No preview available
08/26/2003 City Council1 Approve 8119/03 Minutes pprove laim Pecks laim for mages r EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES August 26, 2003 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5a' Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Dave Earling, Council President (arrived 8:41 p.m.) Jeff Wilson, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Richard Marin, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Deanna Dawson, Councilmember 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT David Stern, Chief of Police Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Director Noel Miller, Public Works Director Stephen Koho, Treatment Plant Manager Steve Bullock, Senior Planner Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Lawrence Cretin, Video Recorder Jeannie Dines, Recorder COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Council President Earling was not present for the vote.) 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Council President Earling was not present for the vote.) The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 19, 2003. (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #64781 THROUGH #64952 FOR THE WEEK OF AUGUST 18, 2003, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,194,987.08. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS AND CHECKS #36392 THROUGH #36548 FOR THE PERIOD AUGUST 1 THROUGH AUGUST 15, 2003, IN THE AMOUNT OF $933,806.41. (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM RICHARD SMITH ($35.00). (E) APPROVAL OF LIST OF EDMONDS BUSINESSES APPLYING FOR RENEWAL OF THEIR LIQUOR LICENSES WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 1 42 Id Street Storm (F) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED AUGUST 5, 2003 FOR THE 242ND STREET STORM Improve- IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO EMERALD ents SERVICES, INC. ($54,596.47, INCLUDING SALES TAX). rian Dods (G) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED AUGUST 5, 2003 FOR THE LORIAN WOODS STORM Storm IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO MARSHBANK Improve- CONSTRUCTION, INC. ($48,569,40, INCLUDING SALES TAX). ents mee nd d PFD (H) ORDINANCE NO. 3468 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE EDMONDS PUBLIC r FACILITIES DISTRICT CHARTER, ESTABLISHING A SEMI - MONTHLY REGULAR F Charter MEETING SCHEDULE FOR THE EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT BOARD. Street 3. PUBLIC HEARING ON A STREET VACATION FOR THE RIGHT -OF -WAY LOCATED ON Vacation — THE NORTH SIDE OF THE 8500 BLOCK OF BOWDOIN WAY ADJACENT TO THE CITY Right-of- OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8505 BOWDOIN WAY. Way on North side of 8500 Block City Attorney Scott Snyder advised this was legislative and not a quasi judicial matter. of Bowdoin Way Development Services Director Duane Bowman explained on November 12, 2002, the City Council passed a resolution authorizing staff to proceed with a street vacation for a portion of the right -of -way on the north side of Bowdoin Way in the 8500 block. The purpose of this vacation was to review the City's need for the right -of -way from Bowdoin Way north to a point where it provides emergency access to the Montclair Condominiums. In preparation for surplusing the Five Corners Fire Station which subsequently was sold to a private developer, the City made arrangements as part of the purchase price to allow for seven units to be developed on the site which required vacation of a small portion of the right -of -way that serves as emergency access to the Montclair Condominiums and also serves as a maintenance road for the City's water tanks located at 8505 Bowdoin Way. Mr. Bowman stated the right -of -way was 55 feet wide and had primarily been used as access and parking for the fire station and Public Works when performing maintenance on the water tanks or pumphouse. A minimum of 25 feet must be retained for emergency access to the Montclair Condominiums. Mr. Bowman noted this request only vacates the easterly 3 feet and maintained a 47 -foot wide access, more than adequate to serve as access to the water tanks as well as emergency access to the Montclair Condominiums. The recommended action is to direct the City Attorney to draft an ordinance vacating the eastern three feet of right -of -way located between the Five Corners Fire Station and the water tanks. Councilmember Petso inquired whether the property adjacent to this parcel had' already been sold. Mr. Bowman answered it had. Councilmember Petso recalled Mr. Bowman's statement that as part of the sale, the City indicated it would vacate the property. Mr. Bowman advised in the sale of the property, the City agreed to the purchase price on the basis of seven units. Staff's examination of the existing property and the right -of -way necessary for seven units resulted in the determination to vacate three feet. Councilmember Petso inquired about the consequence of the Council making a decision not to vacate the property if an issue arose during public comment. Mr. Snyder advised the sale documents included a mechanism for reversing the sale and returning the funds to the purchaser. Councilmember Petso recalled previous vacations required the property owner pay the City and asked whether payment had been requested or whether it was assumed in the purchase price. Mr. Bowman assumed payment was made as part of the purchase agreement of the Fire Station site. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 2 Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. There were no members of the public who wished to address the Council. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE VACATING THE EASTERN THREE FEET OF THE RIGHT -OF -WAY LOCATED BETWEEN THE FIVE CORNERS FIRE STATION AND THE CITY'S WATER TANKS. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Council President Earling was not present for the vote.) Ic-str-t-1 4. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 5.30 OF THE EDMONDS mse CITY CODE REGARDING CONSTRUCTION NOISE Development Services Director Duane Bowman explained the Community Services/Development Services Committee discussed the potential amendments at their August 12 committee meeting and recommended changes to the noise ordinance with regard to construction noise. Mr. Bowman stated this topic was originally raised on July 10 when a petition was submitted to the Council with regard to a Planned Residential Development (PRD) project near the Shell Valley neighborhood and the neighbors' concerns with the impact of construction noise on the neighborhood. Staff reviewed the petition and determined it would be more appropriate to consider construction hours on a citywide basis. At the Community Services/Development Services Committee meeting issues that were raised included eliminating noise on Sundays and holidays, exempting road projects, and establishing a phased variance process as suggested by residents. Mr. Bowman referred to the draft ordinance that contained the recommended changes. Mr. Bowman reviewed the current code standards regarding construction noise, which include work hours 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. weekdays, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sundays and holidays, and requires variances to be processed by the Hearing Examiner. The amendments proposed to the ordinance included weekday work hours 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. and 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturdays, and no Sundays or holidays, exempting street projects, and establishing a 3 -step variance process to address unusual short term circumstances. Mr. Bowman advised possible further amendments suggested by residents include weekday work hours of 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. as a compromise for the new proposed variance process, limiting administrative variances to no more than two per project, and adding specific language prohibiting work on Sundays and holidays as the ordinance currently did not reference Sundays or holidays. Mr. Bowman reviewed additional amendments to the ordinance as suggested by residents: • Section 5.30.110.B: "Sounds originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the provisions of this chapter, but only during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 6 :00 p.m. on weekdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, excluding Sundays and holidays." • Section 5.30.120.C.1: "The Mayor or his/her designee may grant an no more than two administrative variances for no more than two consecutive days in those cases where..." • Section 5.30.120.C.2: "In circumstances where it is not possible to meet the normal variance process, the Mayor or his/her designee may grant an no more than two administrative variances of longer than two days but no longer than seven days..." Mr. Bowman clarified construction could occur 24/7 as long as it did not generate noise as the standards were with regard to noise levels as adopted by ordinance. He advised the ordinance would be submitted to the Department of Ecology for review and comment. Once Department of Ecology has signed off on the ordinance, it would become effective. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 3 Councilmember Wilson recalled holidays were discussed at the Community Services/Development Services committee meeting, but the specific holidays were not defined. Mr. Bowman suggested inserting "federal holidays." Councilmember Wilson agreed. City Attorney Scott Snyder clarified emergency repairs of public utilities were excluded by another section; therefore, that type of construction noise was not addressed by this ordinance. Councilmember Wilson referred to the limitation per tier and asked if consideration had been given to a timeframe such as a six month period or the life of the project. Mr. Bowman answered the timeframe would be the life of the project. He offered to insert "per project" following "administrative variances." Councilmember Wilson preferred a six month period due to differences between projects depending on the scope of the project. Mr. Bowman advised this had not been a huge enforcement issue in the past although there were occasional noise complaints. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. He advised the Council received a letter from Gerta Fischer who was supportive of the changes as Mr. Bowman outlined. Patrice Raplee, 21001 Pioneer, Edmonds, explained 1' /Z months ago neighbors in and around Shell Valley presented a petition with over 100 signatures requesting relief from construction noise in Shell Valley from a Main Street project. Since that time, neighborhoods throughout the City were seeking a citywide amendment to the existing noise ordinance to ensure quality of life and relief from excessive construction noise during sensitive hours, Monday through Friday 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturdays 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. and no construction noise on Sundays and federal holidays. She commended Mr. Bowman and his staff's efforts to develop a comprehensive and reasonable noise amendment. She noted there were additional amendments necessary to the ordinance. Ms. Raplee explained that the three tiered variance process was a compromise offered to assist builders when special circumstances arose where construction noise must extend past regular noise hours. The compromise was an effort to offset and work in conjunction with the 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. amendment request. She requested the proposed three tiered variance state the specific number of limitations per tier and per project. She also requested that for builders who needed to work past regular noise hours for 7 days, neighbors be notified and staff may grant the variance but only for a limited number of times per project. She referred to the matrix provided by staff for the Community Services/Development Services Committee meeting of construction noise hours adopted by surrounding cities. She commended Councilmembers Plunkett and Orvis for assistance in initiating the amendment to the noise ordinance and Councilmembers Marin and Wilson for review and expertise at the Community Services/Development Services Committee meeting. She concluded that the proposed amendments were a balanced and well thought out approach to the noise ordinance that citizens could support with the suggested additional amendments and no modification to the amendments as proposed by Mr. Bowman. Don Kreiman, 24006 95th Place W, Edmonds, commented the proposed amendments were a good example of resolute and fair minded citizens who identified a problem and worked with staff to craft a fair solution. He explained the solution considered builders' needs, considered other cities' noise ordinances, and included a 3 -tier variance process for exceptions. He urged the Council to honor the citizens' effort and their solution by approving the amendments. James Chalupnik, 540 Dayton, Edmonds, expressed his support for the proposal. He advised he worked for many years in the area of noise control and it appeared the proposal was eminently workable and would be a great benefit to the City. He urged the Council to adopt the proposed amendments. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 4 f Kristina Kirlik, 21000 Pioneer Way, Edmonds, advised she became involved with the issue of construction noise due to a pending construction project in their neighborhood. Now several neighborhoods were seeking balance between the spirit of existing communities and right of builders to expand and develop. She noted this was a good example of the democratic process and commended staff on their efforts to develop an update to the City's code that was fair and reasonable to builders and current citizens. However, she recommended specific verbiage be included to avoid difficulties with interpretation. She supported the 3 -tier variance process, noting this process, in conjunction with the 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. weekday work hour request provided both sides a win -win outcome. Eileen Carter, 8318 Ih Avenue South, Edmonds, stated Bothell's construction noise hours were 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays, noting that much of the construction in Bothell was occurring on previously undeveloped land rather than in densely populated areas. Bothell does not allow construction on Sunday and Lynnwood had the same hours with further restrictions on noise on Saturdays. She lives adjacent to the site of a soon -to -be developed PRD that would require at least a year of construction and was concerned with the prospect of her family being kept awake at night and awakened early each morning. She supported the 3 -tier variance process as it would allow builders exceptions but wanted limits on each tier to ensure the intent of the law was not violated. She supported including a definition in each tier regarding how many times exceptions could be made or a time period. She also suggested neighbors have immediate recourse if the regulations were not observed. Speaking on behalf of her neighbor, Mary Proudfoot, she also supported exemptions whereby citizens' needs could restrict builders' opportunities to utilize a variance such as the birth of a child, a patient home from the hospital, etc. Paul Harrison, 21225 Shell Valley Road, Edmonds, expressed support for the amendments. As one involved in construction for 11 years and responsible for generating and supervising construction as well as maintaining deadlines, he stated the proposed weekday hours of 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. were reasonable. He noted much of his work was public and subject to stricter requirements, recalling that City contracts often had more stringent limitations on noise generation. He explained allowing construction late in the evening often meant that the general contractor was not supervising the workers and unsupervised subcontractors often did not have as much regard for local residents as the general contractor. Ross Conley, 21116 Pioneer Way, Edmonds, as the father of small children, appreciated quiet evening hours and the City's efforts to eliminate construction noise after 6 p.m. He expressed his appreciation for the additional wording proposed to the ordinance and urged the Council to approve the changes. Matt Douglas, 21021 Pioneer Way, Edmonds, commented he was proud of neighbors for coming together to present the facts and work together on a solution. He noted Councilmembers were elected to assist the City in growing the right way and he urged the Council to support the proposed amendments. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, agreed with the need to limit construction noise, but expressed concern regarding whether the proposed hours would be sufficient for developers to complete their work. He commented weekday hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. were more reasonable. With regard to federal holidays, he noted many companies were eliminating holidays. He also supported regular construction hours on Sundays and holidays. Rich Demeroutis, 921 Pine Street, Edmonds, questioned whether the language in the ordinance would cover a PRD that contained 20 -30 houses, constructed a few at a time and whether the builder would be entitled to two 2 -day variances or forty 2 -day variances. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, commented on the amount of cooperation between staff and citizens in developing the proposed amendments. He commended Mr. Bowman for his assistance, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 5 noting a number of Councilmembers had also been very helpful and the result was a positive solution for the city. He complimented Ms. Raplee for her endeavor and those who signed the petition. He noted the proposed amendments were fair such as allowing for variances. He noted the proposed ordinance did not address residents' recourse in the event of continual variances. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Councilmember Wilson asked for clarification of Section 5.30.120.C.1, "Any period of violation shall be deducted from the two day maximum and posting the subject property by the applicant." Mr. Bowman explained this was in regard to a builder who worked beyond allowed construction hours without staff approval and was later caught; the time would be subtracted from the allowed two days. Councilmember Wilson referred to Mr. Demeroutis' comment and suggested language be crafted to differentiate between a project that included multiple structures versus one single family home. Mr. Bowman answered it could be by project or by individual building permits within the development. He noted the developer of the PRD that has been referred to was aware of the proposed hours and was willing to work with them. Councilmember Wilson suggested the "by project method" would be preferable than the "by building permit" method. He noted if a builder foresaw the possibility, they could utilize the formal variance process such as the City did for the waterfront bulkhead project where the City anticipated a need to work outside allowed construction hours and obtained a variance via the Hearing Examiner process. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the ordinance contained penalties for violations. Mr. Bowman answered violations would be processed as a civil violation. Councilmember Wilson asked whether a legal mechanism could be included in the ordinance that would allow the City to curtail construction if a project violated the allowed construction hours. Mr. Snyder referred to a comment by the public that assumed the ordinance would be reviewable under the City's review of approved permits, explaining unless referenced, it would not as it was not part of the Community Development Code. He suggested the simplest method would be to include a provision that indicated this section would be reviewable pursuant to ECDC 21.100.040 which would allow staff, citizens or City Council to bring up for review a permit that was causing a public nuisance and have additional conditions imposed. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the additional conditions could be shorter construction hours than allowed by the ordinance. Mr. Snyder answered no. Councilmember Wilson noted there did not appear to be any recourse for a builder who continually violated the construction noise ordinance such as a greater penalty. Mr. Snyder explained there were a variety of mechanisms. He suggested the ordinance be adopted and the Council request staff provide a report at yearend including whether current penalties were sufficient. :Mr. Bowman was uncertain how penalty language would be received by the State Department of Ecology who would be seeking consistency between the application of this ordinance and similar ordinances in other cities. He preferred to adopt the proposed amendments and make additional amendments if a problem arose. He reiterated this had not been a huge problem in the past; most times when a problem arose, staff approached the builder and the problem was resolved. Councilmember Wilson expressed concern that the proposed amendments did not have any "teeth" with regard to enforcement due to the lack of penalties. Mr. Bowman advised language could be inserted to put it back under the review of the approved permit. Mr. Snyder suggested this could be accomplished via adding a Paragraph E to Section 5.30.120 that read, "Variances granted pursuant to this ordinance Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 6 are subject to review under ECDC 20.100.040." He noted ECDC 20.10.040 provided for revocation and imposition of additional limitations. Councilmember Wilson supported including language that would add teeth to enforcement to avoid the City having to explain to neighbors that there was nothing the City could do to stop continual violations. Councilmember Petso recalled public comment regarding how staff would consider citizens' special circumstances, asking whether it was within staff's discretion not to grant a variance without notice if for example a citizen were ill. Mr. Bowman answered the ordinance provided the Mayor or his/her designee the discretion to consider it. Mr. Snyder advised that could be taken into consideration in tiers two and three, but likely with a 2 -day variance, the work would be completed before the person contacted the City. Councilmember Petso concluded as a practical matter, only the second two tiers of the variance would be available to citizens. Mr. Bowman agreed, noting the first tier would likely be an emergent need such as a water line break. Councilmember Petso inquired about citizens' recourse with regard to violations. Mr. Bowman advised they were to call 911. Mayor Haakenson stated this had not been a problem in the City. In the event there was a violation and the police were called and dispatched, a builder would stop. Mr. Snyder reiterated there were plenty of tools to address the habitual violator. Councilmember Orvis pointed out variances would only be granted for special circumstances. Mr. Bowman agreed, explaining the builder would need to demonstrate there was an unusual circumstance that required a variance. Mr. Snyder explained the ordinance must contain the grounds upon which the Mayor or his designee would exercise his discretion, referring to language in the ordinance "where unplanned, unusual, physical or economic circumstances arise which make it necessary to complete immediate construction." Councilmember Orvis asked whether the language in the variance applied to Mr. Demeroutis' example. Mr. Bowman answered "per project" or "individual building permit" could be included in the tiered variance language. He recommended inserting "per project." Mr. Bowman again reviewed the amendments to the ordinance: • Section 5.30.110.B: "Sounds originating from temporary construction sites as a result of construction activity are exempt from the provisions of this chapter, but only during the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 700 6 :00 p.m. on weekdays and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays, excluding Sundays and federal holidays." • Section 5.30.120.C.1: "The Mayor or his/her designee may grant an no more than two administrative variances per proct for no more than two consecutive days in those cases where..." • Section 5.30.120.C.2: "In circumstances where it is not possible to meet the normal variance process, the Mayor or his/her designee may grant an no more than two administrative variances per proec of larger than two days but no longer than seven days..." • Section 5.30.120: Add paragraph E "Variances granted pursuant to this ordinance are subject to review under ECDC 20.100.040." Mr. Snyder explained ECDC 20.100.040 was the section that governed review of approved permits and provided that if the conditions of the permit were not met or the activity was causing a nuisance or hazardous condition, it could be reviewed. The review could be triggered by the Community Development Director, a motion of the City Council, or the application of three persons within 300 feet. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 7 The section contained provisions regarding the review including revocation or the imposition of additional conditions. Councilmember Plunkett inquired whether a definition of "project" was needed that indicated it was every building on the site. Mr. Snyder explained enforcement would likely be civil so the preponderance of evidence standard applied. He noted the greatest protection was provided via the limitation in the number of days. He recommended any variances be specific regarding the length and coverage of the variance. Mr. Bowman advised "per permit" could be added; if there were 22 building permits in development, there could potentially be 22 administrative variances. Mr. Snyder pointed out it would be difficult to demonstrate the need for 22 unplanned circumstances in the same project. He commented these situations would be far and few between; it was better to define the scope of a variance at the time of issuance. Councilmember Wilson noted most projects with multiple structures had some type of discretionary permit where the conditions could be further defined. Mr. Bowman agreed, pointing out there would need to be a finding and nexus for imposing the condition. Councilmember Wilson referred to Section 5.30.120.C.1, suggesting "per six month period" be inserted. He also suggested in Section 5.30.120.C.1, requiring notice be posted on the site. Mr. Bowman suggested the following amendment: "Notice of the administrative variance shall be given to the Police Department and notice posted on the property." Councilmembers agreed. Councilmember Wilson asked whether there was a limitation in the administrative variance in the number of additional hours that could be granted. Mr. Bowman answered it was open ended; an applicant would need to demonstrate why they needed the variance. Councilmember Wilson commented he was not concerned about a variance that extended construction hours to 8 p.m. but more concerned with extending hours to 1 a.m. Mr. Bowman answered he was not aware of circumstances where that would be necessary. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, FOR APPROVAL OF THE ORDINANCE WITH THE AMENDMENTS AS DESCRIBED BY STAFF. rd# 3469 Noise o COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO AMEND SECTION 5.30.120.C.1 TO ALLOW NO MORE THAN TWO EXCEPTIONS IN ANY SIX MONTH PERIOD. AMENDMENT CARRIED (4 -1) COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS OPPOSED. (Council President Earling was not present for the vote.) COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO AMEND SECTION 5.30.120.C.2 TO ALLOW NO MORE THAN ONE EXCEPTION IN ANY SIX MONTH PERIOD. Councilmember Wilson explained a six month period provided 144 working days; two administrative variances under tier one provided an additional four days and one administrative variance under tier two added seven days for a total of 11 days or approximately 7% of the 144 days. He preferred keeping the number of days under a 10% threshold. MOTION CARRIED, (4 -1) COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT OPPOSED. (Council President Earling was not present for the vote.) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 8 Councilmember Wilson suggested stipulating the maximum evening hour a variance could be granted. He noted the current ordinance allowed construction noise until 10 p.m. and suggested the maximum evening hour that could be granted on an administrative variance be limited to 10 p.m. Councilmember Petso pointed out Section 5.30.120.B limited variances to the minimum time period found to be necessary under the facts and circumstances. Mayor Haakenson assured variances would not be granted past 10 p.m. Councilmember Marin commented that before this issue came to the Community Services/Development Services Committee, he met with Mr. Sundquist (the developer of the PRD in Shell Valley) who was agreeable to the proposed amendments although he wanted to consult with other builders and the Master Builders Association. Mr. Sundquist also raised the issue of a homeowner who wants to work on a deck or fence project. Because Committee members were relatively certain this was an issue the Council would support, they directed Mr. Bowman to prepare a draft ordinance for consideration at the Committee meeting. Ms. Raplee was invited to attend and agreed with making provisions for homeowners working on a deck, fence, or other home project. Councilmember Marin expressed his thanks to Ms. Raplee for bringing a problem and a solution to the Council. Councilmember Plunkett noted the reason this was successfully before the Council was the way it was presented to the Council; citizens made a proposal along with positive alternatives, allowed the Council time to discuss at committee, participated in the committee meeting, and participated in the public hearing, all in a manner that contributed and was positive and effective. He thanked citizens for taking the time and making the effort to make this possible. Councilmember Wilson noted it may seem tedious to add this level of detail but many years' experience in drafting and enforcing ordinances revealed if an ordinance was not written with the intent to accomplish a goal, changes would be required in the future when the ordinance did not accomplish the goal. Councilmember Orvis thanked Ms. Raplee and other petitioners for bringing this issue to the Council. He noted it would benefit not only their neighborhood but the entire City. MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (Council President Earling was not present for the vote.) Mayor Haakenson relayed that Council President Earling had indicated he was 100% behind the proposed ordinance. Annexation 5. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ON THE CONSOLIDATED ANNEXATION OF A SMALL Ballinger Lift Station TRACT OF LAND COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ABANDONED BALLINGER LIFT STATION Site SITE. THE SITE IS CURRENTLY OWNED BY THE CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE, BUT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS Councilmember Petso explained when this issue was before the Council previously, she stepped down and asked whether she should again step down. City Attorney Scott Snyder advised annexations were typically legislative decisions of the Council and Councilmember Petso was not obligated to step down, it was her decision. He assumed she had reviewed the minutes of the previous public hearing. Councilmember Petso indicated she had not reviewed the minutes, and advised she would step down as she had not heard the public comment during the previous public hearing. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 9 Mayor Haakenson inquired whether the four remaining Councilmembers constituted a quorum. Mr. Snyder answered the Council maintained a quorum but all four Councilmembers would be required to vote in the affirmative to implement this action. Mayor Haakenson inquired about the consequence of a 2 -2 tie vote. Mr. Snyder answered all four Councilmembers would have to vote in the affirmative; anything less than four votes, the matter would be defeated and would need to be rescheduled. Senior Planner Steve Bullock displayed a vicinity map identifying the location of the abandoned Ballinger Lift Station. He explained the annexation of the property was mandated through an Interlocal Agreement with a number of adjacent utility providers, including Mountlake Terrace and Olympic View Water & Sewer District that documented the City's obligation to take over the Mountlake Terrace Ballinger Lift Station property. Unfortunately, the legal documentation to make that occur, a Quit Claim Deed from Mountlake Terrace to Edmonds, never happened. One element of ensuring the property was transferred to the City was annexation of the property from Mountlake Terrace into Edmonds. In response to testimony submitted at the previous public hearing regarding the facility being a liability due to previous failures the lift station had experienced, Mr. Bullock explained in the early 1990's King County constructed a new lift station on the south side of 205 'h that abandoned this lift station in its capacity as a lift station. He assured it no longer served as a lift station; there were a number of pipes that traversed the property that are part of the Edmonds system and flow was metered through the site. Further, Mr. Bullock explained there had not been any maintenance problems with the property since the new lift station was placed in service. Therefore, the concerns that arose at the previous public hearing regarding liability and this facility were not valid. Mr. Bullock advised staff was supportive of the annexation as the enactment of the Quit Claim Deed would establish the City as the legal property owner and the annexation would make the City the regulatory authority for the property. As long as the property remained within the City of Mountlake Terrace, any permits the City may need must be obtained via Mountlake Terrace. Staff feels Edmonds is the better permitting agency for the property as it was completely surrounded and would ultimately be owned by the City of Edmonds. With regard to the zoning of the property, Mr. Bullock advised in Mountlake Terrace the property was zoned Public Utilities and Services; the comparable Edmonds zoning would be Public Use Zone. Therefore, upon annexation, the default zoning would be Public Use. Councilmember Orvis commented that although Edmonds was the lead agency, it was not the only agency responsible for clean up. Mr. Bullock agreed, noting the Interlocal Agreement outlined how costs would be separated; all jurisdictions have a proportionate share and Edmonds' share was approximately 1/3. He explained the clean -up of the facility had been scheduled and budgeted in the City's Capital Improvement Plan for a number of years. Mayor Haakenson advised the public participation portion had been closed at the last public hearing COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO APPROVE THE ANNEXATION RESOLUTION ANNEXING THE PUMP STATION PROPERTY. Councilmember Wilson expressed his thanks to staff for researching the questions the Council raised at the last public hearing. He expressed his support for the recommended action. Councilmember Plunkett recalled most of the questions he raised at the :previous public hearing were in an effort to avoid encumbering the City with the costs. As indicated by staff tonight, the burden of cleanup would be shared and he planned to vote in favor of the motion. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 10 MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (4 -0). (Council President Earling and Councilmember Petso did not participate in the vote.) The resolution reads as follows: 1047 exation RESOLUTION NO. 1047 CONCURRING IN THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN REAL a r PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND COMMONLY KNOWN AS ILift'Station Site THE BALLINGER LIFT STATION, BY CONSOLIDATION METHOD PURSUANT TO RCW 35.10.217(2), AT THE REQUEST OF THE OWNER OF SAID PROPERTY AND THE REQUEST OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE; AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF A QUIT CLAIM DEED FOR SAID PROPERTY; PROVIDING FOR ITS FILING OF RECORD; AND PROVIDING DIRECTION TO THE EDMONDS CITY CLERK REGARDING DISPOSITION OF CERTIFIED COPIES OF THIS RESOLUTION. Mayor Haakenson declared a brief recess. (Councilmember Petso returned to the dais.) Mid 6. REPORT ON AMOUNT FOR 144 RAILROAD AVENUE WALKWAY PHASE OF THE MID Waterfront Walkway WATERFRONT WALKWAY/BULKHEAD PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR way Bulkhead TO SIGN CHANGE ORDER WITH BOSS CONTRACTORS A JOINT VENTURE IN THE roject APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF $200,185.00 Parks & Recreation Director Arvilla Ohlde advised the mid - waterfront project was progressing quickly and on schedule. She described the history of the project that included purchase of the tidelands but not the chicane bulkhead in front of Waterfront Park Associates, and the agreement they would build the bulkhead and provide the City a permanent walkway easement connecting Brackett's Landing to the Senior Center. This portion of the project at 144 Railroad Avenue, which was held out from the original project, completed the connection to the entire waterfront. She requested the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the contract allowing completion of the waterfront bulkhead. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the $100,000 remaining as contingency represented more than 10% of the valuation of the work remaining in the final contact. Ms. Ohlde answered yes. (Council President Earling arrived at 8:41 p.m.) Councilmember Petso asked what the anticipated cost of this portion of the project had been. Ms. Ohlde answered the engineer's estimate was $185,000 - $200,000. Councilmember Petso asked why this portion was being handled as a change order rather than being re -bid, questioning whether a change order prevented the possibility of a lower bidder and asked what were the advantages of a change order. Ms. Ohlde answered the contractor was already on site, the products were on site, and it was less disruptive than de- mobilizing one project and re- mobilizing another project. Further, it avoided the delay of de- mobilizing and re- mobilizing, possibly pushing the project into 2004. She commended the property owners in the area for their tremendous cooperation. Councilmember Petso concluded the advantage of the change order was to save time and it was not significantly different than the anticipated cost. Ms. Ohlde agreed. Councilmember Wilson asked whether this work was an alternate to the original bid. Ms. Ohlde answered no, the first phase was bid and this was a change order. She advised BOSS had been a very good contractor who had worked efficiently and with the public. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, THAT THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A CHANGE ORDER TO BOSS CONTRACTORS, A JOINT VENTURE IN THE APPROXIMATE AMOUNT OF $200,185.84, INCLUDING SALES TAX, FOR THE 144 RAILROAD AVENUE WALKWAY PHASE OF THE MID - WATERFRONTBULKHEAD PROJECT. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 11 Councilmember Wilson expressed his appreciation for the approach to this project and handling it as a change order. He agreed de- mobilizing and re- mobilizing was expensive and eliminated the potential for "finger- pointing" by contractors regarding who did what to whose project. He concluded this would allow for more quality control and keep the cost as low as possible. Councilmember Marin commented he had inspected the work twice and the quality of the work and the artwork on the caps were spectacular. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Edmonds 7. 2003 PRELIMINARY REPORT FROM THE EDMONDS ALLIANCE FOR ECONOMIC, Alliance for DEVELOPMENT Economic Development Jack Oharah, President of Edmonds Community College, advised this was a preliminary report from the Alliance to which the Council could provide feedback. He anticipated the final report would be available in October/November this year depending on the feedback provided by the City Council, Port, and Chamber of Commerce. This report was a summary of the Alliance's efforts. He recalled the Council approved the Alliance's 2003 work plan that supported efforts on Hwy. 99. Those efforts included a streamlined approach toward zoning and the permitting process. The Alliance was also developing a database related to business solicitation and retention efforts through September 2003. The centerpiece of the Alliance's work plan in 2003 was a review of about a dozen regional cities (with a focus on six) to determine the most successful approaches toward meeting goals. He summarized the Alliance matched these efforts with past and current data, reports, findings, etc. in order to develop a series of recommendations for the City, Port, Chamber and others to consider. Mr. Oharah explained the Alliance had a retreat recently where the following mission for economic development in the City was developed, "Create an Environment that Supports Business and Increases the Quality of Life in Edmonds." Three goals were developed at the retreat, 1) create an environment that supports business, 2) increase revenues that generate sales tax, and 3) broaden property tax base. The strategies that were identified included identifying locations and developing action plans for key property development on the waterfront and Hwy. 99, emphasizing new business recruitment and determining and enhancing local and regional market competitiveness such as FACE, Arts Center, etc., streamlining the permitting process, and enhancing and improving codes. David Peterson, Executive Director, Edmonds Alliance for Economic Development, explained when he addressed the Council approximately nine months ago, he indicated the Alliance planned to contact other cities to determine how they approached economic development. He explained a variety of cities were contacted and six were visited (Bremerton, Port Townsend, Tacoma, Federal Way, Everett and Renton). He advised they did not select communities on the basis of trying to find cities exactly the same as Edmonds; some cities were approximately the same size, some were not, some had similar economic issues and some did not. He noted what they looked for were communities that had defined a problem or series of problems and once the problem was identified, set goals and solved the problem. Mr. Peterson referred to Bremerton, Tacoma and Renton where the problem was a diminishing tax base, noting there were several common denominators in how they set about reaching conclusions to fix the problem including doing it on a holistic basis. He noted in addition to the six cities, the Alliance also met with Shoreline's Economic Development Director. He noted common denominators included leadership, how cities solved the problem, and an understanding of the length of time and consistency required to make economic development successful. He summarized that the communities who were beginning to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 12 solve their problem(s) in addition to great leadership, the single biggest issue was consistency, staying the course, and doing a little each year. Mr. Oharah explained their visits found in many cases the economic development structure in cities was in response to a crisis in funding. He explained strong public leadership was essential for an economic development program to succeed along with a team approach in the planning, zoning, finance, and administrative areas of the City. He reviewed the Alliance's preliminary recommendations; first that the City establish a professional position in City government reporting to the Mayor, and second that the economic development professional and the Mayor establish an advisory and community input process. Councilmember Plunkett�commented this was a concise and helpful report and expressed his appreciation for the Alliance's effort. He asked what made the structure of a professional position in City government more effective than other structures. Mr. Oharah explained a matrix was prepared of the issues that affected economic development currently and in the future and it was apparent that the Mayor needed to be in a leadership position in economic development and that the Council controlled much of the efforts that needed to be undertaken to make economic development most successful in Edmonds, such as planning, zoning and finance. Councilmember Plunkett observed the Alliance's conclusion appeared to be that connecting ideas and possibilities to the people who were responsible for implementation could result in success as opposed to a looser organization outside the City structure. Mr. Oharah agreed that was the Alliance's conclusion. Councilmember Petso requested a further explanation regarding the statement "broaden the property tax base." Mr. Peterson stressed it was not to raise property taxes; there were commercial areas on Hwy. 99 and other areas of the City where under - developed and vacant properties could accommodate commercial development which would broaden the tax base and take some of the burden off the single family taxpayer in the City. Councilmember Petso asked for clarification on the strategy, "enhance and improve codes." Mr. Peterson answered this pertained to the recommendation to create a position within staff as there were a variety of issues that were within the Council's purview. He pointed out this stood out among the strategies as one that was easier to implement from inside the City rather than outside. He noted 3 -4 of the cities they considered who turned their tax base around and took the burden off the single family taxpayer via increased commercial development have done so via a remarkable ability to display an atmosphere of "getting to yes," of moving a streamlined permitting process forward so that developers know the rules in advance and can obtain building permits in a relatively short period of time. He noted this was an issue that could be discussed by an organization such as the Alliance or Chamber but only the City could implement. He noted another possibility was modernizing the zoning on Hwy. 99. Councilmember Petso noted the waterfront and Hwy. 99 were coupled in the strategies. Mr. Peterson answered they were the two areas where there were opportunities to expand the tax base and accomplish quality development but the areas would likely be treated quite differently according to their demand and limitations. Council President Earling inquired about the composition of the advisory board. Mr. Peterson answered that had not been formally discussed. He explained Federal Way and other communities indicated a good part of their success came from the viewpoint of a broad spectrum. Council President Earling asked whether there had been any discussion regarding selection/appointment of an advisory board. Mr. Peterson assumed appointments would be made by the Council and Mayor. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 13 Council President Earling asked who the advisory board would report to. Mr. Peterson answered in one model, the Mayor chaired the committee, the staff person reported to the Mayor and Council, agendas were prepared by staff and the Mayor, and appointments were made by the Mayor and Council. Mr. Peterson noted this was a preliminary report and the preliminary proposal was a staff person whose salary maybe $100,000 or more. If the Council's general reaction was positive, they would proceed with discussions with the Port, Chamber, and others; if the Council had major problems with the recommendations, the Alliance needed to be informed. Council President Earling asked whether the final report would include answers to the questions he posed tonight. Mr. Peterson agreed. Councilmember Marin commented the Alliance was proceeding in the right direction. He noted it was appropriate for the City to continue funding the Alliance to allow them to conduct this study to point the City in the right direction. He agreed it was appropriate to have a professional economic development director on staff who could identify opportunities for changes. Councilmember Petso requested the Alliance provide copies of the preliminary report to the City Clerk who could make them available to members of the public. 8. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Lake Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, recalled flooding in the Ballinger area in 1997/1998 Ballinger and meetings held by the City in 1999 -2001, facts that were not presented by staff. He asserted that it Way was the residents' understanding that the City would pick up costs if flooding occurred again. He pointed out there were 390 homes in the area that were in District 1, suggesting the City should have considered annexing property further east on Lake Ballinger Way. Edmonds Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, referred to the Alliance's recommendation to add Alliance for another $100,000 salary to the City, commenting the City did not have sufficient budget to add such a Economic position particularly when the City already had difficulty funding police and fire. He noted the City Development provided over $100,000 in financing to the Alliance over the past five years. He recalled the Alliance originally proposed higher building heights and they still appeared to be interested in changing the code and speeding up the permit process. He alleged the permit process was slowed at times by the inability of staff to function. Next, Mr. Hertrich referred to the Council's consideration and approval of the amendment to the construction noise ordinance and Councilmember comments regarding the citizens effort that made the amendments happen and the benefits to the neighborhood, questioning why the Council did not consider that when they discussed the Hearing Examiner. He referred to the anti - sentiment that existed in the City by the Council sending PRD decisions to the Hearing Examiner. Community 9. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF AUGUST 12, 2003 Services/ Development Community Services/Development Services Committee Services Committee Councilmember Marin reported the Committee considered amendments to the noise ordinance which the Council approved earlier on the agenda. Next, the Committee discussed differentiating between right -of- way, street use, and encroachment permits. Staff was directed to meet with the business community and if there were no significant changes, bring the matter to the Council. If significant issues were identified, staff was directed to return the matter back to the Committee. The Committee then discussed an ECDC wireless code update; the Committee directed staff to refer this to the Planning Board for review and recommendation. The Committee also reviewed a request by a builder to develop an ordinance codifying Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 14 requirements for the adoption, publication, and distribution of administrative policies, rules, standards and code interpretations. Staff was asked to return at the next Committee meeting for discussion of the perceived scope of the problem. Finance Finance Committee committee Councilmember Petso reported the Committee discussed a proposal to create a Parks Non - Expendable Trust Fund for the Parks & Recreation Department to fund the flower program, Yost Pool, and Beach Ranger Program which the Council approved last week. She noted this would allow donations to be made whereby the principle was protected and only the interest used to fund those programs. Next, the Committee discussed equipment rental rates, whereby vehicles were rented to various departments. She noted the rates would be changing; the largest change would be to include the new 800 MHz radios in the equipment rental fund. The final item the Committee discussed was the probation officer position requested by Judge White. She noted this would require an addition to the budget with payment from the Ending Cash Balance. ublic safety Public Safety Committee ommittee Councilmember Plunkett advised the Committee also discussed the probation officer and recommended that the probation officer position be approved subject to a financial review. 10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Haakenson had no report. 11. INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEEBOARD MEETINGS vy Lid Lift Council President Earling advised a levy lid lift vote was scheduled on the November election. He o and Con ommittees invited anyone interest in writing the proponent or o pp onent statement to contact the City Clerk 425 - 771 -0245) by close of business Friday, August 29 to be considered for appointment to the committees writing those statements. He advised the appointment would be made by the Council President. Health Councilmember Marin advised the Health District applied for a grant through the Bill and Melinda Gates District Foundation for the program "Sound Families" which provides case management in conjunction with the Snohomish County Housing Authority's "First Steps" program which is administered by the Health District. He described his participation in a visit in the "First Steps" program to a location that was very undesirable, families living in conditions that were not conducive to overcoming their predicament. He recalled the Snohomish County Housing Authority who took ownership, with the approval of the City Council, of a large apartment complex on SR 104 which has provided a setting where families have case management in a city where they can see peers doing things well. ort Councilmember Wilson reported at the Port meeting an Interlocal Agreement was approved whereby the Port would provide electrical service to the City Marina Beach Pier. He explained when the City acquired the tidelands, it also acquired the pier along with the obligation to maintain power to the pier for lights for safety and navigational purposes. He noted power to that pier would be cut as a result of remediation on the Unocal property. The City and the Port entered into an Interlocal Agreement whereby the Port will provide electrical service to allow the City to provide power to the pier to maintain safety lights along the pier and navigational lights. He noted this would keep the cost down and benefit the City, Port, and community. Mayor Haakenson commented the Port had been very cooperative in this effort and saved the City an immense amount of money by allowing the City to tap into their lines. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 15 inter city ommission Council member Petso announced the Sister City Commission was raffling a quilt; tickets were available at the Frances Anderson Center for $2. With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.. G Y HAAREN N, MAYOR '4. ..dr ./c SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 26, 2003 Page 16 1 1 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 51" Avenue North, Edmonds 7:00 - 10:00 p.m. AUGUST 26, 2003 7:00 p.m. - Call to Order Flag Salute 1. Approval of Agenda 2. Consent Agenda Items (A) Roll Call (B) Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of August 19, 2003. (C) Approval of claim checks #64781 through #64952 for the week of August 18, 2003, in the amount of $1,194,987.08. Approval of payroll direct deposits and checks #36392 through #36548 for the period August 1 through August 15, 2003 in the amount of $933,806.41. (D) Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages from Richard Smith ($35.00). (E) Approval of list of Edmonds businesses applying for renewal of their liquor licenses with the Washington State Liquor Control Board. (F) Report on bids opened August 5, 2003 for the 242nd Street Storm Improvements Project, and award of contract to Emerald Services, Inc. ($54,596.47, including sales tax). (G) Report on bids opened August 5, 2003 for the Lorian Woods Storm Improvements Project and award of contract to Marshbank Construction, Inc. ($48,569.40, including sales tax). (H) Proposed ordinance approving an amendment to the Edmonds Public Facilities District Charter; establishing a semi - monthly regular meeting schedule for the Edmonds Public Facilities District Board. 3. (20 Min.) Public Hearing on a street vacation for the right -of -way located on the north side of the 8500 block of Bowdoin Way adjacent to the City owned property located at 8505 Bowdoin Way. Page 1 of 2 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA August 26, 2003 Page 2 of 2 4. (30 Min.) Public Hearing on proposed amendments to Chapter 5.30 of the Edmonds City Code regarding construction noise. 5. (20 Min.) Continued Public Hearing on the consolidation annexation of a small tract of land commonly known as the abandoned Ballinger Lift Station site. The site is currently owned by the City of Mountlake Terrace, but is located within the City of Edmonds. 6. ( 5 Min.) Report on amount for 144 Railroad Avenue walkway phase of the Mid Waterfront Walkway /Bulkhead Project, and authorization for Mayor to sign change order with Boss Contractors, a Joint Venture, in the approximate amount of $200,185.00. 7. (30 Min.) 2003 Preliminary Report from the Edmonds Alliance for Economic Development. 8. Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* "Regarding matters not listed as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings. 9. (15 Min.) Report on City Council Committee Meetings of August 12, 2003. 10. ( 5 Min.) Mayor's Comments 11. (15 Min.) Individual Council reports on outside committee /board meetings. Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Please contact the City Clerk al (425) 771 -0245 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations. The Council Agenda as well as a delayed telecast of the meeting appears on cable television Government Access Channel 21.