Loading...
06/26/1990 City CouncilI IILJL 1'1111V I LJ JVUV LV I IV JULY 17, 1990 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 26, 1990 (WORK MEETING) The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naughten at the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main St., Edmonds. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor John Nordquist, Council President Steve Dwyer, Councilmember Roger Hertrich, Councilmember Jo -Anne Jaech, Councilmember William Kasper, Councilmember Jeff Palmer, Councilmember Jack Wilson, Councilmember STAFF Mary Lou Block, Planning Div. Mgr. Art Housler, Admin. Svc. Director Peter Hahn, Comm. Svc. Director Dan Prinz, Police Chief Bobby Mills, Public Works Supt. Brent Hunter, Personnel Manager Bob Alberts, City Engineer Arvilla Ohlde, Parks & Rec. Mgr. Dick Mumma, Building Official Scott Snyder, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder Councilmember Kasper said it was his understanding that it was the Council's policy that agenda items were to be accompanied with a time ,frame for discussion. Mayor Naughten said Council Presi- dent Nordquist had suggested that only hearing items have time frames. Councilmember Kasper inquired about the Council's policy with respect to placing items that were removed from the Consent Agenda at the end of the regular agenda. Mayor Naughten did not recall that the Council had set that policy. He explained that items that are removed from the Consent Agenda are discussed before regularly scheduled items in consideration of Staff members who are present at the meeting for a particular Consent Agenda item. Councilmember Jaech said she did not think it is fair to the public to delay hearing items to discuss Consent Agenda items and Consent Agenda items should be placed at the end of the regular agenda. It was suggested that the Council indicate if a Staff member should remain when an item is moved to the end of the agenda. In response to Councilmember Kasper's first question regarding agenda times, Council President Nordquist said he thought that eliminating times for non -hearing items may help expedite a partic- ular item because people are inclined to discuss an issue for 20 minutes if it is scheduled for 20 minutes when, in reality, it can be discussed in 5 minutes. CONSENT AGENDA Items (B) and (H) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL a,,-, �(C) ADOPTED ORDINANCE 2782 ADOPTING STATE LAW PROHIBITING USE OF DOMESTIC DOGS AND CATS AS BAIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRAINING OTHER ANIMALS 'lJ�� (D) ADOPTED ORDINANCE 2783 ADOPTING -STATE LAW PROHIBITING THE FAILURE TO STOP A VESSEL UPON THE REQUEST OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER (E) ADOPTED RESOLUTION 701 AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSISTANCE FROM AQUATIC Y LANDS ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT OF DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR INTERPRETIVE PORTIONS OF BRACKETT'S LANDING UPLAND IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (F) REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF TRANSFER OF UNEXPENDED FUNDS FROM 1989 MEDIATION APPROPRIA- TION TO ENGINEERING CONSULTANT BUDGET FOR ADDITIONAL SOIL TESTING ASSOCIATED WITH HARBOR HILLS DEVELOPMENT (G) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM WILLIAM E. McANDREW ($294.02) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 19, 1990 rITEM (B) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA] P�Mayor Naughten referred to page 8, last paragraph, third sentence, where Councilmember Palmer stated, "Kirby White wrote the Mayor a letter advising that the Planning Board opening be filled by someone residing in the Edmonds High School area or Ballinger area, and Councilmember Palmer pointed out that the position is not represented by someone from that area. Councilmember Palmer noted that there are three members from the bowl area, three members from the Meadowdale area, and no representation on the Planning Board from the high school area of Ballinger area". Mayor Naughten clarified that Mr. White sent the letter to the Mayor back in February of 1990, and not recently as the statement implied, in response to a newspaper ad that was placed by the City for another vacant position on the Planning Board. He noted that that position was filled by a per- son that resided in the high school area. The Council discussed the process by which Planning Board candidates are selected and appointed. Because Councilmember Wilson was dissatisfied with the present selection process, Mayor Naughten suggested that the Council change the present policy of the Mayor appointing a member and the Council confirming his appointment. Councilmember Palmer said he would like the ordinance to be applied in its entirety, which included a provision to strive for a geographic balance of candi- dates throughout the City. MAYOR NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MO- TION CARRIED. REPORT ON BIDS OPENED JUNE 12 1990 FOR REROOFING ANDERSON CENTER AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO KATHOL ROOFING, INC. 66,423.12, N L D NG L X I EM N THE CUNSENTAGENDA] Councilmember Hertrich noted that Staff recommended that the roof not be insulated, but he thought it would be an opportune time to insulate the roof while the building is being reroofed. Councilmember Hertrich said Staff based their decision whether or not to insulate solely on cost savings for heat. He suggested that the Council approve the contract with the ability to insu- late if, after the Council discusses the issue further, they decide to approve insulation. In response to Councilmember Kasper, City Engineer Bob Alberts said it was estimated that a 15% heat savings will be realized with the new furnace that heats the west wings. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER FOR DISCUSSION, TO APPROVE THE ROOFING CONTRACT, LEAVING THE ISSUE OF INSULATION OPEN. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the roof will be replaced entirely. Mr. Alberts replied nega- tively. He saidthe decking will remain in place but the leveling board will be replaced to help drainage. Counc.ilmember Kasper inquired if any part of the building is insulated. Mr. Alberts replied negatively. He said, however, the new windows will provide some form of insulation when they are installed. Mr. Alberts noted that insulation for the west wings should be provided from the roof if the Council decides to approve insulation, but insulation can be blown in through the walls for the remainder of the building. He recommended that insulation only be installed in the west wings at this time if the Council approves any insulation. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the contract will be affected'if the Council approves insula- tion. Mr. Alberts said the contract must be awarded by July 17, and it will be difficult to award a contract without specifying what the award is. Mr. Alberts said an additional $80,000, including contingencies, will be necessary to insulate the west wings. He said monies could be transferred to do the insulation from projects that were budgeted in the Building/Maintenance Fund 116 this year but will probably not be accomplished until 1991 and they can be rebudgeted. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO AMEND THE MOTION.TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT AND INSULATE THE. TWO WEST WINGS. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUN- CILMEMBER NORDQUIST, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, AND COUNCILMEMBER KASPER IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER PALMER, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED. Mr. Alberts noted that there is $50,000 earmarked for seismic work, $5,000 for Sno/King space renovation, $15,000 for unanticipated projects, $9,000 for a boiler, and $4,000 for seismic de- sign that can be used for insulation. Councilmember Palmer expressed a concern with spending monies that were earmarked for other projects to insulate the west wings. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, THAT MONEY FOR ITEMS MENTIONED BY MR. ALBERTS FOR ELIMINATING THEIR PLACE IN THE BUDGET THIS YEAR BE MOVED TO THE ROOFING BUDGET, REFERENCING THE.LIST OF ITEMS EQUIVALENT TO $83,000. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 June 26, 1990 COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO TABLE THE MOTION UNTIL THE COUN- CIL HEARS FROM THE DEPARTMENTS THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THOSE REDUCTIONS (PUBLIC SAFETY AND COMMU- NITY SERVICES DEPARTMENTS). A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION TO TABLE. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, COUNCILMEMBER PALMER, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, AND COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO DISCUSS AWARD OF THE CONTRACT ON JULY 10, 1990 IN A STUDY SESSION PRIOR TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. CWC-HDR MONTHLY REPORT Gordon Culp, CWC-HDR, Inc., reported that operation of the new Phase I primary treatment facili- ty ties and hauling of primary sludge to Seattle Metro continues. The contractor is working to T complete the Phase I deficiency items in the raw sewage pumping station and solids process build- ing. Rehabilitation of primary clarifier no. 1 is near completion. Mr. Culp said construction of the solids processing and sludge incineration facilities is pro- gressing toward completion in August 1990.. The contractor is preparing for initial start-up and curing of the incinerator in July 1990. The belt filter presses and sludge pumping facilities are undergoing start-up and operational checkout at the present time. Construction of the odor control facilities is behind schedule. Ventilation equipment will be operational for start-up of the solids processing equipment. However, odor removal equipment will not be operational until the end of August 1990. Fuel oil has been added to the underground fuel oil tank in preparation for start up of the incinerator. Mr. Culp said construction of the secondary treatment units on the north end of the site contin- ues. The contractor has completed 50% of the aeration basin walls and has completed the concrete floor slabs for final clarifiers no. 1 and 3 and the effluent pumping station. Mr. Culp noted that change order no. 7 is under review by the contractor at the present time, which includes the increase in State taxes effective May 1, 1990 and a raise of primary sludge dumping fees by Seattle Metro. Mr. Culp said the meter station construction is near completion and will be ready for final in- spection in early July 1990. The concrete vault structure for meter station no. 3 at SR-99 near the off -ramp from SR-104 is constructed and backfill is near completion. The contractor has had a delay in removal of the shoring system at meter station no. 3 and will be completing that work at the end of June 1990. Negotiations with the contractor regarding the underground debris and gas line encountered will be complete by the end of June 1990. Councilmember Kasper inquired when actual expenditures will coincide with the revised projected expenditures. Mr. Culp said the contractor has met the revised schedule and the project will be completed within the budget. i L In response to Councilmember Palmer, Mr. Culp said curing of the incinerator is not related to actually burning sludge. He said the earliest sludge will be burned is mid -August, and there will be no odors emanating from the treatment plant during the City's Centennial celebration. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if there will be a surplus of funds on the meter station. Dan Harmon, CWC-HDR, Inc., said there is additional work to be done on the meter station, and he hoped that the work will be completed within projected expenditures by next month. REPORT ON CEMETERY STRUCTURE PROPOSAL BY HUBBARD TRUST AND CEMETERY BOARD Arvilla Ohlde, Parks & Recreation Manager, reported that the Edmonds Memorial Cemetery Board voted on November 1989 to continue progress toward the development of a building on the cemetery grounds. The structure would be used for inside services with capacity for thirty to fifty peo- ple and would have restrooms. The building is proposed to be constructed by the Hubbard Trust and maintained in perpetuity by the Trust and donated to the City. Ms. Ohlde said the Cemetery Board presented their proposal to the Community Services Committee on January 9. She noted that the proposal, if approved, would necessitate a change in the cemetery zoning to allow the project to proceed. Kirk Clothier, Vice -President of the Hubbard Trust, submitted a preliminary drawing of the propos- al to the Council, which was a nondenominational chapel duplicating the first church that was built in Edmonds. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 June 26, 1990 Councilmember Nordquist inquired where the chapel is proposed to be located. He. also inquired if any grave sites would be displaced. Rosemary Speck, member of the Edmonds Memorial Cemetery Board, said the chapel isproposed to be located on the west side of the cemetery on a road be- tween Block 2 and Block 3 that is no longer in use. She said a map of the cemetery does not show any burials in that location. Councilmember Nordquist inquired if additional parking would be necessary. Ms. Speck replied negatively. Councilmember Palmer inquired about yearly maintenance and operation costs. Mr. Clothier said those costs have not been estimated, but he reiterated that the Hubbard Foundation will maintain the structure entirely. Councilmember Palmer inquired about revenues for the use of the facili- ty. Mr. Clothier said any revenues will go to the Cemetery Board or the City. Councilmember Palmer inquired about the height of the structure at its highest point. Mr. Clothier said it is proposed to be 20 feet at its.highest point. COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO DIRECT THE MATTER TO THE COMMUNI- TY SERVICES COMMITTEE FOR COST FIGURES IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE PLAN (MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION COSTS, POTENTIAL REVENUE, SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENTS AND A DRAWING OF THE CEMETERY, INCLUDING THE SITE). Councilmember Palmer said he would like the City Attorney to address the propriety of a rezone at the Community Services Committee meeting. MOTION CARRIED. Lee Rae Esterberg, Hubbard Foundation, said she did not understand the Council's concern regard- ing cost of maintenance because the Hubbard Foundation will guarantee to underwrite those costs in perpetuity. Councilmember Palmer said he misunderstood Mr. Clothier, then, and thanked Ms. Esterberg for clarifying that issue. He said he would like the other issues discussed in detail, though. Councilmember Nordquist explained to Ms. Esterberg that the Council would like to see a plot plan of the cemetery showing the relationship of existing structures to the proposed struc- ture, ingress and egress, and the size of the building. He said the Council is appreciative of the gift, but they need more information to make a decision. Mayor Naughten noted that the issue will be discussed further on July 10, 1990. DISCUSSION WITH MARY HUGHES ON SEWER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES Community Services Director Peter Hahn reported that the proposal to retain a.consultant to pre- pare a financial analysis for system development charges for new developments (also known as connection charges) was originally brought to the Community Services Committee in April, and the Committee recommended that Mary Hughes discuss the concepts with the Council as a whole. Mr. Hahn said the concept of connection charges is well accepted in utility financing, and the fees are consistent with the New Growth Management Act, which requires new development to pay for impacts. He said the connection charges are related primarily to the new treatment plant which has capacity for future connections. He noted that capacity is currently being paid for only by existing rate payers who are "front ending" the capacity until someone connects. He said a con- nection charge essentially reimburses the whole system for this "front ending". Mr. Hahn said it is the recommendation of Staff to approve the contract with Mary Hughes for $4,000 from the Combined Utility Fund 412. - COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT WITH MARY HUGHES. MOTION CARRIED. YEASTINGS & HUGHES ASSOCIATES PRESENTATION OF THEIR RECOMMENDATION ON THE PROPOSAL, SUBMITTED BY U�DAIN W R , INC., TO REFUND THE 1980 Administrative Services Director Art Housler reported that on June 12, 1990, the Council Adminis- trative Services Committee approved Yeasting & Hughes Associates to analyze the proposal submit- ted from Dain Bosworth, Inc. to refund the 1980 G.O. Bonds. Mary Hughes, Yeasting & Hughes, said the City has contemplated a refunding of the 1980 General Obligation Bonds for several years, and Yeasting & Hughes had recommended that the City wait until the bonds became callable before refinancing. Ms. Hughes noted that the bonds first become callable on September 1, 1990. She said in her view, the City should act now if it wishes to accomplish the refunding. Ms. Hughes stated that the municipal bond market has been relatively stable for the past year. She said there are no strong prospects for a major downturn in ten-year interest rates in the next two years. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 June 26, 1990 Ms. Hughes recommended that the City proceed with a negotiated sale of the bonds with Dain Bosworth, Inc., on or about July 24, 1990 so that funds will be available for the September 1, 1990 retirement of the 1980 bonds. She said timing is rather inflexible because the call notice must be published by August 1, 1990. Ms. Hughes noted that the projected present value savings of refunding is between $110,000 and $140,000, due to an estimated interest rate change between now and the time the bonds are issued. Ms. Hughes said the underwriters have presented three alternate means of taking the savings. She recommended a level savings if the City's object is to provide a saving to .taxpayers or front-end savings .if the City, intends to spend the savings for a specific project. Ms. Hughes said Yeasting & Hughes will monitor the process to see that it is carried out in the City's best interests and will assist in negotiating the actual interest rate and underwriters' spread prior to the bond sale. Dick Ehlers, Vice -President of Dain Bosworth, Inc., said in order tomet the August 1, publica- tion requirement, an offer to purchase the bonds will be presented to the Council on July 24, 1990. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE YEASTING & HUGHES ASSOCI- ATES RECOMMENDATION AND AUTHORIZE DAIN BOSWORTH, INC., TO PROCEED WITH REFUNDING THE BOND ISSUE. Councilmember Palmer inquired at which option. Councilmember Dwyer replied the long-term op- tion. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER OPPOSED. Councilmember Hertrich requested Councilmember Kasper to explain his reason for voting against the motion. Councilmember Kasper said,' "I think the market is going further, and I think we should wait until March". Mr. Ehlers said the City will lose approximately $15,000 present value savings for every six- month delay, assuming a stable interest rate market. PRESENTATION ON REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Community Services Director Peter Hahn noted that the Council expressed an interest earlier this year to review the Regional Development alternatives which the Puget Sound Council of Go (PSCOG) is studying. He said the PSCOG Assembly plans to adopt a preferred vision inthe nFall, and the Edmonds City Council may wish to express its opinions on which alternative it prefers. He noted that comments on the topics are not limited to member jurisdictions. Mr. Hahn empha- sized that the alternatives will affect Edmonds very little because the projected population or density for Edmonds is virtually the same in any of the scenarios that will be presented. Mr. Hahn introduced a staff member from the PSCOG, Grace Burns. Ms. Burns played a video presentation of 'Regional Development alternatives, providing the follow- ing information: We face a crossroads choice in the Central Puget Sound region this year. King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties are asked to choose from among different visions about how the region will grow in the long run and the type of transportation system that will suit us best. We can choose the status quo or choose to go in a new direction. Impacts of our decision will last well beyond our lifetimes. They will influence how and where our children and our childrens' children will live, work and play. Central Puget Sound is stirring with concern and debate. There is an impressive range of propos- als about how to deal with the region's rapid growth and its effects. Our freeway congestion is rated one of the worst in the nation. We have gridlock roads, long lines for ferries, sprawling subdivisions, booming suburban office and shopping centers. Even with our problems, we still have many reasons to be proud of the Central Puget Sound re- gion. It is a special place. We enjoy the benefits of growth and our national and international rankings. Yet, we worry about the pace and pattern we are setting for the future. Growth and transportation are leading issues. We are not adequately prepared today to handle the effects of growth that we expect tomorrow. Between 1990 and 2020, the Puget Sound Council of Governments forecasts we will gain another 1.4 million residents, for a total population of over 4 million, which is equivalent to adding 15 cities the size of Bellevue or the entire Port- land/Vancouver urban area. The Council forecasts another 860,000 jobs, for a total of 2.3 mil- lion in 2020. We have no regional strategy in place for handling these challenges. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 June 26, 1990 We also need to turn our attention to transportation facilities and measures to control further traffic congestion. Our development pattern is geared toward the car; yet, present regional plan emphasizes transit. The Council of Governments predicts that if we do not change our present plans and conditions, in 2020 the evening peak hour period of traffic congestion will last 5 or more hours on much of the freeway and arterial systems. We are also not prepared with a government structure to help us decide and implement regional solutions to regional problems. These goal problems we have talked about transcend local bounda- ries. In short, the Central Puget Sound region does not have a vision and strategy with the appropriate geographic scope, balance and commitment to help us take control of our long-range future. Fortunately, there is good reason to be optimistic that we can turn this around. For several years, PSCOG, in association with local governments in King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties, has been analyzing the growth and transportation problems and the Council has identified alternative solutions. Vision 2020, growth strategy and transportation plan for the Central Puget Sound Region, will be the result of that effort. The Council has been looking at a new structure for regional governments. The region has long had a transportation plan, but Vision 2020 is notable nationally for its broad approach. Trans- portation and land use affect each other clearly. Vision 2020 connects land use with our invest- ment in transportation facilities. Each of the five options being considered includes a growth strategy and a transportation plan. Before the end of 1990, PSCOG will select one option, setting the course for the region for the next 30 years and well beyond. Each of the five alternatives looks at growth and transportation from a different perspective. They are: No Action, Existing Plans, Major Centers, Multiple Centers, and Dispersed Growth. Under the No Action alternative, local and State agencies would finish only those transportation improvements that are currently or soon to be funded. There would be no further investment in transportation except for maintenance. In other words, travel conditions would get a lot worse -- ten times worse. Existing Plans alternative - We will depend on current plans of the various governments in our region to accommodate our forecasted growth. There is no regional growth strategy under the Existing Plans alternative. Each city and county determines its own. Local land use plans en- courage nonresidential development to locate in loosely defined activity centers. Under this alternative, we can expect new employment to continue to locate in downtowns, office parks, shop- ping malls and strip centers across the region. Most new housing would continue to be built in the suburbs. This type of land development puts pressure on rural and forest areas. Also, our transportation system would be augmented by projects currently funded or planned. We would con- tinue emphasis on transit and build a 100 mile light rail system and 185 more miles of diamond lanes and expanded bus service and more passenger -only ferry routes and park 'n ride lots. One hundred miles of freeways and 250 miles of major arterials would be widened. Major Centers alternative - the majority of new employment will be directed to six major cen- ters: Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, Bremerton, Bellevue and South King County. Both residential and job growth will be contained within defined urban areas. New multifamily housing will cluster around transit stations and terminals. A maximum investment in public transit to connect the centers would occur. This would include a 140 mile light rail system, commuter rail on existing tracks from Seattle to Olympia, 300 miles of diamonds lanes and many new passenger -only ferry destinations. Strong measures would be taken to encourage transit use and car pooling. Multiple Centers alternative - this alternative concentrates jobs and housing growth in major and medium-sized centers. The goal is to balance new jobs, housing, shopping and recreational oppor- tunities within each center's influence area. A variety of housing types would be promoted with- in a short commute of the centers with the highest density around transit stations. Neighbor- hoods would be actively protected. Multiple Centers calls for transit investment but also more highway capacity, especially in developing areas. This option anticipates a 120 mile light rail system, commuter rail from Seattle to Puyallup, 250 more miles of diamond lanes and many new passenger -only ferry routes. Strong measures would be taken to encourage use of transit and car pooling. One hundred miles of freeway and 225 miles of regional arterials would be widened. Dispersed Growth - major new growth would be in what are now small suburbs in Pierce, Kitsap, East.King and North Snohomish Counties. New jobs and housing would be dispersed but also direct- ed to Everett, Tacoma and Bremerton. Growth caps would be enacted where congestion on highways exceeds a certain level. This alternative emphasizes highways to serve new areas and auto fer- ries. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 June 26, 1990 About 400 miles of regional arterials would be widened and 60 miles of regional arterials added. One hundred fifty miles of freeways would be widened to add lanes for cars. Bus service would be expanded in most areas with more diamond lanes. There would be no rail. The Council of Governments is circulating for public review a draft Environmental Impact State- ment (EIS) that evaluates the implications of all these alternatives. New transportation facili- ties would cost abut $30 million in each plan, excluding the No Action alternative. According to PSCOG, the estimated amount of undeveloped land that will be developed under the four action alternatives is: Existing Plans, 750 square miles; Major Centers, 450 square miles; Multiple Centers, 400 square miles; and Dispersed Growth, 1,000 square miles. With respect to air quality, it is at the local level that differences among the options show up. Under all action alternatives, various pollution hot spots develop while some districts improve. For air quality in the region overall, the Centers and Dispersed Growth options are about the same. It will not be money that drives the selection but our values and attitudes about open space, the environment, living styles, livability, transit accessibility, travel options and how best to stay competitive in a changing economy. The issues are tough and demanding. PSCOG invites all citizens to participate in helping select the preferred growth and transportation alternative. Committees of the Council of Governments are scheduled to choose a preferred alternative in July. A Vision 2020 Plan itself will then be drafted. Adoption by the Council's governing assembly is scheduled in late October. Mayor Naughten said these are exciting t'mes that we are living in with all the growth and plan- ning. He said elected officials at all levels do have tough decisions to make, probably the toughest they have had to make in the last one hundred years regarding growth in this area and the future. Councilmember Kasper said it appears that the PSCOG would like to increase high density in ferry terminal areas. Ms. Burn said it is the recommendation of PSCOG that multifamily housing be located near the passenger -only ferry terminals. She said that alternative would not increase overall the amount of multifamily housing that would be locating in what might be considered the greater Edmonds area. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if more park 'n ride -type lots are envisioned on the Kitsap Penin- sula. Ms. Burn said the Existing Plans, Major Centers, and Multiple Centers alternatives do include expansion of park 'n ride lots, but there is a difference in the emphasis of those lots. Councilmember Palmer inquired which of the options HB 202 most directly promotes. Ms. Burn said Existing Plans, Major Centers and Multiple Centers would fit within the intent of the Bill be- cause all three have a direction relationship between land use and transportation. In response to the Mayor, Ms. Burn said the first half of a questionnaire that was disseminated to 4,000 people revealed that 46% were in favor of Multiple Centers and 44% were in favor of Major Centers. A survey of working people in the region revealed that 46% were in favor of Multi- ple Centers, 28% were in favor of Major Centers, and 22% were in favor of dispersed growth. She said the majority of people who attended the public hearings in Lynnwood, King county, and Kitsap County were in favor of Multiple Centers but a majority of the people in Pierce County were in favor of Major Centers. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO REDUCE COMPENSATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY TO BE VACATED ALONG THE REAST SIDE OF 8TH AVE. N. IN VICINITY OF 771 DALEY ST. In 1980, the City approved the vacation of a portion of 8th Avenue North between Aloha and Daley Streets. One of the adjacent property owners refused to pay compensation for the right-of-way on the east side of 8th Avenue North adjacent to 771 Daley Street and the right-of-way was not vacat- ed. The area in question is a 15x110 foot strip of right-of-way. The City will retain a utility easement across the entire 15 feet. Since this area was not previously vacated, the City has planned to use it as a staging area during construction of the Shell Creek drainage project and the vacation ordinance is written to retain that capability. Chris Cox recently purchased the property at 711 Daley Street, and she has indicated a desire to obtain the right-of-way. Staff calculated the compensation requirement per Chapter 20.70.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code at $3,369.09. Ms. Cox would like the amount reduced. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 June 26, 1990 Councilmember Kasper said he did not believe the right-of-way should be vacated until the Shell Creek project is completed and the issue should not be discussed until that time. Community Services Director Peter Hahn noted that the ordinance specifies that the right-of-way will not be vacated until the project is completed. Councilmember Kasper inquired why the value of the right-of-way needs to be determined at the present time. Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block said Ms. Cox purchase the property adjacent to the right-of-way *and has requested that the amount of compensation be reduced. Councilmember Kasper noted that the utilities are not located within the right-of-way, and he questioned the reason to retain the easement. City Attorney Scott Snyder noted that matters of compensation should be referred to the Hearing Examiner to make a recommendation to the Council, and a public hearing should be scheduled to determine the value of the right-of-way. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO REMAND THE MATTER TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR ADJUDICATION. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL DELIQERATION ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block noted that this item was continued by the City Council from the public hearing on May 15, 1990. The Planning Board recommendation and minutes from the May 15th Council meeting were included in the Council packets. Councilmember Hertrich said the intent of the proposed ordinance is to prevent developers from clear cutting a site. He believed a "rooting period" should be included in the ordinance. He said a rooting period would require a developer who has clear cut a site to replant vegetation and that a specified period of time go by to insure that the plantings have rooted. City Attorney Scott Snyder explained that a rooting period would deter developers from premature- ly clearing a site of vegetation before applying for the proper permits. He said there are a number of permit processes for which the City cannot arbitrarily establish waiting periods after cutting vegetation and before a development application. However, under SEPA and general ration- al governmental purposes, the City could establish a process that requires a person who has prema- turely cut vegetation to go to the Architectural Design Board so they can review and approve neighborhood buffering and dust erosion control measures and require those to be implemented and that a reasonable rooting period take place to insure that neighborhoods will be buffered when development occurs. He noted that that administrative review and site restoration period would be between six months to one year. Councilmember Kasper was concerned with the City's ability to impose such an administrative peri- od. He noted that there are many areas in the City that vary in characteristic, and one area may value trees where another area values a view of the water. He thought the ordinance should. take into consideration the different characteristics and be applied accordingly. Councilmember Kas- per was also concerned that the wording In the proposed ordinance is confusing, and citizens are under the impression that it will restrict a private owner of a large lot from cutting a single tree. He recommended that the issue be remanded to the Planning Board for further review. Coun- cilmember Wilson concurred. He said the ordinance should also address view corridors. Councilmember Palmer said the overall concept of the proposed ordinance is incredibly valuable, and he did not "want to throw the baby out with the bath water". COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH FOR DISCUSSION, TO PASS THE ORDINANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS: 1) IN THE PERMIT SECTION ON PAGE 2, ADJUST THE LANGUAGE SUCH THAT THE TRIGGER LEVEL WOULD BE LAND PARCELS OF ONE ACRE OR GREATER; 2) ADJUST 18.45.030(B) SUCH THAT PRD'S WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE COVENANTS ESTABLISHING TREE HEIGHT LIMITS TO PROTECT VIEWS; 3) DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE LANGUAGE ESTABLISHING A PERIOD FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AND SITE RESTORATION. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ELIMINATE THE SECOND SENTENCE IN 18.45.030(H)(6) REGARDING TOPPING. MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED WITH COUNCIL - MEMBER DWYER AND COUNCILMEMBER PALMER OPPOSED. Mr. Snyder advised the Council, if the Council wished to approve the ordinance with a new substan- tive, amendment, to refer the ordinance to the Planning Board. Councilmember Palmer disagreed that the administrative period is a new substantive issue. He said he was heavily involved with the proposed ordinance at the Planning Board level, and a waiting period or administrative period was discussed at length. He pointed out that 18.45.075(D) specifically calls for a period of administration. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 June 26, 1990 Councilmember Kasper requested a roll call vote on the amendment. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE AMENDMENT. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, COUNCILMEM- BER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER AND COUN- CILMEMBER PALMER OPPOSED. At the request of Councilmember Hertrich, Councilmember Palmer explained that the Architectural Design Board would not be able to approve a PRD plan unless it included covenants establishing tree height limits to protect views. Councilmember Hertrich said the proposed ordinance protects existing trees whereas Councilmember Palmer's motion regarding PRD's addresses new plantings to protect view corridors. Councilmember Palmer disagreed. He said he was simply recommending that the City exercise its authority to control view issues in PRD's. Councilmember Hertrich believed that view issues in PRD's should not be included in the proposed ordinance because they are a separate issue from tree cutting. Councilmember Dwyer said he would vote against the motion because he could foresee the City "be- coming a City full of tree police climbing along people"s balconies and trying to see what you Can and can'.t see (with respect to views) and deciding, then, whether you can or cannot cut the tree". He said the City has met its match on its ability to regulate, and he did not believe the existing or proposed ordinance fully addresses the issue of trees. Mayor Naughten said the issue is confusing, but there must be some controls in place to provide protection to people who want to preserve their views as well as to people who love trees. Councilmember Jaech inquired if lots less than an acre in size would be exempt from the proposed ordinance if the language referencing lots of one acre or greater was included. Mr. Snyder re- plied affirmatively, regardless of ownership, use, or inning. Because there was confusion regarding the definition of developed and undeveloped lots, Council - member Hertrich read sections 18.45.050(E) and (M) of the proposed ordinance into the record. He said he lives on a partially developed lot that is capable of being subdivided but, in his opin- ion, a one acre parcel of flat land does not fall into either one of the categories. He suggest- ed that the proposed ordinance include wording to the effect of a partially developed lot always having a structure on it in which someone resides. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MAIN MOTION. MOTION FAILED WITH COUNCILMEMBER PALMER AND COUN- CILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH AND COUNCILMEMBER JAECH OPPOSED; COUNCILMEMBER KASPER ABSTAINED BECAUSE HE DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN A SINGLE LOT OR,A DOUBLE LOT. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED TO REFER THE ORDINANCE TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE. THE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO PASS THE ORDINANCE BUT CHANGE THE EXEMPTION FLOOR FIGURE TO ONE ACRE PARTIALLY DEVELOPED, AND EXCLUDE THE SECTION REGARDING COVENANTS IN PRO'S AND INCLUDE WORDING ON PERIOD FOR ADMINISTRATION, REVIEW AND SITE RESTORA- TION. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION FAILED WITH COUNCILMEMBER PALMER AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, COUNCILMEM- BER JAECH AND COUNCILMEMBER KASPER OPPOSED. In order to allow the Council to discuss the issue at more length, COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, TO MOVE CDC-2-89 TO THE AUGUST 28, 1990 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER OPPOSED. PROPOSED RESOLUTION 702 AUTHORIZING APPLICATION TO INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION FOR GRANT FUNDS TO PURCHASEATERFRONT PROPERTY — Parks & Recreation Manager Arvilla Ohlde said .the Mayor discussed the possible sale of a lot with the owner of a lot on the waterfront but the owner is not interested in selling until perhaps �August. She said there is a parcel of land for sale, however, at 264 Beach Place for $695,000 � that is 25x60 feet, is zoned commercial waterfront, has a 25 foot wide beach side an a 760 square foot cottage. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, TO SUBMIT THE HENNING PROPERTY FOR THE IAC GRANT. MOTION FAILED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER AND COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER PALMER AND COUN- CILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED TO SUBMIT THE PROPERTY AT 264 BEACH PLACE FOR THE IAC GRANT. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9 June 26, 1990 Ms. Ohlde noted the Snohomish Conservations Futures Grant application provides a possibility for open space purchases but must be submitted by August 30. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 702 TO SUBMIT THE CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD FOR THE IAC GRANT. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER PALMER AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH AND COUNCILMEMBER KASPER OPPOSED. APPROVAL OF BUILDING DIVISION JOB DESCRIPTIONS Personnel Director Brent Hunter noted that as a result of the new Combination Inspector/Plans Examiner position (which was approved by the Council on May 22), some .of the job assignments of the other positions in the Building Division have been shifted. The job descriptions for all positions in the Building Division, including the new combination Inspector/Plans Examiner,have been revised accordingly and are submitted for the Council's approval. He said the pay grade level for the new position was established at an NE-11 but all other positions' grades will re- main at their previous level. He noted that the Combination Inspector's position requires an ICBO certificate within one year of hire. Councilmember Palmer said he would like the educational requirements for the Building Official, Combination Inspector/Plans Examiner, and Building Inspector to be changed to a Bachelor's degree instead of an Associate degree in one of the fields indicated on the proposed job description. Councilmember Nordquist suggested that the City hire people who have already obtained ICBO certi- fication rather than hire employees and require them to obtain it within a year of hire. Build- ing Official Dick Mumma said it is diffigult to find people who are ICBO certified. Councilmem- ber Nordquist said he was not confident that an employee will obtain that certificate within the specified time period. Councilmember Dwyer suggested that an employee be given the opportunity to obtain ICBO certification within a year, taking the test the first date it is administered after he/she is hired and the second time it is administered if he/she fails the first test, but discharge the employee if he/she fails to receive certification within that time period. Because the job responsibilities are almost identical for the Building Inspector and Combination Inspector/Plans Examiner, Councilmember Hertrich recommended that the job classification for the Combination Inspector/Plans Examiner be NE-10 rather than NE-11 until an ICBO certification is obtained. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO REQUIRE THAT THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, COMBINATION INSPECTOR/PLANS EXAMINER, AND BUILDING INSPECTOR HAVE A BACHELOR'S DEGREE; THAT THE COMBINATION INSPECTOR/PLANS EXAMINER OBTAIN ICBO CERTIFICATION WITHIN ONE YEAR WITH NO EXTENSION; AND APPROVE THE JOB DESCRIPTIONS FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if Councilmember Nordquist was amenable to his suggestion that an employee be required to take the ICBO test on the first opportunity that it is administered after the date of hire and the second time it is administered if he/she fails the first test but that he/she be discharged automatically if ICBO certification is not obtained. Councilmember Nord- quist replied affirmatively. MOTION CARRIED. - PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2674 AMENDING EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH LANDSCAPE STAN- DARDS FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD CONTINUED MOM MAY 21 HEARING AND MAY 20 CONSENT AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO RESCHEDULE THE. ITEM TO AUGUST 28, 1990 AND CLOSE THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. SET DATE FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING CODE ENFORCEMENT/CIVIL PENALTIES (SUGGESTED HEARING DATE: AUGUST 21 1990 COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PALMER, TO SET THE DATE FOR THE HEARING ON CIVIL PENALTIES FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT ON AUGUST 21, 1990. MOTION CARRIED. MAYOR Mayor Naughten said the Police Department certification team is in the City of Edmonds. He noted that there are only six agencies in the State that have obtained that certification. Mayor Naughten said the NLC meeting will be held from December 1 through December 5 in Houston, Texas. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10 June 26, 1990 COUNCIL Council President Nordquist asked Councilmember Palmer which Boards or Committees he is serving r��,:,fs on. Councilmember Palmer said he currently serves on the Cable Committee but would prefer not to serve on the Disability Board. Council President Nordquist said Councilmember Kasper has volun- teer, to serve on the Disability Board in place of Councilmember Palmer. Council President Nordquist noted that there are five weeks in July, and he recommended that the Council meet with the Mukilteo City Council in Edmonds on July 31 at a dinner meeting to continue the discussion that recently took place. The Council concurred. Council President Nordquist said the City of Lynnwood would also like to meet with the Council in the near future. He said he would schedule that meeting when Councilmember Kasper returned. �. Councilmember Jaech said she and Councilmember Palmer are going to take each other's place on the committees that they serve on so she will be on the Public Safety Committee and Councilmember Palmer will be on the Community Services Committee. Councilmember Jaech requested the Council to let her know in advance if they plan to attend the 4th of July celebration at her house. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, TO RECONSIDER ITEM (H) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA (REROOFING THE ANDERSON CENTER). As a procedural matter, Mayor Naughten adjourned the meeting at 10 p.m. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR FIVE MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER PALMER AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, TO AWARD THE CONTRACT AND INCLUDE INSULATION ON THE TWO WEST WINGS, AND APPROVE THE FUNDS BY BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS OF ITEMS LISTED ON EXHIBIT B THAT WILL NOT BE ACCOMPLISHED IN 1990. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, AND COUNCILMEMBER KASPER IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER PALMER, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED. The meeting adjourned at 10:03 p.m. THESE MINUTES ARE SUBJECT TO JULY 17, 1990 APPROVAL. �JACQYELINE G. PARRETT, City Clerk LARRY S. NAUGHTEN, Mayor EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11 June 26, 1990 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL PLAZA MEETING ROOM -LIBRARY BUILDING 7:00 - 10:00 P.M. JUNE 26. 1990 WORK MEETING - NO AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION CALL TO ORDER FLAG SALUTE 1. CONSENT AGENDA ZA) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 19, 1990 (C) PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2782 ADOPTING STATE LAW PROHIBITING USE OF DOMESTIC DOGS AND CATS AS BAIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRAINING OTHER ANIMALS (D) PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2783 ADOPTING STATE LAW PROHIBITING THE FAILURE TO STOP A VESSEL UPON THE REQUEST OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER t I I (E) PROPOSED RESOLUTION 701 AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR FUNDING ASSISTANCE FROM AQUATIC LANDS ENHANCEMENT ACCOUNT OF DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR INTERPRETIVE PORTIONS OF BRACKETT'S LANDING UPLAND IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (F) REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF TRANSFER OF UNEXPENDED FUNDS FROM 1989 MEDIATION APPROPRIATION TO ENGINEERING CONSULTANT BUDGET FOR ADDITIONAL SOIL TESTING ASSOCIATED WITH HARBOR HILLS DEVELOPMENT (G) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM WILLIAM E. MCANDREW ($294.02) (H) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED JUNE 12, 1990 FOR REROOFING ANDERSON CENTER, AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO KATHOL ROOFING, INC. ($66,423.12, INCLUDING SALES TAX) 2. CWC-HDR MONTHLY REPORT 3. REPORT ON CEMETERY STRUCTURE PROPOSAL BY HUBBARD TRUST AND CEMETERY BOARD 4. DISCUSSION WITH MARY HUGHES ON SEWER SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 5. YEASTINGS & HUGHES ASSOCIATES PRESENTATION OF THEIR RECOMMENDATION ON THE PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY GAIN BOSWORTH, INC., TO REFUND THE 1980 G.O. BONDS 6. PRESENTATION ON REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 7. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST TO REDUCE COMPENSATION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY TO BE VACATED ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF 8TH AVE. N. IN VICINTIY OF 771 DALEY ST. 8. COUNCIL DELIBERATION ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING TO LAND CLEARING AND TREE CUTTING (CDC-2-89/CITY OF EDMONDS) (FROM SECOND PUBLIC HEARING MAY 15, 1990) 9. PROPOSED RESOLUTION 702 AUTHORIZING APPLICATION TO INTERAGENCY COMMITTEE FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION FOR GRANT FUNDS TO PURCHASE WATERFRONT PROPERTY 10. APPROVAL OF BUILDING DIVISION JOB DESCRIPTIONS 11. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2674 AMENDING EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ESTABLISH LANDSCAPE STANDARDS FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD (CONT. FROM MAY 21 HEARING AND MAY 29 CONSENT AGENDA) 12. SET DATE FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING CODE ENFORCEMENT/CIVIL PENALTIES (SUGGESTED HEARING DATE: AUGUST 21, 1990) 13. MAYOR 14. COUNCIL THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND PARKING AND MEETING ROOMS ARE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE