Cm161206.pdf
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR
COMMENCING JANUARY 1, 2017. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS None
Î
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. PUBLIC HEARING AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENTS
Planning Manager Rob Chave explained because a major Comprehensive Plan update was done last year,
only minor amendments were required this year, 1) integrating the Marina Beach Master Plan, 2) adding
an implementation action to the Capital Facilities element (similar to other plan elements, and 3) adopting
the Capital Facilities Element.
Council President Johnson recalled last week she asked questions regarding the Marina Beach property.
Mr. Chave referred to the explanation in the agenda memo, explaining the Shoreline Master Program
(SMP) does not specifically address dog parks, only parks in general which are allowed in the shoreline.
If a specific application were submitted such as dog park, staff would consider permitted uses in the SMP
and then the details such as how it is operated, etc. would be considered which could result in conditions.
He summarized a dog park was potentially allowed in the shoreline environment.
Council President Johnson referred to the August 12, 2015 Planning Board minutes that appear to
contradict that statement; then-Chair Tibbott asked specifically about the d
og park and Keely OÓConnell
explained In general, they also know that the impact of waste (solid and urine), impacts water quality,
Ð
and a park like the off-leash area would not likely be permitted on Puget Sound today. She summarized
that, at this time, the City does not have enough studies to know, by the numbers, what the direct impact
is. However, it is known that an off-leash park is not the best use of a beach property, especially one that
is protected for marine
habitat.Ñ Mr. Chave responded Ms. OÓConnell was not necessarily talking about
regulations.
the SMP or the CityÓs
Council President Johnson recalled this was during a discussion of the Marina Beach Master Plan. The
proposed change is to correct a discrepancy between the Marina Beach Plan and the Comprehensive Plan.
The existing policy states the dog park should be relocated; the new policy says it should be consistent
with the SMP. She commented that may be nonsense without knowing what it means. She asked whether
the dog park was protected by grandfathering, commenting the proposed change to make it consistent
with the SMP did not make sense to her. Mr. Chave responded there is nothing in the SMP that precludes
the siting of a dog park, either where it is, its current configuration or a reconfiguration. Subsequent to the
Planning BoardCouncil approved the Marina Beach Master Plan which includes a
Ós discussion, the
reconfigured dog park. If there were an inconsistency with the SMP, it should have come up then.
Council President Johnson pointed out it did not and that is the reason for the proposed change to the
Comprehensive Plan to be consistent with the adopted Marina Beach Plan. She questioned the logic of
changing the policy to compliment the Plan. Mr. Chave said the policy is not in the SMP, it is in the
Comprehensive Plan. The intent of the proposed change is to resolve the language and since the action by
the Council regarding Marina Beach led to the conclusion that it was compatible, it makes sense to close
the loop and modify this policy that seems to potentially be in conflict. He summarized several different
actions have been taken at different times; the intent was to resolve that and bring them into consistency.
new policy language, nsure uses in
At Council President JohnsonÓs request, Mr. Chave provided the ÐE
environmental sensitive areas are consistent with critical area regulations and the Shoreline Master
Council President Johnson nonsense because there is nothing in the SMP or the
Program.Ñ said thatÓs
critical area regulations regarding dog parks. Mr. Chave saidnsure that uses in environmentally
, ÐE
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 6, 2016
Page 9
sensitive areasa broad statement that does not specifically address dog parks. The language states
ÈÑ is
any use in this environment should be consistent with the SMP and the critical area regulations.
Council President Johnson agreed but said that did not address the difference between the policies. Mr.
Chave explained it is shifting from a specific policy or statement that conflicts with other actions the
Council has taken and making it a more general, positive statement that would apply to a variety of uses.
Councilmember Tibbott recalled in speaking with Keely at the Planning Board about the dog
OÓConnell
park in relation to the potential daylighting of Willow Creek, she said the dog park would not prevent a
fully functioning habitat for salmon. Councilmember Tibbott was satisfied with the proposed language
and suggested proceeding with the understanding, 1) monitor how the dog park relates to the salmon
habitat, and 2) whether there are recreational uses other than a dog park that would be more suitable for
that environment. Mr. Chave said the State monitors water quality on beaches all over Puget Sound and
are very aware of the uses at Marina Beach. It was his understanding, if the State finds a problem, they
will notify the Health Department who follows up locally. That monitoring program is the appropriate
way to ensure a particular use does not create problems. He summarized there are ways to condition or
ensure that a particular use complies with the SMP and critical area regulations; it is unusual to single out
a particular use such as relocating the dog park as it conflicts with other actions the Council has taken.
The Marina Beach Plan will undergo permitting in the future.
Council President Johnson relayed her understanding the State tests the water for fecal coliform; however,
dogs produce a great deal of urine and the water is not tested for pH. She recalled testimony at the
Planning Board that during low tide, the flora and fauna in front of the dog park is quite sterile, a visible
difference. She suggested studying more than just fecal coliform. If the goal is to bring back salmon to the
marsh, efforts need to compliment and encourage the return of salmon to the marsh. Mr. Chave
commented that would be relevant during the permitting discussion.
Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Hearing no comments,
Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the hearing.
Council President Johnson requested action be taken at
next weekÓs Council meeting.
Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out no one spoke at the public hearing. She reiterated Edmonds was
not the only dog park located near water.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT,
TO APPROVE THE 2016 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS.
Councilmember Teitzel pointed out the CFP includes $10,000 in 2017 for the trackside warning system
but nothing in future years and a total cost in excess of $300,000. He asked how that cost would be
reflected in the CFP. Public Works Director Phil Williams advised it would reconciled via the yearend
budget amendment. The intent was to expend most of the funds in 2016 with a small amount carried over
into 2017 but the opposite has occurred. A meeting with BNSF today indicated there was unlikely to be
any progress this year but hopefully in first quarter 2017. Approximately $9,000 - $10,00 has been spent
this year and the rest will be spent in 2017.
Councilmember Teitzel recalled the Council approved this project last year not anticipating the problems
that have been encountered with BNSF related to signal timing, etc. He recalled a commitment at one
point to bring this back to Council for confirmation to proceed with the project knowing those challenges
exist. He asked if double tracking would have any effect on the trackside warning system related to the
number of horn blasts. Mr. Williams answered double tracking would not change the number of horn
blasts; the number of trains could possibly reducing them. Currently there is sequential passing of trains
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 6, 2016
Page 10
on the single track. Double tracks would allow trains to go both directions at the same time, resulting in
the activation of a horn for trains traveling north and southbound at the same time. How often that would
occur would require further study but he did not anticipate the number of horns would increase. The
location of the horns will work with double tracking.
Councilmember Teitzel asked whether input had been sought from other communities on Puget Sound
that have installed trackside warning systems. Mr. Williams answered several have been installed near
Lakewood; they are very happy with their operation. Councilmember Teitzel how asked how to ensure
train engineers did not blow their horn manually where entering a zone with a trackside warning system.
Mr. Williams said under FRA rules, engineers have the right to blow their horn if they see fit to do so.
Likely the only time that would happen is if they passed the whistle board and the signal system was not
working or there was something on the track. They are not obliged to do so and are encouraged not to
unless they feel it is necessary. Councilmember Teitzel concluded there would not be the same number of
manual horn blasts plus the trackside warning signals. Mr. Williams said a manual horn would be a rarity,
not a normal activity.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Council President Johnson why she wanted to postpone action for
a week. Council President Johnson said in general, a public hearing is an opportunity to get public input.
Councilmembers also collect information via other methods and delaying a week after the public hearing
provides the Council extra time before making a decision. Although no one spoke at public
tonightÓs
hearing, she and many others are concerned about the return of salmon to the marsh. She did not want to
offend any dog owners or dogs and realized the dog park was a community asset beyond Edmonds, but it
was important to have a thoughtful opportunity to consider whether the amendment is needed.
Consideration may need to be given to monitoring the water for pH. She sees a potential conflict between
dogs and salmon and wanted an extra week for the public to weigh in.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
2. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE FIRE DISTRICT 1 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
City Attorney Jeff Taraday commented the Interlocal Agreement with Fire District 1 (FD1) has been in
the works for some time. He introduced Finance Director Scott James and Dr. Stephen Knight, Fitch &
Associates, who was hired to advise the City. The Interlocal Agreement in the packet is the
MayorÓs
proposed amendment to the Interlocal Agreement with FD1. The Council makes the decision whether to
proceed
and there are other options if the Council is not satisfied with the MayorÓs proposal.
As background, Mr. Taraday explained the City entered into an agreement with FD1 for fire and EMS
services in 2009 and service officially began January 1, 2010. For the first five years of that agreement,
neither party could terminate.
Now the agreement is terminable by either party upon two yearÓs notice. In
August 2014 the City received an invoice for $1.67 million attributable to a recently completed collective
bargaining agreement between FD1 and the union. The agreement was retroactive to 2013 which resulted
in a large invoice. The invoice was somewhat of a surprise to the City; the City agreed to pay the invoice
but decided to take a closer look at fire service in general. As the City needed expertise to assist with that,
staff began researching fire and EMS consultants in April 2015; the City Attorney and Finance Director
invited five firms and a local fire chief to interview and narrowed consultants to three for interviews by
the Mayor and Councilmembers Buckshnis, Fraley-Monillas and Petso in May 2015 and ultimately Fitch
& Associates was selected to guide the City through this process.
Mr. Taraday explained the City and Fitch & Associates agreed on a scope of work and signed a contract
on June 17, 2015. Dr. Knight made a presentation to Council in February 2016 of several different
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
December 6, 2016
Page 11