Loading...
04/03/2001 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES April 3, 2001 Following a Special Meeting at 6:45 p.m. for an Executive Session regarding legal matters, the Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Dave Earling, Council President Thomas A. Miller, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Christopher Davis, Councilmember Richard Marin, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Tyler Fisher, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Greg Wean, Acting Police Chief Duane Bowman, Development Serv. Director Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director Noel Miller, Public Works Director Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Dave Gebert, City Engineer Don Fiene, Assistant City Engineer Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Mayor Haakenson introduced State Representative Joe Marine in the audience. 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA hange to Mayor Haakenson requested a "Proposed Ordinance Establishing a Moratorium on Processing Building genda Permit Applications for Community Churches Located on Collector Streets" be added to the agenda as Item 8A. He also requested a "Proclamation regarding Friends of the Library Week" be added to the agenda as Item 3A. Councilmember Marin requested a "Motion to Reconsider Ordinance No. 3354" be added to the agenda as Item 3B. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Council President Earling requested Item E be removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilmembers Petso and Miller requested Item F be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, FOR APPROVAL OF THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL rove /01 (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 27, 2001 Ii-utes Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 1 pprove laim (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #47210 THROUGH #47379 FOR THE WEEK OF Pecks (D) MARCH 26, 2001, IN THE AMOUNT OF $289,315.08 ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM BLAKE LONGSINE laim for [Damages ($150.00) ays of emembrance (G) PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE: REMEMBERING THE PAST FOR THE SAKE OF THE FUTURE, APRIL 15 - 22, 2001 Item E: Approval of Findings of Fact Regarding a Closed Record Meeting Held on March 13.2001 - Anneal findings of of the Hearing g Examiner's Decision Approvinan Application for a Four -Lot Short Subdivision Called act- Seaview Highlands. The property is located at 18111 - 84 Avenue West and is Zoned Single -Family Leary Residential (R-12). Applicant: Orlo Fuller / Appellant: Dennis and Carla O'Leary. File No. S-2000-50 / AP - Appeal 2001-17) -2001-17 Council President Earling explained he would abstain from the vote as he had recused himself from the discussion of this item as the applicant was an agent in his office. Councilmember Orvis advised he would also abstain due to a business relationship with one of the attorneys in this matter. Councilmember Petso stated she would be voting no as she did when this matter was before the Council. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS, TO APPROVE ITEM E. MOTION CARRIED (4-1-2), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO OPPOSED, COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING AND COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS ABSTAINING. The item approved is as follows: (E) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING A CLOSED RECORD MEETING HELD ON MARCH 13, 2001 - APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A FOUR -LOT SHORT SUBDIVISION CALLED SEAVIEW HIGHLANDS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 18111 - 84Tn AVENUE WEST AND IS ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-12). (Applicant: Orlo Fuller / Appellant: Dennis and Carla O'Leary. File No. S-2000-50 / AP-2001-17) Edmonds Item F: Approval of Consultant Contract Award for the Edmonds Crossing Pine Street Ferry Crossing - Traffic Study Pine Street Ferry Tragic Councilmember Petso explained she pulled this item to provide Council an opportunity to consider an Study alternative. When the Council reviewed this item on February 27, staff recommended transferring $49,000 to fund the study although the grant matching funds required only a transfer of $18,000. As the item was presented on the Consent Agenda, the request was to transfer $93,000. She reiterated that due to the 80% grant funding, the necessary transfer amount was $18,603. City Engineer Dave Gebert explained the objective of transferring $93,018 into the Edmonds Crossing Project was to make the amount of the contract study available for matching funds and to leverage additional opportunities to use the Edmonds Crossing grant funds. He agreed the option suggested by Councilmember Petso, transferring only the $18,603, was possible but would require that staff request additional funding for the Edmonds Crossing Project in the future. He explained it was currently estimated an additional $150,000 would be necessary to complete the final EIS and reach a Record of Decision and the cost could increase depending on comments provided by agencies reviewing the EIS and the Merger Agreement Committee. He said the advantage of transferring the total amount was one action and allowing staff to proceed more quickly with actions in the future. For Councilmember Petso, Mr. Gebert advised the transfer of $93,000 provided approximately $465,000 in total Edmonds Crossing funds. Councilmember Petso asked whether staff could expend those funds Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 2 without further approval/direction from Council. Mr. Gebert advised any contract actions would require Council approval such as amending the current contract with CH2M Hill for the EIS. Councilmember Miller asked whether any of the $93,000 transfer to match the WSDOT grant was reimbursable from WSDOT. Mr. Gebert explained the $93,000 represented the City's 20% match, which would be used to leverage 80% in grant funds from WSDOT or federal funds. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY. COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO APPROVE ITEM F AND THAT COUNCIL TRANSFER $18,603.00 FOR THIS PURPOSE. Councilmember Petso explained as future expenditures were necessary from this fund, they would be presented to Council which would provide up-to-date information regarding the project. Council President Earling suggested the Council approve the full amount requested and request staff provide a periodic written or oral update on the progress of the project. MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS ORVIS AND PETSO IN FAVOR, COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, COUNCILMEMBERS DAVIS, MILLER, PLUNKETT AND MARIN OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM F WITH QUARTERLY REPORTS FROM STAFF. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO OPPOSED. The item approved is as follows: (F) APPROVAL OF CONSULTANT CONTRACT AWARD FOR THE EDMONDS CROSSING — PINE STREET FERRY TRAFFIC STUDY Ik ds of 3A. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF THE FRIENDS OF LIBRARY WEEK ibrary Mayor Haakenson read a Proclamation in Honor of the Friends of the Library Week, April 1-7, 2001, and presented the proclamation to John Pryor, Chair of the Friends of the Library. On behalf of the Friends of the Edmonds Library, Mr. Pryor thanked Mayor Haakenson and the Council for the Proclamation. He explained the volunteer Friends of the Library group valued and supported the library. He suggested interested citizens donate books to the book sale and attend Friends of the Library meetings on the fourth Thursday of each month in the Library Plaza Room. Reconsider 3B. RECONSIDERATION OF MOTION ON ORDINANCE NO. 3354 Motion on rda 3354 - Councilmember Marin explained during the discussion of this ordinance, there were two conflicting Temporary issues, whether to pursue an opportunity to fund several long neglected projects through bonds using Reduction - til; Tax revenue provided by increased electricity prices, or to return the approximately $12 per year to taxpayers. Both ideas had great merit but he recalled he had expressed concern over the timing of the library vote. In retrospect, he said the Council's action may have been hasty, particularly in view of the absence of a public hearing regarding the issue. He said one of the reasons Edmonds was such a nice place to live was the sacrifices citizens have made in the past to pay for the City's infrastructure. He said the Council's earlier discussion of this item was really whether to make a sacrifice that would fund improvements that would make the City a better place or just reduce taxes. After further consideration, he was willing to "put his $12 back on the table" and recommended the Council allow citizens to provide input. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, TO RECONSIDER ORDINANCE NO. 3354 THAT PROVIDES FOR A TEMPORARY SMALL REDUCTION ON THE TAX ON ELECTRICITY FOR THE YEAR 2001. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 3 City Attorney Scott Snyder explained a vote to reconsider was a two-part motion, whether to reconsider the ordinance and whether to take a different action on the ordinance. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, COUNCILMEMBERS DAVIS, MILLER, AND MARIN IN FAVOR, COUNCILMEMBERS ORVIS, PETSO, AND PLUNKETT OPPOSED. The ordinance to be reconsidered is as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3.20.050(A) PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICTS TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION 4 IN ORDER TO PROVIDE A TEMPORARY REDUCTION IN THE BUSINESS AND OCCUPATIONS TAX ON PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICTS FURNISHING ELECTRICAL ENERGY AND POWER FOR TAX YEAR 2001, PROVIDING FOR A SUNSET OF SUCH PROVISION ON DECEMBER 31, 2001 AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. Mr. Snyder explained Ordinance No. 3354 was published and would be effective Friday, April 6. He suggested the Council repeal the ordinance and set a public hearing for a later date. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO REPEAL ORDINANCE NO. 3354 AND SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 22. Councilmember Miller expressed his admiration for Councilmember Marin's suggestion to reconsider the Council's action. He said the vote taken last week was precipitous and lacked the opportunity for staff to provide further information and for public input. Councilmember Orvis reiterated his intent in presenting the ordinance last week was to reduce utility taxes for the last seven months of the year by 30%, which would leave $260,000 in the hands of the voters. He explained those funds were not budgeted and were not necessary to pay the City's increased utility bills. He said the ordinance was also drafted to avoid long term commitment to the reduction and return only the excess. He explained this was important as it allowed the Council to do its part in reducing utility bills. He pointed out the importance of everyone doing their part, by conserving, cutting taxes, and reducing regulations. Councilmember Davis thanked Councilmember Marin for his motion to reconsider. He said his opposition to the motion was the lack of long range planning for capital needs balanced with the unanticipated tax revenue as well as the lack of public input. Councilmember Petso said although holding a public hearing was appropriate, she questioned repealing the ordinance as it was her opinion the Council did the right thing by enacting the ordinance. She explained one of her earlier objections was the need to preserve funding for the library. She appreciated the intent to hold the public hearing after the library vote which would ensure funding for the library was not dedicated to long term bonds prior to the vote regarding library funding. Although she supported public tax relief, she was amenable to holding a public hearing to determine whether the public wanted temporary tax relief. UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, COUNCILMEMBERS MILLER, DAVIS, AND MARIN IN FAVOR, AND COUNCILMEMBERS rd# 3354 PETSO, PLUNKETT, AND ORVIS OPPOSED. ailed to ass The Council debated Ordinance No. 3354, and it failed to pass. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 4 1 IF__Y-___1 3C. PUBLIC HEARING ON ADOPTION OF 2001 — 2006 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT itV l PROGRAM (CIP) AS PART OF THE'CITY OF EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Assistant City Engineer Don Fiene explained the six -year CIP shows proposed projects and revenue streams from the following funds: 112-100/200: Combined Street Construction Improvement —Arterial Projects 112-300: Combined Street Construction Improvement —Vehicle Registration Fee Projects 112-400/500: Combined Street Construction Improvement— General Projects 113: Multimodal Transportation 116: Building Maintenance 125: Park Acquisition/Improvement 126: Special Capital 325: Capital Improvement 326: Public Safety Building Construction 412-100: Combined Utility Construction Improvement— Water Projects 412-200: Combined Utility Construction Improvement — Drainage Projects 412-300: Combined Utility Construction Improvement — Sewer Projects 414: Wastewater Treatment Plant Mr. Fiene explained the six -year CIP was a long range planning tool that considered projects over the next six years and anticipated revenues including grants. He displayed a description of projects to be funded by each fund. Mayor Haakenson offered to circulate the CIP booklet to audience members, commenting the book had pictures and descriptions of projects. Mr. Fiene explained the booklet included project descriptions, benefits, rationale, anticipated construction schedule, photographs, Comprehensive Planning for the project, etc. for all projects in 2001. Staffs goal was to have project descriptions for 2002-2004 projects in next year's CIP booklet. Councilmember Orvis asked for clarification of what the Council's approval of the CIP committed the City to. Mr. Snyder explained the CIP was a required portion of the Comprehensive Plan as GMA required consistency between planning and zoning. The CIP provided a blueprint of projects and priorities the City has for funding and construction. He described the importance of including projects on the CIP that the City assesses mitigation for and projects the City plans to seek grants for. He explained the six -year CIP was reassessed each year. Councilmember Orvis referred to a project in Fund 112, the overlay of 84th Avenue West between 224 and 220th, and asked when the project was scheduled and whether sidewalks would be constructed on both sides. Mr. Fiene answered 84th was one of the individual projects within the identified overlay projects. The project in the CIP was only the overlay. Councilmember Orvis questioned whether overlaying a street designated as a collector but not installing sidewalks was inconsistent with the Transportation Plan. Mr. Fiene stated there was nothing in the Transportation Plan that required construction of a sidewalk in conjunction with an overlay on a collector street. Councilmember Orvis asked whether collector streets had sidewalks on both sides. Mr. Fiene answered construction of a new collector likely would have sidewalks on both sides. Councilmember Orvis asked whether consideration could be given to constructing sidewalks on 84th Avenue West when the project was done. Mr. Fiene answered yes. Councilmember Orvis commented many of the utility projects were funded via transfer from the Combined Utility Fund and asked whether the intent was to raise rates during the six -year timeframe. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 5 Mr. Fiene answered the revenue was consistent with the existing rate structure. Public Works Director Noel Miller said an increase in drainage rates was being evaluated. Councilmember Petso asked whether approval of the CIP meant all projects would be completed on the proposed schedule. Mr. Fiene answered the Council would consider projects during the budget as well as at the time the project was bid. Councilmember Petso asked whether projects could be deferred. Mr. Fiene answered yes. Mayor Haakenson explained the eight questions addressed in the Council packet were responses to questions asked at the March 14 Planning Board meeting. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, referred to the overlay on 84"' Avenue West, pointing out the extreme need for a walkway leading to an elementary school. He said doing only an overlay would be poor planning. He recommended the City budget additional funds to construct at least one walkway for safety reasons. He referred to the information provided in the Council packet regarding the status of funding for the new fire station that indicated the cost would be $2.25 million. He pointed out the purchase of the land was $489,000 and construction was originally estimated at $1,570,580 and asked how the additional funds would be obtained. He questioned the reference to two privately owned parcels on the waterfront and preferred the two parcels be identified. He suggested some recreation classes such as pottery or computers could be moved to the old Public Works facility rather than remodeling the Frances Anderson Center. He requested consideration be given to a sidewalk on 9'' Avenue and Casper, areas used by school children. He questioned why engineering and construction of 220'" Street improvements were delayed until 2004 and 2005. He preferred a more detailed description of the professional services for the multimodal project be provided. He pointed out the lack of a sprinkler system in the new Public Safety building and questioned whether that should be added to the CIP. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, referred to funding for walkways and bikeways, commenting there were grants available for bikeways. He suggested the public be informed that the City had funds budgeted for library improvements that were not included in the Sno-Isle contract. He referred to funding for an Aquatic Recreation Complex, commenting that project was not 'likely to materialize. He supported a proposition in 2002 to fund numerous park acquisition/improvement projects, commenting that would remove the projects from the City's budget. Rich Demeroutis, 921 Pine Street, Edmonds, referred to park acquisition/improvement Fund 126, and questioned how the acquisition projects coordinated with siting of a regional wastewater treatment facility and siting of a multimodal facility. He questioned whether the City could fund park projects when the City's roads and sewer system continued to deteriorate. He recalled the Council considered using park acquisition funds for road overlays last year. He objected to park improvements that resulted in paving of parklands. He questioned the advisability of purchasing additional parklands, commenting it would require additional park employees and would raise citizens' taxes. Elaine Yard, 9209 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, recommended a Saturday meeting to seek input from citizens regarding the City's Capital Improvement Program. She noted citizens were told the City did not have sufficient funds to meet its budget for the next two years and had placed annexation on the ballot to acquire an additional $1.6 million in taxes to fund the library. However, the CIP had funds budgeted for acquisition of parkland. She recommended there be a reassessment of how funds were spent and an open discussion held with citizens. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 6 Councilmember Petso referred to the affordability issue raised by several citizens and asked whether a project included in the CIP that did not include grant funds or other financing options could later be funded by those means. Mr. Fiene answered yes. Councilmember Petso asked whether staff would be actively pursuing grants. Mr. Fiene stated staff was aggressively pursuing grants and low interest loans. COUNCILMEMBER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO EXTEND DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Fiene responded to the issue raised by Mr. Hertrich regarding why the City did not do walkway projects adjacent to overlay projects. At the Planning Board meeting, he indicated this was not done because priorities differed for walkways and overlays. After further consideration, he agreed this should be considered when the Walkway Comprehensive Plan was reviewed due to cost savings associated with doing a walkway and overlay at the same time. Councilmember Petso asked whether Council approval of the CIP would limit this possibility. Mr. Fiene answered no. Councilmember Petso referred to the comment regarding expenditures for the library, pointing out that in addition to the library roof the CIP included $147,000 in expenditures for gas heat, miscellaneous and upgrades. Mr. Miller answered these were necessary for maintenance of the library building. He said who funded the items could be addressed in the future. Councilmember Petso asked whether the building maintenance fund that Sno-Isle agreed to establish if annexation was approved could be used to fund the conversion to gas heat. Mayor Haakenson answered yes. Councilmember Petso asked whether any details were available for miscellaneous or upgrade projects in 2003 and 2005 and whether the City was obligated to expend those funds. Mr. Miller answered the 2003 expenditure would be considered during review of the 2003 budget. Councilmember Plunkett referred to Mr. Rutledge's comment regarding the availability of bikeway grants. Parks and Recreation Director Arvilla Ohlde answered those grants were included in transportation projects. She explained funding and priorities were described in the bicycle plan. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the square footage of parkland in the City was less than the national standard for a city Edmonds' size. Ms. Ohlde agreed the City was below the standard. She explained the acquisitions in the CIP were in response to deficits identified in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Plunkett requested an explanation of funding mechanisms for acquisition of parkland. Ms. Ohlde explained numerous grants are pursued to match City funds. She said the first and second '/4% REET, less payments on City Hall, were dedicated to acquisition. She explained these revenues provided funds to leverage state and federal grants. She described various grants the City could pursue. Council President Earling commented some of the projects indicated for 2001 were funded but many were projects that would be constructed if sufficient funding could be identified. Mr. Snyder said the Council would be required to approve contracts for major Public Works expenditures. In some instances, having the project on the CIP would allow staff to require a developer pay mitigation funds for impacts identified during the SEPA process. It was also essential to have projects on the CIP if the City was applying for State grant funding for the project. Council President Earling said including a project such as the multimodal center or an aquatic center on the CIP did not necessarily mean the City had identified sufficient funding for the project. He emphasized the CIP was a required planning document and not including projects on the CIP limited the City's ability to leverage State and Federal funds to finance the projects. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 7 Mayor Haakenson remanded the matter to Council for action. Councilmember Miller expressed dismay with citizens who personally attacked a Director or Councilmember. He stressed Directors did not make decisions without acting upon the policy established by the Council. Regarding the comment that the Council was not interested in taking public testimony, he pointed out the Planning Board held extensive public hearings on the CIP. He pointed out the CIP was a planning document, not a budgetary document. He commended staff on the development of the project descriptions for 2001 CIP projects. COUNCILMEMBER MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE FOR COUNCIL CONSENT APPROVAL ADOPTING THE ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AS PART OF THE CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Councilmember Marin commented on the "robust" educational process he has been involved in since being appointed to the Council. He commented the CIP was a wish list of projects;the City would like to accomplish although sufficient funds were not yet available for all projects. He commended staff for the development of the CIP. Councilmember Petso acknowledged the necessity of adopting the CIP but stressed the need to review each project prior to construction to ensure the Council and the public were satisfied these projects were still appropriate. She said adopting the CIP did not prevent the City from reviewing and amending the projects in the future. She encouraged members of the public, particularly those who mentioned a particular project, to stay involved. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council President Earling requested Mr. Gebert have 2-3 CIP booklets available for citizen review. School 4. PUBLIC HEARING ON EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN FOR District ADOPTION AS PART OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Capital Facilities Ian Planning Manager Rob Chave advised Bret Carlstadt, Edmonds School District, was unable to attend tonight's meeting but offered to respond in writing to any questions or attend a future Council meeting. Mr. Chave explained the Edmonds School District Capital Facilities Plan was a required element of the City's Comprehensive Plan due to the need to show that school facilities within the City met the needs of the school district and the citizens and that adequate funding for those facilities was available. He said the Capital Facilities Plan did not describe programs or operations. The School District informed the Planning Board that they have sufficient capacity at this time; a bond passed several years ago instituted a district -wide construction program for major and minor projects. Although Edmonds School District qualifies to collect impact fees under Snohomish County Impact Fee ordinance, they have not needed to collect impact fees as sufficient funding has been provided via bonds. The benefit to the City of adopting the Edmonds School District's Capital Facilities Plan was to better integrate the City's planning efforts, transportation, City facilities, etc. with the school district. Further, it indicated the City was meeting the needs of the school district. Councilmember Petso referred to Appendix F that indicated the Capital Facilities Plan should include a description of leased facilities including their location, size, capacity and the remaining term of the leases. At least one facility and likely more have been designated in the Capital Facilities Plan as long term leases. Could the City obtain the information indicated in Appendix F? Mr. Chave answered the Edmonds School District indicated the old Woodway Elementary was identified as a long term lease as it was considered a transition site and not actively used to meet the school district's capacity needs. The Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 8 Edmonds School District's other leases include Pacific Montessori that leases four classrooms through June 30, 2005; Edmonds Historic Museum that leased one classroom primarily for storage through June 30, 2004, and Calvary Chapel, which leases one classroom for storage on a monthly basis. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, pointed out the decline in the Edmonds School District population in 2001 may reflect the declining population of youth in Edmonds. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, directed attention to staff s narrative that no substantial issues were raised during the public hearing, and the School District's response to his comments at the Planning Board that a permanent designation for the use of the old Woodway High School has not been made. He referred to page 7 of the Capital Facilities Plan that indicated the school district did not project their long range forecast beyond six years. He recommended the City seek a definitive answer from the school district regarding the old Woodway High School site due to the transitional nature of the school. He recommended the City consider the site for future recreational uses. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Councilmember Petso asked whether staff had contacted the Edmonds School District to determine whether the Capital Facilities Plan prohibited staff from discussing park uses at the old Edmonds- Woodway High School site. Parks and Recreation Director Arvilla Ohlde answered no, recalling when the Council met with the Edmonds School District approximately 18 months ago to discuss a partnership for an aquatic center, it was narrowed to two potential partnership sites, the Civic Center and the old Edmonds-Woodway High School. Mayor Haakenson remanded the matter to Council for action. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE FOR COUNCIL CONSENT APPROVAL ADOPTING THE EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN AS PART OF THE CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Councilmember Marin complimented the Edmonds School District on their responsiveness to the needs of Edmonds. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Haakenson declared a brief recess. Purchase 5. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT FOR and Sale MARINA BEACH PROPERTY WITH UNOCAL AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS Agreement - Marina Beach Parks and Recreation Director Arvilla Ohlde introduced colleagues who worked with her on this item, Property Community Services Director Stephen Clifton and Bill Joyce, an Attorney with Ogden Murphy Wallace, who specialized in ensuring the City acquiring an environmentally clean site. Mayor Haakenson introduced Unocal representative Rick Tack. Ms. Ohlde explained Marina Beach, which included the northern fully developed park area, the abandoned pipeline and the southern parcel, currently owned by Union Oil of California, known as Unocal, was for sale. If the City did not purchase the property, it could be sold for commercial waterfront development. She explained the Marina Beach parcel, south of the Port of Edmonds, was Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 9 accessed through a 60-foot easement with the Port. The 4.5 acre site had over 1,000 feet of Puget Sound shoreline and was adjacent to 15.9 acres of Department of Natural Resources public tideland. She said Marina Beach served as a southern anchor in the Edmonds lineal waterfront park system. During the 140 days of sunny weather, over 5,000 people visit Marina Beach daily. Annually over 100,000 visitors come to Marina Beach for beachcombing, waterfront access, picnicking, sunbathing, volleyball, kayaking, scuba diving, walking and to attend musical events. The City has historically supported and tenaciously pursued the purchase of waterfront property for public access. The City's and Snohomish County Comprehensive Plans state it is essential to secure public waterfront sites for regional benefit. In the 2001-2006 Comprehensive Park Plan, the public ranked shoreline access and waterfront parks as the highest leading public priority. The Edmonds Downtown Waterfront Plan and the Economic Development Strategic Action Plan, a partnership plan between the Port, the Chamber of Commerce and the City, reiterate the need for public access. In the Community Visioning Plan, which included over 1,000 individual surveys, interviews and two public gatherings, the number one recommendation was the need for public waterfront access and waterfront acquisition. The Port was currently completing their Master Plan and at public workshops, the public stated the need to acquire Marina Beach. Ms. Ohlde said the Port of Edmonds provided a letter of support for the acquisition. The Brackett's Landing Foundation, a local community advocacy group who works to retain the fragile shoreline, has also provided letters of support for the acquisition. Ms. Ohlde said Unocal planned to sell the site; the property was on the market and interested buyers met with the local corporate representatives daily. She emphasized the City was in a precarious position; over 30 years ago, in response to the need for public waterfront access, the City entered into a non- binding annual lease for the Marina Beach property. The City then, without any guarantees, invested in the northern development that currently exists and leased the southern portion, keeping it as a natural, open area. The appraisal documents completed by the City indicate the site could be developed with a 2- story 56,000 square foot office/retail/commercial waterfront structure with parking for over 150 vehicles. Ms. Ohlde said the Brackett's Landing Foundation continued to support waterfront acquisition and the daylighting of Willows Creek to the Puget Sound. Willow Creek currently travels through the Edmonds Marsh, underground through a culvert to Puget Sound. The supported concept provides for daylighting of the creek south along the east side and through a box culvert to the southern parcel and into Puget Sound. The box culvert under the railroad would be constructed by Sound Transit when they complete the double tracking within the railroad right-of-way. She displayed a rendering of a daylighted creek. She explained the future concept of ferry service at Pt. Edwards would align with the current abandoned pipeline location, creating an overhead structure. Public waterfront access would receive added benefit with the elimination of the existing cyclone fence barrier and by providing expanded waterfront access below a new structure. Ms. Ohlde advised Unocal was offering to sell the property to the City for $3.1 million or $14.50 per square foot. The Unocal appraisal was $4.7 million and the City's appraisal was $3.4 million. The Purchase and Sale Agreement included in the Council packet was a 9-month process to completion. The agreement was designed to allow for the chronological step to complete the due diligence on all environmental issues and to secure State and federal matching grant funds to diminish the amount of local contribution to the purchase. The City has currently received a no further investigation letter from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regarding sediment investigation, indicating the site was clean. She anticipated if matching state and federal grant funding was successful, ;the City would secure over two-thirds of the acquisition through partnership grants. The Purchase and Sale Agreement steps would allow the City to secure the property while depositing two earnest payments. The first $25,000, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 10 paid at the time of signing and the second $25,000, due in July would be held until November 30, 2001. With all environmental questions satisfied and matching grant funds in place, staff would request final authorization from Council to enter into the final payment due at closing on November 30, 2001. Ms. Ohlde summarized it was essential that the City secure this last remaining waterfront parcel from Unocal before it was lost forever to private development. Marina Beach was the last large parcel remaining to be purchased and preserved for public waterfront use. Many of the callers during the past week in response to newspaper articles believed the City already owned the Marina Beach property. She recommended the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the Purchase and Sale Agreement for Marina Beach between Unocal and the City of Edmonds and appropriate $50,000 earnest money from Fund 126. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of this item. State Representative, 21" District, Joe Marine, 9244 491h Avenue West, Mukilteo, expressed his support for the purchase of the Marina Beach property. He commented it was a great opportunity to protect the environment of the community by preserving precious open space, which was important to the quality of life. He urged the Council not to pass up this rare opportunity. He noted King County had listed this property as a possible site for a wastewater treatment facility, a fate he believed would be ridiculous for this waterfront property. He recommended the site be retained as a popular public park and valuable environment resource. He commended Unocal, the current owner, for their willingness to make the property accessible to the public for the past three decades and for the generous terms they were offering to sell the property to the City. He offered his support for securing state funding for assist in the purchase of this park. Susie Shaefer, 1055 Edmonds Street, Edmonds, expressed her support for the purchase of the Marina Beach property. She inquired about the fate of "dog beach" at Marina Beach. She supported the City having all the parks it could, particularly on the waterfront. Nancy Farrell, 19525 86th Avenue W, Edmonds, said she and her 15-year old daughter volunteer with the Edmonds Park Department Beach Rangers and strongly supported the City's purchase of the Marina Beach property. She thanked Unocal for providing the City the opportunity to purchase the property. Owen Caddy, 2417 NE 63rd Street, Seattle, an interpretive specialist in the Parks and Recreation Department, who interacts with school groups and the public on a regular basis at Marina Beach, emphasized the diversity of the intertidal community on Marina Beach and the wide variety of marine life that was accessible to the public on that beach during low tides that was not accessible on other beaches in the City. He said visitors from out-of-town are amazed such a beach exists and residents often indicate it is one of their favorite places. He summarized Marina Beach was a key recreation site and urged the Council to support the purchase of the property. Frances Murphy, 5804 168th Avenue SW, Lynnwood, representing Brackett's Landing Foundation, provided a map that identified the north and south boundary of the City of Edmonds shoreline. She explained the shoreline within the City was virtually the only public access to the shoreline in South Snohomish County. She said the City had proven itself to be an outstanding steward of this public resource. Edmonds Beach Rangers had more than fulfilled the obligation to protect the shoreline and teach visitors about the wonderful variety of organisms to be found on the beach and to respect that resource. She said the task of protection had been successful in spite of the enormous increase in population in South Snohomish County. She summarized the Brackett's Landing Foundation vigorously supported the purchase of Marina Beach Park. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 1 I Bonnie Storm, 2047 13th Avenue W, Seattle, a Beach Ranger volunteer since, 1995, expressed her support for the purchase of the Marina Beach property. She said the waterfront parks, particularly Marina Beach, helped make Edmonds the jewel of Puget Sound. She urged the City to keep the parkas wild and natural as possible. W. Darryl Thompson, 9222 2401h Street SW, Edmonds, president of the Pilchuck Audubon Society in Snohomish County, representing approximately 2,200 members, reiterated the positive aspects of this purchase. He said there was an entire page devoted to the Edmonds marina wildlife sanctuary in the book the Society published, `Girding in Snohomish County." He said the organization spent a great deal of time at Marina Beach, using the area as an outdoor classroom. He supported the purchase. Mary Lou Block, 23821 115th Place W, Woodway (former Edmonds Planning Manager) spoke in support of the purchase of the Union Oil property. She explained this property's value could not be overstated; it was truly the crown jewel in the City's waterfront park and access system. She said the park was used by tremendous numbers of children and adults. Thanks to the generosity of Union Oil, the City has had the use of the property for approximately 30 years. Now Union Oil was making it possible for the City to purchase the property under very favorable terms. She referred to a survey conducted in August 1988 that tallied 732 people entering Marina Beach during a 3-day period, commenting the park's usage had increased in the past 13 years. She said the park was a tremendous amenity to children and their families. She urged the City not to lose the opportunity to purchase this property. Alvin Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, said he assumed Ms. Ohlde had identified $50,000 in available funding for this purchase and that she anticipated $2 million in grant funds would be acquired. Rich Demeroutis, 921 Pine Street, Edmonds, questioned who would be responsible for removing the Union Oil pier and who would be responsible for any resulting contamination. He questioned whether there were plans to remodel the park after the purchase such as connect Marina Beach to the Port property with a paved walkway. He commented the City may wish to consider purchasing the southern tip of Marina Beach which is owned by the Port. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, commended Ms. Ohlde for her efforts to acquire waterfront property. He recommended the City make the purchase of the southern tip of Marina Beach from the Port a priority. Jeff Wilson, 21306 84'h Avenue W, Edmonds, supported the efforts of the City to pursue a rare opportunity such as this to acquire private beachfront for public purposes. He noted in California and Hawaii, private ownership of beaches was not permitted; Washington, however, allowed private ownership of beaches and tidelands. He urged the Council to support this effort as well as future efforts to provide amenities such as the purchase of Marina Beach. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public comment portion. Mayor Haakenson recognized Port Commissioner Bruce Ferris in the audience. Councilmember Petso asked whether the City would be compensated if the City purchased the property and it was later determined as the location for a sewer plant or for Sound Transit's use. Ms. Ohlde answered if the site were selected, she was unclear how the design of a treatment facility would impact the site. She noted Sound Transit would remain in the right-of-way on the east side of the property. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 12 Councilmember Petso asked whether there were any plans to remodel the park or construct walkways following the purchase. Ms. Ohlde answered no, a linear walkway was not required. She noted the southern tip of Marina Beach was located in Woodway. Councilmember Petso asked about the cost of removing the pier/pipes on the site. Ms. Ohlde answered there was a negotiated deduction of $300,000 for that item. DNR agreed the City could defer removal of the pier and demolish it as part of the Edmonds Crossing project. If the Edmonds Crossing Project did not come to fruition, the removal of the pier would be renegotiated with DNR in the future. COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO EXTEND THIS ITEM FOR TEN MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council President Earling asked Ms. Ohlde to summarize the issues that would be considered over the nine months including environmental review and grants the City plans to apply for. Ms. Ohlde advised some due diligence had been conducted including boring, drillings, assessments, asbestos on the pier, ground water, etc., all of which has been clean. The agreement states Unocal would be liable for any contamination on the east side. She said staff would continue working on grants over the 9-month term of the agreement. She noted the purchase ranked as the number one project in the State. She anticipated only a 20% local contribution would be required for this purchase. Councilmember Miller asked what impact the purchase had on "dog beach." Ms. Ohlde said there would not be a negative effect; the uses could cohabitate on the site. She anticipated there would be some restoration as part of the daylighting project to provide shading for salmon. Mayor Haakenson remanded the matter to Council for action. COUNCILMEMBER DAVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT FOR MARINA BEACH WITH UNOCAL AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS AND APPROPRIATE $50,000 EARNEST MONEY FROM FUND 126. Councilmember Marin thanked Unocal for three decades of cooperation and for allowing the public to use the park. He thanked citizens who spoke, Representative Joe Marine for his support of the purchase, and attorney Bill Joyce for his efforts to develop this project. Council President Earling recalled during his first year on the Council, the City had an opportunity to purchase the Anderson Marina site. At that time, most citizens supported the purchase. He pointed out the importance of long range planning and an understanding of the community and region's desire for waterfront access. He urged the Council to have a long range vision for many issues facing the City. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mayor Haakenson added his thanks to Ms. Ohlde and her staff, Mr. Clifton and his staff, attorney Bill Joyce and Unocal for their efforts. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Hwy 99 Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, recommended the City resume meetings regarding Hwy. 99. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, noted the City did not advertise the Marina Beach eating purchase as an opportunity for public comment. He said repealing Ordinance 3354 reduced the # 3354 effectiveness of a future action to reduce the utility tax. He said it was important the Council show Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 13 compassion for the public plight. He said the reduction of the utility tax via Ordinance 3354 to his household was $18 not $12 and his home was not heated with electricity. Mr. Hertrich referred to his inability to complete his comments regarding the CIP, noting he usually completes his comments in a timely manner and was nearly finished. He objected to Councilmember Miller's criticism of the public's comments. Mayor Haakenson reminded Mr. Hertrich of the 3-minute rule for audience comments. Public Rich Demeroutis, 921 Pine Street, Edmonds, noted the Mayor has stated the City did not overspend on Safety the Public Safety Complex and had sufficient funds to complete the fire station on 196t'. However, his Complex discussions with Mr. Gebert indicate there was approximately $1.5 million for the project that was now estimated to cost $2.25 million, a $750,000 shortage. He questioned how the additional cost would be funded. Regarding annexation to the Sno-Isle Library District, he estimated taxpayers would spend $15 �ibrmillion over a 30-year period for the same library services. This amount would increase due to increases ontr ct in the City's assessed valuation. He questioned how the increased cost of library services via the existing contract method were determined. He requested the reasons he recommended Council President Earling resign from Sound Transit be included in the March 20 Council minutes. ibrary Elaine Yard, 9209 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, referred to a newspaper commentary entitled [Annexation "Current Contract Beats Annexation" which compared the $0.36 per $1,000 of assessed property value to the $0.487 per $1,000 assessed value. Ms. Yard pointed out the $0.487 per $1,000 if annexation was approved would be in addition of the currently assessed $0.36 per $1,000. helan Co 7. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH CHELAN [Regional COUNTY FOR HOUSING INMATES IN THE CHELAN COUNTY REGIONAL JAIL Pail Contract Acting Police Chief Greg Wean explained the City currently has agreements with Lynnwood and Snohomish County to house inmates. Lynnwood's booking fee was $75 per booking and a $65 daily fee. Snohomish County Jail's booking fee was $81.22 and $60.21 daily housing fee. Chelan County has offered to house prisoners for no booking fee and $48 per day. Chelan County would transport inmates to and from Lynnwood or Snohomish County to the Chelan County Regional Jail. He said the remainder of the contract was nearly identical to the City's contract with Lynnwood and Snohomish County. The only difference was the daily housing cost was considerably less. He said issues that required further investigation were determining how long an inmate's sentence should be before housing them at the Chelan County Jail. He requested the Council authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement and staff would work out the details. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MILLER, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR HOUSING INMATES IN THE CHELAN COUNTY REGIONAL JAIL. Councilmember Davis applauded staff for seeking less expensive alternatives for housing inmates. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Southwest 8. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH asin Study EARTH TECH, INC. FOR THE SOUTHWEST BASIN STUDY Assistant City Engineer Don Fiene explained the Southwest Edmonds Basin was the only area remaining in the City that had not had a basin study performed. The goals of the study were to get citizen feedback, analyze drainage problems, and determine necessary solutions to correct problems. 'Solutions would then be added to the City's CIP in the future. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 14 COUNCIL PRESIDENT EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO ' SIGN THE `PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH EARTH TECH, INC. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8A. ORDINANCE NO. 3355 ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON PROCESSING BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY CHURCHES LOCATED ON COLLECTOR STREETS City Attorney Scott Snyder explained in accordance with the Council's request, he prepared a moratorium ordinance. On a super majority an ordinance establishing a moratorium could become effective immediately and it would become effective in five days with a simple majority. Development Services Director Duane Bowman displayed a map identifying the location of existing churches and arterials and collector streets within the city. He identified two churches (Christ Lutheran and Holy Rosary) whose sole access was on a collector street. He said St. Matthews Lutheran had access from 84th as well as 212th, therefore, their sole access was not from a collector street. He said churches located on collector streets that wished to expand from a neighborhood church to a community church would be impacted by the moratorium. He commented an improvement to a school on the affected property would not be impacted as it was a different use. Councilmember Orvis asked for clarification whether this only impacted churches over 22,000 square feet. Mr. Bowman answered it would impact churches that were currently that size or that wanted to expand to that size. He said as there had not been any indication from any church regarding expansion, it was his opinion that the moratorium was unnecessary. In response to concerns regarding siting of a mega church, he said there were no parcels large enough to support such a use. Councilmember Orvis said under the ordinance approved, a small church could expand into a mega church with a Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Bowman answered if the church's sole access was from a collector street, they would be prohibited from obtaining a building permit for expansion. For Councilmember Plunkett, Mr. Bowman agreed churches were defined in the Community Facilities ordinance as community churches and neighborhood churches. He noted mega churches were larger churches such as Overlake Christian. Councilmember Plunkett inquired whether the Planning Board's intent was to address impacts based on the size of the church. Mr. Bowman agreed. Councilmember Plunkett observed although Mr. Bowman did not feel a change to the ordinance was necessary, the ordinance did not reflect the Planning Board's distinction between community and neighborhood churches. Mr. Bowman explained the Planning Board addressed areas of impact and location criteria. During Council deliberation, the question was raised whether collector streets should be included. Based on the types of streets where churches were located, his opinion was the moratorium was unnecessary. If the Council had sufficient concerns, he suggested the Planning Board revisit the matter without establishing a six-month moratorium. Mr. Snyder explained the initial September recommendation from the Planning Board had three church categories which was later simplified to two categories. The term "collector" was added to the description of larger churches to better reflect streets within the City. He said Ogden Murphy Wallace has developed a number of mega church ordinances. As indicated by the current controversy in King County, mega churches were being sited in rural areas due to the need for large campuses. He said there were few sites available on collector streets in the City that could be used to site a mega church. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 15 Mr. Bowman noted collector streets were an appropriate location for church facilities due to the heavier traffic pattern on collector streets. He said the Council could adopt a moratorium or direct the Planning Board to consider this issue. Councilmember Petso said when the term "collector" was added to the larger category of churches, the Planning Board's intent was changed without Council discussion. The Planning Board's intent was to have really small churches on local neighborhood streets, slightly larger churches on collectors but a really big church would need to be on an arterial and not a collector. She explained her intent via the moratorium was to prevent adverse changes from occurring until the Planning Board could consider how the change impacted their intent. Councilmember Petso questioned whether other churches would be impacted by the moratorium. Mr. Bowman responded the moratorium affected churches located on collector streets; many of the churches on the map were in Snohomish County and would not be impacted by the ordinance. Councilmember Petso asked whether the two churches Mr. Bowman identified were within 1,200 feet of an arterial. Mr. Bowman answered yes, but they would be impacted by the moratorium as their sole access was from a collector street. Mr. Snyder pointed out if the moratorium was approved, a public hearing needed to be scheduled within 60 days of the date of passage. Councilmember Orvis said his understanding was a CUP process would be required for an existing church that wanted to expand beyond 22,000 square feet. Mr. Snyder agreed, noting with the moratorium in place, this would not be possible for a church not located on an arterial. He said the intent was to prevent the siting of new, large community churches on collector streets. Mr. Snyder said the City could grandfather non -conforming churches but it would be difficult constitutionally to allow an existing church to expand in a location where a new church could not be sited. Mayor Haakenson remanded the matter to Council for possible action. Councilmember Petso recalled there was intense discussion at the Planning Board's public hearing regarding church size and where they should be located. She recalled an effort to accommodate existing churches with the 1,200-foot location from an arterial. The questions she and Councilmembers Plunkett and Orvis raised indicated there was sufficient complexity in the issue that necessitated another review by the Planning Board. COUNCILMEMBER PETSO MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 3355 ESTABLISHING A MORATORIUM ON PROCESSING BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR COMMUNITY CHURCHES LOCATED ON COLLECTOR STREETS AND TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING DATE WITHIN 60 DAYS. Councilmember Marin said he planned to oppose this on the principle that a church would not pose a threat to the community. He preferred the Planning Board review the issue without the adoption of a moratorium. Councilmember Plunkett said although he preferred a moratorium was not necessary, he was concerned with unintended consequences of the ordinance. He encouraged the Planning Board to review the matter as soon as possible. He said by supporting the motion, he was not implying churches were a threat but they created traffic impacts that must be considered. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 16 Councilmember Orvis suggested the Planning Board determine whether the ordinance could be structured using the distance from an °arterial" to accommodate existing churches. He supported the moratorium to provide the Planning Board an opportunity to consider the matter. Mr. Snyder advised the public hearing date would be May 14 (rescheduled from Tuesday, May 15 due to the election on May 15). MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER MARIN OPPOSED. 9. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Haakenson had no report. 10. INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL REPORTS/UPDATES ON RESPECTIVE BOARD MEETINGS There were no Council reports. With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:05 p.m. OAKkNSON,MAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes April 3, 2001 Page 17 AGENDA _ EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North 7:00 -10:00 p.m. APRIL 3, 2001 SPECIAL MEETING 5:45 P.M. — EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING A LEGAL MATTER — Jury/Executive Session Room 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 27, 2001 (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #47210 THROUGH #47379 FOR THE WEEK OF MARCH 26, 2001, IN THE AMOUNT OF $289,315.08. (D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM BLAKE LONGSINE ($150.00) (E) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING A CLOSED RECORD MEETING HELD ON MARCH 13, 2001 — APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR A FOUR -LOT SHORT SUBDIVISION CALLED SEAVIEW HIGHLANDS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 18111 — 84T" AVENUE WEST AND IS ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS-12). (Applicant: Orlo Fuller / Appellant: Dennis and Carla O'Leary. File No. S-2000-50 / AP-2001-17) (F) APPROVAL OF CONSULTANT CONTRACT AWARD FOR THE EDMONDS CROSSING — PINE STREET FERRY TRAFFIC STUDY (G) PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF DAYS OF REMEMBRANCE: REMEMBERING THE PAST FOR THE SAKE OF THE FUTURE, APRIL 15 — 22, 2001 3. (30 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING ON ADOPTION OF 2001 — 2006 SIX -YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) AS PART OF CITY OF EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4. (45 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING ON EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN FOR ADOPTION AS PART OF CITY OF EDMONDS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 5. '(20 Min.) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT FOR MARINA BEACH PROPERTY WITH UNOCAL AND THE CITY OF EDMONDS 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3 Minute Limit Per Person) 7. ( 5 Min.) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH CHELAN COUNTY FOR HOUSING INMATES IN THE CHELAN COUNTY REGIONAL JAIL 8. (10 Min.) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH EARTH TECH, INC. FOR THE SOUTHWEST BASIN STUDY 9. ( 5 Min.) MAYOR'S REPORT 10. (15 Min.) INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL REPORTS/UPDATES ON RESPECTIVE BOARD MEETINGS 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 as well as a delayed telecast of the meeting appears on AT&T Cable, Channel 21.