No preview available
03/16/1999 City Council1 pprove /2/99 Minutes IArpr aim arrants EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 Following a Special Meeting at 6:45 p.m. to interview a candidate for the Architectural Design Board, the Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Barbara Fahey in the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main Street. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Barbara Fahey, Mayor Gary Haakenson, Council President Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Jim White, Councilmember Dick Van Hollebeke, Councilmember Thomas A. Miller, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Meghan Cross, Student Representative ABSENT John Nordquist, Councilmember Dave Earling, Councilmember 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Robin Hickok, Police Chief Mike Smith, Fire Inspector John Westfall, Fire Marshal Paul Mar, Community Services Director Ray Miller, Development Services Director Peggy Hetzler, Administrative Services Director Joan Ferebee, Court Administrator Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor Noel Miller, Public Works Director Karissa Kawamoto, Planner Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Director Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Sherrie Ringstad, Deputy City Clerk COUNCILMEMBER WHITE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS SUBMITTED. MOTION CARRIED. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember White requested Items J, N, and O be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 2, 1999 (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #29337 THROUGH #31217 FOR THE WEEK OF MARCH 1, 1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $148,117.10. APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #29340 THROUGH #31395 FOR THE WEEK OF MARCH 8, 1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $171,916.67. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL WARRANTS #22502 THROUGH #22629 FOR THE PERIOD FEBRUARY 16 THROUGH FEBRUARY 28, 1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $332,571.49 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 1 laims for (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM JAMES N. NOLAN amages ($493.90), AND MEGAN HOAG/ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY ($765.00) Update Hwy Project 9 Proect (E) UPDATE ON HIGHWAY 99 PROJECT Update Public Safety (F) UPDATE ON PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECT Project Approval (G) APPROVAL OF PUBLIC WORKS TEAMSTERS UNION LABOR AGREEMENT PW Agmt (I) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR' TO SIGN THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT rlocal BETWEEN THE EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT AND CITY OF EDMONDS POLICE EchD ool Dist DEPARTMENT FOR COMMUNITY:ORIENTED POLICING AGENT Q Bank (I) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR CITY ervices BANKING SERVICES s £or (K) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR UNIFORMS AND LAUNDRY forms & E SERVICES FOR PUBLIC WORKS, PARK MAINTENANCE, AND TREATMENT PLANT nd Svcs EMPLOYEES MOU (L) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING with Port re Park WITH PORT OF EDMONDS REGARDING DEVELOPMENT IN RELATION TO CITY'S MARINA BEACH PARK AND ACCEPTANCE OF SIX-FOOT EASEMENT Hing (M) AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO SIGN REVISED CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT gmt 97-28 RELATED TO THE PARK REZONE', NO. 97-28 rd 3243 ID 216 (P) ORDINANCE NO. 3243 FORMING ;NORTH PERRINVILLE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) NO. 216 Advertise for Bids to Purchase a 1999 Harley Davidson Police Motorc cle Item J: Authorization to Adv v v id for ]999 race and Item O• Authorization for Mayor to Sign a Lease Agreement with Lynnwood Cycle Barn, Inc. otorc cle Councilmember White observed the purchase of a police motorcycle is less expensive than the lease, and ase Agmt questioned why one Consent Agenda item proposed the purchase of a police motorcycle and another th cycle F Consent Agenda item proposed a lease. Public Works Director Noel Miller responded funds are not rr` currently available to purchase the second motorcycle. When the budget was developed, the lease amount was unknown; however, recent analysis indicates a purchase is slightly less expensive; therefore, it was felt the lease could be continued for one year until the funds can be identified to purchase another motorcycle. He said this also rotates the motorcycles into the pool on a staggered basis. nuactfor Item N• Authorization for Mayor to Sign Contract for Victim Advocacy Services with Laura R. Advocacy Lindstrand Services Councilmember White expressed concern this had not been reviewed by the Public Safety Committee and suggested more information be provided regarding Ms. Lindstrand including a presentation to the Council in the future. He pointed out the number of hours this individual will be working has been left blank in the contract. He said Paragraph A (Termination of Agreement at Cities' Option) in Section 5 and Paragraph B (Termination for Cause) were in conflict. He said if the City has the option to terminate at will, it is inappropriate to state that cause is required prior to termination as this suggests there must always be cause to terminate. Councilmember White questioned why resolution of dispute (Section IX) must be filed in King County rather than Snohomish County. He preferred the contract be reviewed and considered by the Public Safety Committee. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 2 Court Administrator Joan Ferebee explained that for three years the City has had a contract with the Center for Battered Women. The Center did not want the contract this year as they felt they were in conflict trying to be a legal advocate and trying to provide community service also. In addition, the City wanted an advocate who would help victims via the court system. Three applicants applied and were interviewed by Lynnwood, Prosecutor Jeff Goodwin and herself. City Attorney Scott Snyder then developed the contract. Ms. Lindstrand is awaiting approval of the contract prior to beginning work. City Attorney Scott Snyder asked the estimated hours Ms. Lindstrand would work. Ms. Ferebee said it is estimated to be 40 hours although it could be 50, 60, or 30 hours. Mr. Snyder asked if inserting 40°hours, striking paragraph 5, and changing King County to Snohomish County would address Councilmember White's concerns? Mayor Fahey explained part of the desire to change the role of the advocate was a result of a request from the Prosecuting Attorney who felt there are some distinctions to be made between advocates who work with human services providers (such as the Center for Battered Women) and an advocate who understands their role is to assist the victim in the court process. For this reason, the Center for Battered Women did not feel they could provide an advocate to meet Edmonds' and Lynnwood's prosecuting attorney's requirements and a decision was made to hire an individual who could assist victims through the court process. The Council was not involved in the hiring process, as it was similar to hiring any other staff person in the City. Councilmember White said his concern was not with selection -of the individual but with the creation of a position that did not previously exist. He said the changes Mr. Snyder. suggested would address the majority of his concerns. Councilmember White pointed out paragraph C in Section 5 could also create problems. He requested a bi-annual report be provided to the Public Safety Committee. Ms. Ferebee said Ms. Lindstrand plans to provide monthly reports with her invoice, which could be forwarded to the Public Safety Committee. COUNCILMEMBER WHITE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM N WITH THE INSERTION OF 40 HOURS IN LINE 3 OF PARAGRAPH 2, THE DELETION OF PARAGRAPH 5A AND A CHANGE TO SNOHOMISH COUNTY IN PARAGRAPH 9. MOTION CARRIED. The item approved is as follows: (N) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN CONTRACT FOR VICTIM ADVOCACY SERVICES WITH LAURA R. LINDSTRAND COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS J AND O. MOTION CARRIED. The items approved are as follows: (J) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS TO PURCHASE A 1999 HARLEY DAVIDSON POLICE MOTORCYCLE (0) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH LYNNWOOD CYCLE BARN, INC. 3. CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS onfirm Apt o ADB Mayor Fahey explained the Council interviewed Tom Bykonen, a candidate for at -large Architectural Design Board position #5, prior to tonight's Council meeting. Mr. Bykonen is a structural engineer with considerable expertise. She said although this position does not specifically require a structural engineer, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 3 the ADB members felt his expertise would be beneficial and he would be an appropriate selection for this at -large position. She requested the Council approve his appointment. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON, TO CONFIRM THE APPOINTMENT OF TOM BYKONEN TO SERVE IN THE AT -LARGE POSITION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Fahey introduced Mr. Bykonen and thanked him for his willingness to serve on the ADB. 4. RECOGNITION OF CITIZENS JOE EICKSTADT, JUNE RACINE AND RICH WIMPY FOR Recognition Citize s SAVING A LIFE f Citizens � for Saving A Life Fire Marshal John Westfall explained this is an opportunity for the Fire Department and community to see the "full picture" involved in an emergency situation. Fire Inspector Mike Smith explained on February 9, 1999, Steven Blackburn collapsed and went into cardiac arrest at Top Foods. Three store employees, Joe Eickstadt, June Racine, and Rich ; Wimpy began CPR and restored Mr. Blackburn's heartrate until medic crews arrived and transported jhim to the hospital. Fire Inspector Smith expressed his gratitude to the store employees for taking action and for having the training and knowledge necessary. He presented Mr. Eickstadt, Ms. Racine, and Mr. Wimpy each with a certificate as a token of appreciation. Mr. Blackburn thanked Mr. Eickstadt, Ms. Racine, and Mr. Wimpy for saving his life. i Mayor Fahey thanked the members of the fire service and EMS Chief Deb Ayres for bringing this heroic act to the Council's attention. She said it is always nice to celebrate the actions of citizens who have come to the aid of others in the community. She pointed out the value of CPR training, particularly the ability to provide CPR until medical personnel arrive. She expressed her appreciation for the store employees' -knowledge of what to do and their appropriate action. She encouraged the public to take advantage of the opportunity to learn emergency procedures and potentially becoming part of the City's CERT team. Councilmembers congratulated Mr. Eickstadt, Ms. Racine, and Mr. Wimpy. Fire Marshal Westfall invited citizens to contact the Fire Department regarding upcoming CPR classes. H re Vaca- 5. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A R. ion of ROW THE 180TH STREET SOUTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY T-98-52 DRIVE (Applicant: Greenleaf Evans / File No. ST -98-52) Mayor Fahey explained this is a continued hearing; at the original hearing the Council made a decision to vacate the right-of-way but continued the consideration of compensation until tonight. Mr. Snyder explained at the close of public comment at the original public hearing, the Council made a decision regarding the public need/necessity to retain the right-of-way and deferred the issue of value until tonight. He said state statute indicates the Council may require half the value of the right-of-way in situations where the property was dedicated and up to full value if consideration has been paid. He noted for the record it did not appear the City had paid for the right-of-way, which has been confirmed by the original plat maps. State statute refers to appraised value, however, the City does not have an appraised value. Washington Courts have interpreted the statute to permit the Council to request but not require consideration. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 4 i 1 Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson displayed a site map identifying the right-of-way and the applicant's property. He recalled Council requested staff review the assessed value information for the applicant's property (Lot 3). He referred to the chart on page 2 of the Council packet, which indicates the applicant's property is approximately 27,707 square feet and has a current assessed value of $10,000 which equates to approximately $0.36 per square foot. Applying that ratio to the right-of-way requested to be vacated, slightly under 10,000 square feet, results in an approximate value of $3,562. However when comparing the property to the east and west, which also front on 180`'', the property to the west is slightly over 32,000 square feet and has an assessed land value of $107,000 equating to a value of approximately $3.33 per square foot. Applying that to the right-of-way to be vacated results in a value of approximately $32,950. The property to the east (Lot 2) is slightly over 10,000 square feet but has an assessed land value of $62,000, which equates to $6.08 per square foot. Applying that to the right-of-way to be vacated results in a value of $60,102. He pointed out there is a wide range in the value for property fronting on the same right-of-way, thus there is not a clear, common denominator to be used in determining a value. Mr. Wilson said averaging the value per square foot resulted in a value of $2.56 per square foot. Applying that amount to the right-of-way would result in a value of approximately $25,331. Mr. Snyder recalled staff was asked to consider the square footage of the property as well as its zoning classification. He asked what zoning classification the property has. Mr. Wilson answered it is presently zoned RS 12, a minimum of 12,000 square feet is required for each lot. Based on the size of the subject property (27,707 square feet) there would be sufficient area (on paper) to allow for subdivision into two lots. Mr. Snyder asked if the lot and right-of-way to be vacated were subject to the City's critical areas ordinance. Mr. Wilson answered a portion of the eastern half of the applicant's property (Lot 3) is identified on the City's critical areas map as slopes with erosion potential. This is intended to identify properties with slopes and soil types that because of the steepness of the slope and the soil types, unless adequate precautions are taken, there is a possibility for erosion. In parcels of that nature, the City requires strict adherence to the City's erosion control standards in the development of the property. He said this does not necessarily preclude development of the property, but provides additional considerations and restrictions in how the property is developed to ensure there are no erosion problems. Mr. Snyder asked, based on square footage, whether there was any impediment under City ordinance to the subdivision of the property into three lots in the event of vacation. Mr. Wilson answered based on square footage, the property could be subdivided into two lots. The addition of the vacated right-of-way would bring the property to over 36,000 square feet, which would be sufficient for subdivision into three lots. Without detailed analysis of the property through a subdivision process where detailed topographical information is reviewed, he was not aware of any conditions that would preclude three lots; there were no major impediments. However, until a full analysis is done, .he would not guarantee subdivision into three lots would be possible. Mr. Wilson said that normally an appraisal is required to be submitted with the application for street vacation. At the beginning of this process, the applicant asked if the City would consider waiving that requirement based.on how the property was acquired/dedicated through the platting of Seaview Estates. He and Mr. Snyder discussed this and informed the applicant they could proceed but the final determination of value would be made by the Council. He said if the value is uncertain based on the information in the packet, the Council could table the vacation request to allow the applicant to seek a full appraisal of the right-of-way to be vacated to develop a more accurate value. This appraisal would be consistent with the City's appraisal standards and could address factors such as the relative increase in the value of the property due to the ability to potentially increase the number of lots via subdivision. He said when the street vacation ordinance was amended recently the assessed valuation method was Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 5 i changed to an appraisal method in an attempt to di velop an accurate value for the right-of-way to be' vacated. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said that on the site map, Lots 1 and 3 are essentially the same - below the grade on Olympic View Drive, in a ravine, and similar in size, yet there is an 11 -time difference in the assessed value ($1.0,000 for Lot 3 vs. $107,000 for Lot 1). Therefore, an appraisal would be appropriate. Mr. Wilson said he too was surprised�to find such a wide range in the value of the three parcels. He said the applicant indicated Lot 1 may have more view opportunities than her parcel or the parcel to the east; this would be an issue the appraiser.coffld-consider more accurately. Mr. Snyder recalled the applicant indicated due to the placement of the home, the property would not be subject to subdivision. Therefore, a third option yin considering the vacation would be for the applicant to offer a waiver of development rights for a third lot! The Council would need to determine if this was adequate consideration. Councilmember White asked what the legal practic ility would be for accepting a value of $25,331 with reconsideration upon receipt of an appraisal (done at the applicant's cost). Mr. Snyder said the decision could be structured in that manner. Mayor Fahey explained although this is a continued hearing, there will be an opportunity for the public to provide comment. She described time frames for each participant including 5 minutes for the applicant and.3 minutes for each member of the public. Applicant Lori Greenleaf Evans, co-owner of 8615 Olympic View Drive, requested 10 minutes for her presentation. Mayor Fahey agreed. Ms. Greenleaf Evans indicated she had a topography map of her property and adjacent property. Council President Haakenson asked if any Councilmembers have visited the property. Councilmembers Van Hollebeke and Miller indicated they have viewed the site. Ms. Greenleaf Evans displayed a topographic map showing their lot and the lot that has been built on (to the west of their property), which has a greater buildable area as well as two roads fronting the property which eliminates the need for a driveway. She referred to a letter from the City mapping the setback requirements from the top of the slope. She described her understanding of the setback requirements. Their property is 100 feet wide at the widest point a>d only 80 feet on the east point. Therefore, without the 30 -foot right-of-way, their property is not a buildable lot. She said the setbacks identified in the City's letter can be reduced to 25 feet from the top! of the slope as well as the toe of the slope with a geotechnical survey. The 15 -foot setback could also be reduced to a 10 -foot setback. Upon her request for a critical areas study, the City returned with a study submitted February 23, 1995, showing this lot has steep slopes of greater than 50%, and less than 30% of 10 feet over a horizontal distance (33-66 feet), showing no other hazardous sites. Ms. Greenleaf Evans said when the lot was platted in 1906, a 30 -foot right-of-way was dedicated to the City. She said once Olympic View Drive was constructed, the 30 -foot right-of-way was no longer needed as it only serves these three lots. Both other lots have other access; Ms. Greenleaf Evans' lot is the only lot that would be land locked. A traffic study identified the only access point on Olympic View Drive to allow adequate stopping distance for traific. She said their access to Olympic View Drive Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes 1 March 16, 1999 Page 6 i requires another 30 feet so that together with the setbacks, there is only 50 feet of space available on this portion of the property. She pointed out the property that is valued much higher has level access to Olympic View Drive and has full use of their entire property. Ms. Greenleaf Evans displayed a map identifying the setbacks on the property, which result in 5 feet of buildable lot area even with the vacation of the right-of-way. She said they did not get an appraisal as the City acquired the property via the dedication process when the property was platted. Further, she was told the appraisal would cost more than the valuation of the 30' x 330' strip. Assuming they purchase/acquire the right-of-way, and a geotechnical survey is done to prove the property will hold a reduction in buffers, the City will consider a reduction in the 25 foot buffer to a 10 foot buffer. She said this would result in a buildable area of approximately 42 feet x 60 feet. She said the original plans she submitted were not applicable once the only access point on Olympic View Drive was identified. She said the cost of developing a portion of the right-of-way (180" Street SW) from 88' Avenue West to their property was over $114,000 in 1985. She displayed a map of the adjacent lot west of their property, which is similar to their property. She pointed out their access on 881 Avenue West and the three buildable areas on their lot. She felt this accounted for the difference in valuation in the properties. She said they were told when they purchased the property that the 30 -foot right-of-way was included. She said if the City requires $25,000 for the purchase of the right-of-way, they will not request vacation of the right-of-way. She said they did not object to fair compensation for the land but felt $25,000 was not fair. She pointed out if the property is developed, the property taxes they pay will increase. The current taxes on the property are $120 per year; she estimated this likely would increase to $3,000 per year, an increase of over $2,800. If the property remains unbuildable, they will continue to pay $120 per year. Mr. Snyder said the City's Critical Areas Ordinance has been amended since the February 4, 1998, letter she received and the percentages on this property have changed. He recommended Ms. Greenleaf Evans contact the Planning Department regarding a reasonable use exception, which for an individual lot, regardless of size, allows construction of a single family home as well as variance procedures to amend setbacks. He asked if Ms. Greenleaf Evans and Mr. Evans would consider waiving development rights for the creation of any additional lot? Ms. Greenleaf Evans answered yes. Mr. Snyder also stated that the City's classification of slopes has changed and their property is now classified as an erosion hazard rather than a steep slope hazard area. Councilmember White asked what fair price they were willing to pay. Ms. Greenleaf Evans answered that she felt $0.36 per square foot would be,a fair price for the 30 -foot right-of-way based on the size of house they could construct and with the waiver of subdivision rights. COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO EXTEND DISCUSSION OF THIS MATTER FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Van Hollebeke inquired about the cost of an appraisal. Ms. Greenleaf Evans answered an MAI appraiser ranged from $2,500 to $5,000. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if she would be willing to have an appraisal process if a less expensive way could be determined and the City paid for it. Ms. Greenleaf Evans answered yes. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if the City could pay for the appraisal. Mr. Snyder said legally the Council could direct an appraisal to be prepared in order to provide substantial and confident evidence to counter the information placed in the records by Ms. Greenleaf Evans. The Council has avoided this in the past simply due to the belief an applicant should provide that information. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 7 Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portiori of the hearing, reminding speakers they may speak only to the issue under consideration, which is what compensation, if any, should be required. The decision to vacate the right-of-way has already been made. I Bob Gustafson, 8602 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds (across the street from the subject property on the east end), expressed concern with the discrepancy in assessed valuation between the properties, particularly the difference in valuation between the] subject property and the property to the west. He pointed out the property to the east is only 1.0,000 square feet and is zoned RS 1.2 yet it does not meet the minimum lot area. He questioned the range in value'; per square foot from $0.36 to $6.08. He agreed the property to the left is not steep terrain. He questioned vacating the center portion of the right-of-way. Mayor Fahey cautioned Mr. Gustafson not to comment on the issue of vacation only compensation. He did not favor or object to development of the property and was glad the property owners were willing to. waive subdivision rights. i Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds,1 suggested the Snohomish County Assessor's office be contacted to provide a value for the property. i Kevin Clarke, 23924 107h Place West, Edmonds; a member of the Appraisal Institute and an MAI appraiser, said he has not appraised or inspected the 1property but is very familiar with the area. He said the Council must determine what is appropriate and fair. As a member of the American Arbitration Association who acts as an arbitrator and mediator iin property disputes, he said disputing parties have used the assessed value of the subject property with ]the rationale that the assessed value by law is to be 100% of market value. He said the property to the east and west are substantially different or the assessor would not have established those values! He discouraged the City from averaging three dissimilar properties to develop a value. He said it! the property owner is willing to waive subdivision rights, they should pay the same value for the vacated right-of-way that they are currently paying for the property. Further, the City has no use for the right -,,of -way and if it were appraised as a single 30 -foot wide property, it would have very little value. He was opposed to a citizen paying $2,500 to $5,000 for an appraisal when the value of the property likely would not equate to the cost of the appraisal. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Fahey Council President Haakenson referred to Ms. Gree buildable area on the property and asked if this stated the original critical areas determination on t amended in 1996. The amendment changed the st( change the designation of a property. Further, wh thexestrictions are significantly reduced including drainage and erosion requirements are met. He restrictions on the property but lie was unable to cc the public participation portion of the hearing. of Evans' comments regarding the narrowing of the accurate. Mr. Wilson said Ms. Greenleaf Evans property was issued in 1995 and the ordinance was slope from 30% to a 40%, which may significantly a property is established as an erosion hazard area, mination of buffers and only requiring that all City d it is possible there are now significantly fewer rm that without further review. COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO EXTEND DISCUSSION OF THIS MATTER FOR 1.0 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Miller asked if a buffer to the park pould be required to be maintained where the right- of-way currently exists. Mr. Wilson answered since the property is not identified on the environmental sensitive areas map, no SEPA evaluation would be required for development. The property is only identified on the critical areas map for erosion hazards on the eastern portion of the property. He said the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 I Page 8 I I I i 1 City does not have the ability to place additional buffering or greenbelt easement on the applicant's property. Even with vacation of the right-of-way, as a condition of vacation the City can retain easement such as for public access or possibly buffering. Mr. Snyder said the City cannot retain an easement solely for the purpose of providing a buffer or green space. An easement can be retained for the maintenance of utilities, but none exist in this area. He said as this property was within the Meadowdale landslide hazard area, there were restrictions on plantings in the building permit application process. He said the latest information being provided by geotechnical engineers is that, contrary to prior advice the City received, the maintenance of large trees on steep slopes is potentially hazardous because if those trees slide, their root balls add weight to the landslide mass and destabilize the slope. Other forms of plantings such as blackberries and other small vines with a root system that holds the soil are preferable. Council President Haakenson observed Mr. Snyder indicated this property was in the Meadowdale landslide hazard area. Mr. Wilson said he did not identify the property on the Meadowdale landslide hazard area map. Mayor Fahey remanded the hatter to Council for deliberation. Councilmember White pointed out the property was acquired by the City via a process of approving development many years ago at which time it was believed there was a need for a road in this area. Prior to that dedication, the property was privately owned and a decision was made to deed it to the City for the purpose of road construction in the future. It has been determined a road will not ever be built in this location creating the potential for vacating the property. He said that factor should be considered in the. Council's deliberations. He was comfortable establishing a value of the right-of-way at $3,562 if the property owner relinquished subdivision rights as well. COUNCILMEMBER WHITE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE TO VACATE THE SUBJECT RIGHT-OF-WAY; THE APPLICANT SHALL PAY COMPENSATION TO THE CITY IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,562; SUBJECT TO THE PROPERTY OWNER RELINQUISHING SUBDIVISION RIGHTS IN ITS ENTIRETY. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Fahey cautioned the audience that the public comment portion of the agenda as well as the aquatic center presentation would take place following the public hearing that is scheduled for at least 60 minutes. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if the Council was willing to have the aquatic center presentation prior to the next public hearing if the participants in the Boo Han Plaza Development were agreeable. It was the consensus of the Council to adhere to the agenda. 6. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE PROPOSED BOO HAN PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER PH re Boo DEVELOPMENT TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED DEVELOPER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE Pan Plaza CITY AND THE BOO HAN PLAZA REPRESENTATIVES TO RESOLVE THE ILLEGAL TREE REMOVAL WHICH OCCURRED ON THE SITE, AND OTHER SITE DEVELOPMENT ISSUES. THIS HEARING MAY ALSO INCLUDE COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF ANY APPEAL OF THE REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION WHICH WAS ISSUED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT, AND WHICH HAVE BEEN CORRECTLY FILED IN A TIMELY MANNER THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 22618 HIGHWAY 99. (Applicant: Ted Litzenberp-er, Arch/Tech International / File No. ADB -97-90 Mayor Fahey explained there are two parts to this hearing: (1) consideration of the development agreement, and (2) a SEPA threshold determination appeal. The Council was provided information by the City Attorney regarding the processes that need to be followed. She said it is necessary to handle the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 9 i SEPA threshold determination prior to any action on the development agreement. She explained one of the requirements of SEPA is that all individuals speaking to the issue must be sworn in. City Attorney Scott Snyder explained unlike other appeals where the applicant presents their position first, in the appeal of a SEPA threshold determin ition, the appellant provides comment prior to the applicant. Mayor Fahey explained the appellant will address the issue following a presentation by staff. The appellant will have ten minutes to present their position and may retain a portion of that time for rebuttal. Following the appellant's presentation and public comment (limited to three minutes each), rebuttal can be made. There will also be time for clarification of issues, questions, and then the issue will be remanded to the Council for consideration. This will be followed by a hearing process for the development agreement. Mayor Fahey reviewed the Standard of Review which stated "upon hearing the presentation of evidence by staff, the appellant and the public, Council should decide the SEPA appeal under the following standards: 1) the appellant carries the burden of proof to prove that the SEPA determination is in error or unlawful, 2) the determination of staff to issuance of the MDNS rather than require a full environmental impact statement is required to be afforded substantial weight by the Council, 3) Council may reverse the mitigation conditions imposed by staff only where Council finds such mitigation conditions are clearly erroneous; the Court having defined clearly erroneous to mean that the decision maker is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed, 4) Council may add new or additional mitigation conditions where Council finds that there are probable and significant adverse environmental impacts which are not adequately addressed by the mitigation conditions in the MDNS." She said the Council was provided a definition of "probable" and "significant." Mayor Fahey asked if any Councilmember had ex!,, parte contact, had a financial interest, bias, or any reason for concern with their participation in the process under the Appearance of Fairness Act? There were no disclosures made by any Councilmember. Mayor Fahey asked if any member of the public had any reason to feel any Councilmembers should not' participate in this decision-making process? There were no objections. Mayor Fahey advised all members of the Council would participate in the process. City Attorney Scott Snyder sworn in the appellant and members of the public who wished to make comment on the SEPA issues. Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson advised he serves as the City's Responsible SEPA official and was the signator on the Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS) that was issued by the City for this project. He introduced Planner Karissa Kawat%oto who has worked on the SEPA process and the project. He said Julie Wiebush, The Greenbush Group, the City's acoustical consultant who participated in the environmental review of the project, was present to answer Council questions as well as David Bisom, Highridge Corporation, the landscape architect who worked with Ms. Wiebush to develop landscape alternatives for mitigation of the acoustical problems created as a result of the project. Planner Karissa Kawamoto displayed a vicinity' map and identified the project and surrounding properties including areas within and outside the City limits. She commented this site was the previous location of the Edmonds Music Store, which has since been demolished. She said tonight's discussion is regarding the new SEPA determination issued February 23, 1999. Previous SEPA determination issued for this property are irrelevant. She explained the Boo Han Plaza project is a 34,000 square foot grocery i Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 10 store and associated retail/mixed-use development. The project was approved by the Architectural Design Board (ADB) in January 1998 and the applicant submitted their building application in March 1998. She recalled in September 1998 comments were made during the audience comment portion of a Council meeting regarding tree clearing that occurred on the property. Staff was directed to investigate and have been working to resolve those issues since that time. Staff discovered there were errors in the environmental checklist provided by the applicant with the original application for ADB review, specifically with regard to the number and type of trees that existed on the site. The existing trees on the site were removed prior to receipt of a building permit and erosion control measures were not installed. Staff took action to ensure the exposed soil was protected (hay placed on top of the soil to present rainwater from washing the soil away onto the street or neighboring properties). Staff also withdrew the original MDNS that was issued as part of the ADB process in 1998. Ms. Kawamoto explained neighbors raised concerns with both noise and visual impacts with the loss of the trees. She said staff recommended hiring an acoustical expert and a landscape architect to consider the situation, compare pre- and post tree noise and recommend any potential mitigation including structural (sound wall) or landscaping to buffer the neighbors on the west side of the project. An acoustical engineering firm was selected froln the City's consultant roster and via a three -party contract financed by the applicant, an analysis was done and a report prepared which is included in the Council packet. In addition, a landscape architect considered the situation and made recommendations. The acoustical report and the landscape architect's recommendations were analyzed in drafting new SEPA mitigations in the MDNS issued on February 23, 1999. The acoustical report found there were no noise differences between the pre -tree and post -tree situation. As a result of this finding, the landscape architect proposed a different type of tree species on the west property line and expanded the heavy tree planting over more of the property than originally proposed. In this reconsideration, staff found other problems with the original approval. The ADB approved a 10 -foot landscape buffer on the west side of the property; the current Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) requires a 15 -foot landscape buffer because this property is adjacent to residentially zoned property. The ECDC also requires a 6 -foot solid screen fence between commercially and residentially zoned property, which was included as a mitigation requirement in the most recent SEPA determination. Staff also felt because the fence was not originally required, the trees needed to be taller to help soften the visual impacts. Therefore, 12 -foot trees were required instead of the 6 -foot trees originally proposed by the landscape architect. She said the traffic mitigation required in the original SEPA determination was included in the most recent SEPA determination. She summarized there were three new SEPA mitigations proposed in the current SEPA application and one carried over from the previous application. She displayed a drawing of a new landscape proposal for the portion of the site in question, noting it does not yet show the 15 -foot landscape buffer. Leland Cyprus are very fast growing trees and are currently proposed to be planted 20 - feet on center, at a 12 -foot height. The landscape architect also recommended hedge -type material in addition to and in between the trees. Mr. Snyder clarified a third party agreement is the City hiring an independent expert that is directed by the staff rather than the developer. Ms. Kawamoto agreed all contact was through her. Mr. Snyder said the 12 -foot tree height required in the new SEPA mitigation is double what a normal development of this type would be required to install under the City's landscaping requirements. Ms. Kawamoto agreed. Council President Haakenson asked if the Council did not uphold the appeal and approve the SEPA as presented, could the Council address screening and trees in the next step of the process (consideration of the development agreement). Mr. Snyder answered yes. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 1 i Councilmember White asked how a 12 -foot tree height was determined. Ms. Kawamoto said the landscape architect was not aware a fence would be required on the property line. With a 6 -foot fence and a 6 -foot tree, the benefit of the landscaping to soften the site was eliminated. Requiring a tree height above the fence would provide adequate screening and visual buffer for the project. She said 12 -foot trees on another project in the City have done very well in a small area such as this 15 -foot wide area. She said only specific trees can grow in this limited space. Mr. Snyder pointed out the landscape consultant was available to answer Council questions Councilmember White asked whether the trees that were removed could have been removed as part of the development process and whether the additional trees now proposed could have been required. Ms. Kawamoto answered yes. Councilmember White pointed out the City was never in a position to prevent "the logging of the land." Ms. Kawamoto said it was done prior to issuance of a permit, actually days away from the issuance which would have allowed this to occur. During investigation of the complaint, staff found there were some misleading/inaccurate references on the SEPA Checklist that were more significant than the logging issues and needed to be addressed. She said the site plan as proposed was approved with the existing trees. Councilmember White asked if the site plan approval was subject to any public comment. Ms. Kawamoto stated that the public hearing process for this project before the ADB occurred in December 1997 and January 1998. Councilmember White asked if the original erroneous SEPA Checklist caused a delay in the development. Ms. Kawamoto answered this process has caused significant delays to the applicant. She estimated the (permits would have been issued in October. David Bisom, landscape architect with Highridge Corporation, said he prepared the landscape plan that is before the Council. Councilmember Van Hollebeke observed the 12 -foot Leland Cyprus were proposed on the western border of the property as well as on the southern border and are proposed to be planted 20 -feet on center (12 -foot trees, 20 feet apart). Mr. Bisom agreed. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked the width of a 12 -foot Leland Cyprus at the time of planting (in an attempt to determine the space between the trees). Mr. Bisom answered they are 7-8 feet wide at planting, resulting in approximately 12 -feet in between which would have hedge material such as Photinia and Portuguese Laurel hedge to fill that space. Councilmember Van. Hollebeke asked the height of the hedge material. Mr. Bisom answered they are 30 -36 -inch high as required for a Type II buffer. He noted these hedge materials were also fast growing. Councilmember Van Hollebeke observed that along the most sensitive portion, the western side, there would be a 6 -foot solid board fence. Therefore, initially for a period of 2- 4 years, the hedge material would not be visible about the fence. Mr. Bisom agreed. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked how long until the Leland Cyprus would grow together. Mr. Bisom explained it is a fast growing tree (from a cutting to 15 feet in 5 years) and can grow from 1-1% feet per year once they are established. He said the Leland Cyprus is a good tree for this location as they can reach 30 -feet in height. The shrub material will grow above the fence within a 4 -year period and be a very dense, attractive addition to the neighborhood in 5-7 years and provide adequate screening. He cautioned against planting the Leland Cyprus much closer together because it would provide a "green curtain" and. incredible shade that would block territorial views from homes in the area. The intent was to provide filtered screening that would allow view shed throughout the neighborhood. i Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked the closest practical spacing for a Leland Cyprus of the proposed size. Mr. Bisom answered not closer than 15-16 feet. He pointed out a dense buffer without any wind relief increases damage; therefore, some space' is desirable to allow the wind to dissipate.. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if Leland Cyprus taller than 12 -feet were available. Mr. Bisom Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 12 answered the larger the tree, the more difficult it is to establish them and the easier they can be blown over by wind. He said the proposal for 12 -foot trees was appropriate, noting this represented a 4 -year old tree. He said a 12- foot tall tree would result in a 16 -foot tree in 3 years, therefore, he felt 12 -feet was a very good height and would not recommend planting a taller tree. Council President Haakenson asked the survival rate of a 12 -foot tree versus an 18 -foot tree. Mr. Bisom answered the project's proposed irrigation system would assist in survival. He said grading of the site will result in the project being below the grade of the adjacent property and the trees will be planted above a 6 -foot high wall. The problem with larger trees is the area in which they will be planted. He said a taller tree is difficult to secure from high winds. He preferred planting a fast growing 12 -foot high tree, secure it well, and allow it to become established. He estimated a 70-80% success rate with an 18 - foot tree. He agreed with the proposed increase in height of the trees to 12 feet, as it was a compatible height for thelocation. Council President Haakenson asked if taller trees would need to be planted further apart. Mr. Bisom answered the planting pattern would likely need to be redesigned. He said 18 - foot tall trees are approximately three times more expensive, noting they rarely plant trees over 16 -feet in height due to the ease of installation and ease of transplanting. Council President Haakenson asked if all the existing trees could have been removed after the issuance of the building permit. Ms. Kawamoto said their application did not propose saving any of the trees although there was discussion of saving some of the trees during the ADB public hearing. She explained a site plan was provided for the Council packet, which provides a profile view of a 12 -foot tree. She said the retaining wall referred to by the landscape architect is actually 8-12 feet in height. Therefore, from the property line there will be a fence, trees, and a retaining wall that drops 8-10 feet to the area where parking and the building will be located. Because of the retaining wall, there will be some restriction on trees and, during construction of the retaining wall, trees nearest to the property line may have had their roots destroyed. Due to .the site layout, it was unclear if any of the trees could have been maintained. Council President Haakenson referred to the landscape architect's comment that the Leland Cyprus could be maintained at a 30 -foot height and asked if there was a requirement that the trees be maintained at a certain height. Ms. Kawamoto answered there was no regulation that required the trees be maintained at a certain height. She was only aware of a maintenance inspection required after two years to ensure the trees are still alive. Mr. Snyder explained the development agreement addresses the maintenance of the landscaping to be installed; if the Council wishes to require the trees be maintained at no less than 12 - feet, that would be an appropriate recommendation during consideration of the development agreement. Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing. Mayor Fahey asked if the neighborhood group needed to divide the time allotted for their presentation among the group or select one representative to speak on their behalf. Mr. Snyder said his understanding was the letter of appeal was from Racheal Martin and while the neighbors concurred, the appellant was Racheal Martin. Mayor Fahey reminded Ms. Martin she was allotted 10 minutes for her presentation and she may retain a portion for rebuttal. Appellant Racheal Martin, 7825 227" Place SW, Edmonds, distributed a letter and maps to the Council. She requested 5 minutes be retained for rebuttal. Ms. Martin explained she filed an appeal on March 10 due to the adverse impact the Boo Han project has on their view. When she notified the City in September that over thirty 40-60 foot evergreen trees had been removed from the property, she and two other neighbors wanted to move due to the great impact this had. She referred to the SEPA Checklist and the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 13 mitigation measures, noting the January 26 landscape revision indicates 190 feet on the south side is proposed to have Leland Cyprus trees and 212 feet on the west side and 35 feet on the north side spaced 20 feet apart. She said the original landscaping did not include any trees on the south side. She said the view at the end of 227°i and 78" in the pictures she ;provided the Council, is still very disturbing to her. She explained a few years ago a Highway 99 study discussed preserving the trees. She said the pictures of the stumps indicate the trees out were 5-7 feet apart not 25 feet apart as indicated. She said they do not want deciduous trees as these "would be a problem" in the winter. She preferred 20 -foot trees be planted because they are located on a hill overlooking the project. She stressed this was an illegal cutting of trees and recalled when the trees were discussed during the ADB review, the developer indicated most would be retained. She said the project has resulted in a decline in real estate values. She pointed out Mr. Bisom is the landscape architect for Boo Han Plaza, which she felt was a conflict of interest. Mayor Fahey informed the applicant he would have ten minutes to present his position and would not have the opportunity to retain time for rebuttal. AApplicant Ted Litzenberger, Architect, said staff has explained the situation quite well. He agreed the landscape architect that worked with the City on this final review was also the landscape architect for their original submission. He stressed they had no communication with them at all during this recent revision. They paid for the services but the contract stipulates all contact/direction is via the City thus there is no conflict of interest. He said they are only following the decisions of the City and the consultants in an effort to remedy the situation. He said the choice of the Leland Cyprus was excellent as they are fast growing and are very dense so provide a better screening than most native trees. He said they are evergreen and would satisfy most of the requirements. He agreed spacing was crucial for survival of the trees and the spacing proposed provides nearly a solid screen as viewed from an angle as it is from most of the surrounding residences. Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the hearing. Harry Borylla, 22711 78" Avenue W, Edmonds; whose property abuts the Boo Han project on the southwestern portion, distributed pictures to the Council. He agreed with Ms. Martin's statement that a buffer is needed to protect their view, particularlyon the southern border. He said there were previously trees in that location that he could not see over from his house (a rambler 30-35 feet above grade). He said the architectural drawing indicated a bulkhead of approximately 13 feet, noting there is no provision for screening on the south side other than 12 -foot Leland Cyprus which he felt was an insufficient height to protect his view. He expressed concern with noise pollution from Highway 99. He pointed out the acoustical study was done on only one day which he' deemed insufficient to obtain an accurate reading of the noise from Highway 99. He said the sensor was located only 6 -feet above grade but should have been 30 -feet above grade because that is how the sound would travel to the properties above. On January 21, 1998 the developer stated there would be no equipment on top of the shopping center; however, the most recent information indicates there will be four HVAC units on the roof but no provisions have been made for visual or noise pollution. He suggested these units be enclosed in a louvered structure to reduce any noise or visual pollution. Jim Jefferson, 22616 78" Place W, Edmonds, a resident of the cul-de-sac west of the proposed Boo Han Plaza project, suggested 18-20 foot trees rather than the proposed 12 -foot trees, planted 7-8 feet apart. He said 12 -foot trees would do little good. He explained he now has a direct (not at an angle) view of Highway 99 and can also hear Highway 99. Prior to the removal of the evergreens on the Boo Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 14 Han Plaza property, he could neither see nor hear Highway 99. He agreed the Cyprus would eventually grow but would take a number of years. To address noise and visual pollution he requested a full screen and not deciduous trees on 227th. Mayor Fahey advised only those who were sworn in would be allowed to speak. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the hearing. Rebuttal Ms. Martin said Big Tree Company in Snohomish and Olympic Tree Company in Woodinville, recommended spacing these trees 8 -feet apart for a hedge. She said 17 trees, 18-20 feet tall were needed for the 36 feet on the north, and for the 104 -feet on the west side. The remainder can be as staff sees fit. She said spacing the trees 20 feet apart on the other sides may not be fair to those residents but her primary concern was residents at the end of 227" as indicated by the view in the pictures she provided. She reiterated her outrage that someone would cut 30 huge evergreens in this day of ecology and environment. She thanked Ms. Kawamoto for her assistance. She noted the two companies she contacted indicated the trees should be staked and would be guaranteed for two years. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked for clarification of the location Ms. Martin was suggesting the taller trees be planted. Ms. Martin explained the location was 36 feet on the north (by Shurgard Storage) and 104 feet on the west side. She explained taller trees are needed in these areas because the residences are higher than the project. She stressed none of this needed to have happened if the developer had done the right thing. Councilmember Van Hollebeke clarified she was recommending taller trees on the west beginning at the north corner and extending about halfway on the west border. Mr. Wilson explained staff s investigation began when Ms. Martin brought the removal of the trees to the Council's attention in September 1998 and the discrepancy between what existed on the site and what was indicated in their environmental checklist was discovered. He explained under normal circumstances, had the trees been correctly indicated in the checklist, there is no guarantee the trees would have been retained. Based on the fact that the property is commercial, based on the elevations, the plans for the site, minimum requirements for landscaping, and the 15 -foot buffer, a tree of that size left on a buffer with cut slopes likely would cause more danger than benefit due to damage to the root system. However, had the correct information been provided, there may have been the ability to consider modifications in design to retain portions or pockets of the existing trees but not the full number of trees that existed on the site. A primary concern was with noise impacts created by the new project and traffic from Highway 99, staff hired an acoustical engineer to evaluate the change between the project with the trees in place versus the project with the trees removed. This was done to determine if there was a change that created noise patterns to the receiving properties (to the west) that are in excess of the state standards. Mitigation measures considered what would be necessary to mitigate the noise impacts to reduce them sufficient to meet the state standards. He clarified the landscape architect's role is to react based on information provided by the acoustical engineer to reduce any increase in noise levels via the use of landscaping materials. COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO EXTEND DISCUSSION OF THIS MATTER FOR 40 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Wilson said the process in considering how to mitigate the impacts included a) determine whether there where impacts that exceed the standards and b) what would be necessary to reduce those impacts to a level that met the standards. The acoustical engineer and the landscape architect were hired to address Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 15 these issues. He suggested the Council allow the acoustical engineer, Julie Wiebush, to provide information regarding the amount of noise created, what information was evaluated, what standards were used, what methodology was used, and to explain whether the trees would have made a difference if they remained. Mr. Snyder explained noise is a SEPA issue, view protection is not. As the Council knows, a development application cannot be denied based on the preservation of views. He pointed out the City has specific screening standards in its landscaping requirements and the proposal is for the applicant to. provide twice the normal standard. Julie Wiebush, Greenbush Group, explained the trees, fence, and the retaining wall are not acoustical mitigation. The result of their study was that there was no additional impact that needed to be mitigated as a result of the Boo Han project. The trees were added as an amenity and will not reduce the noise level. The trees that were removed had little effect 'on noise levels. She said 100 feet of dense forest reduced noise levels by 3 dB which is barely perceptible to humans. She referred to the table on page 6 of the Boo Han Noise Analysis, agreeing the noise levels were measured only on one day for 24 hours. She explained the Leq is an average of the sound ovei an hour. Aside from the nighttime hours, there is a fairly consistent noise level, primarily caused by the traffic on Highway 99. She said similar noise levels would have been produced if the site was monitored for a longer period of time. She said Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) limits noise from roadways on residential properties to 57 dB but their analysis indicates the noise level does not exceed that standard. Once the trees have been removed, the standard still will not be exceeded. Following an evaluation of the combined energy level from all the mechanical units (four rooftop units on the grocery store and the 13 smaller units on the retail space), it was determined there was a level of 46 dBA at the nearest property line which is 10 dBA less than the existing noise from Highway 99. She said it is likely the mechanical equipment is not even audible. Deliveries to the project will be via a step -van type of vehicle; there will not be semi -truck delivery like large grocery stores. Most deliveries will occur vial the front door and there is no large loading dock similar to large grocery stores. She stressed this is a small operation and it was predicted noise levels from trucks and traffic would be approximately 50 dBA at the property line, again less than the impact of Highway 99. She said construction of the Boo Han building will reduce noise levels at these property lines by acting as a buffer from the traffic on Highway 99 to the residences. She said their measurements were taken at 6 -feet above grade, consistent with . the first story window for the nearest receiving location. If measurements were done 30 -feet above ;grade, there would have been reduced noise levels due to the distance. Mayor Fahey remanded the SEPA threshold determini ation appeal to the Council for deliberation. Councilmember White asked if the Council must find that there would be probable and significant adverse environmental impacts without additional ;mitigation factors in order to modify the SEPA threshold determination. Mr. Snyder answered yes. ;Councilmember White observed that finding is not necessary to add additional elements in the developin'ent agreement. Mr. Snyder agreed, but pointed out the development agreement is not a penalty and additional requirements would need to be based on provisions in the City's development code to sustain it. COUNCILMEMBER WHITE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON, TO DENY THE SEPA APPEAL AND AFFIRM THE MDNS AS ISSUED. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if approval of this motion addressed the appeal process and the Council would still have an opportunity during consideration of the development agreement to address Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March I6, 1999 Page 16 landscaping. Mr. Snyder said that by denying the appeal and accepting the mitigating measures, the Council accepts the evidence contained in the reports. The Council can impose additional conditions but they must identify the evidence for the requirements. Councilmember Plunkett observed since views would be immaterial in consideration of the SEPA threshold determination appeal, views would also be immaterial in consideration of the development agreement. Mr. Snyder said view is basically immaterial in Washington law. The purpose of the fence and screening is to screen adjacent neighborhoods from the impact of the development, not to preserve or create a view. He said as this site is designated commercial in the Comprehensive Plan, the applicant has the right to develop it as commercial in accordance with City standards. Councilmember Miller asked if the applicant is obligated to restore the site to its status prior to the clear cutting that was in violation. Mr. Snyder answered no, as indicated by staff, the applicant could have cut the trees if they had waited a few days. He stressed this was not a process to impose penalties and the City has no tools to prevent development of the site. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if the motion is approved, the Council still has the opportunity to address the screening as it applies to the impact this project has on the neighborhood. Mr. Snyder answered yes. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Snyder observed the testimony provided in the first hearing is equally applicable in the second hearing. He suggested the Council take quasi judicial notice of all testimony given so that additional comment can be limited to information specifically related to the development agreement and that has not already been said. This could be done so that the audience would not feel it necessary to repeat testimony already provided. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTE OF COMMENTS MADE AT THE PRIOR HEARING AND LEAVING OPEN ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AS THEY RELATE TO THE AGREEMENT. MOTION CARRIED. Council President Haakenson asked if public testimony was limited to those who were sworn in previously. Mr. Snyder advised the swearing requirement was only applicable to the SEPA hearing. Ms. Kawamoto referred to the Development Agreement in the Council packet (page 44), pointing out the building permit application was reviewed and approved under the 1994 Uniform Building Code which was replaced with the 1997 Uniform Building Code. She said although there were significant changes between the codes, the review of the Boo Han Plaza complex was significantly completed under the 1994 code. The Development Agreement indicates the project is vested under the 1994 Uniform Building Code and redesign under the 1997 Code is not required. Mr. Snyder said the applicant is vested as they received ADB approval. Ms. Kawamoto said because the applicant submitted building permit applications in March 1998, building permit plan check fees are good for one year and will expire on March 19, 1999. This agreement would vest them under that agreement and they would continue to use that application for the remainder of the permit process that will take place once the SEPA mitigation is finalized. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 17 Ms. Kawamoto explained there are terms built into! the 'Development Agreement, i.e. the terms of the agreement require it be enforceable for a period ;of ten years following action on the agreement. Mr. Snyder explained the Development Agreement process was authorized by state law two years ago and is similar to concomitant rezone agreements the Council has seen in the past. It extends a similar process to Development Permit Applications when a developer wants to provide written assurance enforceable for a period of years and runs with the land to bind future owners to ensure the fulfillment of the conditions. He recalled Council President Haakenson's remark about maintaining the trees at a certain height, noting that would be an appropriate requirement. Ms. Kawamoto pointed out #4 in the Development Agreement refers to a time frame when installation of the SEPA mitigated screening trees and fence would be installed. Through discussion with the applicant, it was agreed that within 90 days from the date the permit is issued, they would install the SEPA mitigations. i Councilmember Miller asked if any of the significant differences between the 1994.Uniform Building Code and the 1997.Uniform Building Code addressed screening of trees. Ms. Kawamoto answered no, the differences all pertained to the interior of the building. Applicant Ted Litzenherger, Architect, said the owners of the project want to be good neighbors and are willing to abide by whatever is decided to remedy the situation. i Mayor Fahey opened thepublic participation portioniof the hearing. She requested comments be limited to 3 minutes, reminding public comment was not limited to those that had been sworn in earlier. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, pointed out other factors that have occurred since the project was originally reviewed such as increases in population, increases in revenue, and improvements on and Highway 99. He said Councilmembers should have disclosed whether they have viewed the site. Harry Borylla, 22711 78" Avenue West, Edmonds, referred to the architectural drawing which indicates the bulkhead at the property line abutting; their property is 13 -feet in height. The trees stop there and no other bulkhead is provided toward the east to support it. He said 12 -foot tall trees would be below the bulkhead and larger trees would be required. Mayor Fahey pointed out the trees would be planted above the bulkhead. Mr. Borylla agreed that was true to the end of the property line but to the east on the southern border the base of the property line will be 13 feet below the top of the bulkhead. Therefore planting 12 -foot tall trees on the south border does no good. i Sing Han, 7416 100" Avenue, Tacoma, Boo Han's on, said he was available to answer questions. Councilmember White asked why the trees were cut before they should have been. Mr. Han said, in view of the site, it was unreasonable for them to state as many trees as possible would be saved. He said the trees were removed in an attempt to get the project going before winter, not realizing it would become such a problem. Councilmember White asked the cost of the delay as a consequence of cutting the trees a couple days early. Mr. Han answered construction costs have increased 10-15% although new construction estimates will be required. He noted the increase in cost included not only the increased construction costs, but also additional trees and lost sales due to the delay. He referred to comments regarding extending trees beyond their property line; and agreed they also own the property to the south Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 18 but there are buildings on the property and additional trees would require removal of the buildings. He said they do not own the property on the northern border and have no right to plant in that area. He said they have owned the property for approximately ten years and during that time there have been a number of vagrancy problems, dumping, etc. He said they spent several thousand dollars cleaning up the property as a result of old oil tanks on the property. Mr. Snyder said in addition to the costs Mr. Han cited, they also paid for the noise report and the arborist report. Mr. Han agreed, noting it was a costly mistake to remove the trees prior to issuance of the permit. Mr. Snyder cited Washington State Appeals case Grader v. Lynnwood, which states a city may not impose a mitigation requirement on an adjacent piece of property even though in common ownership with property where a problem has developed. Each development parcel must be treated individually. Racheal Martin, 7825 227 Place SW, Edmonds, said the landscape architect changed the original landscaping plan in January, pointing out there were previously no trees indicated in the landscape plan on the border. After the trees were removed, she called the restaurant on the property and asked if they were planning to retain the six remaining trees. She was told "no, it was his property and he could do what he wanted to do." She said the SEPA checklist indicated there would be minimum grading - 472 cubic feet. She questioned why it was now 10 feet. She said the applicant also indicated in the SEPA report that views would not be altered. Mayor Fahey cautioned Ms. Martin to restrict her comments to the Development Agreement only. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 50 MINUTES (UNTIL 11:00 P.M.). MOTION CARRIED. Rich Demeroutis, 921 Pine Street, Edmonds, said it appeared the developer was willing to be a good neighbor and asked if the affected parties had met with the owners of the property to determine what could reasonably be done to remedy the situation. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the hearing. Council President Haakenson referred to Mr. Borylla's statement that the trees would be planted lower than the retaining wall on one end of the property and asked if there was a slope on the property. Ms. Kawamoto answered that was not her understanding. She identified the area she believed Mr. Borylla was referring to on the southern boundary, pointing out there would be a retaining wall around the garbage enclosure and would reduce in height as it goes toward Highway 99. The landscaping will be on top of the retaining wall in all locations around the site. The parking lot and the building will be much lower than the landscaping border. Council President Haakenson asked if there were trees in this area previously. Ms. Kawamoto said the photographs provided by Ms. Martin indicated there were trees along a screen fence but she was not aware if there were trees along the southern boundary. Councilmember White asked what involvement the neighborhood/community has in drafting the Development Agreement. Ms. Kawamoto answered none, it was strictly between the City and the applicant. Councilmember White asked if the comments made at previous hearings and letters were taken into consideration. Ms. Kawamoto said she attempted to address comments via SEPA mitigation, which were incorporated into the Development Agreement. Mr. Snyder said an example would be the elimination of deciduous trees and the use of Leland Cyprus, which was a species the neighbors recommended. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 19 i I Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked if it was possible to involve the neighbors in the process of mitigating the visual impact the Boo Han project lias on the neighborhood. Mr. Snyder answered the ADB held a hearing and approved the site plan, they City has landscaping requirements and the proposal is double the City's normal landscaping requirements, and the applicant is vested in the approved development plan. He said the hearing could be continued to allow the residents and the applicant to discuss the spacing of the trees. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said his intent was to accommodate both parties in the best way possible, noting a tremendous amount of time has been expended on this process. He said the Council could recommend spacing but felt it would be more appropriate for the affected parties to agree on a modification of the landscape screening so that it was satisfactory to all. Councilmember White pointed out the City could riot require what the applicant is offering if they had not cut the trees two days early. However, since the trees were cut early, the developer is providing twice what the City would require. He said although it is unfortunate the trees were cut, that is not the issue for the Council to decide and is their right as property owners. COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO EXTEND DISCUSSION; OF THIS MATTER FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT HAAKENSON, THAT THE LANDSCAPE MATERIALS BE MODIFIED; CONTINUE WITH THE SUB MATERIALS SUGGESTED, PHOTINIA AND A FORM OF LAUREL, AND THAT THE LELAND CYPRUS BE PLANTED INSTEAD, OF AT 20 FOOT CENTERS AT 16 FOOT CENTERS AND INSTEAD OF 12 -FEET IN HEIGHT, THEY BE 14 FEET IN HEIGHT. THE TREES ARE TO BE MAINTAINED AT A HEIGHT OF ;NOT LESS THAN 14 FEET FOR A MINIMUM OF TEN YEARS. Councilmember White pointed out planting the trees 16 -feet apart would require additional trees and therefore a change in the landscape plan. He noted this would result in more than twice what the applicant would have been required to provide. Councilmember Van Hollebeke explained the intent of the original landscape plan was to plant Leland Cyprus 20 feet on center resulting in 21 trees. His intent was Leland Cyprus be planted 16 -feet on center which would add approximately 25% more trees. Mr.. Snyder advised this change would result in 26 trees. Councilmember White asked if the Council must make a finding regarding the basis for the amendment to the plan. Mr. Snyder said it was his understanding the amendment was to achieve the screening purposes of the City's ordinances and achieve maximum screening of the property in accordance with the purposes of the ADB. He said this would be included in the resolution that would be placed on the Council's next Consent Agenda. MOTION CARRIED. i For Council President Haakenson, Mr. Snyder advised landscaping. a two-year maintenance bond is required for Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 20 1 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS t-itted Mary Bennett, 930 Carol Way, Edmonds, said she is here as a part of a volunteer group who is onin interested in bringing an indoor pool to Edmonds. She advised an informational meeting was held in Support of Indoor Pool February 'regarding the current effort to develop an indoor aquatic center in Edmonds. Approximately two weeks later, a group of citizen volunteers began a petition drive for purposes of determining the community's support of an indoor pool. She coordinated the petition drive effort, which was to culminate with the presentation of the petitions to the Council tonight to make the Council aware of the community interest in a pool. She said over 1200 signatures were gathered, some from residents outside the City limits. An overwhelming majority of people who listened to the proposal regarding the pool signed the petition. She said given the short period of time they had to circulate petitions and the small number of volunteers undertaking this effort, the number of signatures they gathered and the number of people who attended tonight's meeting in support of the pool indicates the community has a strong interest in an indoor pool. She requested the Council support this important improvement to the community. She said most citizens involved in this effort agree citizens do not have use of a pool for 10+ months of the year and an indoor pool would enhance the community and benefit citizens of every age group. She submitted a copy of the petitions they circulated. n Support Ellen Ernst, 702 7"' Avenue S, Edmonds, a participant in the group seeking to locate an all-purpose, all fAquatic generational aquatic center in Edmonds. She said she goes to the Mountlake Terrace pool twice per enter week, spending over $800 during the last year. On behalf of the people who signed the petitions, she asked the Council to support an aquatic center in Edmonds. U rt Nana Lowell, 8405 198`n Place SW, Edmonds, supported funding for an indoor pool. As she and her ic family do not belong to an organized swim club and are not competitive swimmers, they represent another group interested in pursuing a pool. She said she swam a great deal as a child and continues to swim as an adult. She said swimming is a form of recreation and exercise available to all ages. The proposed aquatic center is an outstanding and self-supporting pool. With the addition of good programming, it could be the centerstone of the community. She said the cost per homeowner is not great, all citizens would benefit, and she felt Edmonds was worth the investment. Susan Reichmann, PO Box 7306, Shoreline (speaking for Jan Kavadas, 217 Alder Street #305, of n Support Edmonds) said Ms. Kavadas asked her to submit the article showing her swimming and describes her Center atic current swimming career at age 67. Ms. Kavadas requested she advise the Council that the public support for this project is evident and it is time to put it to a public vote. Ms. Reichmann agreed the research has been thorough and it is time to move on. She encouraged the Council/City to talk with the citizens group, to secure the site at the high school, to seek private/public partnerships, and to put the aquatic center on an upcoming ballot. Betty Mueller, 209 Casper Street, Edmonds, submitted a recap of the revenues and expenditures for uestions the Aquatic Center in Federal Way which show the city providing a subsidy of $604,208.32. She e Aquatic lCenter questioned if the City had sufficient funds in its budget to subsidize a pool. She agreedswimming was great but questioned the cost and the location. She said at the February meeting, it was indicated the high school would allow the City to have the land for the pool. Attendees at the meeting were told the hospital would allow the public to use their parking. She visited the hospital the next day and hospital staff was unaware of any such arrangement, stating they did not have enough parking now. Ms. Mueller said she also called the School District Property Manager who indicated they were not aware of the meeting and had not given permission for the City to use the land at the high school. She urged the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 21 Council to consider these facts along with the en need to be reduced to make it affordable. She definite location. In Support William McAndrew, employment address - 21 of Aquatic Woodway, said this area is greatly underserved wi Center constructed, it needs to be a first class facility that c swimmers. If funding is provided via a bond issl signatures at Stevens Hospital, every person he aske new taxes, others didn't care about taxes and favorec Fn Support Allen Clark, 806 Dayton Street, Edmonds, sai fAquatic Mountlake Terrace or Lynnwood but stopped becal enter has been involved with synchronized swimming for of the proposed pool to Federal Way's aquatic cente studies indicate a pool could be self-supporting v Board sought a building permit for the high school, plans. He said the School District was not in a p building permit was issued and force the City to fi proximity to the hospital and central location with questioned whether the old Woodway-Edmonds possible site for the pool, was a central location fo. are in favor of the pool. He said it was time Edmon ave the Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmom Log Cabin Log Cabin open house on April 1 i from 2:00 to March 1 regarding the December 31, 1999 celebr Chamber of Commerce member Josephine Fye or center on an upcoming ballot. He said many resid requested more information. Lora Petso, 10616 237 Place SW, Edmonds, r otice for Public public hearing regarding accessory dwelling units bearings I proposed this understood 50% of the City was no She explained in actuality only 40% of citizens gi 20% are missed and receive a utility bill only once be aware of this if the utility billing is to become suggested a supplemental mailing be done on impc omitted if notice is provided via utility billings. for the pool. She said the size of the pool may the need to inform citizens of the cost and a 116 76`h Street W, Edmonds and a resident of h regard to swimming facilities. If a pool is to be n serve the needs of everyone including competitive e, the pool will be supported easily. In gathering I was supportive of a pool. Only one person said no the pool. he used to swim a mile three times a week at ;e those pools have become so congested. His wife 10 years. He expressed concern with the comparison which had donations from Weyerhaeuser. He said thin 1.8-24 months. He recalled when the School t included a swimming pool similar to the proposed sition to rescind the commitment made when their id another location. He favored the pool due to its ood bus service for seniors as well as students. He ligh School site, which has been suggested as a students. He said most seniors he has spoken with s provided its own aquatic facility. encouraged Councilmembers to attend the Save the 00 p.m. He reported on a meeting he attended on on and said further information was available from e Mayor's office. He supported placing the aquatic is were in favor of the aquatic center although many alled the Council discussed providing notice of a the utility bill. She said the Councilmember who ied one month and the other 50% the next month. a utility bill one month, 40% the next month, and eery 5-6 months. She stressed the Council needs to common method of providing public notice. She int issues as a significant number of people will be Aquatic Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, said the proposed aquatic center needs a lot of definite Center facts before it is presented to the voters. He said the hospital indicated the only parking for the YMCA Parking was on the east side where the employee parking is located (a long way from 761) and they would not Garage consider combined parking in the visitor parking lot. He said this results in parking located ''/z mile from the pool. He said the location at the high school is questionable and recommended a back up location be determined. He said supporters will likely continue !to support the aquatic center but voters need to know all the facts. Mr. Hertrich reported on a discussion i at a Property Owners meeting regarding the parking garage. He said it appears there is a general feelingthe LID method will not work, that too much will be Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 22 f 1 spent on appraisals and not enough funding will be provided from this method so other forms of funding are being considered. He stressed there is not a rush to do the parking garage. ad Rich Demeroutis, 921 Pine Street, Edmonds, said he raised questions regarding funding for road e airs repairs several weeks ago. Although Council President Haakenson called him to discuss some of the quatic issues and Councilmember Plunkett sent him a note, he requested a written response from enter Councilmembers and Mayor Fahey regarding funding to repair the roads, repair the buildings, and options to constructing a parking garage such as adding parking spaces on the public safety complex. Mayor Fahey advised the information available was included in the budget book; no additional information is available and the City is not required to develop additional information that is not part of the public record. Regarding the pool, Mr. Demeroutis recalled the consultant stated at the original meeting that pools are not a moneymaking venture and questioned how this information has changed. He said the aquatic center was previously an $8 million project but is now a $10 million project. He was not opposed to the swimming pool; he reiterated the facts provided by Ms. Mueller indicated the Federal Way Aquatic Center operates at a $600,000 deficit per year. He said if the community wants a regional pool, the taxing area should be expanded to include South County. He said each time a bond issue is added, citizens on fixed incomes are driven out of the community. [n Support Claire Fankhouser, 1010 Carol Way, and Amanda Clarke, 23924 107"' Place West, swim team fAquatic captains for the girls swim team at Edmonds-Woodway High School described their involvement in enter swim programs including swim teams, instruction, and life guarding. The girls swim team at Edmonds- Woodway High School is very beneficial to the athletic program. They have been very successful including finishing 1st in District, 1st in Westco, 1st in NW District and 7th in the entire state. Their team members are very dedicated and bring a lot of enthusiasm to the school. The swim schedule involves practices at the Mountlake Terrace pool, and Lynnwood is the only pool available for swim meets. Although 60-80 students try out for the swim team, cuts are necessary due to the limited space. The benefits of the pool outweigh any negatives. The number of students and parents present at tonight's meeting indicates the amount of support for a pool. rf Support Kevin Tolabana; 22515 8"' Avenue W, and Richard Shinn, 730 13"' Way, swim team captains for the Aquatic boys swim team said a pool at Edmonds-Woodway High School would be very helpful, pointing out the enter difficulty of getting students to and from swim practice and meets at Mountlake Terrace pool and Lynnwood. A competitive -style pool in Edmonds would attract bigger swim meets, which would bring business to the community and benefit the surrounding area. The pool could also be used for high school P.E. classes. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 30 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. n support Sam Morgan, 23911 107' Place, Edmonds, ASB President at Edmonds-Woodway High School, of Aquatic pointed out the importance of a pool at the high school. He said the old high school had adequate Center facilities such as a gym, football/soccer fields, a track but not a pool. Although a new school was constructed, it still lacks a pool. He said the boys swim team was not very large this year; a pool would be another incentive to attract students to the program and provide activities for all students. He said other sports such as basketball and football get a lot of support but swimming does not. This is due in part to the distance students must travel to attend swim meets. He urged the Council to consider the 1700 students at Edmonds-Woodway High School who would like to have a pool. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 23 n Support Eleanor Spellman, 713 14" Way SW, speaking on behalf of her two competitive swimmers, explained of Aquatic there are a lot of competitive club swimmers in the north Seattle area who would spend a lot of time in a Center 50 meter pool. Only one of her children has access to a 50 -meter pool 2-3 days a week. This requires her child to be bussed to Seattle pools, often not returning until 10:00 p.m. because there is no 50 -meter pool to practice in. She said her 10 year-old does not have the opportunity to practice in a 50 -meter pool although she competes in a 50 -meter pool. She said one of her children recently broke five free -style records. Hing Kevin Clarke, 23924 107" Place W, Edmonds, thanked Community Services Director Paul Mar and Issues City Attorney Scott Snyder for their prompt response and approach to the letter he provided today and Aquatic enter looked forward to working with them on the issues he outlined regarding the zoning issues on the old Woodway High School site. Regarding the pool, as a parent of a competitive swimmer, he has paid fees to allow them to swim at pools in other cities. He said they must spend a lot of time on the road and spend money in other cities that could be kept in Edmonds. He said the Edmonds School District also pays Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace for the right to use their pools; those tax dollars could be used to pay for the pool. He said there is a strong support for recreational and competitive swimmers. He pointed out the grade point average of students who participate in competitive swimming is impressive and they often become great leaders in the school and give back to the community. He said there is a great deal of community support for the pool and he was interested in participating in a positive campaign to help the community raise money and support to make the pool a reality. Darlene Dillon, 527 Forsyth Lane, said her four children became involved in swimming in the 1960's n Support after joining the Klahia Swim Club and later in competitive swimming. One of her daughters is still f Aquatic enter involved with synchronized swimming and her grandchildren are still swimming. She described the need to travel to different pools for regional competitive synchronized swimming. She said everyone she has talked to is supportive of a pool in the Edmonds area. n Support Chris Bennett, 607 Elm Place, Edmonds, pointed out the numerous groups that would benefit from a fAquatic pool such as the hospital, the YMCA, seniors who want water therapy, etc. She said she learned to swim enter in high school and believes all students should learn to swim in school. She suggested the City "put this on your agenda" as something that is needed for the quality of life citizens in Edmonds deserve. She said if the Council wants a pool, the funding can be identified. n Support Monica Van Hollebeke, 580 Hemlock Way, Edmonds, a teacher at Edmonds Community College :of Aquatic (ECC), spoke in favor of the pool. She said the 8,000+ students at ECC would be delighted to participate Center in supporting and paying for the pool. She said athletic facilities are sparse at ECC and they do not have a pool. She said she walks each morning and is surprised by the number of people walking the track at the Boys and Girls Club. The aquatic center would be a perfect opportunity for an indoor track that would provide a safe, dry place to walk in the winter. For those reasons, she felt a pool would be a wonderful addition. Mayor Fahey appreciated the supporters of the aquatic center attending tonight's meeting, particularly waiting until the late hour to provide comments. She said Mr. Hertrich was correct regarding the need to secure a location for this facility and said that has been one of the "stumbling blocks" for quite a period of time. She stressed the importance of the public making their opinions known to the School Board that Edmonds-Woodway High School is the appropriate location for the pool. If the School District is interested in working with the City, it will be a collaborative effort to place the pool in a location that would benefit students, increase the value of the educational process, as well as provide the other Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 24 benefits that have been cited. She said a bond issue cannot be presented for a vote until a location is secured. If the City is required to purchase a private site, the cost will be enhanced again. She explained the reason the cost has increased is due to delays and increases in construction costs. She urged those with a vested interest who want the pool sited at the high school to snake their views known to the School Board to allow a collaborative effort on this issue. 8. PRESENTATION ON AQUATIC CENTER sentation Parks and Recreation Director Arvilla Ohlde said this was the number one public response item on the L. Aquatic Comprehensive Park and Open Space Plan. The City completed a feasibility study in 1995, which "mer together with a citizen pool advisory group determined the need for a 50 -meter, 8 -line, 25 -yard indoor swimming pool with adjacent warm water leisure and therapy pool, water slides, wavepool, whirlpool, and other amenities. The need identified was multi -generational program both for competitive swimming but highlighting the recreation/leisure aspects of an indoor pool. The proposed pool had the ability to provide benefits to all age groups including dry side amenities. The 1995 feasibility study considered operation and maintenance and it appeared the pool could operate at 100%, primarily due to the leisure aspects. In April 1998, the operation and maintenance costs were considered again and it was determined the pool would recover nearly 99% of the operations budget within the first year, a slight slow down in the third year and 100% by the fifth year. She said the feasibility study included discussion regarding the Federal Way pool, noting that pool was constructed for competitive swimming and has a different goal of operation. The only similarity is the 50 -meter length; it has double the amount of water and the goal is competitive use. The goal of the proposed pool is recreational and leisure use, which results in higher revenues requiring less subsidy. She said the feasibility study considered numerous sites in the community and the preferred site, which was accepted by the Council, was the new Edmonds-Woodway High School on 76`h. Ms Ohlde reported that construction costs have increased due to the delay. She said the estimated $10 million cost does not include land and assumes a partnership with the School District. A number of funding options have been considered including donations, and partnerships with federal and county entities, although the greatest funding option is a general obligation bond. In 1995, an $8.2 million general obligation bond for a pool would have been $64 for a property valued at $200,000. Today, a $10 million bond would be $53 for a property valued at $200,000. Community Services Director Paul Mar explained when the new Edmonds-Woodway High School complex was designed in 1995, there was a placeholder for a pool in the approved master plan. He said the City was denied the opportunity to include the pool in the Cultural Arts Stadium and Convention District's (CASCD) ballot issue in 1997. Further, the pool was included in Proposition 3 on a countywide vote last fall which was defeated. The City also spent two years considering an alternate site with the YMCA. He said the due diligence effort has been adequate. Ms. Ohlde explained the project was presented to the community on February 4. The community rallied and is expressing their interest in constructing a pool in Edmonds. She said the next step would be for staff to meet'with the citizens group, followed by securing the site with the School Board or raising funds for a private site if that becomes necessary. She plans to meet with Congressman Jay Inslee who expressed interest in a community project, particularly one that benefits families and youth. This process will result in a decision by the Council whether to place the issue out for a public bond. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said answers to the questions raised by Ms. Mueller are available. He said the school district site has not been secured but they are working with them. He said they are also Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 25 aware some private funding will be necessary for the pool. He thanked the members of the audience who participated, particularly Mary Bennett who collected over 1200 signatures in two weeks. He said there were numerous letters and telephone calls to the City in support of the pool. He emphasized what Ms. Bennett said, that her late husband Chet started this idea 25 years ago and it is time to more forward. He requested Mayor Fahey direct staff to research the possibility of placing this on a fall ballot. He said the effort to determine the site will continue. Mayor Fahey said staff could develop a timeline but there are some specifics that need to be determined before a vote can take place. Mayor Fahey reminded the public of the community visioning session with HyettPalma taking placed on March 24 at 7:00 - 8:30 p.m. at the Edmonds Theater. She said this would be one of the most important gatherings in the City as a vision is developed for the 21" Century. She encouraged the public to participate and come prepared to answer questions that have been published in the newspaper, and are available by contacting the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, or visiting the City's website at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. Due to the lateness of the hour, the following items were not addressed: 9. REPORT ON COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS 10. MAYOR'S REPORT 11. COUNCIL REPORTS COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED AY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 11:38 P.M. MOTION CARRIED. . BARBARA S. FAHEY, MAYOR SANDRA S-: CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 1999 Page 26 1 [1 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL PLAZA MEETING ROOM -LIBRARY BUILDING 650 MAIN STREET 7:00 -10:00 P.M. MARCH 16, 1999 6:45 P.M. - INTERVIEW CANDIDATE FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD 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 MARCH 2, 1999 (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #29337 THROUGH #31217 FOR THE WEEK OF MARCH 1, 1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $148,117.10. APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #29340 THROUGH #31395 FOR THE WEEK OF MARCH 8, 1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $171,916.67. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL WARRANTS #22502 THROUGH #22629 FOR THE PERIOD FEBRUARY 16 THROUGH FEBRUARY 28, 1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $332,571.49. (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM JAMES N. NOLAN ($493.90), AND MEGAN HOAG/ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY ($765.00) (E) UPDATE ON HIGHWAY 99 PROJECT (F) UPDATE ON PUBLIC SAFETY PROJECT (G) APPROVAL OF PUBLIC WORKS TEAMSTERS UNION LABOR AGREEMENT (H) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT AND CITY OF EDMONDS POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR COMMUNITY -ORIENTED POLICING AGENT (1) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR CITY BANKING SERVICES (J) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS TO PURCHASE A 1999 HARLEY DAVIDSON POLICE MOTORCYCLE (K) AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR BIDS FOR UNIFORMS AND LAUNDRY SERVICE FOR PUBLIC WORKS, PARKS MAINTENANCE, AND TREATMENT PLANT EMPLOYEES (L) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH PORT OF EDMONDS REGARDING DEVELOPMENT IN RELATION TO CITY'S MARINA BEACH PARK AND ACCEPTANCE OF SIX-FOOT EASEMENT (M) AUTHORIZE MAYOR TO SIGN REVISED CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT RELATED TO THE PARK REZONE, NO. 97-28 (N) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN CONTRACT FOR VICTIM ADVOCACY SERVICES WITH LAURA R. LINDSTRAND CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MARCH 16, 1999 Pane 2 of 2 (0) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH LYNNWOOD CYCLE BARN, INC. (P) PROPOSED ORDINANCE FORMING,NORTH P.ERRINVILLE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) NO. 216 3. (5 Min.) CONFIRMATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 4: (10 Min.) RECOGNITION OF CITIZENS JOE EICKSTADT, JUNE RACINE AND RICH WIMPY FOR SAVING A LIFE 5. (30 Min.) CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING A REQUEST TO VACATE A PORTION OF THE 180TH STREET SOUTHWEST RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT TO 8615 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE (Applicant: Greenleaf Evans / File No. ST -98-52) 6. (60 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE PROPOSED BOO HAN PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER DEVELOPMENT TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED DEVELOPER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE BOO HAN PLAZA REPRESENTATIVES TO RESOLVE THE ILLEGAL TREE REMOVAL WHICH OCCURRED ON SITE, AND OTHER SITE DEVELOPMENT ISSUES. THIS HEARING MAY ALSO INCLUDE COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF ANY APPEAL OF THE REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION WHICH WAS ISSUED FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT, AND WHICH HAVE BEEN CORRECTLY FILED IN A TIMELY MANNER. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 22618. HIGHWAY 99. (Applicant: Ted Litzenberger, Arch/Tech International / File No. ADB -97-90) 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3 Minute Limit Per Person) 8. (10 Min.) PRESENTATION ON AQUATIC CENTER 9. (15 Min.) REPORT ON COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS 10. (5 Min.) MAYOR'S REPORT 11. (15 Min.) COUNCIL REPORTS Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at (425) 771-0245 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations. The Council Agenda appears on Chambers Cable, Channel 32. Delayed telecast of this meeting appears the following Wednesday, Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 32.