 86th Street, Edmonds, commented the ability to ftame the dock on both sides with a park would be beneficial to the City in view of the fact the dock may one day be a pedestrian pier. She felt parking on the site would violate the space and pointed out the neighboring property owner will benefit from the park. Mr. Hanchett responded to issues raised. He agreed with Mr. Hertrich's and Ms. Murphy's experiences with traffic problems at the beach and noted this is a problem which is admitted by the City as a "critical parking problem." He also agreed the proposed park would be an asset to their building but the intent of the park is to attract people which will require access to it, therefore parking will be needed. He would be satisfied with ten parking spaces, the minimum identified by the EIS as well as one handicap accessible stall. He reiterated it is not permissible to develop a public recreation facility which will interfere with the private rights of adjacent properties. He pointed out the City has "painted themselves into a comer" as they applied for IAC funding, stating parking would not be included. He felt this was an issue the City had created when not considering the impact of the use on adjacent properties, the existifi g parking problem on the waterfront, or the need for parking as contained in the EIS. Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor, referred to Exhibit J, pages 342-345, which outlines the projects consistency with the local Shoreline Master program and the State Shoreline Management Act. He noted the parking impact mitigations identify in the EIS, include additional signage. He explained the first parking available to a driver is the Senior Center parking lot. The appellanVs parking is underground and less visible; therefore would be the least likely to be used by a casual passerby. The 23 spaces indicated in the EIS are the maximum number of spaces during a one hour peak use time period and the analysis found 73 parking spaces available in the three public City parking lots that are part of the linear system. The City has stated they are willing to put in a crosswalk across Main Street at the ferry terminal. He pointed out the traffic in the area is intermittent, a fact most pedestrians are aware of. The City's parking requirements in the downtown waterfront area do not require all parking be provided on the site, any applicant may provide parking within the downtown core. A comment letter from the Senior Center indicates the majority of their parking violators come from the building/restaurant to the north, ferry commuters and shoppers. He summarized the EIS prepared for the project adequately identifies available parking within the area to meet the City and the applicants needs for the Brackett's Landing South facility and there has not been substantiated proof of harm to the appellant's property. He believed the appellant had not proved the project was inconsistent with the Shoreline Master Plan or the goals and policy of the State Shoreline Management Act. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI -MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, TO EXTEND THE HEARING 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Scott Snyder responded to issues raised. Due to the terms of the grant, the City cannot provide on -site parking; the City Code for the'area does not require on -site parking and most downtown parking is provided off -site. The City currently provides spaces in excess of those required for the City's existing linear park system which are sufficient to meet the demand needs of this project. In examining 25 years of the City's accident record litigation has not revealed any pedestrian/vehicular accidents for individuals crossing the intermittent ferry traffic. The City has the right to stripe and pedestrians have the right to City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 8 cross the section by State Statute. He questioned where additional parking could be located and said alternatives are needed to discontinue the domination of the waterfront by vehicles which the City recognizes by the purchase of a van for the Senior Center. The City's ordinances and Comprehensive Plan encourage the use of alternative means of access. He concluded the City is providing the parking spaces required by City Code in the same way required of any developer and neither City Staff nor the IAC intended to develop parking on this site. He noted a pull-out and a striped crossing are a part of this development application, as recommended by the Hearing Examiner. Arvilla OhIde, Parks and Recreation Manager, said she did not "paint the City into a comer" when the grant was sought. The IAC would not have accepted her grant application if it did not met the grant criteria. She explained when a project goes before the granting agencies, it goes under the criteria that has historically been the policy of the City. This project scored third in the State of Washington out of, 500 projects which indicates the base work met their criteria for a passive use waterfront access park in the City of Edmonds. Mayor Fahey closed the hearing and remanded the matter to Council. Councilmember Petruzzi stated while he understands the appellant' s concerns for parking, the facts seem to be in favor of the applicant —consistency with the Shoreline Master Plan as well as other plans the City participates in. In addition, Chapter 17.050 provides for off -site parking for all developments. The number of available parking spaces indicates parking is available and the City is willing to put in the crosswalk across Main Street. He felt the City should have some responsibility for signage for the adjoining properties. He disagreed with the appellant's interpretation of the EIS as the EIS indicates the existing parking at Bracketfs Landing North, coupled with other public parking on the adjacent right-of- way and the Senior Center, was sufficient. He reiterated his recommendation that signs be installed and pointed out the Hearing Examiner reiterates the mitigation proposed in the EIS. Councilmember Myers pointed out the City is not taking advantage of any rules or regulations that any other developer would need to follow and he would therefore be in favor of the recommended action. Councilmember Van Hollebeke advised he has visited the recreational facilities on the waterfront as well as the appellant's building and has found the appellant! s parking lot difficult to find and would therefore be the least likely parking lot a park user would choose. He pointed out the majority of people using the park enjoy walking. He agreed with the Hearing Examiner's decision with the provision that a loading area be provided. Councilmember Haakenson felt the appellanfs property would not be adversely affected by the project and the proposal was in the long term best interest of the City. Councilmember Earling stated, while he supports the recommended action from the Hearing Examiner, he felt a passive park should not be a passive good neighbor to businesses surrounding the proposed park. He believed the mitigations outlined by the Hearing Examiner should be aggressively pursued such as a well thought out parking map and work with Community Transit to provide service by transit. Councilmember White agreed with Councilmember Earling; he wants it to be apparent that parking is a problem and a comprehensive effort to address the parking problem should be made. He felt the suggestions made by the Hearing Examiner should be the minimum. He pointed out the 73 available spaces indicated by the EIS are difficult to find but the appellant's parking is also difficult to find. He City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 9 supported the Hearing Examiner's decision with the reservation a parking issue exists and the concerns of' the appellant are appropriate and should be addressed by the City in the future. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MYERS, TO DENY THE APPEAL BY WATERFRONT PARK ASSOCIATES, INC. UNDER FILE NO. AP 95- 109 AND UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION TO APPROVE FILE NO. SM-93- 196. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Fahey declared a 5 minute recess and the Council reconvened at 9:05 p.m. 5. REVIEW OF CITY -PAR K -MASTER-PLAN AND AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR REPLACEMENT OF LOWER REST -ROOM AND ADJACENT PICNIC SHELTE or Paul Mar, Community Services Director distributed diagrams of City Park prior to 1995 and of the Master Plan for City Park. He described the Master Plan process which was approved and incorporated into the City's Parks and Open Space Comprehensive Plan. As the consultant concluded existing parking was insufficient and a safety hazard, parking was a major consideration in determining how to redevelop the park. The plan to develop the park was to be in phase form due to the costs involved and the intent to keep the park open throughout the redevelopment process. He displayed an overhead map of the park, identifying redevelopment completed in 1995 which included relocation of the children's play area and installation of new playground equipment, development of the disabled access path system and paving of the existing northwest parking lot. The 1996 project will change the one way road to a two-way road, convert the north road into a service only road, and re -investigate the parking demands to determine if the amount of parking originally proposed is still needed. Design for the replacement of the restroom and adjacent park shelter have been completed and were approved by the Architectural Design Board in December. Staff is requesting authorization to call for bids for these two items. COUNCILMEMBER MYERS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF THE LOWER RESTROOM AND ADJACENT PICNIC SHELTER. MOTION CARRIED. 6. DISCUSSION OF FIRE STATION #6 RENTA flAf . 00"' Michael Springer, Fire Chief, described the temporary relocation of Fire Station #6 to a Modular Home Ab on the site following the discovery of structure damage caused by a 1995 earthquake. Staff is working with the Council regarding a long-term resolution to the Fire Station. The Fire Department is requesting the approval of funding and the extension of the Modular Home contract for an additional year. Council President Earling questioned why this funding was not included in the 1996 budget. Chief Springer replied when Art Housler, Finance Director, gave the year-end review, sufficient funds were available in the Fire Department Cash Carryover. Art Housler, Finance Director, explained when the contract was reviewed in late November, consideration was given to either budget according to the contract or budget for the full year. A decision was made to fund one-fourth of the contract through March 31, 1996 as the contract and ordinance prescribes and address the issue early in 1996. When the presentation was made to the Council on January 19 regarding cash carryover, this item should have been discussed but was not as it was to be discussed at a future meeting. The $25,000 cash carryover from the Fire Department, was placed in the Council Contingency Fund following the year-end review on January 19. Ciry Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 10 Mayor Fahey noted, as three months of the contract have been funded, only $10,125 was necessary for the remainder of 1996 and the three months of 1997 could be included in the 1997 budget. COUNCILMEMBER PETRUZZI MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO ALLOCATE $10,125 FOR FIRE STATION #6 MODULAR HOME AND THE MONEY DEDUCTED FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING OPPOSED. 6a. DISCUSSION OF FERRY TERMINAL OVERHEAD LOADING PROJECT'S DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (fAXY 4A Paul Mar, Community Services Director, referred to his memo dated February 2, 1996, which indicates Washington State Department of Transportation has completed its Environment Determination for the proposed overhead loading project and issued a Declaration of Non -Significance (DNS) dated January 24, 1996. The comment period ends February 9, 1996. He distributed a copy of the minutes from the Council's most recent discussion of this subject when the 4 No's were confirmed in June 1995. He called the Council's attention to the statement made by Scott Snyder, City Attorney, "Council needs to be careful when formulating its statements tonight in prejudging the Shoreline Management Application in advance of a hearing and presentation by the State Ferry System. Although an Appearance of Fairness Doctrine challenge which applies to the whole Council is waivable, pre - judgmental bias will still be open." Scott Snyder, City Attorney, e:�plained the Council would hear any Shoreline Permit request. He noted previous Councils have taken policy stands such as the 4 No's. Although the Council has concerns and questions brought by citizens regarding whether specific issues have been adequately addressed in the DNS, he recommends the Council ask questions, state concerns and not voice opinions. Mr. Mar advised the City will be the permit review agency for the Shoreline Development process and follow thd City's Hearing Examiner process with the applicant, Washington State Ferry System. If the Hearing Examiner's decision were appealed, the Council would hear the appeal; if the Council decision was appealed, it would be heard by the State Shoreline Hearing Board. Councilmember Petruzzi asked if consideration had been given to the impacts of the 14' wide, 502' long dock. Mr. Mar advised view blockage and its impacts would be included in staffs response to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). Jeff Wilson, Current Planning Supervisor, advised staff is completing their review of the DNS issued by WSDOT and a letter would be faxed to WSDOT on Friday. Issues to be addressed include view blockage on the southern side. Councilmember Petruzzi asked if lights will be included on the 502' long dock. Mr. Wilson advised there are Performance Standards in the City's Code regarding light� glare, effect on adjacent properties and streets. Light and glare is included in the State Environmental Checklist if lighting will be provided and staff will address this if it is not adequately addressed in the DNS. Councilmernber Petruzzi asked if grade separation was being considered. Mr. Mar advised a presentation regarding an underpass by Don Carr and Rob Morrison was made to the Washington State Ferry System. They liked the idea but indicated funding was an issue. Mr. Wilson commented the City Attorney would be consulted on this issue as the proposed project is addressing an existing situation and the City is limited in what mitigations can be requested for an existing condition. Councilmember Petruzzi recalled a goal in the notice of the DNS to increase the foot traffic to mitigate the amount of vehicle traffic. I City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page I I Councilmember Van Hollebeke observed the walk-on ramp would likely increase the volume of walk-on traffic. He reiterated a previous comment that the Department of Transportation has three divisions; highways, marine and railroad, and felt they should be approached regarding their obligation to address safety in this area. Mr. Mar advised the Marine and Highway Division of WSDOT are aware of the underpass concept and based on the concern expressed by citizens and the Council, staff will include a comment when preparing their response. Councilmember Myers asked if the seafloor support columns will be removed when the temporary access is removed. Mr. Wilson said pilings in water are not usually removed due to their habitat benefit and the timing of the relocation may determine whether removal is beneficial. Council President Earling asked if public view vistas south of the proposed Brackett's Landing South were considered. Mr. Wilson stated the most immediate impact would be to the property immediately to the south, although it is recognized that properties further to the south and to the east will also be impacted. Council President Earling asked if questions regarding temporary structures could be raised at every stage of the application. Mr. Wilson advised staff will use this opportunity to comment on permanency of the structures to focus on the life span of structures as this will determine how view impacts are evaluated. Councilmember White asked if the DNS considered the sub -surface impacts on the park from silt generated by this project. Mr. Wilson explained the hole will be encased, prior to drilling and material removed from the encased area used to fill a hole in nearby eel grass beds. Mr. Mar advised he would copy the Council with staffs response to WSDOT. 1 7. MAYO Mayor Fahey announced the 1996 budget was printed and available at this meeting and at the Mayor's Office and the Finance Office. She directed attention to the final survey questions regarding public safety issues and encouraged citizens to participate if they were called regarding the survey on public safety awareness and the public safety needs issue. She encouraged the Council to review items contained in the packet, 1) a number of letters complimenting/recognizing staff members, 2) goals accomplished by the Police Department in January, and 3) a copy of a letter thanking Mr. Charleston for his donation of property to the City. 8. COUNCIL Council President Earling directed the Council's attention to the retreat agenda, noting that a 6:30 a.m. ferry departure was necessary. He reminded the Council of the RTA Roundtable scheduled for Monday, February 12 at Edmonds Community College (4:00 - 6:00 p.m.) for discussion of the hypothetical proposal and urged Councilmembers to attend. Councilmember White pointed out he was impressed to learn that the City has, available for public review, an emergency response plan detailing the roles of City staff, Council and other agencies. Student Representative Zitzmarm announced Edmonds Woodway High School was putting on the musical "Bye Bye Birdie" in March and invited Council and citizens to become Patrons of the Arts for the Edmonds Woodway High School. City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 12 Councilmember Van Hollebeke advised he would be having surgery on February 26 to remove a cancerous lung tumor and will miss at least two or three meetings. He commented he loves being on the Council and looks forward to returning very soon. Councilmember Haakenson said he is excited to be on the Council and honored to have been chosen. He thanked the Council and City staff for their assistance in acclimating him to the Council. Mayor Fahey announced she and Councilmember Myers will be attending the Association of Washington Cities Legislative sessions in Olympia on Wednesday and Thursday. The Council adjourned to an Executive Session on a legal matter at 9:59 p.m. to adjourn directly from there. BARBARA S. FAHEY, MAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK I City Council Approved Minutes February 6, 1996 Page 13 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Plaza Meeting Room - Library Building 650 Main Street 7:00 - 10:00 p.m. FEBRUARY 6,1996 CALL TO ORDER - 7:00 P.M. FLAG SALUTE 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 30,1996 (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #3298S THRU #7138F FOR THE WEEK OF JANUARY 29,1996 IN THE AMOUNT OF $382,429.20 (D) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING THE APPLICATION OF CARL PEARSON FOR SHORT SUBDIVISION (File Nos. S-8-87 and AP-93-1 10) (E) APPROVAL OF 1996 TAXI LICENSE RENEWAL FOR NORTH END TAXI (F) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR OBLIGATION OF FEDERAL FUNDING FOR REHABILITATION OF 76TH AVENUE WEST FROM 196TH STREET SW TO 212TH STREET SW (G) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR OBLIGATION OF FEDERAL FUNDING FOR REHABILITATION OF 9TH AVENUE NORTH FROM CASPERS STREET TO MAIN STREET (H) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR OBLIGATION OF FEDERAL FUNDING FOR REHABILITATION OF 100TH AVENUE WEST FROM 224TH STREET SW TO 238TH STREET SW (1) AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE ONE PICK-UP TRUCK FOR THE PARK MAINTENANCE SECTION AND ONE FLAT BED TRUCK FOR THE STREET SECTION FROM THE WASHINGTON STATE CONTRACT ($37,000) (J) AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE NINETY-EIGHT (98) DOZEN SOFTBALLS FOR THE RECREATION DIVISION SOFTBALL LEAGUES FROM A. D. STARR ($2,641.10) (K) PROPOSED RESOLUTION EXPANDING THE BOUNDARIES OF LID 214 (L) PROPOSED RESOLUTION SETTING A NEW HEARING DATE FOR LID 214 3. AUDIENCE (3 minute limit per person) 4. (60 Min.) HEARING ON AN APPEAL BY WATERFRONT PARK ASSOCIATES, INC. OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION APPROVING A SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR THE CITY OF EDMONDS PARKS & RECREATION DIVISION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPOSED BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH PARK LOCATED AT 100 RAILROAD AVENUE, UNDER FILE NO. SM-93- 196 (Appellant: Waterfront Park Associates, Inc. I File No. AP-95-109 i Applicant/Appellee: City of Edmonds Parks and Recreation Division) CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA FEBRUARY 6,1996 PAGE 2 5. (10 Min.) REVIEW OF CITY PARK MASTER PLAN AND AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR REPLACEMEN OF LOWER RESTROOM AND ADJACENT PICNIC SHELTER 6. (15 Min.) DISCUSSION OF FIRE STATION #6 RENTAL 7. (5 Min.) MAYOR 8. (15 Min.) COUNCIL I Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at 771-0245 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations. The Council Agenda appears on Chambers Cable, Channel 32. Delayed telecast of this Meeting appears Wednesday, Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 32.