Loading...
06/06/1989 City CouncilTHESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO JUNE 20, 1989 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 6, 1989 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 ABSENT STAFF Larry Naughten, Mayor John Nordquist Jim Barnes, Parks & Rec. Div. Mgr. Bill Kasper, Council President Ron Schirman, Assistant Fire Chief Steve Dwyer, Councilmember Duane Bowman, Asst. City Planner Laura Hall, Councilmember Bob Alberts, City Engineer Roger Hertrich, Councilmember Gordy Hyde, Engineering Coord. Jo -Anne Jaech, Councilmember Dan Prinz, Police Chief John Nordquist, Councilmember Brent Hunter, Personnel Manager Jack Wilson, Councilmember Peter Hahn, Comm. Svc. Director Dave Berdine, Student Rep. Scott Snyder, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder Councilmember Dwyer arrived at 8:30 p.m. and did not vote on any item preceding item #7 on the agenda. Mayor Naughten noted that Administrative Services Director Art Housler, Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block, and Police Chief Dan Prinz were at the Westgate Home Owners Association meeting to discuss annexation. CONSENT AGENDA Items (B) and (D) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The ap- proved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL (C) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM SCOTT JENSEN ($454.12) (E) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF HEARING 3 EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AT 7226 SOUNDVIEW DR. (AP-1-89/S-35-88/CAMPBELL) (F) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF ADB DECISION REGARDING READERBOARD AT 22304 HIGHWAY 99, DOUG'S LYNNWOOD MAZDA (AP-7-89/ADB-5-89/BARNES AWNING BROKERS) (G) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF ARCHITECTURAL � DESIGN BOARD DECISION ON SIGN ILLUMINATION FOR EDWARD D. JONES & CO. AT 405 MAIN ST. �te x-La (AP-13-89/ADB-25-89/LAWRENCE) REPORT NOPENED 4IFOR ($RE838NGSALLESTAX) 00NINCLUDIOASON CENTER, AND AWARD OFCONTRACT TOKATHOLROOFNG7O 2Lh,,-,� (I) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED MAY 30, 1989 FOR 212TH ST. S.W. ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND r� AWARD OF CONTRACT TO ASSOCIATED SAND AND GRAVEL COMPANY ($116,092.50) (J) ADOPTED ORDINANCE 2717 AMENDING OFFICIAL STREET MAP TO REDUCE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR 70TH AVE. W. FROM 60 FEET TO 50 FEET IN VICINITY OF INTERSECTION OF 70TH AVE. W. AND 157TH ST. S.W. (APPLICANT: WARREN AND JANET FULLER/ST-1-89/FROM APRIL 4 HEARING) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED MAY 31, 1989 FOR NEW BURSTER/IMPRINTER WITH ONE YEAR MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO STANDARD REGISTER ($9,381.91 INCLUDING SALES TAX) APPROVAL OF DETOUR PLAN FOR FERRY TERMINAL RECONSTRUCTION APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 23, 1989 EITEM (B) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA] Councilmember Hall referred to page 7, paragraph 5, noting that the correct spelling of Neese was K-N-I-E-S-T. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS CORRECTED. MOTION CARRIED. ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION i DENYING-R-EIFUEST FOR HEIGHT VARIANCE N LOT 7, EAGLE'S RE RD V- - P-1 - HUIZ N IT M D N THE CONSENTCOITSENT AGENDA Councilmember Wilson said after reviewing the record of the previous hearings, he was of the * _ opinion. that the appeal should be upheld. He said he made another on -site visit and observed that the unusual topographical conditions necessitate the granting of a height variance in order to construct a single -story structure. He said it would only seem fair to uphold the appeal under those circumstances. He noted that neighboring residents who were opposed to the height variance seemed to be concerned only with the preservation of their views, which did not exist prior to the development of the PRO, but there was no regard for the rights of the applicant. Councilmember Hertrich noted that chapter 20.35 prohibitsthegranting of a height variance in a PRO" review and 20.85.010(A) states that special circumstances shall not be predicated upon any factor personal to the owner nor any factor resulting from the action of the owner or any past owner of the same property. Councilmember Kasper said the Council had decided to approve construction a year ago when a build- ing blueprint was submitted to the Council. He felt it would be unfair to not allow homes to be constructed after the property has been prepared for development. City Attorney Scott Snyder advised the Council that a hearing should be scheduled if the Council wished to reconsider the issue so that the proponents and opponents.could hear their deliberation. Having voted on the prevailing side, COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KAS- PER, TO RECONSIDER THE ITEM AND SET A HEARING DATE FOR COUNCIL DELIBERATION ONLY. Councilmember Kasper felt it was imperative that the Council review their previous actions. Councilmember Hall was concerned about the legal ramifications if citizens spoke with Councilmem- bers about the issue before the hearing. Mr. Snyder said the Council could, if they so desired, hear additional testimony by continuing the hearing to another date. Because several Councilmembers voiced a concern regarding the content of the information that would be reviewed at the hearing, COUNCILMEMBER WILSON SAID HE WOULD CHANGE THE MOTION TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING IF THE SECONDER AGREED. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER AGREED. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Snyder suggested that the Council enter into the record the items that they wanted Staff, the public, and the applicant to address so that they would be prepared to come forward with that information. Councilmember Wilson inquired if the Council could address that issue at next week's meeting. Mr. Snyder replied affirmatively. The hearing was set for July 18, 1989. AUDIENCE Mayor Naughten opened the audience portion of the meeting. Jeff Palmer, 17510 - 76th Ave. W., submitted copies of a letter to the City Clerk for distribu- tion to the Council and from which.he read. Mr. Palmer said at least two fatalities have occurred on the waterfront this year. He requested the City to immediately put into operation the Fire Department rescue craft. He suggested that R the craft be temporarily stored at the Port of Edmonds until a permanent location is identified in order to expedite operation of the boat. He said the ability to provide for the safety and well being of persons using the Edmonds' waterfront was dependent upon the City's prompt atten- tion to the matter. * See Council Minutes of June 20, 1989 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 JUNE 6, 1989 Councilmember Wilson said he was in favor of requesting the Port to provide moorage on a long- term basis. He and Councilmember Hertrich were concerned that any storage unit at Brackett's Landing be an enhancement to the waterfront and not an eyesore. Mayor Naughten said Staff would pursue moorage alternatives and report back to the Council. Gerald Perry, 217 - 5th Ave. N., said it was extremely important that the rescue boat be put into immediate operation when considering that usage of the waterfront has increased. Janet Duncan, Executive Director of the Community Health Center of Snohomish County, 2722 Colby, Everett, said the Center is the only low-income clinic for people in Snohomish County who do not have access to health care. She said the Center is faced with several financial situations which may force closure of the clinic in July. Ms. Duncan said funding has been requested from Edmonds (in --the amount of $5,000), Mountlake Terrace, the County and United Way. Councilmember Wilson inquired about the financial status of the Center in 1990. Ms. Duncan said several Medicaid enhancements were passed by the State legislature which will provide assistance to the Center next year. She said other funding sources, i.e., Federal funding, may also be available to the Clinic next year, which will favorably impact its budget. Councilmember Wilson inquired about the health care that is provided at the clinic. Ms. Duncan said primary health care is administered, which includes hospitalization in the South County facility. She said a family practice physician and nurse practitioner are available in Lynnwood. City Attorney Scott Snyder noted that it was Council policy not to act on any item brought up during the audience portion of a meeting. He said he could draft a contract for the Council's review if they wished to approve the funding. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,000. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Naughten closed the audience portion of the meeting. PRESENTATION OF COMMUNITY SERVICES AWARD TO PORT OF EDMONDS Mayor Naughten noted that the City established the Community Services Award approximately four years ago to recognize individuals or organizations who have contributed to the betterment of the P- quality of life in Edmonds. Mayor Naughten presented the Community Services Award to Commissioner Roger Stubbs of the Port of Edmonds in recognition of their beautification project at the southwest corner of Railroad Avenue and Dayton Street. Commissioner Stubbs, on behalf of the Port, expressed his appreciation to the Council. He said it was an honor to receive the award. He noted that the Port intends to retain an architect to redesign the remaining landscaped areas at the Port. Mayor Naughten recognized retired Coast Guard officer Bill Stevens, the new Port Manager, in the audience. HEARING ON REQUIREMENTS FOR IN -LIEU PARKING AT 605 MAIN ST. (APPLICANT: TED LINDE) Idyl Associate City Planner Duane Bowman reported that the City has received a request from Jay / Middleton, acting on behalf of Ted Linde, to pay into the in -lieu parking fund as a means of meeting the parking requirements for a proposed building at 605 Main Street. Because the request exceeds 50% of the normal parking requirement, the City Council must approve the request. Mr. Bowman said the proposed building is a mix of commercial space and a single family resi- dence. The required parking for the building is six parking spaces, two of which will be provid- ed on site. The remaining four spaces would be provided by paying into the in -lieu parking fund. Mr. Bowman noted that a letter requesting the use of in -lieu parking fund, the site plan, build- ing elevations, and the review criteria for Chapter 17.50.070(2) of the Edmonds Community Develop- ment Code (ECDC) were included in the Council packets. Mr. Bowman said Staff has reviewed the criteria for use of the in -lieu parking fund and finds that sufficient on -street parking is available in the immediate area; that the number of poten- tial customers should not create a parking problem; and that the proposal should not detract from the development of future central parking lots. Staff does not oppose the request. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 JUNE 6, 1989 Councilmember Kasper inquired how the parking requirements were calculated. Mr. Bowman said they were calculated on the floor area of the building. Councilmember Kasper inquired about the park- ing accommodations for adjacent commercial buildings. Mr. Bowman said they have parking at the rear of the buildings. * Councilmember Hertrich said it was impossible to ascertain if the proposal met the criteria of Ordinance 2271 for the in -lieu parking fund because sufficient information was not provided to the Council. * Councilmember Hertrich inquired where future central parking lots will be located in the City. Mr. Bowman said the City is actively working towards providing parking in the downtown area, i.e., the Security Pacific Bank lot and the lot across from Old Mill Town. Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the cost to develop a parking lot. Mr. Bowman replied approximately $10,000. Jay Middleton, Reid, Middleton & Associates, representing the applicant, said the property in question is allowed three times the amount of floor area of the lot. He said there is a possibil- ity that the building may be reduced in size, which would decrease the parking requirement by one space, and a third parking space may be added on the back portion of the lot. Mr. Middleton said the firm conducted a parking analysis in the immediate vicinity of the pro- posed project and found that there were approximately 60 spaces within a block and a half of the proposed project and approximately 1/3 to 1/2 were unoccupied when observed 5 times over a 90 day period. Mr. Middleton said the firm anticipated that probably no more than 4 cars would utilize the park- ing area for the proposed project within any given period. Councilmember Hall said she had a problem with the in -lieu parking fund because it sill does not provide ample parking for customers. Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the ratio of commercial use and residential use if the building is reduced in size. Mr. Middleton said the building, as presently designed, is approxi- mately 6,000 square feet. He said approximately 1,000 square feet is commercial, approximately 3,000 square feet is residential, and the remainder is parking. Mr. Middleton said at least 700 square feet of office space may be deleted from the plans. Councilmember Kasper questioned if the use of the building is required to be 50% retail. Mr. Bowman said the proposal was reviewed and approved by the Hearing Examiner. At the request of Councilmember Hertrich, Mr. Bowman explained that Staff required the project to meet RS-6 standards for the single-family dwelling, which calls for a 20 foot street setback, 5 foot sideyard setback, and a 15 foot rear setback. He said the applicant submitted a request for variance to those standards and was granted the variance. Councilmember Jaech expressed concern that the single-family use could be converted to commercial use. in the future without the City's knowledge. Mr. Bowman said a business license is required if the use is changed, and the parking requirements would be reviewed at that time. He said the City could become aware of a change in use by notice of adjacent property owners or by observa- tion by City officials. Councilmember Wilson inquired if Staff conducted an analysis of off-street parking in the immedi- ate vicinity of the subject property. Mr. Bowman replied negatively. He said, however, he did not believe parking would be a problem in that area from his own observation. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. Bert Stole, 8704 - 182nd P1. S.W., had submitted a letter to the City Clerk for distribution to the Council (marked Exhibit #1). Mr. Stole said in -lieu parking creates a very large building on a very small site. He said his building is next -door to the proposed building and was designed with 5 foot sideyard setbacks to blend in with the residential area, but the subject project, as proposed, will be constructed with a 100 foot Berlin -type concrete wall. He said it did not seem appropriate the in -lieu park- ing would allow the density that is proposed. Upon the advice of City Attorney Scott Snyder, Mr. Middleton was provided with a copy of Mr. Stole's letter. * See Council Minutes of June 20, 1989 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 JUNE 6, 1989 ,4b, _tT Mr. Middleton said the building area will be maximized but was designed subsequent to extensive conversations with City Staff. He said the applicants purchased the property a number of years ago to develop an in -town residence for themselves with a commercial use on the lower level that would help supplement their income when they retire. He said the BC zoning requirements allow a structure up to the property line with maximum density. Mr. Middleton said the composition of the wall adjacent to the alley has not yet been determined, but it will blend with the building itself while not obliterating Mr. Stole's property and will still remain compatible with the near -historic house on the corner of 6th and Main street. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the building will be constructed up to the property line that is adjacent to the alley. Mr. Middleton said it will be 12 to 14 feet from that property line. Councilmember Hertrich inquired how that area will be treated. Mr. Middleton said landscaping will be planted, a driveway installed, and one additional parking space provided. Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the distance from the alley to Mr. Stole's building. Mr. Middleton guessed that is is approximately 25 feet away. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the meeting. Councilmember Hertrich read excerpts from Ordinance 1914 (because he thought it was important for the -Council to understand the philosophy when the ordinance was created) as follows: "Whereas, the City Council finds that unplanned development of parking lots in the downtown area leads to parking lots being constructed between adjoining buildings... this saw-toothed development is not in the best interest of orderly development in the City". Councilmember Hertrich said the Coun- cil, at the time the ordinance was created, wished to prevent the downtown area from developing into a gigantic parking lot. Councilmember Kasper recalled that the intent of the ordinance was to create additional parking for existing businesses which wished to expand their present facility. Councilmember Jaech recommended that the hearing be continued until the Architectural Design Board reviewed the proposal and additional information was made available to the Council because she said the building design could be altered which, in turn, could change the parking require- ment. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO DENY THE REQUEST FOR IN -LIEU OF PARKING. MOTION CARRIED. NG ON APPEAL OF ADB DECISION REGARDING ACCESS ONTO 7TH AVE. N. AND A BRIDGE OVER SHELL Associate City Planner Duane Bowman provided the Council with a revised site plan. Mr. Bowman reported that on May 10, 1989, the Architectural Design Board (ADB) granted final approval for a proposed 15 unit apartment building at 633 Glen Street. Jack Vandeman filed an appeal on May 18, 1989 asking that the ADB decision be overturned. His primary objection to the project is the proposed bridge access off 7th Ave. N. Mr. Bowman noted that copies of the letters submitted by Mr. Vandeman, the revised site plan, and letters from the Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife were included in the Council packets. Mr. Bowman said it is the recommendation of Staff to uphold the ADB decision based upon approval of the revised site plan. Mr. Bowman said Staff and the applicant met with the Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife to review the project. He said revisions were made, and the two departments concurred with the proposed changes. Mr. Bowman said the Department of Fisheries has delayed issuance of a hydrau- lics permit until the City decides the issue regarding the development plans. Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the statement contained in the letter written by Mr. Vandeman that the Department of Fisheries stated that they would not recommend the construction of the bridge if the developer could gain access to the basement parking from Glen Street. Mr. Bowman said alternate access points were discussed at the meeting with the two departments and the applicant pointed out the difficulties that would be encountered. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the City Engineer has reviewed the possibility of access from Glen Street. City Engineer Bob Alberts replied negatively. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 JUNE 6, 1989 Councilmember Kasper inquired if the traffic impact on Holy Rosary School was studied. Mr. Al- berts replied negatively. James Smith, 18500 Olympic View Dr., submitted a large colored rendering of the project to the City Clerk (marked Exhibit #1) and a black and white copy of the portion of the colored rendering portraying the bridge and access (marked Exhibit #2). Upon the advice of City Attorney Scott Snyder, a copy of Exhibit #2 was given to Mr. Vandeman for his review. Mr. Smith said he met repeatedly with the Planning Department since August of 1988 and with the Department of Fisheries to discuss access to the apartment building. He said it is impossible to access from Glen Street. Mr. Smith explained the design of the bridge. He said the project has received ADB approval, and both the Department of Fisheries and Department of Wildlife will approve the bridge as presently designed. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if access from Glen Street was discussed with the City. Mr. Smith said he met with Staff to discuss that issue. He explained the difficulties in providing access at that location. Jack Vandeman, 616 Sater Lane, submitted to the City Clerk copies of a proposed site plan that he drafted showing access from Glen, and an attached letter (marked Exhibit #3). Mr. Vandeman said he has been a builder for a number of years. He said he and his wife informal- ly surveyed the subject property. He said if access was provided from Glen Street, the driveway would only have a 7% slope which, he said, the Engineering Coordinator assured him was moderate. He noted that the slope to the proposed bridge is between 6 to 7%. (Councilmember Dwyer arrived at the meeting.) Mr. Vandeman said parking stalls 29 and 30 could be relocated next to parking stalls 27 and 28 in order to provide access from Glen Street. Mr. Vandeman said construction of the bridge would require 40 foot long trenches, 6 feet in width and approximately 6 to 7 feet deep in order to guarantee the integrity of the bridge throughout the years. Mr. Vandeman said the property owners downstream request the Council to require the builder to construct a legal bridge or provide access from Glen Street. Councilmember Wilson noted that the applicant had stated that the rockery, if access was provided from Glen Street, would create more of a problem than the proposed bridge. He inquired if Mr. Vandeman discussed that aspect with the Department of Fisheries, Department of Wildlife, or the Planning Department. Mr. Vandeman replied negatively. He said, "I consider the Fisheries and Wildlife people to be a waste of time". Councilmember Hertrich inquired about the costs to construct an 80 foot access driveway versus the proposed bridge. Mr. Vandeman said Mr. Smith had stated that the bridge would cost $20,000. Mr. Vandeman said a rockery 10 feet away from the creek would cost approximately $2,500. Council- member Hertrich inquired if construction of a rockery would disrupt the ecological system of the creek. Mr. Vandeman said absolutely not. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. Dorothea Vandeman, 616 Sater Lane, said the creek supports various species of wildlife. She was concerned that vehicular fluids will be washed from the bridge into the creek when it rains and pollute the creek. She said she was opposed to the construction of any vehicular bridge across Shell Creek at 7th and Glen. Kerstin Moser, 825 - 7th Ave. N., read a letter into the record from her father which stated, in essence, that he strongly supported the appeal to deny a bridge over Shell Creek. He said the quality of Shell Creek could not be preserved with the removal of two trees without permanent damage to the creek, especially with the bridge above. Ms. Moser submitted to letter to the City Clerk (marked Exhibit #4). Helen Moser, 825 - 7th Ave. N., was concerned about the impact to the creek if Glen Street is developed to a high density. She said there are more hazards to the creek due to drainage out- lets on 7th Avenue. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 JUNE 6, 1989 Ms. Moser submitted a scrapbook about their salmon hatchery project to the City Clerk (marked Exhibit N5). Norm Hagen, 807 - 7th Ave. N., felt the proposed access would create a danger to the cars exiting onto 7th Avenue because of the posted speed limit on that road. Mr. Hagen was concerned about the safety of the children of the tenants of the proposed apartment complex as they play on or near the bridge, as well as the ecological system of the creek. Mr. Hagen said he did not think anything was impossible to accomplish in construction. He re- quested the developer to reconsider access from Glen Street. In response to a comment by Mr. Vandeman regarding parking stalls 29 and 30, Mr. Bowman stated that the zoned district requires a setback of 15 feet from the street and parking is not allowed in a street setback. He said.any deviation from those standards would require a variance. Jerry Lovell, Lovell -Sauerland & Associates, 19400 - 33rd Ave. W., Lynnwood, said discussions have taken place with Mr. Vandeman to explain to him the logistics of constructing the project as designed. Mr. Lovell said accessing the property from Glen Street would be hazardous because the driveway entrance would be very close to 7th Avenue and Glen Street. In addition, he said access would not be feasible from that location because the difference in grade between the sidewalk and park- ing level would be 6 feet. He explained the details of constructing an access from Glen Street and why it would be unfeasible. Mr. Lovell said a better solution, and a more costly solution, to access would be to construct a bridge across the stream. Mr. Lovell said he is a registered surveyor with over thirty-five years of experience. He noted that Mr. Vandeman incorrectly located the creek on his site plan. He said the location of the creek for the proposed project was surveyed and is accurate. Mr. Lovell said Mr. Vandeman's plan would remove all` of the vegetation on the south side of the creek, noting that the proposed plan will leave intact all of the vegetation on the southeast quadrant of the property. Mr. Lovell said the project has received approval from all of the governing agencies. He request- ' ed approval from the City so the project can proceed. Mr. Snyder noted that the criteria of the ADB has not been addressed yet. He said 20.10.070 (B) --Site Treatment --seems to be relevant to the issue and states that grading, vegetation removal, and other changes to the site shall be minimised where natural beauty exists. Large cuts and fill and impervious surfaces should be avoided. Mr. Snyder inquired if the impervious surface would be reduced in Mr. Vandeman's plan in compari- son to the proposed plan. Mr. Lovell said that surface would probably be very comparable. Mr. Snyder inquired if there would be any more or less fill. Mr. Lovell said he thought there would be more fill in Mr. Vandeman's proposal. Mr. Snyder inquired if any of the grading and fill for the proposed plan would occur on the opposite stream bank from the building. Mr. Lovell replied affirmatively. He said approximately 250 cubic yards of fill would be placed behind the bridge supports. Mr. Snyder pointed out that only one of the site treatment criteria applied to the proposed project, which states, "No one architectural style is required. The building shall be designed to comply with the purposes of this chapter [20.10.070(B)9] and to avoid conflict with the exist- ing and planned character of the nearby area". Mr. Snyder said the Council must make. a finding with respect to the aesthetic quality of the project and also with respect to the environment for the grading plan. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the impact to Holy Rosary School was reviewed. Mr. Lovell said the proposal will generate approximately ninety vehicular trips on a daily basis and traffic would not negatively impact the school. Councilmember Jaech noted that the Department of Fisheries advised that a fence be constructed to protect the creek if the bridge is constructed. Mr. Bowman said a fence is not included in the proposal; instead, Staff discussed with the applicant rehabilitation of the stream and planting of vegetation along the stream bank to provide shade so that it reverts to a more natural environ- ment. Councilmember Jaech inquired if it would be feasible to provide access from Glen Street as de- scribed by Mr. Vandeman. Mr. Alberts said a survey would have to be conducted to make that deter- mination. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 JUNE 6, 1989 Mr. Snyder noted that the Council raised several issues that were not addressed by the testimony given that evening and, in addition, Councilmember Dwyer arrived after the hearing started. He said if the Council wanted him to participate in the hearing, he would have to review the record in order to vote. Mr. Snyder said if the Council continued the hearing on those bases, they would have an opportunity to request input from Staff and the Department of Fisheries with re- spect to Mr. Vandeman's proposal. Councilmember Dwyer noted that his attendance at the meeting was delayed because he was at the D.A.R.E. graduation. He said he would listen to the tapes of the hearing in order to participate in the decision -making process, but he suggested that the Council not continue the hearing unless other reasons existed. Counc i I member. Hertri ch said he would like the Engineering Department to review the possibility of accessing the property without a bridge. Councilmember Kasper was concerned about the traffic impact to 7th Avenue which the proposal would create. He pointed out that the Shell Creek improvement program will mitigate many of the impacts of the proposal to downstream residents. He felt the bridge was an aesthetically pleas- ing amenity and was probably the best access point. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO UPHOLD THE ADB DECISION BASED UPON APPROVAL OF THE REVISED SITE PLAN. Councilmember Hall was not satisfied that the site plan was designed to make the best use of the property. She said she was certain that a site plan could be drafted that was livable to her and which could be defended. MOTION FAILED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH; AND COUNCILMEMBER JAECH OPPOSED; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER ABSTAINED. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO DENY THE ADB DECISION BASED ON NONCOMPLIANCE WITH 2O.10.000 (A) and (D). MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, AND COUNCILMEMBER JAECH IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER KASPER AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OP- POSED; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER ABSTAINED. COUNCIL DETERMINATION REGARDING APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION ON EXCAVATION AND GRADING OF APPROXIMATELY 1,250 CUBIC YARDS AT 633 GLEN ST. P-17-89/CU-2 -89 PPELLANT: JACK V NDEMAN/APPLICANT: JAMES SMITH CONTINUED FROM HEARING OF MAY 16, 1 This item was continued from the May 16th meeting in order to obtain letters of concurrence with the proposed plans from the two governing State agencies. Staff and the applicant met with repre- sentatives of the Departments of Fisheries and Wildlife. There appears to be agreement on a plan. However, it does involve some modifications. Staff's recommendation is to uphold the Hearing Examiner's decision based upon the revised devel- opment plan. With respect to the grading permit, City Attorney Scott Snyder reviewed 20.050.010(C) as fol- lows: "The use, as approved, will not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare and to nearby private property or improvements unless the use is a public necessity". Discussed ensued with respect to assisting the applicant if a future application was submitted so that no additional filing fees would be necessary. Mr. Snyder suggested that the Council table the issue indefinitely pending a new design. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO TABLE THE APPLICATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNTIL ANOTHER DESIGN IS SUBMITTED. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the applicant can submit a revised design to the ADB under the same application without having to pay filing fees. Mr. Snyder replied negatively. Councilmem- ber Jaech inquired if Item #5 could be denied with regard to construction of a bridge but allow review of access from Glen Street without having to pay filing fees again. Mr. Snyder replied affirmatively. COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH WITHDREW THE MOTION. Having voted on the prevailing side, COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO RECONSIDER ITEM #5. MOTION CARRIED. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 JUNE 6, 1989 COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO DENY THE APPLICATION FOR ACCESS FROM 7TH AVENUE FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND REMAND THE ISSUE TO THE ADB FOR CONSIDERATION FOR ACCESS FROM GLEN STREET. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO REMAND THE MATTER WITHOUT A DECISION TO THE ADB TO REVIEW ACCESS FROM GLEN STREET VERSUS 7TH AVENUE. MOTION FAILED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCIL - MEMBER HERTRICH, AND COUNCILMEMBER JAECH OPPOSED; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER ABSTAINED. MAIN MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, AND COUNCILMEMBER JAECH IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER KASPER AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON OPPOSED; COUNCILMEMBER DWYER ABSTAINING. HEARING ON 1990-1996 SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND ADOPTION BY RESOLUTION 686 Due to time constraints, the item was rescheduled to June 20, 1989. (Later in the meeting public testimony was taken.) HEARING ON HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE PROPOSED VARIANCE FOR EDMONDS HIGH SCHOOL TO INSTALL A 60 FOOT SAFETY FENCE V-11-89/APPLICANT: EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT Associate City Planner Duane Bowman reported that on May 4, 1989, the Hearing Examiner held a �0.•t�!/ "" public hearing on the request of the Edmonds School District for a variance to construct a 60 7 foot high safety fence at Edmonds High School along 216th St. S.W. The purpose of the fence is to reduce or eliminate the possibility of baseballs being hit into the street or onto neighboring orooerties. Mr. Bowman said the Hearing Examiner issued his report on May 16, 1989 recommending approval of the variance. Because this is a public facility, the City Council must approve the variance request. Due to the imminent hazard to the public, the Hearing Examiner ordered the fence to be erected immediately and it has been installed. Mr. Bowman noted that exhibits pertinent to the case were included in the Council packets. Mr. Bowman said it is the recommendation of Staff to adopt the Hearing Examiner's recommendation to approve the variance request. (The applicant was not present.) Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. George Wegrici, 21601 - 78th Ave. W., said he lives directly across from the high school and baseballs used to shower his property. He said the safety of his family was endangered, as well as pedestrian and vehicular traffic along 216th St. S.W. Mr. Wegerici said last weekend was the first weekend in three years that he felt safe in his home because the fence was erected. Mr. Wegrici felt the fence should remain in place year-round unless a guarantee could be made that baseballs will not end up in his yard during the off season. Councilmember Hall said although she was glad that the problem has been solved, she questioned why the request was before the Council after the net has been installed. Mr. Wegrici said the Hearing Examiner ordered the fence to be immediately erected because of the severity of the prob- lem. Natalie Shippen, 1022 Euclid, requested the Council to reinstate item #7 (Hearing on the 1990- 1996 Six -Year Transportaion Improvement Program) at the end of the agenda. She said the cavalier handling of public hearings must stop. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember Dwyer said he lives near the high school and has seen baseballs in the street on a regular basis. He said because center field is approximately three-quarters the size of a major league field, a 60 foot fence is necessary to confine balls to school grounds. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOM- MENDATION. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON 1990-1996 SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND ADOPTION BY RESOLUTION 686 �. It was the consensus of the Council to allow public input but postpone Council discussion of the AXI-V item until June 20. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9 JUNE 6, 1989 COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO REOPEN THE ISSUE FOR PUBLIC INPUT. MOTION CARRIED. City Attorney Scott Snyder noted that no one left the room after the item was tabled. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. Natalie Shippen, 1022 Euclid, said she was opposed to the over signalization which seems to be occurring in Edmonds. She said she did not believe that signalization in Edmonds was truly a function of need but, rather, a matter of economics. Ms. Shippen said a signal at every block only grouped vehicles together. She reminded the Council that stop -and -go traffic contributed more to air pollution than flowing traffic does. Ms. Shippen thought the overhead signals were the "biggest eye sore in town". She said she was opposed to four-way overhead lights on two-lane roadways and to a full set of pedestrian signals. Ms. Shippen requested the Council to examine each item on the list of traffic signalization and not just give blanket approval. Ms. Shippen said an overlay from Main Street to Sunset Drive would preclude further underground wiring from 3rd to Sunset Avenue or make it more expensive. She requested the Council to consid- er that item before approving it. Councilmember Hall inquired if traffic lights could be corner mounted on poles rather than on an overhead wire. City Engineer Bob Alberts said corner -mounted lights are a possibility but are not practical or safe on roads posted in excess of 35 mph. He said overhead signals provide better visibility, which has been a concern of the Council. Dick Hill, 1242 Coronado, said a light is desperately needed at the intersection of 9th and Elm. He requested the Council to not overlook that intersection. Jeff Palmer, 17510 - 76th Ave. W., felt the best approach to signalization would be a conserva- tive approach whereby lights are installed in steps, i.e, flashing light in two directions and a red light in the other direction and on to four-way stop lights, rather than installing full- scale signals. Mr. Palmer said he believed the four-way stop at 224th and 76th worked very well with the excep- tion of one of the turning lanes. He did not think that a signal was necessary at the intersec- tion of Meadowdale Beach Road and 76th Avenue West. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED TO APPROVE THE 1990-1996 SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Because the Council thought the motion was premature in light of the scheduled discussion on June 20, COUNCILMEMBER HALL WITHDREW THE MOTION. Mayor Naughten adjourned the meeting at 10 p.m. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL - MEMBER JAECH, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR FORTY MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO SCHEDULE COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF THE ITEM ON JUNE 20, 1989. The meeting recessed at 10:02 p.m. and reconvened at 10:09 p.m. Councilmember Kasper noted the Council had not voted on the motion made just prior to the re- cess. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING TWO 4 LOT SUBDIVISIONS ON WEST SIDE OF 6TH AVE. W., NORTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF 76TH AND OLYMPIC VIEW DR. (APPELLANT: RICH RD SLETTVETkAP-9-89/5-IU-88) Associate City Planner Duane Bowman reported that on March 14, 1989, Staff gave preliminary ap- proval to two four -lot short subdivisions in the Perrinville area. Those approvals were appealed to the Hearing Examiner. Mr. Bowman said the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the appeal on April 20, 1989 and issued his decision on May 9, 1989 upholding the Staff decision but imposing additional condi- tions on the preliminary approvals. Mr. Bowman noted that a copy of the appeal letter, the Hearing Examiner's decision, and the maps of the two proposed short subdivisions were included in the Council packets. He said the files in this matter had been in the Council office for review. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10 JUNE 6, 1989 Mr. Bowman stated that no one disputes that the proposed lots may be very difficult to develop. Chapter 19.05 of the Edmonds Community. Development Code (ECDC) clearly addresses and anticipates the development of sensitive sites such as those proposed. Mr. Bowman said the conditions imposed on the short subdivision will allow the City to do an in-depth analysis of each building site at the time of permit application, as is currently being done in the Meadowdale area. The City, in approving the two short subdivisions, in no way guaran- tees the buildability of any of the lots. Mr. Bowman said it is the recommendation of Staff to uphold the Hearing Examiner's decision. * Councilmember Hertrich said he spoke with Phil Snyder from the Department of Fisheries over the telephone to ask his opinion about the project. He said Mr. Snyder stated that any disturbance to the area would have negative environmental impact and would set a precedent for further devel- opment downstream. Jim Miller, Lovell-Sauerland & Associates, 194000 33rd Ave. W., Suite 200, Lynnwood, representing the applicant, stated: 1) the lots are buildable according to the geotechnical report; 2) the variance criteria have been met; 3) the wetlands setbacks have been maintained and no filling of the natural drainage system is proposed. The development is compatible with the natural con- straints of the property; 4) the development would have no measurable effect on downstream condi- tions (700 acres of urban development drain into the creek); 5) dewatering will be followed to avoid any slope failure on the far side of the stream, as indicated in the geotechnical report; 6) stream setbacks average 30 feet along the stream and vary from 20 to 30 feet and are consis- tent with the recommendations from the resource agencies; 7) a native growth protection area is proposed along the stream and will remain as a native habitat within the corridor that exists along the stream: Tom Belt, the applicant, 917 9th Ave. S., said the subject property is a sensitive area but is not designated as wetlands. He said the soils engineer was satisfied that the land was buildable. Richard Slettvet, 21027 Shell Valley Rd., said the property in question is exceptionally sensi- tive and any development should incorporate extraordinary protective measures. He noted that the property has been designated as environmentally sensitive on City zoning maps. He said Staff dropped the EIS requirement and adopted, instead, a lot -by -lot approval for the eight residences, which will lead to a piece -by -piece destruction of over an acre of wetland. He said the grade and fill requirements for the entire project and the cumulative effect on the wetland should be evaluated before the short subdivisions are approved. Mr. Slettvet said the Assistant City Planner has determined that there are at least two viable alternatives to the proposed development. He said he believed it was the City's responsibility and obligation to review development alternatives which will minimize damage to the environment. Mr. Slettvet said the developer has demonstrated insensitivity for land which the City has clear- ly designated to be environmentally sensitive. Mr. Slettvet noted that 15.15.10(B-1) of the Comprehensive Plan states that a natural drainage system shall not be filled except where no alternative exists. Mr. Slettvet said in order to build eight residences, the builder must divert numerous natural springs to dry up the wetland and then bury it under fill for building an access road foundation. He said diversion of the springs will have the added impact of destroying the wetland properties of the designated greenbelt area. Mr. Slettvet said the proposed development is not consistent with 15.20.5(B-6) of the Comprehen- sive Plan, which requires that new residential development be compatible with the natural con- straints of slopes, soils, geology, vegetation and drainage. Mr. Slettvet said 16.65.000(B) gives the City authority to regulate the use of land in private ownership which cannot be developed without severe and irreversible environmental impacts. He said approval of the subdivision will destroy over an acre of wetland, which he believed is as severe and irreversible as one can get. Mr. Slettvet questioned the advisability of building residences against a steep slope when consid- ering the statements contained in the geotechnical report with respect to their concern about slope stability. Mr. Slettvet noted that the President of the United States, George Bush, is pro- free enterprise, pro- growth, pro- development, and pro- private property rights, but all existing wetlands, no matter how small, should be preserved. * See Council Minutes of June 20, 1989 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11 JUNE 6, 1989 Mr. Slettvet said he believed Staff made a mistake in approving the two short subdivisions and hoped that the Council would correct their error. Councilmember Dwyer inquired what relief Mr. Slettvet was seeking. Mr. Slettvet said he would like the Council to deny the two short subdivision requests as approved and require the developer to seek alternatives which would involve development only on the 76th Street side of the stream and which would preclude development on the Olympic View side. Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. Finis Tupper, 711 Daley, noted that Chapter 20.75.005 states, "Where environmental resources exist, such as trees, streams, ravines or wildlife habitats, the proposal shall be designed to minimize the significant adverse effects. With regard to resources, permanent restrictions may be imposed on the proposal to avoid impact". Mr. Tupper said there are other development options available. Dick Hill, 1242 Coronado, was concerned about the cavalier attitude that the developer has taken towards the streams. He said even though one of the streams is not on the subject property, the developer should take the steps necessary to protect that stream. Mr. -Hill was also concerned about the construction of the two proposed bridges over the stream. Mr. Miller said Staff was provided with a surveyed location of the stream that lies north of the property. Mr. Miller said the concern regarding a precedent of development of downstream properties should be of little concern because he said there are only two downstream properties: one is the llama farm and the other is a park. Mr. Miller said the developer would have to reduce the yield on the proposal by half if only property on one side of the stream is developed. He said access alternatives were considered off of Olympic View Drive but it was clear to Staff and the developer that that was not feasible; that the least disturbance would be to combine the access within each one of the shortplats, minimize the crossing of the creek corridor, and preserve the corridor in its natural state. With respect to the concern regarding the adverse impacts on the slope on Olympic View Drive, Mr. Miller pointed out that the dewatering recommendations contained in the geotechnical report empha- size that the proposed development would not have an impact on slope stability adjoining Olympic View Drive. In addition, he said the geotechnical work requested by Staff and the Hearing Examin- er go further to insure that no unacceptable risk involved with slope stability will occur. Councilmember Hertrich requested Mr. Miller to describe the location of the wetland. Mr. Miller said there are three criteria for wetland designation under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' standards and all three must be met in order to designate an area as a wetland; 1)the presence of hydrophytic soils. Mr. Miller said there are portions of the property that contain hydrophytic soils, but most of those soils are located within the area that will remain as a native growth protection easement; 2) more than 50% of the plant material must be exclusively wetland plants. Mr. Miller said those plants are located within the easement; 3) standing water on the property a significant portion of the year to encourage the growth of wetland vegetation must be present. Mr. Miller said he has not monitored the property year round to ascertain wheth- er there is enough standing water to meet that criteria. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the Corps had jurisdiction on the subject property. Mr. Mill- er said he did not believe so. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the Department of fisheries or Department of Wildlife criteria for wetlands differed from that of the Corps. Mr. Miller said he sits on a committee called the W-4 Committee which is in the process of developing criteria for wetland evaluation. He said the prevailing feeling of the Committee was that the Corps of Engi- neers' definition was appropriate. Councilmember Hertrich inquired where soils testing was con- ducted on the site. Mr. Miller said most of the testing was conducted on the 76th Street side of the property, but probings and hand digging took place on the Olympic View side. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO EXTEND THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 12 JUNE 6, 1989 Councilmember Hertrich inquired if Staff utilized a set of criteria to identify wetlands. Mr. Bowman said Staff refers those matters to outside agencies and uses the Corps' designation. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the wetlands were located within the bounds of the greenbelt. Mr. Bowman said the wetlands may extend slightly beyond. Mr. Snyder noted that the responsible official and the City are required to review other alterna- tives to determine whether a less burdensome environmental alternative is available for develop- ment which would preserve the economic value of the property. Councilmember Hertrich suspected that the two short subdivision applications were made as a means to circumvent environmental requirements that would be placed on a full subdivision. He said reasonable testing on the Olympic View side was not conducted; he did not believe the natural growth protection area was adequate; the wetland area was not properly identified; and the bridge was unacceptable to him. Councilmember Dwyer pointed out that preliminary approval of a project was the impetus to full- scale development. He expressed concern that the landscaping requirement for the proposed project may not be fulfilled because the applicant stated that he would convey the lots after the subdivision and would not have the ability to control landscaping. Councilmember Dwyer said the City may have made an error in approving development on a lot -by -lot basis. He said the City has both the ability and obligation'to require that the impact upon the wetlands from the entire eight -lot development be considered at the present time. He believed the appropriate course of action to take was not to grant preliminary approval to the subdivision request at the present time but, instead, request a development plan of the manners of develop- ment and potential conditions which the City can place on the entire parcel in order to minimize the impact on the wetlands and streams. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO UPHOLD THE APPEAL AND DENY THE APPLICATION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL AND REMAND THE MATTER TO STAFF FOR AN INVESTIGATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE ABOVE -MENTIONED ITEMS THAT HE ADDRESSED. Councilmember Jaech noted that the property is owned by a father and son. She requested Staff to :. ascertain if the son is the heir to the estate as she thought both properties could result in one ownership. Because Mr. Snyder advised the Council not to refer the matter to Staff because the Council would have no control or regulatory authority until a new application was submitted, COUNCILMEMBER HALL WITHDREW THE SECOND TO THE MOTION. * COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO UPHOLD THE APPEAL AND DENY THE APPLICATION BASED UPON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CRITERIA. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL REVIEW OF PARKS AND RECREATION MANAGER JOB DESCRIPTION The item was rescheduled on June 13, 1989. MAYOR Mayor Naughten said he plans to attend the AWC convention so he will not be present at next Tues- day's Council meeting. Mayor Naughten said Willis Tucker sent the City a letter requesting its opinion regarding long - haul disposal. Councilmember Dwyer suggested that the City not preclude that alternative even though several Councilmembers did not think it was economically feasible. Mayor Naughten noted that the 5th Annual Teen Dance will be held Saturday night. Mayor Naughten said Councilmember Hall, Councilmember Wilson, and he had attended the sculpture dedication at Olympic Beach. Council Student Representative Dave Berdine announced that the new high school has been designated as Edmonds-Woodway High School. The mascot is a warrior, and the school colors are green, orange, white, purple and yellow, a combination of both schools' colors. Councilmember Dwyer said he arrived late at the Council meeting because he had represented .the V Q.%' City at the D.A.R.E. graduation, and he encouraged involvement in this worthwhile program. * See Council Minutes of June 20, 1989 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 13 JUNE 6, 1989 Councilmember Jaech inquired if the detour plan for the ferry terminal reconstruction will have any effect on residents and, if so, if they have been notified. Community services Director Peter Hahn said he would provide that information to the Council. The Council recessed to an Executive Session at 11:00 p.m. to discuss labor negotiations for approximately 15 minutes, and then adjourned. THESE MINUTES ARE SUBJECT TO JUNE 20, 1989 APPROVAL. JA QUELINE G. PARRETT, City Clerk LARRY S. NAUGHTEN, Mayor EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 14 JUNE 6, 1989 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL PLAZA MEETING ROOM -LIBRARY BUILDING 7:00 - 10:00 P.M. JUNE 6, 1989 CALL TO ORDER FLAG SALUTE 1. CONSENT AGENDA (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 23, 1989 (C) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM SCOTT JENSEN ($454.12) (D) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION DENYING REQUEST FOR HEIGHT VARIANCE ON LOT 7, EAGLE'S CREST PRO (V-2-89/AP-10-89/HUIZINGA) (E) ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AT 7226 SOUNDVIEW DR. (AP-1-89/S-35-88/CAMPBELL) (F) ADOPTION FINDINGS FFACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW REGARDING APPEAL OF ADBDECISIONREGAR REGARDING READERBOARD AT 22304HIGHWAY 99, DOUG'S LYNNWOOD MAZDA (AP-7-89/ADB-5-89/BARNES AWNING BROKERS) (G) PTION OF CONCLUSIONS FREGARDING LAW APPEAL ARCHITECTURALFINDINGS SIGN ILLUMINATION O OFDESIGN BOARD DECISIONON EDWARD D. JONES & CO. AT 405 MAIN ST. (AP-13-89/ADB-25-89/LAWRENCE) (H) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED MAY 24, 1989 FOR REROOFING A PORTION OF ANDERSON CENTER, AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO KATHOL ROOFING ($7,081.38, INCLUDING SALES TAX) (I) REPORT ON IAB9 FOR 2ROADWAY PROJECTOPENEDDS IMPROVEMENT ANDAWARD OFCONTRACTTO ASSOCIATED SAND AND GRAVEL COMPANY ($116,092.50) (J) PROPOSED IAMENDINGSTREET REDUCE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY AVE. W. FROM60' TO 50' IN VICINITY OF INTERSECTION OF 70TH AVE. W. AND 157TH ST. S.W. (APPLICANT: WARREN AND JANET FULLER/ST-1-89/FROM APRIL 4 HEARING) (K) REPORT ON,BIDS OPENED MAY 31, 1989 FOR NEW BURSTER/IMPRINTER WITH ONE YEAR MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO STANDARD REGISTER ($9,381.91 INCLUDING SALES TAX) (L) APPROVAL OF DETOUR PLAN FOR FERRY TERMINAL RECONSTRUCTION 2. AUDIENCE 3. PRESENTATION OF COMMUNITY SERVICES AWARD TO PORT OF EDMONDS 4. HEARING ON REQUIREMENTS FOR IN -LIEU PARKING AT 605 MAIN ST. (APPLICANT: TED LINDE) 5. HEARING ON APPEAL OF ADB DECISION REGARDING ACCESS ONTO 7TH AVE. N. AND A BRIDGE OVER SHELL CREEK AT 633 GLEN ST. (ADB-17-89/AP-20-89) (APPELLANT: JACK VANDEMAN; APPLICANT JAMES SMITH) 6. COUNCIL DETERMINATION REGARDING APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION ON EXCAVATION AND GRADING OF APPROXIMATELY 1,250 CUBIC YARDS AT 633 GLEN ST. (AP-17-89/CU-22-89) (APPELLANT: JACK VANDEMAN/APPLICANT: JAMES SMITH) (CONTINUED FROM HEARING OF MAY 16, 1989) 7. HEARING ON 1990-95 SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM AND ADOPTION BY RESOLUTION 686 8. HEARING ON HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE PROPOSED VARIANCE FOR EDMONDS HIGH SCHOOL TO INSTALL 60' SAFETY FENCE (V-11-89/APPLICANT: EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT) 9, HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING TWO 4-LOT SUB- DIVISIONS ON WEST SIDE OF 76TH AVE. W., NORTH OF INTERSECTION OF 76TH AND OLYMPIC VIEW DR. (APPELLANT: RICHARD SLETTVET) (AP-9-89/S-10-88/S-11-88) 10. COUNCIL REVIEW OF PARKS AND RECREATION MANAGER JOB DESCRIPTION 11. MAYOR 12. COUNCIL 13. EXECUTIVE SESSION - LABOR NEGOTIATIONS THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND PARKING AND MEETING ROOMS ARE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE ( 5 MINUTES) (20 MINUTES) (30 MINUTES) (10 MINUTES) (20 MINUTES) (10 MINUTES) (40 MINUTES) (10 MINUTES)