Loading...
06/23/2009 City CouncilJune 23, 2009 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor D. J. Wilson, Council President Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember Steve Bemheim, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Ron Wambolt, Councilmember Strom Peterson, Councilmember 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief Mark Correira, Assistant Fire Chief Gerry Gannon, Assistant Police Chief Stephen Clifton, Community Services /Economic Development Director Brian McIntosh, Parks & Recreation Director Rich Lindsay, Parks Maintenance Manager Noel Miller, Public Works Director Doug Fair, Municipal Court Judge Frances Chapin, Cultural Services Manager Kris Gillespie, Cultural. Services Assistant Rob Chave, Planning Manager Ann Bullis, Building Official Rob English, City Engineer Jeri Machuga, Planner Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO ADD "FURTHER DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RED LIGHT CAMERAS" AS AGENDA ITEM IOB AND "HORIZON BANK TREE REMOVAL" AS ITEM IOC. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, TO REMOVE ITEMS 7 (DISCUSSION ON THE EDMONDS YACHT CLUB REDEVELOPMENT) AND 9 (DISCUSSION OF NEW BUILDING AT 523 ALDER) FROM THE AGENDA. Councilmember Plunkett explained Item 7 was discussion of a design feature for a specific building on the waterfront and Item 9 was regarding a design feature on a specific multi family development in another zone. He pointed out design features needed to be discussed zone -wide and not for a specific property and needed to include the Architectural Design Board (ADB). If a property owner /developer Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 1 wished to add a design feature, a variance would be required. He suggested the Council President schedule a design feature discussion at a joint meeting with the ADB. Councilmember Bernheim commented the property at 523 Alder was a single family home and did not require ADB review. Councilmember Plunkett agreed, reiterating that design features should be discussed zone -wide rather than for a specific property. Council President Wilson commented the discussion regarding the building at 523 Alder was not intended to be regarding a specific building but rather using this building as an example of development in the zone and whether development in the zone reflected the Council's vision for single family housing in the downtown core. He encouraged Council to retain that item on tonight's agenda. With regard to the discussion on the Yacht Club redevelopment, Council President Wilson explained the intent was a presentation by the Yacht Club on their new project on the waterfront. The Yacht Club had suggested a code amendment and since they have only approximately 45 days to make a decision regarding the change, he felt it appropriate to have a discussion by Council. Councilmember Plunkett questioned whether a variance would be required for the architectural feature suggested by the Yacht Club. Council President Wilson commented the Yacht Club had been through the ADB process and the ADB recommended this design change. He suggested questions regarding the feature could be directed to the Yacht Club. Councilmember Plunkett pointed out if the Yacht Club wanted to include an architectural feature that extended 8 feet above the allowed height limit, they needed to apply for a variance. Councilmember Wambolt commented a presentation needed to be made to the Port Commission first regarding the Yacht Club because this architectural feature was not part of the building when it was reviewed by the Commission. THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED (5 -2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON AND COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM VOTING NO. THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Mayor Haakenson relayed City Clerk Sandy Chase's request to remove Item B from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. ROLL CALL C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #1.12371 THROUGH #112505 DATED JUNE 18, 2009 FOR $250,496.55. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS AND CHECKS #48179 THROUGH #48237 FOR THE PAY PERIOD JUNE 1 THROUGH JUNE 15, 2009 FOR THE AMOUNT OF $851,536.84. D. APPROVAL OF LIST OF BUSINESSES APPLYING FOR RENEWAL OF THEIR LIQUOR LICENSES WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD, JUNE 2009. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 2 E. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN A "HOLDOVER TERM LETTER" RELATED TO A CONCESSION AGREEMENT WITH SHORTS 'N SLIPPAS, OPERATORS OF DA HULA HUT LOCATED ON PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY AT JAMES STREET IMMEDIATELY EAST OF THE FERRY HOLDING LANES. F. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND THE EDMONDS TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT. G. AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE 2009 ASPHALT OVERLAY PROJECT. H. ORDINANCE NO. 3744 OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC 7.50.050 RELATING TO STORMWATER RATES AND CHARGES, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. L ORDINANCE NO. 3745 OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECC 3.20.050 TO COLLECT AND REFLECT PROPERLY THE COST OF PROVIDING FOR FIRE HYDRANTS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. ITEM B: APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 16 2009. City Clerk Sandy Chase pointed out a correction to the minutes on page 10, noting that two ordinances were passed via a motion and only one was reflected in the minutes. The motion on page 10 would be revised to read as follows: COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 3742 AND ORDINANCE NO. 3743, EXHIBIT 2, THE 200 SQUARE FOOT VERSION. The two ordinance titles read as follows: ORDINANCE NO. 3742 — AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 17.70 TEMPORARY USES, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. ORDINANCE NO. 3743 — AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECDC 19.05.010, WORK EXEMPT FROM BUILDING PERMITS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 16, 2009 AS CORRECTED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION REGARDING A PROPOSED INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A QUALIFIED BUILDING SETBACK EXEMPTION FOR RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WITH EXPIRED COUNTY BUILDING PERMITS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. Planner Jen Machuga recalled Carla Elder spoke to the Council during Audience Comments on May 19, stating her concerns over an unfinished addition to her residence. In 1993 Ms. Elder and her husband obtained permits from Snohomish County to construct an addition to their home. Mr. Elder began the work, but fell ill and passed away before completing the interior portion of the addition. The property was annexed into the City in 1995, and the Elder's building permit expired following annexation. Per the Annexation Agreement, if a County permit expires after annexation, all vesting is lost, and a new permit Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 3 must be obtained from the City which meets current adopted codes. The addition was built in compliance with the County's setback requirements; however, it does not meet the City's current setback requirements. Following annexation, Snohomish County did not notify the City of the Elder's building permit and it is unknown if there are additional properties within annexed areas with similar situations. Using Ms. Elder's situation as an example, staff discussed potential options with the Council Community Services /Development Services Committee on June 9, including a variance, lot line adjustment, removing a portion of the addition to comply with current setbacks, and adopting an ordinance amending the City's nonconforming regulations (ECDC 17.40). City Attorney Bio Park advised that the Council could also adopt an interim zoning ordinance. The Council Committee requested that Mr. Park craft an interim zoning ordinance to bring before the City Council. The interim ordinance would allow for residential building setback exemptions for development projects in areas annexed from unincorporated Snohomish County since 1994 for properties with valid building permits on the date of annexation but the permit expired prior to final approval. The ordinance includes provisions that the projects be residential in nature, located in residentially zoned areas, meet setback requirements of the Snohomish County code in effect on the date of annexation, are consistent with the plans approved by the County, and meet all other applicable criteria in the current ECDC including the current building code. The draft ordinance includes a provision that it is the applicant's responsibility to provide the City evidence the project was approved by the County; however, it is unknown if the County has retained sufficient records to be utilized as evidence of work approved by the County prior to annexation. City Attorney Scott Snyder explained the proposed ordinance is intended to be the narrowest possible exemption while still complying with constitutional special law provisions. He noted accomplishing this via an interim zoning ordinance would deprive the public from an opportunity to comment as the applicant could vest via filing a building permit application. Councilmember Orvis pointed out Snohomish County failed to communicate with the City regarding the pending building permit. Mr. Snyder agreed the Annexation Agreement the City has with Snohomish County required that notification. Councilmember Plunkett expressed concern about a lack of public vetting. Mr. Snyder responded the Council could send the ordinance to the Planning Board for review and public comment before it was enacted. An interim ordinance was based on findings that harm would occur that needed to be avoided and that there was a public benefit. The finding in the ordinance was that half -built houses were detrimental to the neighborhood. Councilmember Bernheim asked how long the house had been in its current condition, recalling a considerable period of time had elapsed where no action had been taken. Ms. Machuga responded the permit was issued in 1993 and it had been approximately 16 years since the addition had been constructed. COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, TO APPROVE THE DRAFT INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE (EXHIBIT 1) RECOMMENDED BY THE COMMITTEE. COUNCILMEVIBER PLUNKETT MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO REFER THE MATTER TO THE PLANNING BOARD. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 4 Councilmember Bernheim commented although he empathized with the unfortunate position the applicant found herself in, he was concerned with the lack of public notice. He pointed out the considerable length of time when no action had been taken which indicated an additional delay would not be prejudicial. He was also concerned with setting a precedent by allowing an applicant to obtain a vested permit without public comment. Councilmember Orvis commented that he was in favor of passing it now because the record did not indicate there had been any complaints and it was important to finish the addition for safety reasons. THE VOTE ON THE AMENDING MOTION CARRIED (4 -3), COUNCILMEMBERS OLSON, COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, AND ORVIS OPPOSED. Mayor Haakenson noted that a vote was not required on the first motion due to the action in the amendment. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT ON 2009 LEVY Council President Wilson clarified the question tonight was specifically whether or not to place a levy on the November ballot. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, advised Mukilteo was considering placing a levy on the February ballot due to expiration of their fire agreement with Everett on July 1. He encouraged citizens to watch Lynnwood City Council meetings that are aired on Wednesdays at 7:00 p.m. and Sundays at 7:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. David Thorpe, Edmonds, recalled during last week's presentation regarding a proposed increase in utility rates a statement was made that with the proposed increase, the city would be approximately 20% below the State average municipal utility rate. He pointed out the City should not be 20% below but should be at the median. Next, he expressed frustration with the Council's handling of the levy to this point. He recalled the work done by the Citizen Levy Review Committee (CLRC), noting by the third meeting all the teams understood the City's dire financial position. He recalled after taking three votes unanimously in support for a levy, the Council then concerned itself with plastic bags and chickens, losing the energy and focus of the CLRC. He summarized the delay let City workers down and forced the Council to wait to place the levy on next year's levy. He reminded this financial situation had been festering for years and that the culture of just getting by needed to change. Elizabeth Scott, Edmonds, a member of the CLRC's yellow team who presented the minority opinion, voiced her continued opposition to a levy, pointing out increased taxes would hurt Edmonds' economy and property values. She cited a study that found a negative relationship between property values and tax rates; raising property taxes caused property values to drop because people were less likely to move into the City. She pointed out Washington had the eighth highest taxes in the nation and second highest gas tax; raising property taxes reached further into citizens pockets, people who were already cutting back on purchasing. She commented on pink slips issued at Boeing and newspaper headlines about orders Airbus has received while Boeing has none, noting Boeing represents 14% of the jobs in Snohomish County and 22% of the wages. She urged the Council to tighten its belt and actively work to increase economic development to raise revenue streams, noting the formation of the Citizens Economic Development was a step in the right direction. Rich Senderoff, Edmonds, pointed out other government entities that have put off levy and bonds will likely place them on the ballot in 2010 and if the Council waits until next year, the City's ballot measure will be competing with these other entities. He commented the overall outcome of the CLRC was still . applicable, that a levy was a short term fix. For this reason the yellow team advocated for the formation of a Financial Oversight and Economic Development Committee. With regard to the type of levy, he and Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 5 others were tired of the Senior Center, Yost Pool and other Parks & Recreation programs being used as pawns and threatened whenever budget issues arose. He urged the Council to fund these necessary services and stop pitting parks against public safety; both were essential to the community. He expressed support for a focused and targeted Parks & Recreation /Senior Center levy and ensuring the funds from the levy were used for those purposes. Bill Keppler, Edmonds, a member of the CLRC grey team, recalled the grey team was unanimous in their recommendation for a revenue - generating levy on the November ballot. He reiterated his support for a levy on the November ballot to, a) address the need for additional revenue streams, and b) to develop an ongoing current comprehensive economic plan for the next 3 -5 years or at least through 2013. He recommended forming carefully delineated short and long term goals with specific benchmarks and qualitative and quantitative measurable outcomes for evaluation by the Mayor, City Council and citizens. He anticipated even without the current economic downturn, the City would be facing significant revenue shortfalls. He concluded Edmonds did more with less than most of the surrounding or other municipalities of 40,000+ population in Washington. To the question of whether the time was right for a levy, he questioned whether the time would ever be right. 5. DISCUSSION AND PROPOSED RESOLUTION REGARDING THE 2009 LEVY COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, FOR APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION NO. 1201 REAFFIRMING THE COUNCIL COMMITMENT TO A NOVEMBER PROPERTY TAX LEVY. Council President Wilson explained the resolution reviews the history of the levy and concludes "Now therefore be it resolved that the Council commits to determining the size and scope of a property tax levy by July 28th in order to be on the ballot for November 2009 for citizen review and approval." He spoke in support of the resolution, noting the Council had been discussing a levy for eight months and City leaders have discussed the unstable fiscal situation for many years. He recalled a Councilmember saying the Council should have gone to the voters earlier; instead while City leadership waited and solutions were cobbled together to get the City to this point, one time funds were used to pay for ongoing operations to buy time such as one -time sales tax revenue from development projects like Pt. Edwards and one -time expenditure of reserves, spending them down in 2008 a total of $2.3 million. This year the City has relied on generous give -backs from City employees and citizen contributions to keep Yost Pool open. Council President Wilson acknowledged when the day of reckoning arrived, it was amid a terrible economic climate. He emphasized employees gave back, Yost supporters rallied, the eight teams on the CLRC supported a levy because they were told the sky was falling; none of them said wait until a convenient time. He stressed the Council had voted unanimously four times to address the City's fiscal problems with a levy this fall, Mayor Haakenson had been steadfast in his comments that additional tax revenue was needed to maintain City services and that focus and cohesion made him proud to be a part of the City's leadership. The Council needed to stand by its statements, put the levy on the ballot and commit to moving forward. Councilmember Bernheim expressed support for allowing the voters to create a dedicated fund that would fund Yost Pool, the Senior Center and park maintenance. Placing funds from the levy into a special fund for these services would prevent their competing with the police, DARE, or the Fire Department which would continue to be funded from the General Fund. He recommended infonning citizens what parks, Yost Pool, parks programs, etc. cost and then ask voters if they wanted to pay for those items. If the voters did not want to pay for them, they could be considered for cuts. He also supported the levy because it was a voter decision; the lesson of the Tim Eyman era was that when money gets tight, the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 6 voters decide. He clarified the Council was not making a decision to raise property taxes; the Council was deciding whether to let voters decide to raise property taxes. Councilmember Bernheim spoke in support of doing a levy soon. He believed the sky was falling and nothing had changed in the City's financial situation in recent weeks. He felt putting off the levy was a mistake, a bandaid and a cowardly approach. He was uncertain how to create a dedicated fund to ensure funds from a levy went into a fund to support specific purposes. If the majority of the Council did not support a levy to support specific items, a General Fund levy would be an alternative. Councilmember Wambolt commented the Council's diversion into the discussion of plastic bags did not delay this process. The Council was on the schedule Council President Wilson established and had not taken time away from levy discussions to discuss other topics. He acknowledged this was a difficult decision, noting last week he favored waiting another year, recognizing citizens were hurting in this economy. He cautioned the levy only affected Edmonds' portion of the property tax, 20% of the total. Councilmember Wambolt stated the City had a revenue problem that needed be addressed long term by economic development. The short term fix was a property tax increase. The most convincing argument was made by Dr. Keppler that most other municipalities were waiting until next year to place their levy on the ballot; therefore, this November may be the best time. He emphasized the need to educate voters about the levy, cuts that may be necessary if the levy fails and that property taxes would not go down due to declining property values unless the property value decreased more than the 11% average. Councilmember Peterson commented it was clear at the retreat and through the process of the CLRC that this wasn't a levy about saving parks or Yost Pool, this was a nuts and bolts levy; employees have given up pay and taken furlough days. He was unwilling to gloss over the problem and tell citizens that the only outcome of a levy failure would be an impact on parks. He commented Mayor Haakenson had done an admirable job with the available revenues to keep the City afloat this long and had faith he could do it for another year. However, the best approach was to be truthful with the citizens and educate them about the reality. He supported placing the levy on the ballot this November, noting the wording of the levy would be key. He did not support placing the funds into a fund solely for parks. Councilmember Plunkett commented he still felt a levy in 2010 was best; however, in light of the remainder of the Council, he would substitute his opinion for what was best for the community — for the Council to speak with one voice. He did not want there to be dissent on the Council, acknowledging a tremendous effort would be necessary to pass the levy. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council President Wilson thanked the Council for being steadfast in their unanimity, particularly Councilmembers Wambolt and Plunkett who voiced concerns last week. 6. REPORT ON THE 4TH AVENUE CULTURAL CORRIDOR PLAN. Cultural Services Manager Frances Chapin recalled approximately nine years ago the City was considering how the old Puget Sound Christian College auditorium could be preserved for public use. As the possible creation of a performing arts center arose, it became important to create or improve the connection along 4th Avenue to the downtown core. The Planning Board incorporated the initial concept into their Downtown Waterfront Activity Center. When Parks & Recreation /Cultural Services undertook the update of the Streetscape Plan in 2005, the concept of creating an Arts Corridor on 4th Avenue for the stretch between Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) and south of Main Street was developed; a process that many residents and businesses participated in. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 7 The 2008 Parks & Open Space Comprehensive Plan and Community Cultural Plan recognized the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor development of the public right -of -way as a critical connection, a linear park and a unique cultural project that contributes to economic development through enhancing Edmonds' identity as a cultural designation. In 2007, the City applied for matching funds for planning and received a federal grant of $50,000 from Preserve America through the National Parks Service to create an implementation and funding plan for the 4th Avenue Cultural Corridor. In 2008, SvR Design was selected to develop the plan. She noted the planning process included a Community Advisory Group (CAG) that began meeting in June 2008; the representatives on the CAG included representatives from the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), Arts Commission, Planning Board, property owners, residents, local businesses, interested citizens as well as numerous community partners including the ECA, the Chamber, Edmonds Community College, Historic Museum and Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation. She recognized many of the members of the CAG who were present for this presentation. In addition to public meetings, the draft plan has been presented to the Arts Commission, the HPC, Chamber Economic Development Committee, Downtown Edmonds Merchants Association, Rotary, and the Planning Board. She noted the scope of work brought the project to a 15% level of design. Brice Maryman, SvR Design, recognized the members of the CAG and staff for their assistance. He reviewed guiding principles for the corridor developed by CAG: • Infuse art at every opportunity along the corridor • Express the uniqueness of Edmonds • Be a community connector • Balance the needs of all ages and user groups • Encourage economic growth • Reflect an honest and authentic community vision • Prove moments of charm and joy • Be a place of constant discovery and spontaneity • Contribute to the environmental health of Puget Sound He explained during the process they analyzed existing conditions including how people moved through the site, views, desired mobility, water flows on the site, and where the energy was on the street. What they heard during the process was a desire to draw people between the ECA and Main Street, select better choices than curbs and gutter, native vegetation, not to privilege one side of the street over the other, a narrow street for vehicles, and one way like Park Lane in Kirkland. As the process progressed, people began talking about the street less like a street and more like a garden. The result was a concept of a water garden, a series of four different gardens, the Market Garden at the south end which is connected to the Cultural Garden near the ECA through the Allee Garden and a Belvedere Garden to one side. Noting the existing right -of -way was 50 feet, he provided the following desires for the street: • Raised curbless intersection at all streets • Consistent paving feel • Flexible street that could be closed for festivals • Gardens throughout • Underground utilities • Full buildout • Pedestrian scale materials Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 8 He described features of the four gardens and displayed photographs of the existing street and renderings of what it could look like in the future during the day and at night. He noted the artist consultant on their team also considered how art could integrate and define the spaces. One of the challenges given by the Preserve America grant was to consider adjacent land uses. As a result they developed a tiered approach of minimal, moderate and maximum intervention to adjacent development, recognizing private versus public investment. He displayed several photographs of the existing land uses and examples of moderate and maximum intervention. He displayed a chart of potential funding sources, recalling the community requested this not be considered just a Public Works project but also a cultural amenity as well as a stormwater amenity. He estimated the cost to implement the total project to be $5.2 -$5.6 million. Mayor Haakenson inquired about the next steps. Mr. Maryman answered the next step would be to secure funding, noting there may be grants available via the Recovery Act. Council President Wilson emphasized future voter - approved levies referred to as a funding source was not the levy citizens would be voting on in November. He pointed out the $20 vehicle license fee that would be collected by the Transportation Benefit District could not be used for this project unless the State law was changed. Councilmember Bernheim noted that he lived on 4th Avenue in this area, and loved the plan. Council President Wilson recalled there was a unique zone in place for the 4th Avenue Corridor and asked if the Council should revisit requirements for the zone to ensure development reflected the vision in the Plan. Planning Manager Rob Chave commented the HPC was interested in establishing an overlay or Historic District in conjunction with the ideas in the Plan. Council President Wilson suggested consideration be given to requiring mitigation for the public investment that would be made in the future. Steve Waite, HPC, commented any discussion regarding a Historic Overlay District that would compliment the existing zoning would include input from residents in the area and citizens. Councilmember Plunkett asked what a Historic Overlay would add to the 4th Avenue Corridor. Mr. Waite answered it would provide a unique flavor; 4th Avenue is a unique street with its own historical context and the residents have many ideas regarding development opportunities. Andy Eccleshall, HPC, commented the HPC was thrilled with the proposed Plan and see it as a great opportunity to further the preservation cause in Edmonds in a sensible way and looked forward to how they along with the input of citizens could assist in making this a beautiful corridor. 7. DISCUSSION ON THE EDMONDS YACHT CLUB REDEVELOPMENT This item as removed from the agenda under Agenda Item 1. 8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Jan D'Arcy, Edmonds, displayed photos of her view of Puget Sound prior to construction of the building at 523 Alder and her current view that was almost completely obstructed by the new building. She questioned if the laws had been properly applied by the Planning Department and contractor with regard to this building. She recalled before purchasing her condominium she contacted Mr. Michel who informed her he did not plan to build on the site for 8 -10 years. She also visited the Planning Department to inquire about the height limit. She anticipated creative architecture had been employed and questioned Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 9 whether the flying buttresses complied with the height limit. The slant allowed the building to extend to 31 feet and she questioned whether the eaves were higher than approved. No public notice was provided to adjacent property owners, noting she had received letters regarding development of other buildings in the area and there was no sign posted announcing plans to construct the building. She questioned if the Council's vision was to have the remaining small spaces in Edmonds filled with creative architecture that allowed it to be 31 feet tall and totally block the views from the adjacent building. Barbara Beeson, Edmonds, resident of the Mariner at 533 Alder, displayed her view of the flying buttresses on the building at 523 Alder. She objected to adjacent residents not receiving notice of this building construction such as she received for other projects and that no sign was posted on the site. She visited the Planning Department and learned the 25 -foot height limit with peaks was distorted by the developer placing a 30 -foot elevation in the center of the house and peaks at each end. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, commented on the Arts Festival this past weekend. He announced the Lynnwood Police Department was having a rummage sale on June 27 and 28 at 19800 44th Avenue West to benefit their "Shop With A Cop" holiday program. Barbara Mercer, Edmonds, a downtown business owner for 19 years, professed her love for trees, explaining she grew up in Germany where trees beautify cities and walking in the forest is part of their culture. She commented trees were not only beautiful but were important for a healthy environment. She left California in 1990 to live in Edmond's green environment, however, Edmonds soon began to change and numerous trees were removed including a large maple on 4th Avenue that was cut for development of condominiums. She expressed concern that the trees in front of Horizon Bank were proposed to be removed, pointing out the City's obligation to care for these trees instead of removing them. With regard to sidewalks being raised by tree roots, she pointed out sidewalks were uneven in many areas where there were no trees and many seniors were more concerned about the loss of trees than fear of tripping. She referred to 5th Avenue in downtown Seattle where elegant business fronts were enhanced by lines of trees. She urged the Council to protect a green healthy environment by protecting and caring for trees. Susan Rogers read a letter from Justin Reeder, Edmonds, urging the City not to cut mature Edmonds trees, noting visitors often comment on their beauty and the sense of place they provide. The trees' size and shape contribute to Edmonds ambiance, their canopy provides a natural habitat and their air- cleaning properties are beneficial to the environment. During this time of economic belt tightening, the City should restrict the use of limited resources to grinding of uplifted sidewalk joints or re- leveling sidewalk panels rather than removing and replacing otherwise healthy trees. Ms. Rogers added the 4th Avenue Corridor presentation referred to the creation of a place that was less like a street and more like a garden and the way to keep people engaged was to create green spaces. She suggested retaining existing trees. 9. DISCUSSION OF NEW BUILDING AT 523 ALDER This item as removed from the agenda under Agenda Item 1. 10A. DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION REGARDING A PROPOSED INTERIM ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECDC 20.12.090(B), AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF ECDC 20.11.050, SUSPENDING APPLICATION OF 20.13.040, FORWARDING FOR REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY'S PLANNING BOARD A NEW PARKING STANDARD FOR THE HIGHWAY 99 CORRIDOR, PROVIDING FOR A SUNSET CLAUSE. AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. Planning Manager Rob Chave commented this was the continuation of a process the City initiated last year, determining where some relief could be provided during the economic downturn. The Council Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 10 previously adopted provisions that extended building permits. The proposed provisions would, 1) allow people to extend design review approval for one additional year beyond the existing year, and 2) provide a waiver from landscape maintenance bonds. He clarified this was not a waiver of the landscape performance bonds. Staff determined the landscape maintenance bond could be waived as it had never been used and the enforcement process could be used rather than the bonding process to ensure landscaping was maintained. Mr. Chave explained the Council Community Services/Development Services Committee also discussed conducting a thorough review of parking standards on Highway 99. He noted this provision was less appropriate for an interim zoning ordinance and would be appropriate for Planning Board review. Councilmember Wambolt asked when the building at 3rd and Dayton would be completed. Mr. Cbave answered it was a building permit issue. Mayor Haakenson agreed to have staff investigate and report to the Council. Council President Wilson asked why an interim zoning ordinance was proposed versus the standard process. Mr. Chave answered the interim zoning ordinance approach was suggested because the economic downturn was occurring now. The proposed changes could be implemented without compromising City standards. He noted it was unlikely these would be permanent standards particularly the extension of design review approval. Staff recommended the parking standards on Highway 99 be reviewed by the Planning Board because it was potentially a long term change. Council President Wilson asked how many permits this would apply to. Mr. Chave answered he did not think there were very many. Councilmember Peterson asked for a clarification between the landscape maintenance versus the landscape performance bond, recalling the sidewalk in front of the 3rd & Dayton project was unusable for a period of time. Mr. Chave responded this applied only to the landscaping maintenance bond, not frontage improvements. He explained there were landscaping requirements for commercial and multi family projects; prior to occupancy the developer must either complete the landscape improvements or bond for the improvements; that is not proposed to be changed. In addition, a landscape maintenance bond is required. Staff felt rather than bonding for landscape maintenance, it could be handled via enforcement. COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, FOR APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 3746. COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO MAINTAIN THE 2 -YEAR LANDSCAPE BOND. Councilmember Bernheim stated in the legal world, bonds were much more effective than enforcement actions. He was not confident staff had time to pursue enforcement action. The advantage of a bond was funds were available in the event of a violation. If the bond requirement was removed and the landscaping did not survive, a builder may be out of business when staff attempted to pursue enforcement action. He acknowledged there was an expense associated with maintaining a bond, typically 1% of the amount held, but it was an extremely important resource to ensure landscaping was protected. Mr. Chave responded Councilmember Bernheim's points were fair, noting staff had never utilized the landscape maintenance bond. He acknowledged it was a minor cost but staff was comfortable waiving it because enforcement could be done via the enforcement process rather than the bonding process. He Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 11 concluded removing that provision from the proposal would not be a huge economic detriment to buildings. Council President Wilson spoke in support of the amendment, noting the downside of maintenance not being maintained was aesthetically significant and the 1% cost was very minimal. THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 10B. DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON RED LIGHT CAMERAS. Councilmember Wambolt explained a few days after he voted against the ordinance to allow red light cameras last week, he learned that the City of Everett unanimously approved the installation of six red light cameras and several citizens contacted him urging him to reconsider his position. He then considered the potential downside risk versus potential for upside gain, finding the upside gain was significantly higher than the downside risk. He acknowledged there were some articles indicating red light cameras caused rear end collisions. The pro and con argument reminded him of the argument between scientists over the cause of global warming; there were scientists on both sides of that issue. To those who fear they would unfairly receive a ticket in the mail, he emphasized the vehicle was photographed and the vehicle owner must pay the fine. If a vehicle owner felt they were unfairly ticketed, they could bring the matter to the Edmonds Municipal Court. Judge Fair has indicated he foresees no problems administering ticket appeals. The upside gain is preventing accidents and the program will provide some revenue. COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE PRESENTED TO THE COUNCIL LAST WEEK TO INSTALL RED LIGHT CAMERAS AT THE TWO INTERSECTIONS. Councilmember Peterson commented the evidence shows this is a public safety issue and although there were articles indicating red light cameras were not good for public safety, the majority of articles indicate it is. He concurred with Councilmember Wambolt the controversy was similar to global warming, pointing out the overwhelming evidence is that red light cameras reduce the severity of accidents and change people's habits as evidenced by the decline in the number of infractions. He compared red light cameras to speed traps; drivers changed their habits to avoid a ticket. To the argument that big brother was watching, he supported law enforcement using technology for the benefit of the public. He assured the red light cameras were located on public streets and it was not an invasion of privacy as the car was photographed not the occupants of the vehicle. Councilmember Peterson commented to those who say police should do their job and write tickets, most who received a ticket question why the police were writing tickets rather than pursuing criminals. Red light cameras were an opportunity to free up police from writing tickets for people running red lights and an opportunity for the police to spend more time fighting crime. With regard to revenue, he felt the primary issue was public safety but red light cameras were not a bad thing simply because they provided revenue. He pointed out the Council voted to ask citizens to consider raising their taxes for City services; this was an opportunity to raise revenues from people who were breaking the law. He summarized if citizens did not run red lights, they would not receive a ticket. Red light cameras were the right thing to do and he thanked Councilmember Wambolt for reexamining his position. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 12 Councilmember Orvis commented this was a major decision and he preferred to have it scheduled on the agenda. He was happy to consider it at a future Council meeting when it had been advertised on the agenda. Councilmember Plunkett advised he was opposed to red light cameras last week and would oppose it tonight because it was not on the agenda. Council President Wilson advised he would continue to oppose red light cameras for philosophical reasons; he was opposed to taking pictures of citizens. He offered to schedule red light cameras on the July 7 or July 21 agenda. For Council President Wilson, Councilmember Wambolt noted the red light cameras took pictures of vehicles, not people. In response to Councilmembers Plunkett and Orvis' objection that this item was not on the agenda, he recalled the Council had made decisions in the past on items that were added to the agenda. Mayor Haakenson pointed out there was not a public hearing when red light cameras were discussed last week, there was not a public hearing tonight and there would not be a public hearing if it was rescheduled on the agenda. Councilmember Plunkett commented as a general policy the Council tried to schedule items on the agenda and in this instance that was the proper procedure. Councilmember Wambolt agreed that was the proper procedure but if Councilmember Plunkett and Councilmember Orvis did not support installation of red light cameras, he questioned the purpose of rescheduling it on the agenda. MOTION FAILED (3 -4), COUNCILMEMBERS OLSON, WAMBOLT AND PETERSON VOTING NO. Mayor Haakenson advised this would be scheduled as an agenda item for the July 7 meeting. IOC. HORIZON BANK TREE REMOVAL. Councilmember Bernheim provided a film of the sidewalk near Horizon Bank, pointing out although the sidewalk was cracked and uneven in places, the trip hazards were not substantial enough to warrant removing the trees. He identified hazards that could be remedied by grinding the sidewalk. He displayed photographs of the location of slip and fall injuries that occurred over the past three years as determined from the City's claims history, noting none of them were caused by invasive tree roots. He compared a photograph of the existing mature trees with a photograph of replacement trees. He displayed a photograph of the trees in front of Horizon Bank, noting they were all healthy, vibrant trees. He displayed a photograph of trees downtown, noting the trees were what drew people to festivals and events and replacing existing trees with small trees did nothing to enhance economic development. He provided several photographs comparing replacement trees with existing trees, noting the replacement trees did not provide any shade. He displayed a photograph of the trees at 5th Avenue where the trees were proposed to be removed in the past. Councilmember Bembeim referred to the resolution he distributed to the Council and asked whether staff could provide assurance that the trees in front of Horizon Bank would not be cut until the Council had an opportunity to consider the resolution. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 13 COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, TO PUT THE RESOLUTION ON A FUTURE AGENDA, A RESOLUTION TO DELAY THE CUTTING OF THE HORIZON BANK TREES UNTIL THE COUNCIL HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXAMINE THE SAFETY ISSUES AND DETERMINE IF THERE WERE ANY LESS EXPENSIVE ALTERNATIVES. Councilmember Bernheim commented he was willing to delay consideration of the resolution if he was assured the trees would not be cut. Mayor Haakenson responded the Council had already taken action several weeks ago to direct staff to remove the trees and removal has been scheduled with the bank in mid July. He offered to check on delaying the removal of the trees. Councilmember Bernheim advised the bank indicated they were neutral parties; the City asked to cut the trees, the bank did not initiate their removal. The motion was restated as follows: DIRECT STAFF TO HOLD OFF ON ANY ACTION ON THE TREES AT HORIZON BANK AND SCHEDULE THE RESOLUTION FOR JULY 21. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEE /BOARD MEETINGS Councilmember Wambolt reported at their July 8 meeting, the Port Commission had a presentation from PSRC regarding Transportation 2040. PSRC is soliciting input on the Draft Environment Impact Statement (DEIS). He asked if the City planned to submit comment on the DEIS. Mr. Chave advised Community Services /Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton would be submitting comments. Councilmember Wambolt reported the July 8 Port meeting also included a presentation by the Harbor Square Athletic Club who plan to make exterior changes to their building rather than expand the south end of their building over the parking lot. The Athletic Club also plans to construct a new outdoor pool in 2010. Further, the Port is replacing many of the windows at Harbor Square because they are leaking. The Waterfront Festival was the most successful ever, likely due to the excellent weather. Councilmember Bernheim reported on the Economic Development Committee meeting which included discussion regarding promoting the cultural community and festivals; developing tourism via a green marketing campaign; developing development guidelines for neighborhood centers such as Perrinville, Westgate and 5 Corners; promoting resource conservation and local economic development via the shop local campaign; plans for the Waterfront/Antique Mall/Harbor Square area and benches being installed throughout the City. He summarized the Committee would be working on these issues and developing specific proposals for each. Councilmember Bernheim reported he attended the Lake Ballinger Watershed Forum. They plan to hold a workshop on July 1.0 where the plan to improve the Lake Ballinger drainage and water quality will be presented to the public. Councilmember Orvis reported the Snohomish Health. District made two cuts at their recent meeting, 1) eliminate one septic tank inspector due to decreased development in the region, and 2) eliminate CCHP, a program that assisted daycares in providing a healthy environment. Snohomish County was one of only a few Health Districts with that program and technically it was DSHS's responsibility. The Health District also considered other cuts including eliminating the free STD clinic in Everett because the services are available elsewhere in the community. He noted the cuts the Health District was considering forced them to choose between spreading disease or sicken kids. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 14 Councilmember Peterson reported the Seashore Transportation Committee meeting included discussion about bringing the City of Seattle back into active participation. Councilmember Plunkett reported the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee met to discuss the distribution of funds from hotels /motels to advertise Edmonds. He noted although funds were down, more advertising was being done via sharing advertising with other entities. Mayor Haakenson reported the Council would not meet next week, the fifth Tuesday of the month. On July 7, the majority of the meeting will be a preliminary report from staff on the Fire District I contract for service. The July 7 meeting will also include discussion and potential action regarding red light cameras. With regard to the new building at 523 Alder, Mayor Haakenson assured the residents who spoke and the Council that the building was at its proper height. A final inspection would be done when the building was complete and if it was over height, it would need to be changed. He assured Mr. Michel knew the code better than most and he was certain the building was as close to the height limit as possible but was legal under the existing code. He explained no notification was given to property owners in the surrounding area because the project was built within code and did not request a variance or any other changes to the code. Notifications were not typically sent out for projects that comply with the code. 13. COUNCIL COMMENTS Council President Wilson reported the Economic Development Commission will be formed at the July 7 meeting. Anyone interested in applying may obtain an application from the website or at City Hall or by contacting Senior Council Executive Assistant Jana Spellman. He requested Councilmembers submit their nominations by July 1 so that they could be included in the agenda memo for the July 7 meeting. Mayor Haakenson asked whether individual Councilmembers would make their appointments or the Council collectively vote on a group of applicants. Council President Wilson envisioned every Councilmember would nominate and the Council would vote on the group. He suggested the evening of July 16 as the first meeting of the Economic Development Commission Councilmember Wambolt was sympathetic to the situation faced by the residents who live in the condominium behind the building being constructed at 523 Alder. He noted their building was in a cocoon for nearly a year due to construction defects and property owners were assessed a large amount for those repairs. Once the cocoon was removed, a building was constructed that obscured their view. He agreed Rob Michel knew the City's code well and would not construct a building that violated the code. He acknowledged the building was higher than 30 feet because it was on a downhill slope and the 4 corners were averaged to determine the height. Councilmember Bernheim commented the building at 523 Alder was not considered by the ADB and no notice was provided because it was a single family home, not because it complied with the code. If the building had been a condominium, notice would have been provided because it would have required ADB design review. He agreed Mr. Michel would not construct a building that exceeded the height limit, recalling he sued the City over a building behind his residence and the court found it violated the code because the code states the roof only may extend above 25 feet in that zone. He pointed out the buttresses referred to by the residents adjacent to 523 Alder indicated there was a high living room area where the interior ceiling exceeded the 25 -foot height limit. He noted the staff report for the building he sued the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 15 City over stated it appeared there may be some areas above the stated height limit that is not roof only. Unfortunately, that question was not raised with regard to the building at 523 Alder. Councilmember Bernheim expressed his appreciation to Ms. Mercer and Ms. Rogers and others who have talked to him about the trees in front of Horizon Bank. He appreciated Mayor Haakenson's cooperation and the Council for taking the time to listen to him and take the action he requested. Council President Wilson recalled Councilmember Plunkett suggested the topic of design features be considered by the Council in the future. He suggested scheduling that discussion on the July 21 agenda and requested Mr. Chave work with Councilmember Bernheim to ensure the information he cited was in the packet. Councilmember Plunkett commented his intent by removing the agenda items was not to ignore the subject matter, finding it worthy of discussion in a different context. To the residents who spoke regarding the building at 523 Alder, he encouraged them to contact the Planning Department and investigate how to take action on a project they did not feel was appropriate. 14. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:36 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes June 23, 2009 Page 16