Loading...
336 ADMIRAL WAY MID-MARINA.pdf3G ADM 16, WAY NJ I 23 Em 1 7 I-V EXHIBIT 2 1-7 93 DATE 00\/. CITY OF EDMONDS FEE HEARING EXAMINER RECT -77 APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE APO'S HEARING DATE: c�AA). 1-71 APPLICANT Port of Edmonds ADDRESS 336 Admiral Way CITY & ZIP Edmonds 98020 PHONE 745-0549 INDICATE TYPE OR DEGREE OF INTEREST IN PROPERTY Owner/Lessee LOCATION OR ADDRESS OF PROPERTY Mid -Marina, Edmonds Boat Harbor LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Portion, Government Lot 3, Section 23, Township 27 N, Range 3E, W.M. VARIANCE REQUESTED: 16.55.020 to reduce the setback of Darki from 60' to 27' 18.95.020 to reduce the�regujred aisle width within a parking lot from 24' to 22'. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: USE ZONE: ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENT: As " 6-rei) A&x/6 Release/Hold Harmless Agree ent The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from any action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. Permission to Enter Subject Property The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of inspection and postingAttendant to: this application. 13 gnature of Applicant, Owner or 1/� Representative, EXHIBIT 2 Subject to City Counci.1 approval of File No. g amendments, to S-horeline Master Fee; Program on January 31, 1984'. 1-Yh Date Filed: QO�V. 'Z2 Y, I-1"rr APPLICATION FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO THE APPLICANT: This is an application for a substantial development permit and is authorized by the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. It is suggested that you check with the appropriate local, state, or feder- al officials to determine whether your project falls within any other permit systems, since a permit under the Shoreline Management Act will not excuse the applicant from compliance with any other local, state or federal ordinances, regulations or statutes applicable to the project. 1. Name of applicant Port of Edmonds 2. Mailing address 336 Admiral Way, P.O. Box 398, Edmonds, Washington 98020 3. Relation of applicant to property: Owner X Lessee X Contract purchaser Other (specify) 4. Name and address of owner, if other than applicant: 5. General location of proposed project (give street address if known, city or town, and coun otherwise give distance and direction to Mi t! nearest town): d �,rina, Edmonds Boat Harbor; The project site is located west of Admiral Way, approximately 1,000 feet South of Dayton Street. 6. Legal description of property; Government Lot 3, Section 23, Towns ip 27N2 Range 3 East, W.M., 7. Name of adjacent water area or wetlands: Puget Sound S. Current use of the property with existing improvements: Mixed uses including; boat lauchers, storage area, vacant land, marine related retail, and boat harbor. 9. Describe proposed project: Construction of a new boat harbor entrance, removal of a portion of the existing bulkhead and timber breakwater, 'dredging to create additional basin area, construction of new bulkheads, installation of aRproximately 116 new boat moorages, and construction of 2 boat launchers, and related upl ndS improvements. 10. Nature of the shoreline. (Describe type, such as beach, bank or dike; material such as sand, gravel, mud, clay, rock, riprap; and extent and type of bulkheading, if any.) The existing shoreline is defined by timber and rip rap bulkheads with filled areas behind. The basin bottom in the vicinity of the existing bulkhead is composed of rock sand and mud. VF Rh- Ibn i p M 11. Project diagrams: draw all,maps to scale, clearly indicating scale on lower right corner of the map. Attach all maps to a P plication. (a) SITE PLAN MAP. Include on map: (1) Site boundary and dimensions in vicinity of pro ject. (2) Land contours using 5-foot intervals or cross sections If,project,includes grading, filling,lor other, altera tion of contours, then either: (i) Indicate existing and proposed contours and item' (3) through (8) below; OR (ii) Provide two cross sections, one showi ng existing ground elevations and height,of structures, the second showing proposed ground elevations and,,he'ight �`J of proposed structures, with both showing'(4) below. (3) Size and location of existing improvements which will be retained. (4) Ordinary high-w ater mark. (5) Size and location of proposed structures. (6) Maximum height of proposed structures above existing grade level. (7) State type and amount of proposed fill. .(8) Proposed utilities. (b) VICINITY MAP. Indicate relation of site to adjacent lands and the uses to w ich they are put for at least 400 feet in all direc- :tions from the project.site. Port of Edmonds am the above-named.applicant for a permit to construct.a substantial development pursuant to the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and hereby state that the foregoing statements, answers, and information ire, in all respects, true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. �6 C (Signature) 4 7 7"""": 77� q. EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF EDMONDS File No C EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Date t? _F3 Fee'65 APO'S APPLICATION TO HEARING EWIINER FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Re c t. No. HEARING DATE APPLICANT:Port of Edmonds ADDREss336 Admiral Way PHONE 7454549 Indicate type or degree of interest in the property: Owner/Lessee OWNER: ADDRESS PHONE LOCATION OF PROPERTY(ADDRESS) Mid -Marina, Edmonds Boat Harbor LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY Portion, Bovernment Lot 3, Section 23, Township 27N, Range 3E, W.M. To be completed by the Planning Division: Use Zone — Legal description checked and approved by: Date: VICINITY SKETCH: PLEASE SH014 BELOW A VICINITY SKETCH AS PER EXAMPLE, INDICATING NORTH. Example: I See attached Shoreline Substantial Development Permit request CONDITIONAL USE REQUESTED: To permit grading in excess of 500 cu.yds. DETAILS OF PROPOSED USAGE: Excavation of approximately 84,000 cu.yds. o material from the mid -marina area of the Port of Edmonds Signature oT—T-pplicant, Uwner or Representative RELEASE/HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT The undersigned applicant, his heirs and assigns, in consideration for the City processing_the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from anv and all damages and/or claims for damages, including reasonable attorneys' fees, arising from anv action or inaction of the City whenever such action or inaction is based in whole or in part upon false, misleading or inCOMDlete information furnished by the applicant, his agents or employees. PERMISSION TO ENTER SUBJECT PROPERTY The undersigned applicant grants his, her or its Permission for public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purpose of*insDection aldposting attendant to this application. _))gMt.re �oAp �JantMl­ �®r� Revresentative Description of Propo� EXHIBIT 3 The Port of Edmonds proposes to complete the Edmonds Boat Harbor by constructing a new moorage area between the north and south boat harbors. The new moorage area will contain 116 new slips, and will involve the construction of a new entrance into the boat harbor, the elimination of approximately 1.2 acres of uplands by dredging, and the provision of necessary uplands facilities. The completion of the boat harbor is the last major element of the Port's Master Plan and follows the construction of the Harbor Square Business Park. Those commercial and industrial businesses that had been located in the mid -marina area have now relocated and the present facilities can be removed making room for the new moorage area. The new boat harbor entrance will involve the extension of the south breakwater, and the construction of two sheet steel pile breakwaters. The new entrance, shown on the attached site plan, will be one hundred feet wide and should eliminate any damaging wave action in the boat basin. The area to be dredged is located between the Port Office and Anthony's Restaurant. The new basin area will extend east from the current waterline to the southerly extension of the north boat harbor bulkhead line. The new bulkhead will be constructed of piling and timber on its upper third and rock on the remainder. Approximately 84,000 cu. yds. of material will be dredged from the new basin and barged to a dredge disposal site near Everett. Initial soils investigation indicates that the material is mostly native glacial till with some limited fill material on top. The 116 slips are distributed into various sizes ranging from 28 feet in length to 50 feet, with most slips in the 36 feet to 40 feet length. No covered moorage is planned. In addition to the moorage, waterside improvements will include: Replacement transient moorage in the area west and north of Anthony's Restaurant, A new and larger fuel dock, Relocation of the Boat Loft overhead launcher, and A new straddle crane launcher. The Port's overhead launcher, south of Anthony's Restaurant will remain and continue its present function. Upland facilities supporting the new moorage include: Removal of the remaining buildings located between the Port Office and Anthony's Restaurant, Parking for 45 to 50 cars in the area south of the Port Office, A continuation of the walkway along the bulkhead, connecting the north and south boat harbors, and making nearly the entire marina waterfront accessible to the public, The creation of an open area located west and north of Anthony's Restaurant (presently undesigned), and A boat repair yard on the east side of Admiral Way, north of the Boat Loft facility. H 1. What are the physical characteristics, (i.e. topography, shape of lot, etc.) which create'a hardship for you in regard to development of your property? SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM 1. FIXED BREAKWATER: The wave action at this point in Puget Sound is too great to be attenuated by a floating breakwater and the mid -marina development can not proceed without modifications to the present breakwater. 2. DREDGING: The Port of Edmonds boat basin can not be expanded to include the mid -marina area without dredging. The present mid -marina area is uplands and shallows. 7nMTKic rnnr These two variance requests would allow the mid -marina parking, walkway and landscaping to be developed similar to the same facilities in the north marina area. 3. BULKHEAD SETBACK: Due to the distance between the proposed bulkhead and the Admiral Way right-of-way, the code required setback would reduce the area available for parking by more than one half. It would result in a very inefficient use of space and insufficient parking to meet the needs of boaters and other Port visitors. Other areas now reserved for other purposes would have to be made available for parking. 4. PARKING AISLE WIDTH: The distance between the proposed bulkhead and the Admiral Way right-of-way is not sufficient to allow a walkway, two driveway aisles and three perpendicular parking bays; all meeting the present code requirements. The requested variance of two feet will permit the most efficient use of the space available and will not adversly affect the functioning of the parking lot or the walkway. : �"Dll 2. How does your property differ from other property in the same vicinity? The mid -marina area is a uniquely situated property. It is bonded on all sides by the existing Port of Edmonds Marina. No other property in the Edmonds area is similarly situated. The requested variances will allow the completion of the boat harbor and associated uplands using the same basic design standards established in the north and south basins. No special considerations are requested beyong those presently existing in the north and south marina areas. 3. Will this variance be detrimental to the public or damaging to other property or improvements in the vicinity? Tv, No. Construction of the mid -marina area completes a long standing improvement project and opens the area to public use and enjoyment. I 4. What hardships will result to you if the variance is not granted? Will these hardships have been caused by your own action? Without the requested variances to the Shoreline Master Program the mid -marina can not be constructed. The Shoreline Master Program variance requests arrise out of the Program itself. The Program encourages and supports the Port of Edmonds marina through its statements on public access, recreation, shoreline use and others, but the two specific sections of the Program for which the variances are requested would prohibit the extension and completion of the marina. The granting of the variances would not be contrary to the purposes and intent of the Shoreline Master Program and should not have a detrimental effect on the Shoreline environment. The requested variances to the zoning code will allow the mid -marina parking area to be developed similar to the parking area serving the north bas'in. If the variances to the zoning code are not granted the parking area for the mid -marina will probably have to be located approximately 500 feet away by placing the parking area where the boat repair area is now proposed and visa versa. The requested variances to the zoning code are caused by the physical dimensions of the uplands remaining between the proposed bulkhead extension and the Admiral Way right-of-way. The existing parking area, walkway and landscaping areas serving the north basin function adequately even though the dimensions of one of the aisleways and the setback of the parking area from the bulkhead does not meet the present zoning code requirements. The proposed extension of the north marina development standards to the mid -marina wi.11 not interfer with the functioning of the parking area nor infringe upon public access to and enjoyment of the waterfront. 5. Can you make reasonable use of your property without the variance? Denial of the requested Shoreline variances would prohibit the mid -marina development frustrating the Port's Master Plan and, to a lesser degree, the City's Comprehensive Plan. Denial of the Zoning Code variances would make the project less efficient and . functional and would not protect any identifiable public interest, � 7F- I=- 4 =, j I., I " '.I , Admiral WaY 7:11 Port of Et� 11111111 LILLJ iLf -Wiwi 11111 4 Admiral Way Edmonds Mid -Marina Port of ....... .... sz TPARKING 3 TBW�K VARIANCE* 110 Anthony's, Home Port B 6 3F;AC --VA'lffT NCE 3� 21 6 PARKING SETBACK VARIANCE 119-! EXHIBIT 7- EW ULKNEAD AIS"I H:VARKiCE- 1-3 Admiral Wav -1 SHEP-T PILP_ 5PLEAKWN, EP. EXHIBIT- 8' 420d H.W Y MLLW- L.W. EL*.- 10� 1112 H-Piles EL: 20.0' Cap EL-4d Fillet Stabs EL: 18' r 1� I Iff U211� I I P '. F.. Wolor GECTION AA 10 6 _C, A -2 t SCALE tN FEET go Openings PKOPO-SED t, Jim m PROP05EV 5MEL IDOW ENTRANCE LF BREAKWATER 0.01 PROPOSEP I)OLPHINI 30 a 4 eMaLwotor 3,41 _EL: -10' LLw_ lzt SEE> F_xl;5T ROCK MR EXTEN51C 15REAKWA'Mit PROMSED ROCK BREAKWATER EXTENSION US Army Corps of Engineers Seattle District Regulatory Functions Branch P. 0. Box C-3755 Seattle, Washington 98124 (206) 764-3495 ATTN: Permit Processor Public Notice IC of APPlication1A10_691'RQ'V__% for Permit Public Notice Date: 22 December 1983 Expiration Date: 23 January 1984 Reference: 071-OYB-2-009202 Name: Edmonds, Port of Interested parties are hereby notified that application has been received for Department of the Army permit in accordance with Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of March 3, 1899, and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act for certain work described below and shown on the inclosed prints. 41,111," APPLICANT - Port of Edmonds Post Office Box 398 Edmonds, Washington 98020 telephone (206) 774-0549 AGENT Mr. John 0. Olsen 121 Fifth Avenue, Suite 200 Edmonds, Washington 98020 telephone (206) 775-3434 LOCATION In Puget sound at Edmonds, Washington. WORK - Dredge with deepwater disposal; place riprap and fill with sheet pile breakwater; install log boom and dolphin; and construct marina addition. PURPOSE (PER APPLICANT) - Provide marina expansion. ENDANGERED SPECIES - Preliminary determinations indicate that the activity will not affect endangered species, or their critical habitat, designated as endangered or threatened (Endangered Species Act of 1973). Formal consultation under Section 7 of the Act is not required. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Presently unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical or historical data may be lost or destroyed by work to be accomplished under the requested permit. The work is not located on a property registered in the National Register of Historic Places. PUBLIC HEARING - Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice, that a public hearing be held to consider this applica- tion. Requests for public hearings shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. 'A 0 -!-OYB--�2­009202 711 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The State of Washington,is reviewing this work for condis- tency with the approved Washington Coastal Zone Management Program. The evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest will include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, EPA,, under author- ity of Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act. EVALUATION - The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact, including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both pro- tection and utilization of important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors which may be relevant to,thepropbs4l"wi1'l':be''' considered, including the cumulative effects thereof; among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural,values, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain values, land:use,.navig4t�ion, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food production and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. COMMENT AND REVIEW PERIOD - Comments on these factors will be accepted and made part of the record and will be considered in determining whether it would be in the best public interest to grant a permit. Comments should refer to the reference number shown above and reach this office, Attn: Regulatory Functions Branch, not, later than the expiration date of this public notice to insure consideration. I Incl Prints (3) 2 I 7 17 EN �7- EX15'rING WOMA6:W . r T1 T; P q rl T1 r! 11 Ti !L I-LL NO 11 7T-1 FT Tr7" Tr- ITT IT7 TF--ll i LI L11 l I .1. EX15T. 14-4 3' 25' (-ryp) t-5��j (BULKW5-AD 0 FORT OFFIM (TYP-) T(Tsy) I PfRopo-'-ap PROPO.tF-P MOOR ,G I FLDA aa'd EBB 50 PA', PAO -- f�N�. 36 0 �! 0* FLOOP TY;)- id, ki 21� RADDLE Ex I 5T. CRANE PIEP MLLW OC� I MHW io-od tLDA� PMPO--F D -OVERHEAD PROPO-C�ED M.44 -W. + lo-od LAUNCWEK 3� T PKOPO-'*ED ACCF—C%S PIER 225' 6a; Exi-ST. W iftESTAURAH 7' 2 qfj E R L---j )ORAGE FL9V w 071 - OYB - 2 - 0002 02 t PROP06ED MARINA Ar>.r>irioN to, PUGE-T SOUNDAT EDMOND-5 COUNTY OF 6NOHOMISH 5TATE OF VVA�5HINGTON APPUCATION BY: PORT OF EDMOND.9, ap 1.0 20 AO 60 Ap -044EET 2 OF 3. DATE i. NOV. M83 SCALE imFfET L ALL EI-EvAT10t,15 PEVER TO M.J..L.W. � O.d N.O.B. q- 2. cwEcGtNr. QUANTITY APPPDX 65 000 Cu-AWS- EDM ro fibe PLSPO-sm OF IN poj� GAkDNER MAY j L-OWG. 1220 WIWI L-AT. A76 S& 00* swo. Co. 3. F-uPpO--,-- - MARINA. EXPAN54ON ESS vi 1 48'- _PRO P05LID 4.ACXJACEr4T OWNSIRS'.00MYOPEDMOND.5 VW0 3F-C. T (D UNION Of L CO . tVL00P CALE IN YARr)6 JOW W. ESTRANGE CD>P 0 �5WSMD &I s E L Z�4 MEET PILS DREAKWATSIZ 50 W/RMCK BASS. 0 5;0 loob VIOINITY-MAP 30 rAKEN FROM N.O.S. CHART 18"G -.30 r.-Ni -20 11111 0 17. Of L.L.W� "b :> I- PKOP0-w-p wqe WWAKW^TEP EXTEN51ON EX16T ROCK EXI-ST. ROCK 5REAKWATER ISRSAKWATER EX16T. TMMER BREAK- WA-TF-R TO e-E REMOVED cn PROPCLSED ROCK t� BRIZZAKWATER tn -m PxTswslow tn 5151 OWN EXI-ST. TIMBER OWNER BREAKWATER AND DECK TO BE op 16 0 \01 r Fr-, 1200' - j_;'�EXIST. MOORAGF- m L L W-auL- �:-Jfl PRO D To 11.00 MLLW SP too 2.0 w &P 1? 100 EXI-S7. ISULKHE-A0 5CA E IN FEET 0'71 - OYF5- 2 - 00,5202 PP.0PO6&D bmAl K d-01 PROPO-SED PF0P0—c,F-r> M H, MARINA A.D.DTION leo i IMCK F*0 F-XL5T, va"L&W-AP To a-. t le.-ol �A PuGET —c-ADUNt> AT EDtA-N&j--.7 COUNTY OF -5t4OHO?,4 I-SH STATF. OF WASHINGTON APPL.&Y: PORT OF EDMOND-S SWEET I OF S. PATE:* NOv. 11983 PROP06ED bTrr=L (G"EET PILM BAEAKWATER EL�*20-0* IYAW-. ILI, APPROX. 8,5000Y. OF GUA-MIRY ROCK TO M PLACED 5Y CA-AM-SHF-LL FOR- lsf;tcA,KWA-rr-R CON5TRUOTICN. LOG 500M PROPO.5V-D EXTEM-SION p P1 U, IQ OF ROCK BREAKWATER \7 I XgL,-+20 'o 5) 1 wzot Ao'l M.H,W i ld" - (-/, MLLW=Q C,� , L -9 EU- 10 �L 35 EL: --;0' -c>Er-TION CC 10 5 0 10 20 W ILI m= I ---- --- c 5L-45 50ALIS IN FEET S.Er-TION AA ISECTION BB 1;"41 O=L o -1 20 E,CALE IN rr.ET 1,200 cy� ov QtJARRY Rocy, PJPPAP U-Z)F-- MOTECTION FROI-A UPL�D SOURCE 7-0 M PLACED IN'/ CLAME"HELL VMT. :�so t :t ----I E;Kl_$T. BULK.1,4EAD -M lbp- IzctAOVl--p Plo F1 LL. EL.tIC,' EL. + 14..4-' E L. + 8� ,,rF-n57.BANK DRUM, is I 11,11 sell off I I will 11/2 W3, 000 r. Y. LbF y4LX-Ast 1.�700141A�- MLLW T BE: r-LAM-%4r:--LL TO MbOTTOI�l M-sw OF - 12. EL. - 11 - 0 ";w 2� 10 10 c�EQTION D. 20 40 GO 610 _SCAj-E im FRUT 071-OYB-2-000202 pp,opo-5F-D MARINA, ADDITION PUGF-T.E,OUND AT PDMOND-5 COUNTY OF -cwOHOMUSH 5TATE Or WA-4*41NGTON AppL. py: PORT OF F-DMOND-s -%4MET 3 OF-3. DAZE: NOV. 085 JOHN SPELLMAN Governor r t STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY MailStopPV-11 Olympia, Washington 98504 (206)1753-2800 �TATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Notice of Application for Water Quality Certification and for Certification of Consistency with the Washington Coastal Zone Management Program Notice is hereby given that a request is being filed with the Department o ' f Ecology for certification that a proposed discharge resulting from the project described in the Corps of Engineers Public Notice No. 0'71-eYffn?�-zo will comply with the applicable provisions of State and Federal Water Pollution Laws. Notice is also given that a request is being filed with the Department of Ecology for concurrence that the above referenced project will comply with the Washington State Coastal Zone Management Program and that the project will be conducted in a manner consistent with that Program. Any person desiring to present views pertaining to the project on either or both (1) water pollution or (2) the project's compliance or consistency with the Washington State Coastal Zone Management Program may do so by providing written comments to the Department of Ecology, Inter -Agency Operations Section, Mail Stop PV-11, Olympia, Washington 98504. Please note, state regulation requires a minimum of 20 days of public notice. The comment period will begin r3(date of publication) and j /9 run until final comments are received from reviewing state agencies and the local government(s). .1 a JZ FTNAL DECLARATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE JAN 'Cft 96 WA Description of Proposal The Port of Edmonds proposes to complete the Edmonds Boat Harbor by constructing a new moorage area between the north and south boat harbors. The new moorage area will contain 116 new slips, and will involve the construction of a new entrance into the boat harbor, the elimination of approximately 1.2 acres of uplands by dredging, and the provision of necessary uplands facilities. The completion of the boat harbor is the last major element of the Port's Master Plan and follows the construction of the Harbor Square Business Park., J �:jj Those commercial and industrial businesses that had been located in the mid -marina area have now relocated and the present facilities can be removed making room for the new moorage area. The new boat harbor entrance will involve the extension of the south TRI breakwater, and the construction of two sheet steel pile breakwaters. The new entrance, shown on the attached site plan, will be one hundred feet wide and should eliminate any damaging wave action in the boat basin. The area to be dredged is located between the Port Office and Anthony's Restaurant. The new basin area will extend east from the,current waterline to the southerly extension of the north boat harbor bulkhead line. The new bulkhead will be constructed of piling and timber on its upper third and rock on the remainder. Approximately 84,000 cu. yds. of material will be dredged from the new basin and barged to a dredge disposal site near Everett. Initial soils investigation indicates that the material is mostly native glacial till with some limited fill material on top. The 116 slips are distributed into various sizes ranging from 28 feet in length to 50 feet, with most slips in the 36 feet to 40 feet length. No covered moorage is planned. In addition to the moorage, waterside improvements will include: Replacement transient moorage in the area west and north of Anthony's Restaurant, A new and larger fuel dock, Relocation of the Boat Loft overhead launcher, and A new straddle crane launcher. The Port's overhead launcher, south of Anthony's Restaurant will remain and continue its present function. Fil IN k F, wl- ","N 11 Upland facilities supporting the new moorage include: Removal of the remaining buildings located between the Port Office and. Anthony's Restaurant, Parking for 45 to 50 cars in the area south of the Port Office, A continuation of the walkway along the bulkhead, connecting the north and south boat harbors, and making nearly the entire marina waterfront accessible to the public, The creation of an open area located west and north of Anthony's Restaurant (presently undesigned), and A boat repair yard on the east side of Admiral Way, north of the Boat, Loft facility. PROPONENT Port of Edmonds LOCATION OF PROPOSAL West of Admiral Way, approximately 1000 feet south,of Dayton Street, Edmonds, Washington. LEAD AGENCY Port of Edmonds CONTACT PERSON Herb Carpenter Reid, Middleton & Associates, Inc. 121 5th Aveune North Edmonds, Washington 98020 This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact upon the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental ,checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Gordon Maxwell POSITION/TITLE Chairman, Edmonds Port Commission SIGNATURE DATE F1 411 A.th... E�3 Admiral Way a - a EXHIBIT _u January 13, 1984 MEMO TO: Planning Department FROM: Stephen 0. Simpson, Director Parks and Recreation Department SUBJECT: PORT OF EDMONDS PROPOSAL The Port of Edmonds proposal to expand the marina is badly needed and should offer the opportunity for more water -oriented recreation activities for city residents. Further concerns that should be addressed in the plan are: 1. The need for expanded transient moorage. A comment this office hears.oft6n is of the inadequacy of the existing transient moorage facilities. Many Seattle boaters would like to take advantage of the Port's waterfront restaur- ants, but will not because of the poor moorage facilities. Transient moorage should be doubled. The Yacht Club's stern -to moorage greatly limits the kinds of boats that can use their transient facilities. Even a few pilings in the Yacht Club's moorage space would make it usable by more kinds of boats. 2. The Port's overhead launcher is slow. This Department receives comments,fr'om trailer boaters who feel their needs are not being met. I suggest ways be ex- plored by the Port to speed up their overhead launcher and use the new straddle crane for launching trailerable boats. 3. The need for an emergency services boat is well documented. The Port's plan should include an area within the breakwater, or a suitable slip, for the fire/rescue boat that will probably be'acquired in 1984. 4. The sidewalk system within the Port of Edmonds may be as important as the boat facilities themselves when considered as a recreational resource. Pedestrian access should be planned as systematically as boat and automobile access. Factors like continuity, linkage to destinations (parks, view areas, restaurants), visibility, safety, and aesthetics will determine whether the sidewalk system has any value from a recreational standpoint. SOS/mw _i;J PROPERTY OWNERS AND IMPORTANT LEASE HOLDERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PORT OF EDMONDS MID -MARINA PROJECT Burlington Northern Railroad Robert R. Pantley 810 3rd 904 North 185th Street Seattle, Washington 98101 Seattle, Washington 98133',:."�­: Union Oil Company of California Harold R. & Ardean L. Stone�: Union Real Estate Division 14277 Worden Way Union Center, Box 7600 Saratoga, Gaory j-,�e .95070 Los Angeles, California 90051 Comm ercial Property Management torp'.,::� Northwest Fur Breeders Cooperative P.O. Box 55549 P.O. Box 399 Seattle, Washington,98155 Edmonds, Washington 98020 State of Washington Department of Natural Resources Public Lands Building Olympia, Washington 98504 Q V PROPERTY OWNERS AND IMPORTANT LEAS E HOLDERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PORT OF EDMONDS MID -MARINA PROJECT Burlington Northern Railroad 810.3rd Seattle, Washington 98101 Q,V Union Oil Company�of California Union Real Estate Division Union Cente r, Box 7600 Los Angeles, California 90051 33, Northwest Fur Breeders Cooperative P.O. Box 399 Edmonds, Washington'98020 State of, Washington Department of Natural Resources Public Lands Building Olympia, Washington 98504 Boat Loft Inc. 465 Admiral Way Edmonds, Washington,98020 Anthony's Home Port 135 Lake Washington Blvd. Kirkland, Washington,98033 Edmonds Yacht Club P.O. Box 356 Edmonds, Washington 98020 Hovd6/Beselin P.O. Box 1043 Lynnwood, Washington 98036 Dick Beselin 300 Admiral Way Edmonds, Washington 98020 Anchor Marine Service 471 Admiral Way Edmonds, Washington 98020 N VJ 0'� ,sA_ I P Ct I -Y :7 1 Qpp i n e r mee ing,� .. ... . Jhanks 1 - /Vo 196,? "C.- - e"'K" 7A 777 . .... .. YX14"n, g V_f� N y� g. g _04 December 2,,1983 V MEMO TO: Duane Bowman 'Assistant Planner TROM: Gary'L. McComas Fire Marshal APPLICATIONS FOR IMPROVEI -1ENTS AT PORT OF EDMONDS _(CU (SM-3-83) -58-83 After review, the fire department has the follow.ing.require, ments: 1. Provide and install,one standard -hydrant near the,,. bulkhead walkway approximately ninty -five,feet �95 south of the,Port office building. an :nor Provide a fire lane,access on the west d th sides of Anthony'sHome Port. Emergency �v hic,le,. access must be maintained.to all docks., 3. Provide and install dry.standpipe.systems..for.'th'e new moorage docks to match.,existing system. GLM:be t q 5�4 R, ;,J� V PACKET MAILED TO HEARING EXAMINER —THIS 1/13/84 EXHIBIT LIST FILES #SM-3-83,'4V,--1-'7", & #CU-58-83 1) Staff Report 2) Applications 3) Des-cription.of Proposed Project 4) Declarations- of the Applicant 5) Site Plan 6) Breakwater and Dredging Area Location Map 7) Variance Location Map 8) Breakwater Elevation Drawings '9) Corps of Engineers Application 10) Final Declaratton of Nons-ignificance 11) Concerns of Parks & Recreation Director *12) Response from the Port of Edmonds to the Parks & Recr'eation Department Memo *13) Letter dated 12/21/83 from the Department of Fisheries *14) Environmental Checklist *15) Letter dated 12/19/83 from Department of Ecology to Gordon Maxwell *16) Amended Application 12/22/83 *17) Memo from Duane Bowman to Hearing Examiner Re: The status of the amended Shoreline Master Plan *181 Order of Hearing Examiner of 2/15/84 requesting more information from the Port of Edmonds-' representative *19) Response of Port of Edmonds to Hearing Examiner's request of 2/15/84 *THESE. EXHIBITS CAN BE FOUND IN FILE #SM-3-83 ONLY STAFF REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER FILES #SM~3-83, Q #CU-58-83 HEARING DATE: JANUARY lg, 1984 I ` Shoreline substantial development permit to allow construction of ` 116 new moorage slips and related improvements, Variances to reduce the setback of parking from o bulkhead from 60' to lO/, to allow buildings to O/, and to reduce the required aisle width within u parking lot from 24/ to 22' ' ' Conditional use permit for dredging 84,000 cubic yards of material. ` II. ; Port of Edmunds Representative: Herb Carpenter 336 Admiral Way Reid -Middleton & Assoc, P.O. Box 398 121 5tb Ave. M,, Ste. 800 Edmonds" WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 08020 ' III. A. Description of the Proposed Actions and Surrounding Area ' The Port of Edmonds is seeking a shoreline substantial de- velopment permit to expand the existing Portmarina. The proposal would odd llG moorage slfpsto the 741 slips. In conjunction with the construction of the new,moorage, the existing boat harbor entrance will be modified with'two new ` ` breakwaters. A complete description of the proposal can be found in Exhibit 3, In order to construct the now moorage facilities, approximately 1,2 acres of upland area /84^000 cubic yards) will be dredged out. Exhibit 6 shows this area. Exhibit 7 shows the location of the proposed variances and their relationship to the proposed marina improvements. Anthony's Humeport restaurant, the Port offices, Northwest Fur Breeders, and the Boat Loft dry land boot storage facili- ties are the immediate commercial uses adjacent to the subject area. Further to the east, across the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way, is the Harbor Square commercial center and the Union Oil marsh. To the southeast is the Union Oil refinery. Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner Exhibit I/Files #SM-3-83, #V-17-83, & #CU-58-83 Page 2 B. Official Street Map Proposed R/W Existing R/W Admiral Way 601 601 C. Conformance to the Comprehensive Plan The subject site is designated by the Comprehensive Policy Plan Map as urban water environment. In reviewing the specific requests, particular attention.must be paid to Chapters 15.37 and 15.38 of the Comprehensive Plan (Edmonds Shoreline Master Program). The proposed actions are clearly consistent with the overall objectives of our master program. Substantial public access is being provided, and the proposed use is a priority use which is shoreline oriented. D. Zoning Ordinance The subject property, as well as the surrounding area, is zoned CW (commercial waterfront). The proposed use, along with the conditional use permit, are consistent with the purposes of the CW zone and the Zoning Ordinance. Of the variances requested, only the request for 01 setback for buildings should be denied, as it is inconsistent with the purposes of the CW zone and the Zoning Ordinance. E. Special Circumstances S*pecial circumstances appear to exist in the case for variances for the parking setback and parking aisle widths. The parking proposed is consistent with what already exists and will even eliminate the present parking setback problem west of the restaurant. No particular circumstances exist to allow 01 building setback. F. Special Privilege The grant of the variances for the parking design would not be a grant of special privilege, as the proposed design is con- sistent with what exists in the marina area. G. Minimum Variance The parking design variances appear to represent minimum -requests, based on the limitations imposed by the property. L: -1 Staff Report to the Hearing Exami.ner Exhibit I/Files #SM-3-83, #V-17-83, & #CU-58-83 Page 3 H. Environmental Impacts The proposed conditional use.permit will, if approved, allow a substantial change to occur at the mid -marina site. The Port of Edmonds has determined that no substantial adverse impacts will occur with this action, and a declaration of nonsignificance has been issued. Overall, the entire project wfll be a positive action for the community. Increased public access to the waterfront will be a direct result of this project. IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: As stated earlier, one of,the most significant results of this pro- posed development is the increased ability of the public to have direct access to the waterfront, which is a major objective of our Shoreline Master Program. Furthermore, this type of water -related use is a priority use under our shoreline program. Because this project conforms to our Shoreline Master Program and the Edmonds Community Development Code, staff recommends approval of SM-3-83, V-17-83, and CU-58-83,.sUbject to the following condi- ti'ons: 1. That the amount of existing transient moorage is retained and increased if possible. 2. That the two floating piers located west of the restaurant and yacht club are open to the public and without gates. 3. That the pier located southeast of the restaurant is used as public viewing area. 4. That a 101 (minimum pedestrian walkway is provided along the waterfront. 5. That a minimum of 20' of paved area, designated as fire lane, is provided west of the restaurant. 6. That standpipes and a fire hydrant, as required by the Fire Department, are provided. Exhibit ll:furth,er notes items of concern that should be�addressed by the Port with this development. The staff recommends denial of the building setback variance, as there is not sufficient justification to approve the request. ' PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THESE ITE i i � | PORT OF EDMONDS ' SM_3-83 SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ` DREDGING BOAT LAUNCHERS, r»xx/nu FOR 45 TO 60 CARS, PrER WALKWAY, AND �CONCESSION '~D^'^O' AT '~^' OF ED^^'~~ MARINA^ 1,000 FEET SOUTH OF OAYT0M STREET, WEST OF ADMIRAL \ ` '`r ^ i VARIANCES TO REDUCE THE SETBACK OF PARKING FROM A BULKHEAD. � -- FROM GO' TO lO/, TO ALLOW BUILDINGS TO O', AND T0,`REDUCE'THE` � ( REQUIRED AISLE WIDTH WITHIN A PARKING LOT FROM 24/ TO22",' CU-58-83 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DREDGING 84,000 CUBIC YARDS OF ` � MATERIAL. ' �� L ' ) �� � _����Y /�e �� ^ &V/��/;gm ADDRESS /��/ _ - / _ ' /�� (2�� �� ` � L / ~�/// \AA -� ' A ce A e- ')) c HEARING DATE; JANUARY 19, 1984 gr CITY OF EDMONDS LARRY S. NAUGHTEN 250 5th AVE. N. EDMONDS, WASHINGTON 98020 (206) 771-3202 PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: March 13, 1984 TO: Herb Carpenter Reid -Middleton Assoc 121 Sth Ave. N., Ste. iOO Edmonds, WA 98020 TRANSMITTING: LETTER OF APPEAL FROM ROGER HERTRICH RE APPLICATIONS. #SM-3-83, "# 1-T # U-58-83 (PORT OF EDMONDS) AS YOU REQUESTED: FOR YOUVINFORMATION: xxx AS WE DISCUSSED: Aq -,", f"321 "RA NAR 07 1984. :WA,,. IP March 6, 1984 Planning Department City of Edmonds Civic Center Edmonds, WA 98020 RE: SM 3-83, V-17-83 and CU 58-83 Port of Edmonds Gentlemen: On January 19, 1984 the hearing examiner held a public'hearing and:on February,22, 1984 granted a conditional use permit to'dredge 84, 000 cubic yards of earth to reduce parking.set back from 60 �o 16 �4'et and reduce aisle width in a parking lot at the mid marina location on Port of Edmonds property. I attended -the hearing and gave testimony and do not agree with the hearing,,examiner decision. I don't feel.the decision is consistent with the.inteni of the Community Development.Code. 'I wish'tIo appeal the decision to the City Council for their consideration. Please�advise me when the hearing date has been set. Siiicerely R P ger RPH: bs Mayor Naughten read a proclamation designating April as Cancer Control Month in Edmonds and urged every citizen to support the American Cancer Society's annual Cancer Crusade. Mayor Naughten advised the Council he had appointed Dan Prinz as Acting Police Chief until a permanent Police Chief is appointed. He said he was currently'researching the pro's and con's of keeping the Police and Fire Chief positions under the Civil Service system. Mayor Naughten mentioned a letter from Mr. Biers asking the City to raise the mora- torium on single dwelling building lots. He said he would notify Mr. Biers that a discussion of raising the moratorium on subdivisions is scheduled for April 10. Councilmember Dwyer asked that Mr. Biers be advised the scheduled discussion will not deal with building or permits. 1. Mayor Naughten advised the council he would be gone March 29 and April 2; Mr. Housler will be available in his absence. The Mayor read excerpts of a letter from Penny Spute commending the fire department and Medic 7 for the excellent Job they had done in responding to a recent emergency. Mayor Naughten requested confirmation of his appointment of Bob Drury to the Board of Appeals. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO CONFIRM THE MOTION: MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF BOB DRURY TO POSITION 6 ON THE BOARD OF APPEALS, TERM TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 1987. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Naughten requested confirmation of his appointment of Jackie Parrett as City Clerk. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO CONFIRM THE MOTION: MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF JACKIE PARRETT AS CITY CLERK. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL Councilmember Dwyer said he had received a letter regarding the day-care issue and asked if these people would be advised of the date of the Planning Board hearing, Ms. Block responded that the Planning Department does not receive letters addressed to the Council. He asked that the letters be conveyed to Planning. Councilmember Dwyer mentioned the staff meeting minutes of March 21, 1984, in which a department head had commented regarding a hearing before the Council. Councilmember Dwyer said he felt it was inappropriate in this situation. Councilmember Hall dis- agreed saying the Council could not control what a person says in a staff meeting; it is not a public meeting. Councilmember Hall reported that the planting strips on SR104 will be planted this year. The Garden Club will plant a portion and the City will plant a portion in wild flowers. A cost breakdown will be furnished on the flower program. She said using seeds rather than transplanting annuals will allow a greater amount of flowers to be used In the City. Councilmember Wilson reported a request from the Arts Festival to put up some sign poles for banners. They have relied on the PUD and telephone company in the past, but they are unwilling to accommodate such use any longer. He said Mr. Mills had EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 - March 27, 1981 THESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO APRIL 27 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 20, 1984 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Larry Larry Haughten in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present Joined in the flag salute. PRESENT STAFF PRESENT Larry Naughten. Mayor Art Nousler, Finance Director Jo -Anne Jaech Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk John Nordquist Jim Adams, City Engineer Jack Wilson Bobby Mill's, Actg. Public Works Diry Steve Dwyer Dan Prinz, Assistant Police Chief Lloyd Ostrom Jim Jessel, Property Manager Laura Hall Jack Weinz, Fire Chief Bill Kasper Pat LeMay, Personnel Director Brian Stewart. Student Rep. Mary Lou Block, Planning Director Dale Schroeder, Engineering Coord. Mark Eames, City Attorney Shirlie Witzel, Recorder Councilmember Nordquist spoke with concern of Kathy Samels' absence from the Press table. He said she had suffered a stroke -like attack but thanks to immediate surgery and medical attenattention. she was on the road to recovery. He then passed a card among the audience and Council members to be signed by any who wished. CONSENT AGENDA items (D), (F), (G) ' (H), and (K) were removed from the Consent Agenda....�,COUNCII.r MEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED', BY' COUNC I LMEMBER WILSON. TO'APPROVE.THE BALANCE -OF Tk: CONSENT AGENDA; MOTION CARRIED. 1he approved items on the Cons I ent 'Agenda� inctided the following: (A) Roll call. (8) Approval of Minutes of March 12, 1984. (C) Set,date of April-3, 1984, for hearing on.�Appeals,oflliearing Examiner decision on matter 'of Shoreline Permit Number Marina expansion project, including Conditiona ' I. Use Permi , t Number CU-tB-93 and Variance Number V-17-wB3. (Appellant: Hertrich). (E) Resolutions of commendation 577, 578, 579. and 580 for retiring officials Katherine Allen, Ramon J. Gould, Larry S. Naughten, and Harve H. Harrison, respectively. (1) Report on bids opened February 28, 1984 for purchase of water meters ($21,285.60) (J) Approval of final 10-lot plat at 18123 - 80th Ave. W. (Seaview Firs 2/P-8- 83) (L) Authorization to contract with testing lab for Meadowdale. COUNCIL PRESIDENT JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY C66NCILMEMBER KASPER, TO MOVE ITEMS (D), (G), (H), AND (K)'TO FOLLOW ITE14 07 ON THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION. MOTION CARRIED. Council President Jaech said item (F), increase Mileage Reimbursement rate, would be removed from the agenda until further information is provided. PRESENTATION OF PLAQUES AND RESO_LUTIONSOF COMMENDATION TO RETIRING OFFICIALS AND RARD MEMBERS Mayor Naughten presented plaques to the following retiring board members: I 4� �M"A March 29,, 1984 ......... MEMO TO: Larry S. Naughten Mayor FROM: Mary Lou Block Planning Director SUBJECT: HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMIVER DECISI-ON ON MATTER OF SHORELINE PERMIT 0SM-3-83, PORT OF EDMONDS MI'D-MARINA EXPAN_ SION PROJECT, INCLUDI-NG CONDITI'ONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE #V-17-83 (APPELLANT:HERTRICH) The Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on January 19, 1984 re-. garding the Port of Edmonds request for the proposed mtd-marina expan- sion, along with a conditional use permit for grading and a Variance to reduce the parking setback from a bulkhead. On February 22, 1984,,the Hearing Examiner issued his- findings on the actions requested by the Port. Subsequently, on March 6, 1984, Roger Hertrich filed an appeal to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision. Attached are a copy of the Heari'ng Examiner's report, a site plan, and a copy of the appeal letter. Staff strongly supports the Port's proposed project and recommends that the Hearing Examiner's decision be upheld. DVB/tq attachments (3) cc: Files- #SM-3-83 #CU-58-83 #V-17-83 FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER OF THE - CITY OF EDMONDS IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION FILES: SM-3-83, V-17-83 OF THE PORT OF EDMONDS.FOR APPROVAL and CU-58-83 OF A SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOP- MENT PERMIT, A VARIANCE, AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DECISION: The shoreline substantial development permit, variance, and the conditional use permit are granted subject to the conditions listed. INTRODUCTION The Port of Edmonds, 336 Admiral Way, PO Box 398, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, and hereinafter referred to as Applicant, has requested approval of a shoreline substantial development permit to allow construction of 116 new moorage slips and re- lated improvements at the existing Port of Edmonds marina. In addition, the Applicant has requested a variance to reduce the setback of parking from a bulkhead from 60 feet to 10 feet, and to reduce the required aisle width within a parking lot from 24 feet to 22 feet. Also, the Applicant has requested a conditional use permit for the purpose of dredging 84,000 cubic yards of material. The property that is the subject of these requests is legally described as: Government Lot 3, Section 23, Township 27 N, Range 3E, W.M., Snohomish County, Washington. A hearing on the requests was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds on January 19, 1984. At the public hearing the following presented testimony: Duane Bowman Herb Carpenter Planning Dept. Reid -Middleton & Assoc. City,of Edmonds 121 5th Ave. N. Ste. 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Roger Hertrich Swan Seaberg 1020 Puget.Drive 8006 206th S.W. Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 John Olson Roger Stubbs 121 5th Ave. No. 903 12th Pl. W. Suite 200 Edmonds, WA 98020 Edmonds, WA 98020 Findings and Decisiun of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 Page 2 Dick Beslin Andy Martin Richard Cole 120 2nd So. Edmonds, WA 98020 Harold Shiery Milton Tuttle Spencer Setter Gordon Maxwell Charles Dalton At the hearing the following exhibits were presented and were admitted as evidence for the requests: Exhibit 1 - Staff Report to 2 - Applications it 3 - Description of Proposed Project it 4 - Declarations of the Applicant it 5 - Site Plan it 6 - Breakwater and DredgingArea Location Map is 7 - Variance Location Map it 8 - Breakwater Elevation Drawings 9 - Corps of Engineers Application 10 - Final Declaration of Nonsignificance 11 - Concerns of Parks & Recreation Director 12 - Response from the Port of Edmonds to the Parks and Recreation Department Memo 13 - Letter dated 12/21/83 from the Depart- ment of Fisheries 14 - Environmental Checklist 15 - Letter dated 12/19/83 from Department of Ecology to Gordon Maxwell 16 - Amended Application 12/22/83 Subsequent to the hearing the following memos were submitted pursuant to the Hearing Examiner's orders: 17 - Memo from Duane Bowman to Hearing Examiner Re: The status of the amended Shoreline Master Plan 18 - Order of Hearing Examiner of 2/15/84 requesting more information from the Port of Edmonds' representative cillu l.--cis.-on ot trie 4 1 LA Hearing Examiner c "the City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 Page 3 Exhibit 19 - Response of Port of Edmonds to Hearing Examiner's.request of 2/15/84 After due consideration of the evidence presented by the Applicant; evidence elicited during the public hearing; and, as a result of the personal inspection of the subject property and surrounding areas by the Hearing Examiner, the following findings of fact and conclusions constitute the basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner. -FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Applicant has requested approval of a shoreline sub- stantial development permit to allow construction of 116 new moorage slips and related improvements at the existing Port of Edmonds marina. In addition, the Applicant has requested variances to re- duce the setback of parking from a bulkhead from 60 feet to 10 feet and to reduce the required aisle width within a parking lot from 24 feet to 22 feet. (Originally the Applicant had also requested a variance to allow buildings to have a zero -foot setback. The Applicant withdrew this request during the hearing.) Also, the Applicant has requested a conditional use permit for the purpose of dredging 84,000 cubic yards of material from the marina. 2. Currently, the Edmonds Shoreline Master Program prohibits dredging. In order for the permits as requested by the Applicant to be granted, the Shoreline Master Program must be amended and approved by the Department of Ecology. On January 31, 1984, the City of Edmonds City Council approved the amendment. (A copy of the amendment is attached hereto and by this reference is hereby incorporated as part of these -findings.) Following approval by the City Council the amendments were forwarded to the State of Washington for their approval. No action has been taken by the State of Washington at the date of this decision. 3. It is the intent of the Applicant to expand the existing Port marina. An additional 116 moorage slips are proposed, which together with the 741 moorage slips would provide 857 slips within the marina.' In addition to the construc- tion of the new moorage slipsi the Applicant is requesting that the existing entrance for the marina be modified with two new breakwaters. 4. The Applicant proposes to construct a new moorage area 'between the existing north and south boat harbors. This construction will result in the elimination of approxi- mately 1.2 acres of uplands by a dredging method. wor I � , ­ � � I ;,­ ­11a Ljeci,­ion of the Hearing Examiner' * the City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 Page 4 5. The proposed develo ment of the boat harbor and moorage additions is a part P of the Port of Edmonds Master Plan which has included construction of the Harbor Square Business Park for commercial and industrial businesses. As part of the improvement for the Marina, the Applicant has requested extension of the south breakwater at the entrance of the marina and the construction of two sheet steel Pile breakwaters on the northern edge. 6. The Applicant is proposing to modify the breakwaters in order to eliminate wave damage within the marina. The proposed modifications of the breakwaters will protect the new piers and slips from wave damage. 7. The Department of Fisheries has expressed . concern about the modification -of the breakwaters. The existing break- water provides habitat for small fish because of the shallow waters around the breakwater. The proposed new breakwater may eliminate this fishery habitat. 8. The proposed dredging of the marina is to occur between the existing port office and the building housing ' Anthony's Homeport Restaurant. Approximately 84,000 cubic yards of material will be dredged from the new basin and barged to a dredge disposal site, Or replaced in the Sound. After dredging a depth of -9 to -12 feet will be attained. 9. Any dredging in the marina is contingent upon approval by the State of Washington of the amended Edmonds Shore- line Master Program. 10. Section 16-55.020 establishes a minimum setback of 60 feet landward of the bulkhead for parking Purposes. The Appli- cant has requested a variance from the standard to lo feet. 11. In addition, the Applicant has requested a variance from Section 18.05.020 Parking Lot Requirements. The required aisle width within the parking lot is 24 feet. The Appli- cant is requesting an aisle width of 22 feet. 12. Section 20.55.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code sets forth the criteria for reviewing shoreline permits. This criteria includes review of the Shoreline Master Program (Chapter 15;35 of the Code), policies of the Shoreline Act, and Policies of wAc 173-14. 13. In order for a variance to be granted within the City of Edmonds, the criteria as set forth in Chapter 20.85.010 must be met. These criteria include: a. Special circumstances relating to the property must exist necessitating the variance; _7 ttinaings ano uecision oz r-ne Hearing Examiner of he City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 Page 5 b. The required variance does not result in a special privilege being granted to the Applicant; C. The variance must be consistent with the Comprehensive Policy Plan of the City of Edmonds; d. The variance must be consistent with the purposes of the zone district in which the property is located; e. The variance must not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity of the same zone; and, f. The variance must be the minimum necessary to allow the same rights enjoyed by other property owners in the same zone. 14. In order for a conditio*nal use permit to be granted within the City of Edmonds the criteria as set forth in Chapter 20.05 of the Edmonds Community Development Code must be met. These criteria include: a. The request must be consistent with the zone ordinance of the zone district in which the proposal is located; b. The proposal must not conflict with the Comprehensive Policy Plan Map of the City of Edmonds; c. The proposal must not be significantly detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor injurious to private properties or improvements; and, d. A determination must be made as to whether the con- ditional use permit should be transferable. 15. The Shoreline Master Program for the City of Edmonds desig- nates the subject property as Urban Environment (Urban Marine). 16. The proposed marina is a commercial development to be developed to enhance the waterfront environment and create opportunities for public recreation and leisure activities. 17. Public access to the proposed marina is available. Public access will include permanent moorage slips, transient moorage slips, and a boat launcher. 18. The proposed marina will cause the minimum disruption to the shoreline environment and minimal conflict with modes of circulation. With the conditions for pedestrian access to the piers and connections with other pedestrian walkways in the area, a safe, convenient and diversified circulation system will be assured. Findings and Decisi of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 Page 6 19. The proposed marina improvements will preserve and expand recreational opportunities. These recreational opportunities will be mainly for those havinig permanent moorage within the pier. Additional expansion of recreational opportunities for those without moorage should be provided through acqui- sition, development and maintenance of other facilities. 20. The proposed development will result in the preservation of the natural shoreline resources if the proposal meets the Department of Ecology's and Department of Fisheries' concerns with regard to the breakwater and dredging proposal. 21. The proposed development will enhance the shoreline area for scenic value to the community. 22. The proposed development will develop water uses within the area and encourage the pattern and distribution of land and water uses in order to enhance the natural shore- line system. 23. With conditions,the natural systems, the geological systems and the shoreline systems will be protected. 24. The proposed use is a commercial use requiring piers, moors and docks, and is given priority in the Urban Environment designation. 25. The proposed use as a marina will provide overnight and. permanent boating moorage facilities on the water. Al- though marina will be a significant part of the Edmonds waterfront, it will not dominate the waterfront in that there are other commercial facilities, public parks and industrial uses,in the area. 26. Open pile and floating dock construction will be required on the site. 27. The marina will be responsible for the safe handling of any chemicals or fuels and shall be required to provide a means of handling any spills that occur. 28. The proposed marina will not.damage fish and shell fish resources. However, the breakwater may be detrimental to fish. Thus, before any permits can be granted, the marina must acquire approval from the Department of Fisheries for the establishment of the breakwaters. 29. The proposed marina will be aesthetically compatible with adjacent areas and will not be disruptive to pedestrian traffic or access to the public shorelines. Findings and Decisi( ,of the Hearing Examiner of the City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 Page 7 30. Boats will be prohibited from discharging chemicals, fuels, or sewage into the marina. 31. The subject property is currently zoned CW, Commercial Waterfront. The proposed use is consistent with the CW zone. 32. The proposed variance is to reduce the setback of parking from the bulkhead from 60 feet to ten feet and this is con- sistent with the Comprehensive Plan in providing substantial public access and use of the shoreline. 33. Special circumstances exist for the granting of a variance for parking purposes. The circumstances are that there is currently a limited amount of parking available for shore- line use and with the reduction of the standards as requested by the variance, additional parking can occur. 34. The granting of the variance is not a special privilege to the Applicant. 35. With the approval of the State agencies for the various elements of the development, it appears that no environ- mental impact will occur. .36. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds recommended the following: 1. That the amount of existing transient moorage is re- tained and increased if possible. 2. That the two floating piers located west of the restau- rant and yacht club are open to the public and without gates. 3. That the pier located southeast of the restaurant is used as public viewing area. 4. That a 101 (minimum)pedestrian walkway is provided along the waterfront. 5. That a minimum of 20 feet of paved area, designated as fire lane, is provided'west of the restaurant. 6. That standpipes and a fire hydrant, as required by the Fire Department, are provided. 37. A witness (Hertrich) testified that the proposal does not satisfy the needs generated by the public and additional environmental information is necessary. The environmental information necessary includes water quality and the effect on the fisheries. 38. The witness Hertrich testified that the proposal does not :F Findings and Decisio of the Hearing Examiner of tne City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 Page 8 satisfy public needs in that it does not create a greater ability for the public to reach the water. The improvements are for a limited number of the public who will be utilizing moorage in the additional slips. 39. The Witness Hertrich testified that the priority for the shoreline should be as a recreational facility. Because of the limited number that can use the marina for moorage purposes the priority for recreational facilities is not being met by the Applicant's proposal. 40. The Applicant testified that the area being dredged could be used for parking purposes instead of permanent moorage and that additional launchers and transient moorage should be allowed. 41. A witness (Swan Seaberg) testified that the Applicant should have to retain the boat launcher and -streamline it so that more public use can be included. The witness also testified that transient moorage should be included in any proposal of the Applicant. 42. The Applicant testified that the proposal would retain at least the same amount of transient moorage that currently exists. No specific figure is established for the transient moorage, although as shown on Exhibit 18 430 lineal feet of transient moorage exists. 43. Currently, one boat launcher is availabie. Because of its size and the time constraints, the use of this launcher is limited. Testimony was received from various witnesses requesting that additional boat launchers be provided. 44. The Parks and Recreation Department of the City of Edmonds requested the transient moorage within the new facility should be doubled. Further, the department suggested that the Applicant streamline the overhead launcher and use a new straddle crane for launching trailerable boats. 45. Various witnesses testified during the public hearing that there should be permanent moorage for boats. According to the witnesses there is a waiting list for moorage slips and the development as proposed by the Applicant will pro- vide additional moorage for those waiting to moor their boats within the City of Edmonds' port. rOMMMSTONS 1. The Applicant has requested approval of a shoreline sub- stantial development permit to allow construction of 116 new moorage slips and related improvements to the existing Port of Edmonds marina. In addition, the Applicant has requested variances to reduce tinainys ana jecis.L,—i ui. uit= Hearing Examiner of -he City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 Page 9 the setback of parking from the bulkhead from 60 feet to 10 feet and to reduce the required aisle width within the parking lot from 24 feet to 22 feet. Also, the Applicant has requested a conditional use permit for the purpose of dredging84,000 cubic yards of material in order to develop the marina as proposed. 2. The property that is the subject of the request requires a shoreline development permit as mandated by the laws of the State of Washington and the City of Edmonds. 3. The proposed project is in basic conformance with the goals and policies of the Edmonds Shoreline Master Plan as set forth in Chaptersl5.35, 15.36, 15.37 and 15.38 of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Conditions for complete con- formance must be met in order for the shoreline permit to be granted. 4. With conditions, the proposed improvement will have no significant environmental impact on the area. 5. Substantial public access provided by the proposal and the use is a priority within the shoreline area in which it is located. 6. The subject has a designation of Urban Water Environment and the proposal satisfies the goals and policies for this particular area. 7. The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Edmonds in that it provides a use for the shoreline oriented activities. 8. The proposal is consistent with the zoning ordinances of the City of Edmonds and the CW zone in which it is located. 9. Special circumstances necessitating a variance exist. Because of the limited parkingra reduction of the parking standards, including the reduction of the setbacks for parking from the bulkhead, and the reduction of the aisle width,will allow more parking in the area and greater use of the facility. 10. The granting of the variance is not a special privilege in that the general public will benefit through the use of the marina and the attendant facilities. 11. The requested variances appear to represent the minimum necessary to properly utilize the property. 12. From the information presented there appears to be insigni- ficant environmental impact on the site. However, further approval of various permits must be acquired from State agencies. I 'Findings and Decis-"--n of the Hearing Examiner o� the City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 Page 10 13. The Planning Department of the City of Edmonds has recom- mended approval of the requested permits subject to the conditions listed in Finding #36. 14. The testimony and concerns of the public in support and opposition to the requests have been noted above. DECISION Based upon the preceding findings of fact; conclusions; the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearing; the evidence submitted subsequent to the hearing pursuant to the Hearing Examiner's order; and, the impressions of the Hearing Examiner upon a site visit, it is hereby ordered that the requested shoreline substantial development permit for additional moorage slips within the Port of Edmonds be granted. In addition, the requested variances to reduce the setback of parking from the bulkhead from 60 feet to 10 feet and to reduce the required aisle width within the parking lot from 24 feet to 22 feet is granted. Also, the conditional use permit for dredging 84,000 cubic yards of material is granted. These permits are granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The amount of existing transient moorage of 430 lineal feet should be retained. In addition, fourteen (14) per- cent increase in transient moorage is required. The new lineal feet of transient moorage will be 60 feet for a total of 490 lineal feet of transient moorage within the marina. 2. The two floating piers located west of the restaurant and yacht club are to be open to the public and are not to have gates. 3. The pier located southeast of the restaurant is to be used as a public viewing area. - 4. A 10-foot walkway is to be provided along the waterfront. This 10-foot walkway will be -part of the setback for the bulkhead parking. 5. A minimum of 20 feet of paved area, designated as a fire lane, is to be provided west of the restaurant. 6. Standpipes and a fire hydrant, as required by the Fire Department, will be provided.� 7. An oil separator as required,by the Department of Public Works will be installed. 8. The Applicant shall maintain t ' he existing boat launcher or shall provide for at least one boat launcher within the marina. 9. The Applicant shall take incentives of acquiring, develop- ing and maintaining other public recreational facilities to meet the public demand for boat launching and transient moorage and other enjoyment of the shoreline. 10. No construction or improvement may begin without approval of the Department of Fisheries, Department of Ecology and other State agencies for permits to improve the marina. Without these permits the granted land use permits are invalid. 11. These permits are conditioned upon the State of Washington approval of the City of Edmonds amended Shoreline Master Program. In granting these permits a thorough review of the Edmonds Shore- line Master Program, Comprehensive Plan and the Applicant's re- quest was made. In my review it became apparent that two recrea- tional needs exist for the use of the shoreline. These recreational elements are the need for additional permanent moorage within the Port of Edmonds and the need for additional transient moorage with sufficient boat launching capabilities within the Port of Edmonds. A small amount of the current port is utilized for transient moorage purposes. The port is requesting an increase of approxi- mately 14 percent of permanent moorage. Accordingly, it is fair to expect that the transient moorage within the port be increased by that amount. Therefore, my decision increases the transient moorage allowed within the marina by 14 percent, or by 60 lineal feet. This does not significantly decrease the need for additional transient moorage, but the economics of operating the port dictate that the permanent moorage be greater than the transient moorage. No provisions are made for additional boat launchers. The main reason no provision was made was not because of lack of need for boat launchers, but because of the lack of parking available for the boats and trailers. As stated -at the public hearing, boat launchers generate the need for at least five acres of paved parking. Currently, there is insufficient parking to provide for additional boat launchers. The Shoreline Master Program of the City of Edmonds has a general policy and goal to acquire, develop, and maintain public recrea- tional facilities to meet public demand for recreational use and '01, Findings and Decis�­p of the Hearing Examiner o� the City of Edmonds Re: SM-3-83, V-17-83 & CU-58-83 .............. Page 12 ............. enjoyment of the shoreline. It appears that there is a signif i-, cant demand for boat launchers in the area. It is strongly recommended that the port review any alternatives available to determine if boat launchers can be provided in addition to that provided within the marina. Entered this day of 1984, pursuant to the authority granted the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.100 of the Community Development Code of the City of�Edmonds_ *J M. DRISCOLL Heing Examiner NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Written appeals alleging specific error of fact or other grounds -for appeal may be filed with the Planning Department, City of Edmonds, Civic Center, Edmonds, Washington, 98020, within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Hearing Examiner's final action. In this matter, any appeal must be received by the Department prior to 5:00 p.m. on 1984. ............ 4 140TION: COUNCILMEMBER DWYER WITHDREW HIS PREVIOUS MOTION AND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, THAT THE MATTER BE REMANDED TO THE HEARING EXAMINER TO DETERMINE WHAT THE NECESSARY FOOTAGE SHOULD BE. MOTION CARRIED. 7,ER�104 I I C 83 �Q Planning Director Mary Lou Block recounted progress to -date on this matter. The Hearing Examiner conducted his hearing on the Shoreline Management Master Permit 3-83 on January 18, 1984, regarding the Port of Edmonds' request for the proposed mid -marina expansion, along with the Conditional Use Permit for grading, and a variance to reduce the parking setback from the bulkhead. On February 22, 1984, the Hearing Examiner issued his findings; subsequently, on March 6, 1984, Roger Hertrich filed an appeal to overturn the Hearing Examiner's decision. Mayor Naughten observed that the appellant was not present, but they had a letter from the Port of Edmonds, written by William E. Auerswald, stressing the urgency of a decision on the matter. He also noted that representatives from the Port of Edmonds were present. At this point, Planning Director Block said she would like to summarize the points from the Hearing Examiner's decision for the benefit of those who were not familiar'with the contents. Since it is a ten -page document, Mrs. Block read the final Order: "Based on the Findings of Fact, Conclusions, testimony admitted at the public hearing and the evidence submitted subsequent to the hearing, and the impressions of the Hearing Examiner upon a site visit, it is hereby Ordered that the requested Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for additional moorage slips within the Port of Edmonds be granted. In addition, the requested variances to reduce the required aisle width within the parking lot from 24 feet to 22 feet, is granted. Also, the Conditional Use Permit for dredging 84,000 cubic yards of material is granted. The permits are granted subject to the following conditions: (1) The amount of existing transient moorage of 430 lineal feet should be retained. In addition, 14 percent increase in transient moorage is required. The new lineal feet of transient moorage will be 60 feet for a total of 490 lineal feet of transient moorage within the marina; (2) the two floating piers located west of the restaurant and yacht club are to be open to the public and are not to have gates; (3) the pier located southeast of the restaurant Is to be used as a public viewing area; (4) A 10-foot walkway is to be provided along the water- front. This 10-foot walkway will be part of the setback for the bulkhead parking; (5) a minimum of 20 feet of paved area, designated as a fire lane, is to be provided west of the restaurant; (6) standpipes and a fire hydrant,as required by the Fire Department, will be provided; (7) an oil separator as required by the Department of Public Works, will be installed; (8i the applicant shall maintain the existing boat launcher or shall provide for at least one boat launcher within the marina; (9) the applicant shall take incentives of acqu ' iring, developing and maintaining other public recreational facilities to meet the public demand for boat launching and transient moorage and other enjoyment of the shoreline; (10) no construction or improvement may begin without approval of the Department of Fisheries, Department of Ecology and other State agencies for permits to Improve the marina. Without these permits, the granted land use permits are invalid; (11) these permits are conditioned upon the State of Washington approval of the City of Edmonds amended Shoreline Master Program. Planning Director Block said that the Hearing Examiner did find that the proposed use was consistent with the intent of the Edmonds Shoreline Master Program, the policy plan and the CW zoning. ESA116"N'b's" Ml T"c"601UNdlemmuTtv t;�P_a —ge" —8-197 _AoFf .11"S ­­ Councilmember Dwyer asked Planning Director Block if any or all of the approvals or permits from the state agencies or other involved agencies had been received since the Hearing Examiner filed his report. Planning Director Block replied that the permits do not come to the Staff or the City; those permits are filed with the State departments and then become a part of the overall permit that is required for the applicant to proceed. By the time the City receives the building permit, they could be assured that all the requirements had been made and the permit itself would be evidence that the permit had been issued by the Corps of Engineers. Councilmember Nordquist asked if anything was required by the Corps of Engineers in this project, and Ms. Block affirmed that a permit from them was essential. The Corps of Engineers will not issue a permit until all other involved agencies have approved the project and issued their own permits or otherwise granted permission. Councilmember Jaech asked how the 84,000 cubic yards of dirt was to be disposed of. Planning Director Block indicated that Public Works is interested in obtaining a substantial amount of that dirt, and City Engineer Adams advised the Council that their department had a great need for that material, for there are two projects scheduled for completion within the next two years where the dirt will be used: On 88thAvenue, north of Main and on the new road out of Shell Valley at Pioneer Way. John Olson, Reid /Middleton, 121 5th Avenue North, addressed the Council with regard to the 84,000 yards of dredging. The original permit request was to dump that in deep -water disposal at Port Gardner Bay. At the request of the City of Edmonds for 24,000 cubic yards of the material, the new permit application was amended to reduce the quantity to 60,000 yards to be dumped. The other 24,000 yards will be upland disposal. Mr. Olson indicated that they wished to work very closely with the City Engineer and the City of Edmonds, to dispose of that fill wherever the City would like to have it placed. The Port of Edmonds, Mr. Olson stated, is interested in the most economical method of disposal and will try to determine the most economical way that will suit everyone involved. If the City can use more than the 24,000 they have requested, Mr. Olson noted that everything would be done to assure that the Cit�v receives as much as they want. There is material which will have to go north to deep water disposal because of the location; it can not readily be reached with a backhoe. All the material that can be reached with a shore type backhoe and put directly in trucks can be disposed of wherever the City of Edmonds Public Works Department would like to have it and the City can have as much as they want, he repeated. He stressed that they did not approach the City for the material; that the City approached them. They have a permit to dump 60,000 yards in deep water, and there is no problem for them. Finis Tupper, 711 Daley Street, indicated that he had testified on this matter in the past. He is not against the mid -marina project. He stated that he does not represent Roger Hertrich, but that he wanted to speak on the matter because he met with Herb Carpenter recently and when he asked what changes were taking place and Mr. Carpenter mentioned a few, Mr. Tupper felt that these were significant changes in terms of reduction to the original proposal. He stressed that the Hearing Examiner made his Findings of Fact based upon the original proposal and chose to limit his conditions to the issue of public access and how it pertains to this development. Mr. Tupper understood the moorage was to be reduced by half and was informed that they would not be dredging 84,000 cubic yards of soil material. Mr. Tupper wonders if there are people who do not understand what a conditional use permit is. He reiterated that it is granted through the Hearing Examiner process, and that was the only way to get a conditional use permit in the City of Edmonds. The process is for the purpose of getting some degree of control and to guarantee consistency and compatability to other existing permissible uses in the zone or zones. The Code sets up certain criteria that must be observed to grant a conditional use permit. Among the criteria, Mr. Tupper said, is that the project "not be detrimental" or "significantly EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9 - April 3, 1984 detrimental" to the public health, safety or welfare, nor to nearby private properties or improvements". Mr Tupper feels that neither of these has been addressed in the Hearing ixaminer's Findings of Fact and/ or the Staff Report; neither addressed the "not detrimental" issue, nor did they address the transferability issue. Mr. Tupper noted that it was customary in this City, in the event of a possible safety hazard when dredging and moving this quantity of earth, for the City to Place conditions on the ' Dermit. He noted that there were no conditions placed on the Conditional Use Permit as read by Planning Director Block from the Hearing Examiner's Decision. He suggested that the applicant should be required to submit a dredging and drying plan; that the applicant should be required to show exactly how much he is going to remove and how; how they propose to dry the fill; whether roads could be damaged; when the hours of operation would be. He feels the applicant should supply to the City an exact dump site. The City should decide before the permit is granted exactly how much soil they want and where it is to be placed. Mr. Tupper feels that only State Route 104 should be used for to and from access from the proposed development site; that the hours should be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Mondays through Fridays. This would preclude the development from interfering with Saturday and Sunday boaters and others wishing to use the area. Mr. Tupper concluded by stating that he believes the Planning Director's office may at times selectively enforce the Community Development Code. Herb Carpenter, Port of Edmonds, said that the Conditional Use Permit was granted for�this site and the sites to be designated by the City of Edmonds. If controls are placed on disposal of the material, that is up to the City, and Mr. Carpenter believes the City will effectively control where the material is to be placed. He indicated further that there are solutions and answers to all objections raised by Mr. Tupper, and'does not understand why there appears to be a problem. He asked the Council if the matter of the appeal could be discussed, rather than extraneous matters. Councilmember Jaech noted that the Council does not have any appeal; that is, they have an appeal but do not know the contents of the appeal at this time. Councilmember Kasper noted that so far as he was concerned the contents of the appeal were set forth in Item 39 of objections raised by appellant Hertrich; he observed that Mr. Hertrich made a written appeal. Councilmember Jaech felt that there was only vague criteria in Mr. Hertrich's appeal, and none upon which the Council could act. Councilmember Kasper dissented ' noting that Item 39 sets forth Mr. Hertrich's reasons during the hearing, and he stated he didn't agree with the Council. Councilmembeir Kasper observed that Mr. Mertrich could be absent from every meeting for the next few months and action could be deferred indefinitely. Councilmember Jaech reminded Councilmember Kasper that Mr. Hertrich had argued with them when they tried to extend his appeal on the sign code; he did not want the extension. Councilmember Kasper responded that the Council is dealing with another public agency, and this is an entirely different matter than when the Council is dealing inside the City on noncontrolled elements. Councilmember Jaech replied that there were also some concerns on the part of the Department of Ecology and Fisheries that the bulkheads that were originally designed may not be the bulkheads that are going in now. Herb Carpenter, previously identified, indicated that there was a concern at one time by.the Department of Fisheries with being able to get small fish to stay in the shallows along the breakwater; there is a s)eet pile breakwater that comes out from the rock breakwater. The concern is still alive and active, and the Port of Edmonds is not attempting to go around it. Drawings have been resubmitted to the Corps of Engineers addressing this problem, showing sheetpile bulkhead inside the existing rock breakwater. The arrangement has been reviewed by the Department of Fisheries and at least, administratively, has been approved. That crucial change as to where the breakwater occurs controls a lot of other things, Mr. Carpenter said. Movinq the breakwater to the inside of the eAting rock breakwaters reduces the amount of area available for moorage. The drawings as submitted to the Corps of Engineers make no changes to the bulkhead; the moorage has been reduced to about 60 spaces. As a result of placing the fuel dock in the most convenient location, there is an increase in the EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10, ADril 3, 1984 amount of transient moorage, however. He observed that the Council was being asked to look at the decision of the Hearing Examiner. 'he Port of Edmonds would submit its plans to the City for review, and if the plans were not within the confines of the Hearing Examiner's decision, they would have to go through whatever ritual was prescribed. Councilmember Jaech inquired of Mr. Carpenter how long he thought it would be before the Corps of Engineers and Departments of Fisheries and Ecology all come to formal agreement on the needed permits. Mr. Carpenter, previously identified, indicated that there was no formal agreement per.se.. He explained, as the Planning Director had also, that the Corps of Engineers has the last crucial permit. They issue a permit only when all other requirements from all other agencies, state, city, have been satisfied; the Corps of Engineers has the "control" permit. They will issue the permit to allow the dredging, and that is the control item. In order for anyone to obtain that permit an individual absolutely has to satisfy all the agencies having an interest. For example, if the Shoreline Management Permit was not granted, then the Corps of Engineers would not issue their permit until Shoreline was satisfied; similarly, if the Department of Fisheries was at all dissatisfied with the marina, they would not issue a Permit; each ' permit from each agency is predicated upon approval from the other. The Corps of Engineers will not issue a dredging permit until all agencies have been satisfied. John Olson, previously identified,spoke again to advise the Council that after the City gets the Shoreline perinit they themselves send it on to the Corps of Engineers, and all the other agencies do the same thing. If the Port of Edmonds were'to reduce the scope of the operation which has been approved, it would be all right. They have been approved for 84,000 cubic yards, but that does not mean they have to remove that much: they can remove less - say, 60,000 cubic yards, he noted. If they were to attempt to change anything from what was originally submitted, the Corps of Engineers would readvertise and start the entire procedure over. When the Port was given permission to build a bridge, or build anything, that did not mean it had to be built, Consequently, just because they have permission to dig 84,000 yards does not mean that they are obligated to dig that much. They can remove that much to that extent; no more. They can only remove 40,000 if they want to remove that little. Mr. Olson indicated that he was also somewhat concerned about Mr. Tupper's remarks concerning dirt disposition and removing. He reiterated Mr. Carpenter's point: The City indicated a desire to have 24,000 cubic yards, and the Port is agreeable to giving it to them. The City will be getting a tremendous value. The Port is merely accommodating the City and the Port will put the material where and in the manner prescribed by the City of Edmonds Department of Public Works. If the City should decide that it does not want the material, then the Port will do as they originally intended before the City expressed a desire to have the material; they will haul it away to deep water. Herb Carpenter, previously identified, said he would like to get back to the appeal matter; that there is a time.problem. He stressed that he is requesting that the appeal be denied. Mr. Hertrich In his letter indicated that he did not feel that the decision of the Hearing Examiner was consis- tent with the Community Development Code. Mr. Carpenter observed that Mr. Hertrich could have attended the present meeting, but instead is out of town. He said that the Port has had no choice in this hearing, but they came and would like to have a decision. Mr. Carpenter told the Council that the months of June, July and August are basically the times during which the construction can occur. The Department of Ecology is reviewing the amend- ments to the Code for the City of Edmonds and decisions on those will be acted upon during the period April 25-30. Immediately thereafter, the Shoreline Permit will be granted, effective with the amendments to the Code. Shortly after April 30, assuming that the Code amendments are approved, EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING Page 11 - April 3, 1984 k .......... the Shoreline Permit then comes into effect and that is forwarded to the Corps of Engineers for a 404 permit. He indicated that the Port is "on track" to get their permit from the Corps of Engineers shortly. From that they do some bidding, order materials, and then proceed. The time left to them after the outlined procedure is very little; that is why they need to get going. They need a decision from the Council. If they do not start the project this year, this June, they will have to wait until next year. Mr. Carpenter indicated that the "critical window" for the project is set by the Department of Fisheries; that is, when they can work around the bottom without disturbing the migration of small fish. Fisheries establishes a period when they can work, and that is when they work. Councilmember Dwyer asked what period of time Department of Fisheries usually prescribes; Mr. Carpenter replied that it was between March 15 and June 15. They hope to commence their project June 15. Mr. Olson, previously identified, said that weather was another factor; contractors could not work much past the end of August or middle of September. The time span is as soon after June 15 as possible, and to complete before September. The public portion of the hearing was closed and the matter returned to the Council for decision. Councilmember Ostrom asked City Attorney Eames if the Council is looking at something diff ' erent from what was being discussed in front of the Hearing Examiner. Mr. Eames responded that the proposal that went before the Hearing Examiner is now before the Council. That is what the Council is being asked to consider. The issuance of the permit, in accordance with the application, would be the parameters within which they could work. The Council would be approving what the Port applied for to the Hearing Examiner. He sees no substantial change that has been proposed. Councilmember Wilson said that since the position of the Port is clear, and time is of the essence and the content of the appellant's appeal has been well -published and understood, COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED MOTION: BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO REJECT THE APPELLANT'S APPEAL. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN, WITH COUNCILMEMBERS WILSON, KASPER, AND NORDQUIST VOTING YES, AND WITH COUNCILMEMBERS JAECH, OSTRON,AND DWYER VOTING NO, RESULTING IN A TIE VOTE. MAYOR NAUGHTEN VOTED TO DENY THE APPEAL, AND THE MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Naughten added that he had several reasons for his vote. He felt that Mr. Hertrich's objections were clearly stated in Items 37, 38, and 39, and there is a time requirement for the Port. He believes the applicants are mitigating problems is they arise and have been doing so. He noted that if the City should decide they do not want the fill -dirt material, the Port has other places to put it. The project is important to the community, Mayor Naughten said; it is going to benefit the public insofar as recreation is concerned and he believes it will improve the whole shoreline and use by recreational boaters. It will certainly provide the transient moorage the City needs, he observed. For these reasons, the Mayor voted for the project, he said. Councilmember Jaech pointed out that those among the Council who voted against denying the appeal were not voting against the Port project; they merely felt they had not heard what the appellant's appeal was to their complete satisfaction. Councilmember Kasper stated that he felt the Council was negligent in taking appeals that were not complete, especially on major projects that affect the entire region. He did not feel that Mr. Hertrich had to have a direct interest, because this was a general subject. He also believed that appeals should be very specific, since he did not feel an appellant had the right to hold up a project. For example, he said, on the hauling of the dirt if that were to become an issue. The City EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 12 - April 3, 1984 r07 'y V4 is already committed to building Pioneer Way; the dirt is needed. Whether we buy it, or it is given to us, it is going to be hauled in there either way. It is just a matter of getting in position and having appeals that are specific and for the Council to accept them only when they are. The City is taking appeals on anything, he stated, for almost any reason. He believes that an appeal must be specific and that that point should be addressed at a future council meeting. MAYOR Mayor Naughten presented Resolution 584 to the Council for approval. This Resolution commended the Washington State Downtown Association DoWn- tDwnDevelopment Assistance Team. Councilmember Kasper noted that he had not seen the Resolution prior to its introduction here and would like to defer it for the next meeting. After further discussion, the Council requested a rewording and rewriting of the Resolution. Mayor Naughten read a Proclamation designating the week of April 8-14 as Private Property Week. Mayor Naughten read a letter from Bruce Agnew, Chairman of the Board of Health, wherein that body discussed an article that had appeared in a newspaper concerning pollution of clams in North Edmonds' beaches and water pollution of Brown's Bay. Samples of the clams have been retrieved and will continue to be tested and sent to the State laboratories for further testing.- The Health District will continue to take samples for testing and notify communities should action be required. Mayor Naughten presented an application for a liquor license application from T & D Produce, Dayton Place, 5th and Dayton, for beer and wine off -premise consumption. The application has been investigated and approved. This Is just a recommendation for approval of the licensei which then goes to the State for ultimate approval. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, THAT THE APPLICATION BE RECOMMENDED FOR FORWARDING TO THE STATE FOR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Naughten introduced Ron Post, the new reporter for the Enterprise, who will cover the Edmonds City Council meetings. COUNCIL Councilmember Jaech presented a letter from Northwest Engraving concerning day-care. She wanted to assure that the letter writer was.appri.sed of the hearing date. Councilmember Jaech advised the Council that Jo Pendergast had received the updated 1984-85 A14C, Washington Cities Directory, for officials. Those members desiring a copy at $8.00 a copy should contact Jo. Councilmember Jaech reminded the Council that a tour has been scheduled for Tuesday, April 10, to look at the signing along Highway 99 for an indication of size and scale. The members will meet in the parking lot at Scotts, will tour the signs and return to Scotts for dinner and discussion. Councilmember Jaech presented a memorandum from Felix DeMello regarding the cost of plants to support the City Beautification Program. She agreed with Mr. DeMello that buying plants from a greenhouse is prohibi- tive and starting them from scratch takes too long. Mr. DeMello was seeking approval for an additional greenhouse; council members advised Councilmember Jaech that the greenhouse was already included in the budget. Councilmember Jaech directed the Council's attention to the fact that EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 13 - April 3. 1984 THE HEARING EXAMINER -WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING THURSDAYj JANUARY 19,1984 ON THE FOLLOWING APPLICATION: FILESNO.- V-17-83 & 2-58- VARIANCES TO REDUCE THE SETBACK OF PARKING FROM A BULKHEAD FROM 60, TO 10'., TO ALLOW BUILDINGS TO 0, AND TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED AISLE WIDTH WITHIN A PARKING LOT FROM 24' To 22'. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DREDGING 84,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL. PROPERTY ADDRESS AND LOCATION PORT OF EDMONDS MARINAi APPROXIMATELY 1,000 FEET SOUTH OF DAYTON STREET, WEST OF ADMIRAL WAY. ZONE DISTRIC QW (COMMERCIAL WATERFRONT) THE HEARING WILL BEGIN AT 7!30 RM., IN THE PLAZA MEETING ROOM, LIBRARY BUILDING, 650 MAIN STREET, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON. IF YOU WISH TO COMMENT ON THIS PROPOSAL, YOU MAY COME TO THE HEARING AND SPEAK. YOU MAY ALSO WRITE A LETTER STATING YOUR VIEWS WHICH WILL BE CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING. PLEASE ADDRESS THE LETTER TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND INCLUDE THE ABOVE FILE NUMBER. IF THE ITEM IS CONTINUED TO ANOTHER HEARING BECAUSE THE AGENDA IS NOT COMPLETED, OR FURTHER INFORMATION IS NEEDED, THE DATE OF THE CONTINUED HEARING WILL BE ANNOUNCED ONLY AT THE MEETING. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 250 FIFTH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS (PHONE 771-3202, EXTENSION 252). THE REMOVAL, MUTILATION, DESTRUCTION, OR CONCEALMENT OF THIS NOTICE BEFORE THE DATE WARNING! OF THE HEARING IS A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT. ee