Loading...
03/24/2015 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES March 24, 2015 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:45 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember (arrived 6:58 p.m.) Michael Nelson, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Noushyal Eslami, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Shane Hope, Development Services Director Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Rob Chave, Planning Manager Rob English, City Engineer Renee McRae, Recreation Manager Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. MEET WITH PLANNING BOARD CANDIDATE MATT CHEUNG FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD At 6:45 p.m., the City Council met with Matt Cheung, candidate for appointment to the Planning Board. The meeting took place in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. All elected officials were present with the exception of Councilmember Mesaros. Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. and led the flag salute. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 17, 2015 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 1 B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #213330 THROUGH #213387 DATED MARCH 19, 2015 FOR $278,273.12. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #61539 THROUGH #61547 FOR $479,080.45, BENEFIT CHECKS #61548 THROUGH #61553 AND WIRE PAYMENTS OF $517,009.76 FOR THE PAY PERIOD MARCH 1, 2015 THROUGH MARCH 15, 2015 C. CONFIRMATION OF MATT CHEUNG TO PLANNING BOARD POSITION #3 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Peter Hallson, Edmonds, reported on the Basics of Bicycling Program. When the program started, it was intended to reduce obesity and get kids active and riding to school. Starting with 30 bikes and a trailer from Cascade Bicycle, during the first year they addressed 8 schools and impacted 2,000-3000 students. They have been working closely with Safe Routes to School including bicycles, trailers and investments in excess of $1.5 million and raised another $150,000 via Verdant grants, Swedish and others. To date, the program has addressed 18 schools and reached 6,000 students. They hope to reach all 20,000 students in the Edmonds School District (ESD). He referred to BikeLink on tonight's agenda, explaining when BikeLink began 1 %2 years ago, recommended routes from Edmonds and Lynnwood became a proposal to Verdant for which Verdant approved a $1.9 million investment. Their challenge is to have all 20,000 students in the ESD as well as their parents riding. Their next dream is to move to the high schools; hopefully they have built enough culture within the ESD to encourage competitive bicycling teams in the high schools. Erin Zackey, Edmonds, a teacher at Edmonds Heights and a mom, said the implications of the artificial turf fields proposed at the former Woodway High School are significant; her classroom is located steps away from the fields. More current research has been done since the City's conducted its research and there are concerns expressed in public media about possible carcinogens in artificial turf. Although further research, evidence and reports from toxicology institutions have been done, the EPA is leaving the decision regarding how the studies are interpreted up to jurisdictions. She expressed concern with off - gassing and the 2-29 years it takes for particulate matter in the fields to break down. She was not willing to sacrifice her health or the health of her children or students' health by the installation of these fields. She was happy to be a resident of Edmonds, had dreams for Edmonds and loves projects such as the daylighting of Willow Creek. Millions are being spent to clean up the same thing that the field project proposes to install. She noted this is not just one field but potentially four. She encouraged the Council to reconsider the project. Kate Smith, Edmonds, a neighbor and parent of children who attend Edmonds Heights, said the fields are designated an open space; she and many neighbors frequently access the space for a variety of activities. She expressed concern with having the space scheduled non-stop with sports teams. She recalled Verdant and other organizations involved in the project advertised it as a community recreational program. Her vision of a community recreational space was open to a wide variety of people at a wide variety of times. It was her understanding the fields will be used for select and premier soccer and lacrosse and possibly softball. She was hopeful a compromise could be reached; using less of the space for fields and leaving some of it open for community access. Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, offered a definition of form -based planning, the basic feature of the Westgate Plan. Form -based planning is a Danish planning theory whose sole purpose is to replace zoning as a form of planning if adopted in the United States. Form -based planning drops numbers such as those currently in the Zoning Code related to heights, setbacks and lot coverage and instead provides pictures for staff to use to determine what new development will look like. When discussing Westgate Plan, she urged the Council to consider that the proposal drops zoning as a form of planning. The proposal before Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 2 the Council is not zoning, it is a district plan and form -based code. It also changes the traditional approach to planning, putting the sole authority in the executive branch to decide what numbers apply using the pictures and descriptions. She noted the only setback in the Westgate plan is the 20-foot setback from the highway. She summarized if the Council adopted the Westgate Plan, it would no longer use zoning. Nathan Proudfoot, Edmonds, explained the organization Feet First began in 1995 as a group of citizens and professionals interested in promoting walkable communities. Feet First works to ensure all communities across Washington are walkable. Since 2001, they have helped people take steps that create better places to live, learn, work, shop and play, a world that cares about health, community and the environment. He is a volunteer neighborhood walking ambassador trained to lead walks that inspire, connect and inform the community. The walks provide an opportunity to explore the community together while meeting new neighbors. They imagine a different way of connecting with surroundings that takes steps toward improving personal and environmental health while sharing knowledge. Walking is an important form of transportation that is healthier, better for the environment and safer for communities. He invited the Council and community to partake in a 3 mile walk he is leading this Saturday at 10 am from the Edmonds Train Station along the waterfront and a section of trail on railroad property as part of the Opening Day for Trails and Rails to Trails Conservancy. He is leading two other rails with trails walks in Seattle on Saturday. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, urged the Council to listen to Ms. Shippen's comments. Next, he referred to the annual report from the Economic Development Commission (EDC) drafted by Bruce Witenberg that summarizes 2014. The report states after an opportunity for each members' review and comment, the report is offered by current Chair Mike Schindler. Mr. Hertrich said that is incorrect; the report never came to the EDC for review. It was his understanding there was a short period of time for members to pick up a copy of the report for review but he never saw it until tonight. After a quick review, he said Chair Witenberg did good job on the report and it is fairly accurate with the exception of the statement that the EDC had an opportunity to review it. He did not recall an opportunity for the EDC to review the white paper on Westgate; he voted against the white paper because he felt it was somewhat a rubber stamp of Planning Board's recommendation. Darlene Stern, Edmonds, corrected Mr. Hertrich's assertion that the members of the EDC did not review the annual report. It was sent out via email with ample time for review by those who chose to review it. Therefore, no correction needed to be made. 6. PRESENTATION OF CITIZENS' ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION 2014 ANNUAL RVPORT Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty explained on June 2, 2009, the City Council passed Ordinance 3735 which amended the Edmonds City Code to provide a chapter that established the Citizens' Economic Development Commission (CEDC). That code requires the CEDC provide an annual report in December. This year's report is provided later in order to include 2014 in its entirety. The report was written by last year's Chair Bruce Witenberg and there was an opportunity for review sent out on February 25 with comments accepted until March 2. Mr. Doherty introduced CEDC Chair Mike Schindler who presented the CEDC's report. Creating Economic Sustainability o What strategies do we have for growth? o How do we bring more revenue into the city? o What new sources of revenue should the city consider? o How do we improve commercial viability? o What impact does and can tourism have on our city? o A lot of what/how questions Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 3 What does our future look like? o Are we overcome by skyscrapers? o Are we Ballard? Kirkland? Clyde Hill? o Will we still export the majority of our workforce to other cities? o How will we tap the talent, skills, and abilities of our citizenry to make Edmonds a thriving city? o Will business want to locate here? Are there incentives? Leadership unites in 2009 o June 2009 Edmonds City Council passed Ordinance 3735 which chartered the Citizens Economic Development Commission o The goal: to get outside citizenry input on how to improve revenue to the city. o Advantage: leverage knowledge base of Edmonds residents. EDC's role o Vision: "A City that has revenue adequate to provide a high quality of life for residents and support business." est. 2010 o Mission: "To identify and ensure implementation of paths that increase revenue through effective economic development reflecting the values of our city. o Empowered to advise and make recommendations to the Mayor and City Council (and other agencies) on new strategies, new sources of revenue, and strategies for improving commercial viability and tourism EDC sets example of balancing strengths to accomplish vision 0 17 Members of the EDC 0 3 appointed by Mayor 0 2 appointed by each councilmember o Diverse Backgrounds: city and county planners, engineering, law, journalism, lobbying, real estate, science, technology, business owners, etc. o Meet as a body on the third Wednesday of each month from 6:00pm — 8:00pm — Open to the public o Each Commissioner is assigned a subgroup — they present to body each month on progress made toward developing recommendations/tasks/goals 2014 Commissioners Accomplish Sizeable Tasks o Elected Chair Bruce Witenberg and Vice Chair Kevin Garrett provided overall leadership of the volunteer body of commissioners. o Three Active subgroups in 2014: Strategic Planning, Business District Enhancement, Tourism and Visitor Services o Enhance working relationship between EDC and Council — to improve lines of communication and receptiveness of ideas. o Worked closely with city staff, Planning Board, Port of Edmonds o Heard updates from BID, Chamber of Commerce, Historical Society, Senior Center, Edmonds Center of the Arts Volunteer Commissioners Helping Council Try to Achieve Excellence o Reviewed and discussed major land use planning projects: Westgate, Firdale Village, Five Corners o Discussed merits of potential incentives to attract new development and retain existing o Prepared a White Paper in support of Westgate proposal o Discussed the merits of a year-round farmers' market o Discussed recommendations for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to introduce mixed used at Westgate o Finalized its review and unanimously approved a paper which focuses on maximizing the economic impact of tourism in Edmonds Path to Victory isn't Always Easy Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 4 o January 2014: Council passed Ordinance 3955 limiting certain office uses within Downtown Zone - CEDC supported that effort o May 2014: Council passed Ordinance 3970 requiring members of CEDC to be Edmonds residents o November 2014: Council passed Ordinance 3981 amending use requirements and modifying parking standards o November 2014: Council passed Ordinance 3984 that incorporates new language for the Westgate neighborhood - CEDC overwhelmingly supported this Comprehensive Plan amendment CEDC Explores Ways to Grow Revenue o Taxing Your Way to Economic Success on fixed incomes Won't Work o Cutting Services won't Sustain City Coffers 2015 Provides Opportunities to Explore o CEDC is fully represented by each councilmember and the Mayor o New Urban Model is emerging: young knowledge workers (25 - 34) want to live, work and play in their cities. o Area of Focus: Economic Sustainability o Subgroups: Tourism / Strategic Action Plan Implementation Group / Business District Enhancement o Each Group Tasked with: - Identifying two areas of focus; target demographics; how suggestion improves tourism, economic sustainability and/or attracts new business and revenue Mr. Schindler added the Council has the opportunity to renew the CEDC this year or allow it to sunset. Councilmember Buckshnis spoke in favor of not allowing the CEDC to sunset as she found the group valuable and she looked forward to their continued work. Councilmember Mesaros thanked Mr. Schindler for his words of encouragement; the best part is there are 17 citizens putting forward ideas and discussing them. He liked that the members have diverse ideas; although a sense of unity is desirable, there should not be so much unity that they are all marching down same the path. He summarized the CEDC is valuable to the City and he recommended the Council move forward quickly not to allow the CEDC to sunset. Councilmember Nelson referred to one of the overarching goals, enhance the working relationship between the Council and CEDC, and asked whether that goal was met or was in progress. Mr. Schindler answered we're getting there. He is relatively new to the CEDC having been appointed approximately 12 months ago and Councilmember Petso is relatively new to the liaison position. He appreciated having representation from Council at the CEDC; the question is whether members feel they can speak freely and what happens to their comments if they do speak freely. The CEDC's overarching goal/mission is to serve the Council. He wanted to ensure it did not become a divisive relationship but an extension of the talent, skill and ability in the City to help bring ideas forward that represent the citizens. Councilmember Nelson referred to the month -to -month breakdown of work the Commission did compared to the ordinances passed by the Council; as a Councilmember he was interested in doing more. Councilmember Johnson said she met Bruce Witenberg and Diane Buckshnis on the Levy Committee in 2009. One difference this year is that the CEDC is looking at the Strategic Action Plan (SAP) implementation. She asked if that was implementing the items assigned to the Economic Development Department or overseeing the whole SAP. Mr. Doherty answered there are two levels of work on the SAP, items for which the CEDC is identified as a participant but also reporting on the implementation of Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 5 all the items will be made to the CEDC's SAP subgroup. The subgroup does not have an oversight role but are a working group make suggestions to assist in moving implementation forward. Councilmember Johnson recalled Cynthia Berne suggested ongoing activity for implementation; she asked whether the CEDC would have that role. Mr. Doherty answered there are many organizations identified as primary leads; the CEDC is the primary lead in only 1-2 items. Because there are so many leads and participants in the SAP it is important to have a mechanism for tracking; software funded in the 2015 budget has been purchased as a pilot program and staff is involved in tracking progress and encouraging leads as well as updating the CEDC subgroup on progress so that they can interact with people in the community. Council President Fraley-Monillas said a second Councilmember is being sought to attend CEDC meetings. With regard to the concern about speaking freely, she asked whether that was the Councilmember speaking freely or the committee members speaking freely. Mr. Schindler responded the Commission wants to ensure they are able to speak freely. This Commission is a working group; they want to be able to debate ideas and do not want a Councilmember to take an idea that has not been approved by the entire CEDC or run with a statement that one Commissioner made. The Commission wants to be sure they can debate issues and that no feelings get hurt in order to present the best ideas to Council. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if there have been situations in past where the Councilmember manipulated conversations at the CEDC. Mr. Schindler answered there have been circumstances. Council President Fraley-Monillas said she hoped the Commission's discussions could be open and honest. She was perplexed by this concern. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled she and Councilmember Johnson were on the Levy Committee in 2009. It was very successful and citizens were very candid. It is good to have opinions and an opportunity for discussion. 7. 2015 SPECIAL EVENT CONTRACTS Recreation Manager Renee McRae reported there are five special event contracts: Market — no change Edmonds Art Festival — no change Car Show — no change July 4th — only change is to allow no more than 20 vendors on the street Taste — Due to a vehicle/pedestrian incident that occurred at the 2014, the Police recommend Main Street be closed at 6th Avenue Greg Urban, Chamber of Commerce, was present to answer questions regarding the Taste. Councilmember Bloom inquired about insurance for festivals and whether it was based on the length of the event. She observed the Market's insurance is $1 million per occurrence, $5 million aggregate for an event that occurs for several months. The Edmonds Art Festival's insurance is $3 million per occurrence and $3 million aggregate for a weekend event. The Taste of Edmonds' insurance is $1 million per occurrence and $2 million aggregate. She assumed the Taste would potentially have more liability compared to other festivals due to the beer garden. She was curious why the aggregate for the Taste was so low and suggested it be similar to the Edmonds Art Festival or $3 million per occurrence and $5 million aggregate. Ms. McRae answered the issue of insurance has reviewed over time by former City Attorney Scott Snyder. The majority of the Arts Festival's insurance is due to the cost of the art and potential damage that could occur. The proposed contracts were reviewed by Sharon Cates, Lighthouse Law Group and she did not make any changes. Councilmember Bloom reiterated her concern with fights or bodily injury at the beer garden at the Taste of Edmonds compared to art which was a fixed amount. Mr. Taraday answered he was not involved in the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 6 review but one of the things considered when his office reviews the contracts is ensuring they comply with the insurance thresholds recommended by the City's insurance pool, WCIA. Assuming they comply with those, in general no other recommendation would be made because WCIA already recommends what they want in contracts with regard to insurance provisions. He was not sure why there were differences but he was confident they met and in some cases exceed the minimum. Councilmember Buckshnis, former director of the Arts Festival, said there is a lot of very expensive art and the vendors do not take their art home at night. She recalled the Edmonds Art Festival asked for that insurance amount due to the very expensive art. With regard to the beer garden, she agreed but said the same thing happens at the waterfront and they have the same amount. Councilmember Petso referred to her email about notifying citizens of the change. She was satisfied with placing this on the Consent Agenda for approval assuming staff will follow through and notify citizens. If anyone affected by the change expresses concern, it can be pulled from the Consent Agenda. Ms. McRae advised the Chamber has prepared the mailing; she reviewed it and it will be sent out tomorrow. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item on the April 7 Consent Agenda. 8. REVIEW OF AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE A HEALTH & FITNESS EXPO Recreation Manager Renee McRae reported the third annual Health & Fitness Expo will be held on May 16 at the Edmonds-Woodway High School Stadium. The City received a $2,000 grant from Snohomish County Public Hospital #2 (Verdant); because they are a public entity, the City must enter into an agreement to accept the funding. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item on the Consent Agenda. 9. CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARD FOR THE 228TH ST. SW CORRIDOR City Engineer Rob English explained this project was initially developed in 2006/2007 as part of the Highway 99 Traffic Safety Circulation Study; it has been in planning, design and right-of-way acquisition phase for 8 years. The project is out for construction bids which were advertised earlier in March. Staff plans to open bids Thursday, March 26. There are nine general contractors on plan holders list and staff is hopeful a large number of bids and good bids compared to the engineer's estimate will be received. The project budget is a tied bid with the SR99 Lighting Phase 3 project, a project for which the City received a federal grant to improve lighting on Highway 99 between 212t1' and 220th Streets. He provided details regarding construction costs and funding: 228th Street Corridor Proiect Estimated Construction Costs Construction (base) $4,686,080 Construction Management 15%) $702,912 Management Reserve (10%) $468,608 Total $5,857,600 Construction Add Alternates $274,368 Funding Federal Grant $3,647,376 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 7 State TIB Grant $1,722,000 Mountlake Terrace $395,864 Water Utility $95,404 Stormwater Utility $68,500 Sewer Utility $238,008 Total $6,167,152 SR99 Lighting Phase 3 Estimated Construction Costs Construction (base) $461,900 Construction Management 15% $69,285 Management Reserve (10%) $46,190 Total $577,375 Funding Federal Grant $590,873 Mr. English explained based on the engineer estimate there is sufficient funding to move forward but that will not be known for certain until bids are opened on Thursday. Staff will come to Council for award of the contract in April or May; staff is working with PUD on utility relocations. Public Works Director Phil Williams advised the City obtained use and possession for the project from PUD, the takes and the easements that the City needs to build this project, but PUD is working to obtain easements to move power lines before the City's contractor is on site. Those conversations have not gone as well or as quickly as PUD hoped or the City projected. He will inform the Council if it affects the timeline. Councilmember Mesaros asked the height of the median separating 76th. Mr. English answered 18 inches. A decorative median wall is one of the add -alternates. Councilmember Johnson asked for a description of the lighting from 212th to 220th and whether there would be any special features for the hospital district, recalling there were red lights and pedestrian level lanterns in the International District. Mr. English said the style of the lighting will not match the International District; it will be a separate decorative style lamp. There will be street level illumination and a lower pedestrian level lighting on the same pole that illuminates the sidewalk as well as a banner. The conceptual layout of the banner emphasizes the health aspect of the Swedish Hospital area. He offered to provide a mockup of the banner. Councilmember Johnson asked whether the poles will be painted. Mr. English yes, they are a brownish color. Mayor Earling advised this will come back to Council for award of the contract. 10. PRESENTATION OF A LOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR THE 228TH CORRIDOR PROJECT AND THE SR99 PH 3 LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS City Engineer Rob English explained this is a contract to provide construction management services for the 228th Corridor Improvements and the SR99 Phase 3 Lighting Improvements. A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) was issued in November 2014 per the City's purchasing policy. Four firms responded, and the Selection Committee selected KBA based on their qualifications and experience. The services KBA will provide include inspection and contract administration which includes full-time inspectors to support City personal, review and approval of submittals, requests for information and Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 8 materials, certified payrolls, disadvantaged business enterprise requirement, reviewing project schedule, change order reviews, public outreach, material testing, project close out a .7 FTE office engineer to support staff in administering the contract. The project includes federal funds which require a great deal of paperwork and documentation. WSDOT does a review at the end of the project as well as progress reviews/audits throughout construction. The level of effort on a federally funded project is much more significant than on locally funded projects. Mr. English explained the consultant fee is $448,936 plus a 10% management reserve of $44,864 bringing the contract total to $493,500. With regard to the overhead rate, WSDOT recently changed their boilerplate lag agreement when a consultant has a review by WSDOT, the approved overhead rate can be retroactive on a contract. At this point the overhead rate for KBA is 1.29%; they are undergoing their WSDOT audit now and anticipate the overhead rate will increase 13-20% over the current rate. Mr. English anticipated some of the management reserve would be needed to cover that. The construction management budget for the 228th Corridor Improvements and the SR99 Phase 3 Lighting Improvements wasl5% or approximately $770,000. This contract is $493,000; a portion of the budget will be used to pay City staff costs that go into managing the project. He summarized the contract and City staff time are within the established budget. Mr. Williams advised the City project manager is Jaime Hawkins who was the project manager on the roundabout. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item on the April 7 Consent Agenda. 11. PRESENTATION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH KPG FOR THE CITY-WIDE BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT City Engineer Rob English recalled a couple weeks ago staff presented an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with the City of Lynnwood for a Verdant grant awarded to Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace and Edmonds to provide bike lanes, signage and education as part of their BikeLink Program. This professional services agreement is to design those improvements within Edmonds. A selection committee with representatives from each of the three cities selected KPG as the consultant. In Edmonds KPG will design plan specifications for the bike lanes on 76th Avenue from 220th to Olympic View Drive and on 212th between 84th and SR99. There is also a task for wayfinding signage that will be installed in the City on several routes. KPG's base fee is $142,214 plus a 10% management reserve of $14,000. The project will be within the budget established in the Verdant grant - $176,000 for preliminary engineering. Councilmember Petso asked the average daily trips on 76th Avenue between 220th and 208th. Mr. English answered he did not have that information with him and Mr. Williams offered to provide it this week. Councilmember Petso asked whether the City can get a refund on the grant money or will have to pay the grant money back if the City ultimately decides not to do the project or to undo this project. She explained the project includes reducing travel lanes on 76th from 2201h to 208th were there are currently 2 lanes in each direction and turn lanes at the intersections. The proposal is to reduce that to one lane north and southbound and one turn lane. Without the average daily trip information, she was concerned the traffic levels along that road and the needs of the schools and hospital may not be conducive to a road diet. If it was discovered that the traffic could not be moved through the once the project was completed and the project had to be undone, did the City have to pay Verdant back. Mr. Taraday said he will research whether the grant addresses that. Councilmember Bloom observed the Lynnwood improvements include bike parking installations but there are none in Edmonds. Yet on the map there are a lot of places where it would be beneficial to park bikes to access shopping, Yost Park, the waterfront, etc. She asked whether bike parking installations Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 9 already existed in Edmonds or was there another reason they were not included. Mr. English explained the budget established by the grant for the 3 agencies for bike parking installations was $20,000. There will be some bike parking installations within Edmonds using the grant money. The actual locations have not yet been determined. Councilmember Bloom suggested that be added to the Edmonds and Mountlake Terrace improvements. Mr. English referred to Exhibit A that identifies bike parking installations for multi agencies. Councilmember Bloom asked how the locations will be determined. Mr. Williams said locations where bike racks would be most usable will be determined during design and property owners asked to host the installation. He summarized professional judgment will be used to determine areas where bicycle are most heavily used. Councilmember Bloom asked whether there would be any public input. Mr. Williams answered there will be public input on the project. Councilmember Mesaros referred to the BikeLink map, Exhibit B, and blue lines (existing bike facilities) that do not connect to other blue lines such as on Sierra Drive. He asked if there was a long term plan to connect them. Mr. English answered there is a Bike Plan in the Transportation Comprehensive Plan. In response to Councilmember Petso's earlier question, Mr. Williams said the three lane configuration with bike lanes on both sides was modeled using standard traffic modeling that looks at the current ADT, projected ADT and determined the City's standard level of service (LOS) was met comfortably. Councilmember Petso said she did recall that but recognized the reality; if the public is unable to get up and down that street as fast as they would like, whether it is LOS F or not, the City will hear about it. A similar road diet was recently discussed for 100th/9th near Westgate; she has researched how a road diet delays traffic thus her request for the ADT. Mr. Williams assured staff will provide her the ADT. He said the benefit derived has far more to do with the number of driveways and turning movements than traffic volumes. Mr. English said capacity is one consideration, safety is another; three lanes that include a turn lane is safer for turning movements than not having a turn lane. Councilmember Nelson referred to the BikeLink map (Exhibit B) and asked if a BikeLink was a combination of bike lanes and sharrows. Mr. English answered BikeLink is Verdant's term for the program and grant. Bike lanes are designated striped lanes typically 5 feet wide adjacent to a travel lane such as on 220th. A sharrow is a symbol on the pavement to make drivers aware to share the road with bikes. When sharrows were initially placed on roadways, they were placed where bike tires should be to avoid conflicts between bikes and vehicle doors. The use of the sharrow symbol has become broader and sharrows can be seen on 11-12 foot lanes. Councilmember Nelson said the map does not indicate where there are bike lane or sharrows; a bicyclist may want to know that. Mr. English said there is a bike map in the Transportation Comprehensive Plan that has that information. The BikeLink program is bike lanes and signage; there are no sharrows proposed other than in areas where a bike lane will not work such as in the drop-off queuing area for College Place Elementary and Middle School. There may need to be a sharrow instead of a designated bike lane in that area. Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested identifying on the map the areas on 76th that are 2, 3, and 4 lanes and how that will be changed. She assumed staff is getting input from people involved with cycling such as Peter Hallson and the Edmonds Bike Club. Mr. English agreed staff is seeking their input. Councilmember Johnson said there are bicycle racks at Yost Park and most new development requires bike racks such as Swedish and new buildings on Highway 99. She suggested Bowdoin Way would be a good candidate for bike lanes because it is a travel route to Chase Lake Elementary, the Five Corners Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 10 Roundabout and the school district. Bowdoin Way currently only has bike route signage. She also suggested extending bike facilities north and south on 9th/100`h in Westgate. Councilmember Mesaros asked whether the red lines on the BikeLink map will have bike lanes. Mr. English answered the red lines represent improvements via BikeLink; the improvement will be a bike lane or signage. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item on the April 7 Consent Agenda. 12. PRESENTATION OF FINAL CONTRACT COSTS OF THE ANNUAL SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT - PHASE 1 City Engineer Rob English advised the Council awarded the contract to Shoreline Construction in April 2014. The project replaced approximately 1800 feet of sewer line on Railroad Avenue and Dayton and 960 feet of water main on Railroad Avenue. Much of the cost of the 2 change orders, which totaled approximately $64,000, was associated with working with BNSF such as BNSF flagger during construction due to the proximity of the equipment to BNSF's right-of-way. Buried railroad ties were also found during excavation and water main adjustments were required due to buried objects. The final amount paid to Shoreline Construction was $1,186,000; the final reconciliation, change order 3, was a negative amount, bringing the project under the award amount. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this item on the April 7 Consent Agenda. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. 13. REVIEW OF DRAFT WESTGATE ZONING ORDINANCE Mayor Earling relayed Council President Fraley-Monillas and he agreed to allow one hour for this item and rotate questions to give each Councilmember an opportunity to ask questions. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether this needed to be removed from the table first. Mayor Earling answered that has been taken care. Development Services Director Shane Hope explained there has been a lot of public process on this topic since it began over 5 years ago including 15 public meetings at City Council with 2 public hearings, 11 Planning Board meetings with 3 public hearings for a total of 26 public meetings, not including other groups that have discussed Westgate. The last Council discussion regarding the Westgate zoning proposal was on November 3, 2014. It was tabled pending completion of the SR-104 corridor study. The SR-104 study was presented to the Council on March 10, 2015. Tonight's agenda item is to review the draft Westgate ordinance and Council discussion/direction on ordinance options to be brought back for final action. Mr. Chave displayed a Zoning Map Amendment of the Westgate area, the commercial properties around the intersection of SR-104 and 100th. He explained the propose of the Westgate proposal Respond to growth o Focus on exiting areas/nodes Respond to demographic change o Population and housing needs changing Respond to the environment o Forterra input on transportation choices; walkability; attractive urban environment o "Green" features and slope protection Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 11 He reviewed proposal features: No expansion of the existing commercial area Opportunity for additional intensity of development within the commercial area "Hybrid zone" mixture of traditional regulations (uses, setbacks) and form -based elements not regulated in standard zones (requirements for amenities and open space, building types and locations) Mix of building heights dependent on location and topography, 2 to 4 stories maximum "Green Factor" landscape system Additional protection for surrounding slopes and trees/vegetation Increased setbacks & visual emphasis on the intersection/"entry" Supporting traffic analysis — no reduction in level of service (LOS) He displayed photographs illustrating a variety of building/uses and spaces that buildings create. He relayed the consultant's conclusions/recommendations from the SR-104 Corridor Study: No additional travel lanes needed along SR-104 and 100th Ave W Recommended minimum setback 0 15 feet at the interstation 0 12 feet away from the intersection Parking standards: minimum 1 stall per 500 commercial square feet is reasonable, plus residential parking. Can be refined over time. Access management with new development Mr. Chave displayed the following schematics from the Fehr & Peers SR-104 Corridor Study: Westgate Access Management Master Plan Standard building setback — 12-foot setback away from 100th Ave W Larger setback at intersection — 15-foot setback at 100`h Ave W intersection Next steps: 1. Integrate corridor study recommendations into the ordinance (12 and 15-foot setback, access management, enhanced language on entry/gateway features, access management) 2. Bring back final ordinance for Council action 3. Future: consider what should happen within the ROW (e.g. bicycle improvements or pedestrian crossing options along 100th Ave) Council President Fraley-Monillas inquired about the setback on 196th and SR-99 where there is new development, noting there is space for tables/chairs and vegetation. Ms. Hope offered to research that. Councilmember Bloom said she stepped it off and the sidewalks are 12 feet and 30 feet at the corners and the buildings are 15-20 feet from the sidewalk. Mr. Chave was uncertain how much right-of-way was used for that; it may not all be on private property. Councilmember Bloom said she took Natalie Shippen's concerns with form -based code seriously. Councilmember Bloom asked why the zoning could not be done quadrant by quadrant. She had a difficult time accepting this as a package deal because she did not view the quadrants as a package, she saw them individually. What she would like to have in the quadrants is not reflected in the Westgate proposal. For example, in the Bartell quadrant, she could see housing closer to the hillside and leave what exists and develop it more fully. She could not see putting buildings up to the sidewalk with commercial and housing above. In the QFC quadrant, she relayed the City has been told QFC is not going anywhere for a while, perhaps something different on the southeast side and PCC is planning on staying. When the four quadrants are taken as a whole, she has a hard time accepting form -based code and leaving it up to the developers to decide with only a few frameworks. The City needs to be really careful where residential Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 12 and mixed use are allowed. She was not opposed to residential in Westgate but was opposed to allowing mixed use in all four quadrants. Councilmember Bloom asked why the plan could not be done quadrant by quadrant. Ms. Hope answered the current zoning is not quadrant by quadrant; it is one zone and there is no proposal to change that. There are a number of different factors that apply to form -based code; people are not always accurate about what they believe form -based zoning is. For example, some people have said form -based zoning does not require setbacks; it does and this zoning proposal requires setbacks, dimensions, it has the same type of requirements that are in traditional zoning but adds a lot with regard to design. The Westgate proposal was designed to be holistic, to recognize there are great opportunities and that it does not all have to be alike. Councilmember Bloom said commercial and residential mixed use (previously called commercial block) is allowed on every quadrant and there could potentially be amenities and open space. She was concerned with treating every quadrant the same. Townhouses are allowed in one quadrant behind QFC; she suggested being more specific about areas where residential only versus mixed use are allowed. Mr. Chave said doing one quadrant at time would lose a lot of the benefits such as access management which is a significant change to the existing circumstances. For example if only the southwest corner of the quadrant where Bartell is now is done, the benefits of access management, additional amenities, landscaping, etc. on the other quadrants would not be realized. He said the configuration of building types could be changed; the current proposal was very flexible and he did not think the same kind of development would occur everywhere in Westgate because the area did not lend itself to that. The configuration of the properties, the surroundings such as slopes, the access and the property ownerships in the quadrants are all very different. For example, PCC has no interest in adding residential; Bartell is interested and if a change was made, he could envision mixed use in that quadrant. Although a particular building type could be done throughout, it likely would not happen. The initial proposal did not allow mixed use everywhere; one of the early comments was maximizing commercial uses in Westgate. He urged caution with a phased approach due to the loss of benefits. Councilmember Johnson relayed her understand the goal was to make Westgate more pedestrian friendly and walkable. She asked what role the businesses with drive-throughs played in that, observing they were more auto oriented. In the five years that the Council has been discussing Westgate, a number of new drive-throughs have been constructed including two fast food, two banks, two pharmacies, and potentially a coffee drive through. She asked how to transition from auto oriented development with drive-throughs to the new walkable area and whether drive-throughs be allowed in the future. Ms. Hope answered the design standards would change the look of those buildings so drive-throughs would be less likely. The proposed code does not outright prohibit drive-throughs; if the Council wished, staff could consider that. Mr. Chave said the intent was a transitional approach; the first step was to deemphasize drive-throughs and make it secondary to the business. As the area begins to redevelops, there may be a time the Council does not want any more drive-throughs and that would be good opportunity to revisit and change the standards. Councilmember Johnson commented in the past 4-5 years there have been 4 new drive-throughs in Westgate. There may be a conflict that needs to be addressed sooner than later. Drive-throughs are prohibited downtown. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled she was on the Council when the UW made the presentation regarding form -based code. She referred to the Form Based Code Institute's website that states there are five elements and more requirements under form -based than under standard block building. She suggested looking up the UW's presentation. Form -based code is visual as well as words to describe how things are done and actually provides more control of development. Mr. Chave challenged anyone to compare the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 13 Westgate zoning code to other zoning codes and say Westgate is less definitive or regulatory. The Westgate zoning includes choice but there are actually more requirements. Councilmember Buckshnis said it would be beneficial for the public to see that there are more standards in form -based code; it is not just done by the developer. Councilmember Mesaros expressed appreciation for the work that has gone into the Westgate Plan. He asked how far from the intersection the larger setback extends. Ms. Hope answered 40 feet. Councilmember Petso recalled staff said earlier a plain commercial building perhaps with a drive -through could be allowed under this Westgate code. She referred to a blog post today where someone suggested an In/Out Burger to get money from people passing through. The 2014 sales tax distribution indicates Westgate is twice as productive as other neighborhood business districts and downtown. With all that, she did not see where in the code a plain commercial building was allowed. The plan allows rowhouse, courtyard, stacked dwelling, live -work, loft mixed use, side court mixed use and commercial mixed use. She asked whether a drive -through burger joint would be allowed or whether an eighth building type needed to be added. Mr. Chave said it would be allowed; mixed use is allowed but it does not require a mixture of residential of commercial in a building, it is an option. Councilmember Nelson asked the difference between amenity space and open space; amenity space seems to be outdoor activity space open to the public. Open space seems to have more restrictions such as a roof garden/deck that can be private. Mr. Chave explained amenity space is active space such as a plaza. Open space does not include active areas; it is natural features possibly with a pathway or landscaped area such as the slopes behind some buildings. Council President Fraley-Monillas said taller buildings on the QFC property make the least sense to her compared to taller buildings that back up to a slope. Mr. Chave said there are two principles with regard to higher building, put them in places where 1) there are higher slopes so they do not interfere with views, and 2) there are no nearby residences such as the QFC property. That property is surrounded by other commercial uses and taller buildings would not impact on neighboring properties. Locations for taller buildings considered not only topography but also surrounding uses. He noted in a 4-story building, the top floor must be stepped back. Councilmember Bloom referred to the Compass building and asked if there was a 5-foot strip between the sidewalk and curb. Mr. Chave answered it may be 4 feet. Councilmember Bloom asked the width of the sidewalk. Mr. English estimated it was 5 feet. Mr. Chave recalled the combination of the sidewalk and curb are in the right-of-way and there was only about 9-10 feet between the paved surface and the edge of the right-of-way. The Compass building at the corner has a 4-foot setback. Councilmember Bloom relayed her understanding of Mr. Chave explanation there is 9 feet from the curb and a 4 foot setback to the first Compass building. Councilmember Bloom inquired about the setback for the second Compass building, the lower residential building. Mr. Chave said the one he was talking about was the building on the corner which is the mainly commercial building. The building setback on the lower residential building may be 10 feet; the configuration of the sidewalk and planting strip is similar to the building on the corner. Ms. Hope said that is less than is proposed in Westgate; the proposal in Westgate is a 12-foot setback plus 10 feet within the right-of-way so a total of 22 feet. Councilmember Bloom observed the second Compass building is 19 feet, only a 3 foot difference from the Westgate proposal. Ms. Hope said staff will confirm the distances for the Compass building. Councilmember Johnson referred to the legal principle in planning that it cannot be arbitrary or capricious. She asked why the McDonalds site was recommended for a 4-story building and Walgreens is Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 14 recommended for a 3-story building when both were recently demolished and rebuilt. Mr. Chave said they were rebuilt under existing codes in the configuration they chose. The reason for 3 stories at Walgreens was the height of the slope behind; the slope declines eastward on SR-104. Residents above the slope expressed concern at the Planning Board about the height of the buildings, not realizing the existing height limit in the BC-EW could have been above the slope. The slope in the McDonald's area is much higher. Councilmember Johnson observed the slope near Walgreens declines but the slope at Walgreens is very high. Mr. Chave answered it depends on the location; the height limit on that site could be revisited. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled the parking was 1:500 for commercial and asked about graduated parking for a large building like QFC and several smaller buildings, noting smaller buildings may need less parking. She asked about the amount of residential parking; Mr. Chave said the proposal is 1.2 parking spaces. He explained buildings are not typically constructed for a small business; there is usually a large building with a number of tenants and the parking is a blended rate which is the average rate. Each use is not identified for its share; parking is provided for the overall development. In a mixed area, businesses typically have different peaks; in a large commercial area with shared parking, the need for parking ebbs and flows. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the residential parking will be gated to keep it separated. Mr. Chave answered that will be up to the developer; but he assumed in marketing the residential units, the residents will want assurance their parking is reserved. Councilmember Mesaros asked whether the existing zoning for commercial parking is uniform throughout Westgate or whether it varies in the different quadrants. Mr. Chave answered parking is totally different depending on the use. Ms. Hope said each use has a different parking requirement; and as a result, if the business in a space changes, there may not be enough parking. The intent is to provide a blended parking rate. Mr. Chave said the benefits of a blended rate cannot be overemphasized. He provided the example of a restaurant that wants to locate in a space that was previously an office space; in addition to the tenant improvements, they potentially need to provide more parking. If there is not enough parking, potentially the restaurant cannot locate in that space. That does not make sense in an area that overall has good parking nor does it make for good PR. Councilmember Petso recalled the traffic consultant saying the parking could be fixed later; however, if the QFC develops with a grocery store at 1:500 there will not be enough parking and that cannot be fixed later. When Council considered this previously, the existing parking utilization and the change to parking on Highway 99 were considered. She asked for confirmation that the consultant making this recommendation did not do any utilization analysis of the existing parking at Westgate. Ms. Hope answered the consultant looked at various information that was available but she was uncertain that met Councilmember Petso's intent. Councilmember Petso relayed she requested a copy of the consultant's parking utilization study and received a memo stating they were comfortable with 1:500 because other cities do it and it is walkable. If a parking study can be provided, she asked to see it. Ms. Hope offered to research that. Councilmember Nelson referred to permitted uses, primary and secondary uses and conditional uses. He asked what a condition use is, noting a zoo was a conditional use. Mr. Chave answered a conditional use process is discretionary; the principle for a condition use is it is probably acceptable but the details need to be reviewed to determine how it presents itself. For example a zoo in a walkable area would need to have a pedestrian face for people walking by. Ms. Hope pointed out a conditional use permit goes to the Hearing Examiner; all the regular rules apply plus some additional rules. Mr. Chave said the drive- throughs are conditional uses to ensure vehicles do not interfere with pedestrian ways. Council President Fraley-Monillas referred to an email regarding parking recalling the Council passed a motion that made parking in that area 1:400. Now the consultant has recommended 1:500. She asked Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 15 whether the 1:400 stands unless the Council changes it. City Attorney Jeff Taraday referred to the earlier question whether this needed to remove from table to begin discussion. Under Roberts Rules of Order, for a body like the Council that has regular weekly meetings, each meeting is a session. When something is tabled, it is only effectively tabled until the next session. If it is not removed from the table and disposed of at the next session (meeting), the motion dies. Everything the Council did in November, all the amendments and votes, are dead and the Council is starting from scratch from a matter of parliamentary procedure. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if that varied was based on what was tabled; she recalled the motion was to table discussion about proceeding with Westgate until the transportation study was finished. If that was the motion, she asked wouldn't the things the Council already worked on still be active. Mr. Taraday no, there was a main motion that was subject to several motions to amend. When the Council tabled the main motion and all the things that attached to it, they were all tabled at the same time and all die at the same time if not taken from the table in a timely manner. He summarized the Council now has a blank slate. Councilmember Bloom said that was very depressing news. If she had known the motion to table would eliminate all the work done that evening, she would not have supported tabling. She relayed her understanding the second Compass building is 19 feet from curb. What is recommended for Westgate is 22 feet from the curb. Ms. Hope said she was not certain with regard to the Compass building but agreed the recommendation for Westgate was 22 feet and 25 feet at the intersection for 40 feet in each direction from each corner. Councilmember Bloom inquired about the Planning Board's recommendation regarding the setback. Mr. Chave answered 12 feet. Councilmember Bloom relayed her understanding the Planning Board recommended 12 feet and the current setback is 20 feet. Councilmember Johnson requested a redline version from the original Planning Board recommendation as there have been several changes incorporated and it is difficult to remember what was discussed last. Councilmember Petso relayed she was at City Hall yesterday looking at setbacks and property lines in the Westgate area with City staff. One of the things they encountered was irregular lot shapes; for example at Key Bank a portion of their lot juts into the sidewalk if not beyond and at the proposed Starbucks, the property line is under the sidewalk. Today in the City's mapping application she found one of the property lines in front of QFC is in the street. As she understood it, if the proposed setback was applied from the property line and the 12-foot setback was measured from the street, the building setback from the curb would not be 22 feet. She asked how having the building at least 22 feet from the curb would be achieved. Ms. Hope answered in discussions with staff, there is an 80-foot right-of-way and the City's GIS maps are pretty accurate with regard to that location. While there may be some small anomalies, it is generally pretty clear where the right-of-way is and there is a requirement for a planter and sidewalk regardless of where the property line is. Staff can determine what Councilmember Petso was reviewing and return with more information. Mr. Chave said during development review it is not unusual to encounter legacy right-of-way jogs; that is usually cleaned up during development review via right-of-way dedications, etc. He recalled a jog on 100th that is an anomaly and is small enough the only risk is that someone would want to construct a building with the jog. Councilmember Petso said in the event the City received an application, which apparently happened for Key Bank, is the setback measured from the part of the property line that is furthest in the road or where it is expected to be found. Mr. Chave answered it is measured from every part of property line. If there is a historic jog where the right-of-way wasn't dedicated, typically dedication would occur during the development process in order to establish a uniform setback. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 16 Councilmember Johnson referred to buildings located at the intersection of 100th/SR-104. She recalled a concept with a circular setback. If buildings are setback 22 feet, she asked how far the stepback would be on the 4t'' floor. Mr. Chave answered the current stepback was 30 feet. If a building is setback 22 feet, the stepback would mean the 3rd and 41h floor would be stepped back another 8 feet. If the setback is 25 feet at the intersection, there would be a 5 foot stepback on 3rd and 4th floor. Councilmember Petso recalled the setback would be measured from the property line and that the stepback was measured from the center of the intersection. Mr. Chave answered it is 30 feet from the intersection right-of-way. Councilmember Petso did not recall any provision in the transportation consultant's presentation for bus pullouts in the right-of-way. Ms. Hope answered Community Transit is trying to get away from bus pullouts. There is language related to sidewalks that refers to bus pullouts. She offered to research and get back to Council. Councilmember Petso asked what happens on SR-104 if there are no bus pullouts, whether traffic just backs up behind a stopped bus. Ms. Hope answered although transit agencies are trying get away from bus pullouts; there are bus pullouts now and there are no plans to remove them. Councilmember Petso asked how bus pullout would be provided, whether it would narrow the sidewalk. Ms. Hope suggested there would not be a landscaped area where people are entering/exiting the bus. Councilmember Petso observed a bus pullout would be wider than the five foot landscape area. Ms. Hope agreed to research that. Councilmember Petso said one of things she previously requested was a work session to discuss regarding building types, where they are located and heights. She asked whether Council was interested in a work session to discuss the height and building diagrams. Councilmember Bloom expressed interest in that, noting that would be helpful for Councilmember Nelson who is new to this. 14. DISCUSSION ON DRAFT CULTURE & URBAN DESIGN ELEMENT - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Development Services Director Shane Hope relayed this is related to the Comprehensive Plan update that is due by mid-2015. Several questions arose at the public hearing on the draft Culture & Urban Design Element. She invited further Council questions/input, advising work continues on this Element along with the remainder of the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Petso recalled one of her questions at the previous meeting was uninspiring language about poorly maintained strip malls on Highway 99. She recalled the Planning Board requested that language be eliminated or changed. She suggested changing that paragraph and consolidating the three paragraphs that followed regarding buildings should be well maintained, wiring should be undergrounded when possible, commercial signs should be regulated and there should be street landscaping. Mr. Chave referred to page 118 in Exhibit 1, noting Councilmember Petso was referring to the introductory paragraphs under General, much of which is legacy language that has been in the plan for nearly 30 years. The Planning Board was doing some work to make statements more positive and he uncertain whether they had completed that work. Councilmember Petso referred to page 174 of Exhibit 2 where one of the general guidelines reads, protect natural environments using sustainable design practices and "using sustainable design practices" was added which seemed to limit the opportunity to protect the natural environment. For example at Westgate, one of the things being done to protect the natural environment is a setback or protection of the wooded hillside and she was uncertain that was a sustainable design practice. She preferred to leave the statement as "protect natural environments." Ms. Hope said the additional language was suggested by the Planning Board. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 17 Councilmember Petso referred to A.2 on page 175 Exhibit 2, Layout of Parking, "Locating buildings in proximity to the street to facilitate direct pedestrian access and help define the street edge." She asked whether these guidelines apply citywide, noting that would make sense for a new building downtown but less sense to a church in her neighborhood where the houses sit back from street. She asked whether the language in the document was zone specific or an overall concept. Mr. Chave answered the language in the Comprehensive Plan is intended as a general statement that the zoning will interpret; different zones will have a different, unique takes on them. One of the cleanups in the code rewrite is references to these overall design objectives; the zoning should interpret how it applies in a specific location. Councilmember Petso suggested the design guideline state the building location be consistent with the area where it is constructed. Ms. Hope said the language could be fine-tuned. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed her appreciation for the revisions; it reads well and staff did great job. Councilmember Nelson referred to the Implementation Action, Develop Urban Forest Management Plan by the end of 2017. He asked why that time line was chosen and not earlier. Ms. Hope said the Streetscape and Street Tree Plan will be presented at a future meeting; this is a placeholder. The intent is to propose implementation for things that are important to accomplish and establish a doable timeline. Councilmember Bloom echoed Councilmember Petso request to eliminate "sustainable design practice," because she was unclear what sustainable design practice meant. Councilmember Bloom reiterated the concern she stated at the last meeting that Urban Design Objectives B.2 and B.4 are contradictory; B.2 states "improve pedestrian access from the street by locating buildings close to the street and sidewalks, and defining the street edge" and B.4 states "building setbacks create a common street frontage view with enough repetition to tie each site to its neighbor." The pictures provided are also contradictory; one shows the building at the street and the other shows tables and umbrellas. Mr. Chave said the umbrellas in the picture are in the right-of-way; there is a huge sidewalk area in that location. The B objectives refer to downtown. Councilmember Bloom referred to language in B.4, "In the waterfront area west of the railroad, buildings should be set back from the waterfront to preserve and provide a buffer from existing beach areas." and asked if that was consistent with the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Mr. Chave referred to additional language in B.4, stating he did not see a conflict with the SMP. Councilmember Bloom referred to the question she raised last week seeking clarification regarding the City's responsibility in pursuing public and private funding for cultural sites. She noted one of the sites identified was the Edmonds Theater which is a private business. She questioned how the City would choose who to provide funding to; the City already provides funds for the Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) and the ECA seeks their own private funds. Mr. Chave answered the intent was a broad statement regarding the City constantly seeking public/private partnerships to support arts and culture. If the language is not clear, it can be revised. Councilmember Bloom suggested it also be clarified which entities the City will seek funds for. Mr. Chave said the entities listed are only examples. Councilmember Johnson referred to Community Cultural Goal B, "encourage recreational opportunities," observing the goal is specific and the policies seem to be more general. Ms. Hope said the current plan has a recreational goal so it was retained and some meaning added via the policies. Councilmember Johnson said the reference seems to be open space and natural features not recreational features. Mr. Chave said much of that is included in the PROS Plan and may not be necessary. It was included because it was in the plan previously. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 18 Councilmember Petso acknowledged this Element is still a work in progress. She observed in the section regarding site access, objectives have been removed such as regarding garage entries. She asked whether they were removed because they were addressed elsewhere. Ms. Hope said the goal was to clean up the Comprehensive Plan so it contained more general statements and not regulatory language and rely on the code, and changes to the code, to provide specifics. Mr. Chave said the goal was a more concise statement without all the specifics that are addressed in the code. Councilmember Petso said if the Council wanted to prioritize safe site access in the Comprehensive Plan and the code that language would need to be included. Mr. Chave said yes, if a significant concept is missing. Councilmember Bloom referred to the page 179 in the redline version, and questioned the new language in A.14, "encourage new construction to avoid repetitive, monotonous building forms." Mr. Chave said that statement was moved to this section from somewhere else. Councilmember Bloom asked how that balanced preserving historic places and spaces. Mr. Chave said it doesn't, it is a different design objective. Councilmember Bloom referred to A.15 where language regarding views is crossed out. She recalled Mr. Hertrich's comments last week about removing language regarding views. She asked whether the language in A.14 that had been crossed out was located elsewhere in the Comprehensive Plan and if so, where. Mr. Chave answered it is impossible to understand what some of the language means such as protect views — from what, to what? It is such a broad statement that it becomes meaningless. Councilmember Bloom asked where the statement, "minimize blockage of light and air to adjacent properties or to the sidewalk area" is addressed. Mr. Chave said it is unintelligible what that means and difficult to translate into code. Building setbacks, stepback or height typically address light and air. Mr. Chave advised the Council's comments will be forwarded to the Planning Board. 15. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling had no report. 16. COUNCIL COMMENTS Council President Fraley-Monillas invited citizens to the Edmonds Senior Center annual meeting tomorrow at 3:30 p.m. Councilmember Mesaros will be the guest speaker regarding fundraising. Councilmember Bloom reminded comments regarding the Edmonds Marsh setback are due Friday, March 27 by 5 pm. The address is David.PatergECY.wa. ov. She referred to Councilmember Buckshnis' article in My Edmonds News regarding the setback and interim zone. The Port wants to reduce the setback to 25 feet; a 100-foot setback is required for federal funding. Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Finance Director Scott James for the excellent report he provided last week on the unaudited yearend financial statements and the annual report on impact fees. 17. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 18. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. 19. ADJOURN Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 19 With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:53 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 24, 2015 Page 20