Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19840515 City Council MinutesMay 8, 1984 -continued Councilmemb~r Dwyer reported that SNOCbM spent 24.781 of its budget during the first quarter. Councilmember Kasper asked ~hat the Edmonds Public Disclosure Ordinance be pla~ed on the agenda. He said there are inconsistencies with the State and the document should be corrected. He said there is a Community Services Committee meeting next week and asked for touncil support of the City Engineer's request for retention maintenance ponds~ Councilmember Kasper asked for a total financial report for the Council of how much was spent on Dayton St. ~uring construction and the funding sources. Council President Jaech reported that she had requested copies of person~el vacancy announcements so the Council would know what is going on in the City. She reminded evepYone of the workshop sched-uled on May 19 at 8:00 a.m. ·in Community Services Staff Lounge, indica'ting the Council would review . .. . . I items discussed at the retreat. · . , Council President Jaech said several neighbors around 555.Walnut St. had asked her to correct a situation involving children playing in the building excavation area. Mayor Naughten said he had discussed the situation with Ms. Block and the developer will be asked to secure the area. Countil President Jaech said there is a probl~m at the intersection of 9th and Casper with dirt and gravel on the roadway. She asked that someone supervise and.keep the road clean. Councilmember Hall commented on the thank-you note from Mr. Simpson. Since there was no ·further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at 10: 35 p.m. . ' LARRY S. NAUGHTEN, Mayor May 15, 1984 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naughten in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor Jo-Anne Jaech Lloyd Ostrom Bill Kasper Laura Hall Steve Dwyer Jack Wilson. John Nordquist ABSENT Brian Stewart, Student Rep. STAFF PRESENT Steve Simpson, Parks & Rec. Director Jack Weinz; Fire Chief Jim Jesse 1 , Property Manag'er Mary Lou Block, Planning Director Jim Adams, City Engineer Bobby Mills, Actg. Pub. Wks. Supv. Pat LeMay, Personnel Director Robin Hickok, Actg. Police thief Jackie Parrett, City Clerk John Wallace, City Attorney Scott Snyder, City Attorney Shirlie Witzel, Recorder Councilmember Kasper advised Mayor Naughten that Councilmember Nordquist would be delayed at a Community Transit meeting but would Join the Council later in the evening. CONSENT AGENDA Item (F) was removed from the Consent Agenda by Mayor Naughten because of language pro~lems and was returned for Council consideration during the Mayor's portion of the meeting. Items (B), (C), (G), (K), (L), (M) and (N) were withdrawn from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO APPROVE .THE BALANCE OF .THE CONSENT A~ENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved i terns on the Conser:it Agenda included the fallowing: (A) Roll call. (D) Authorization to advertise for procurement of traffic control poles (SR 524 and 80th Ave. w.). (E) Adoption of Ordinance 2428 amending Chapter 18.95.of Community Development Code regarding parking lot construction and standards. · (H) Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages from Grant K. Weed for $910.89. (I) (J) Accept recommendation to make 20 annual payments of $34,866 each as Edmonds' share of improvements to Brown's Bay Treatment Plant. Authorization to award Public Works Uniform Service Contract for two years to Troy Linen & Uniform ~ervice for $8,314:80 annually. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MAY 8, 1984 [ltem (B) on Consent Agenda] Councilmember.Hall asked that Page 8, first paragraph, last sentence be corrected to read ''Council- member Hall said in order to mitigate all of the problems the playfield would have to be closed and the Council would have to work backwards from that point." COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, THAT THE MINUTES BE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. MOTION CARRIED. I I I I I I I I I I 385 May 15, 1984 -continued AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO EXECUTE CONSULTANT CONTRACT (UNION OIL WATER LOOP) [Item (C) on Consent Agenda] .Council member Kasper asked for clarifi,cation regarding the figures used in connection with the engineering costs of $13,960 and $5,898. City Engineer Jim Adams indicated that th~ reduction was a result of negotiation and possible misunderstanding by the consultant of what the City wanted. He added that nothing had been dropped from the original plans ·and specificatiqns .. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH FUJIKI & ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR A TOTAL FEE OF $5,898. MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2429 ~MENDING CHAPTER 17.40 RELATING TO NONCONFORMING SiGNS AND AMENDING CHAPTER.· 20.60 REGARDING MODIFICATIONS TO S1GN CODE [Item (G) on Consent Agenda] . -· .. · . Councilmember K~sper said because the sign code had not been finalized and the Council had not acted in good faith with .the Planning Board and Architectural Design Board, he would be voting against the ordinance. The ordinance dries not include areas .other than Highway 99, and he will not support the or,diriance unless .areas such as SRl04 are included. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER' MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL- MEM~ER WILSON, THAT ORDINANCE 2429 BE AMENDED TO 1NCORPORATE THE WORDING ''THE HEIGHT OF THE SIGN SHALL BE LIMITE~ TO THE TOP.OF THE PARAPET ON A FLAT ROOFED BUILDING AND THE DRIP LINE OF A PITCHED ROOF .·11 A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN WITH COUNCILMEMBERS KASPER, HALL AND WILSON VOTING YES; COUNCIL-· MEMBERS JAECH, OSTROM, AND DWYER VOTING NO, RESULTING IN A TIE VOTE. Councilmember Jaech noted that she had voted no since Councilmember Kasper had indicated he would be voting no on the ordinance and she believes .the Council should wait until-Couno-ilmember. Nordquist arrives before voting on the -Ordinance. Councilmembe~ Kasper.indicated he would be asking for repeal of the.ordinance that was adopted last week and.would be willing to wait until Councilmember Nordquist is present. He said he would be willing to vote for the -Ordinance in question if it were complete; however, the Council had not dealt with th~ question under ~onsideration. In regard to the ordinance passed last week, · Councilmber Kasper said former.Councilmember Gould h~d made a ~otion on December 6, 1983, seconded by Councilmember Naughten, to meet with the ADB to discuss retention of ADB authority before any action is taken to adopt the. ordinance giving this authority to the Hearing Examiner. Council- member Kasper said the Council. w~s acting in poor faith in not waiting to meet with the ADB before adopting that ordinance. · In addition, he said, when he brought up the question of criteria for the ADB, Councilmember -Ostrom had asked the Council to ~oncentrate on the sign code and not discuss criteria. Councilmember Kasper said he believed the motion to pass Ordinance 2427 was out of order. He was assured by the City Attorney that it was in order and had asked the Mayor to veto the ordi- nance. The M~yor had chosen not to veto and Councilmember Kasper then asked Council~ember Nordquist, who had voted on the prevailing side, to move to reconsider the ordinance. Councilmember Jaech moved that Item (G) on the Conseht Agenda be moved to Item .7 on the Agenda. Councilmember Kasper said he was .not agreeable. He said he would bring up the subject of Ordinance 2427 later in the evening .. He asked that the vote on his motion be taken at this time. MAYOR NAUGHTEN VOTED NO TO BREAK THE TIE. MOTION FAILED. .COUNCILMEMBER. KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, THAT ITEM (G) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BE MOVED.TO ITEM 7 ON THE REGULAR AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. SET DATE FOR HEARING ON APPEAL.OF .HEARING EXAMINER 1 SDE.CISION REGARD.ING SETBACK DETERMINATION Ar8029\'·242ND;.;sr~·. S~ W •' (APPELLANT: · MATHAY) [Item ( K). on Consent 'Agenda] ' . ' . . , . Councilmember Kasper questioned scheduling this hearing for-the May 29th meeting since the Council had agreed to keep fifth Tuesdays open. Council President Jaech said scheduling of the Town Hall Meeting on May 1. had used up the fifth Tuesday of the month. A 11 other fifth Tuesdays this year have been blocked out and nothing.will be scheduled. If the Council does not use this date, there will be a backlog of hearings. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO SET A DATE. OF MAY 29, 1983 FOR HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION REGARDING SETBACK DETER- MINATION) AT 8029 242ND ST. S. W. (APPELLANT:. MATHAY). MOTION CARRIED. REPORT ON BIDS OPENED MAY 4, 1984 AND AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR RENOVATION OF MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS [Item {L).on Consent Agenda] . REPORT~N BIOS OPENED MAY 2~ 1984 AND AWARD OF CONTRAtT FOR RENOVATION OF EbMONDS MUSEUM [Item (M) on ~onsent Agenda] REPORT ON. BIDS OPENED.;MAY 2, 1984 AND AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR WADE JAMES THEATER IMPROVEMENTS [Item '(~) on Consent Agenda] · Councilmember Kasper pointed.out that all three of these contracts provide that one percent of the total project cost.will be transferred to the Public Arts Fundr However, since these projects are federally funded, one percent cannot be transferred to the Arts. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY'COUNCILMEMBER JAECH,.THAT THIS PROVISION BE REMOVED FROM THESE THREE CONTRACTS AND COUNCIL APPROVE AWA~D OF BIDS TO HAWK CONSTRUCTION IN AMOUNT OF $22,597.88 FOR MEADOWDALE IMPROVEMENTS, TO AINSLEY CONSTRUCTION IN AMOUNT OF $15,150 FOR EDMONDS MUSEUM.RENOVATION, AND TO ED BOULTON INSULATION IN AMOUNT OF $48,170 FOR.WAOE.-JAMES THEATER IMPROVEMENTS. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Kasper raised a question regarding exp.enditure above the· budgeted amount for the Mead?wda 1 e. Clubhouse and site. improvements. Planning Di re,ctor Mary Lou Block replied that bids received were over the budgeted amount. Contingency monies were requested from HUD to cover increased costs and the request was approved. Coun~iimember Jae~h asked if the cost of the el~v~tor ~as included in th~ amount of $15,i5o for renovation of the Edmonds Museum. Ms. Block said the elevator cost has to be added to the bids. Mr. Adams explained that the total .cost was $41.,090 -Of.which $~5,150 plus tax· was for construction ?f.the_shaft. The purchase of the elevator has already been awarded for approximately $25,000 including tax .. The $69,623 was an estimate by the architect .. Councilmember Jaech asked that future information furnished to the Council include all pertinent information for use in comparison of costs, etc. . 386: May 15, 1984 -continued AUDIENCE. Dan Rice, '1~726 Soundview Pl., represenii~g the Edmonds Planning Board, read a letter from the Board to the Council expressing their views regarding adoption of Ordinance 2427. The Planning Board asked the Council to defer any decision on Item (G) of the Consent Agenda until the Planning Board has opportunity to make recommendations for a definitive sign code. Bob Boye, 24235 76th Ave. W., member of the Planning Board, asked the Council to remand the sign code back to the.Planning Board if Ordinance 2427 is not repealed. It was the intent of the Plan- ning Board during their work on the sign code that the ADB would be the flexible partner in admin- istering the code. If that changes, the sign code must be made more definitive for the Hearing Examiner's use in working with ~ariance.requests. He used the example of the K-Mart sign to illus- trate his point. Councilmember Ostrom asked if Mr. Boye wanted to provide better crit~ria for evaluating variances heard by the Hearing Examiner. Mr. Boye replied that the Planning Board would like to make some definite recommendations regarding heights and other areas, as well as establish- ing criteria. Councilmember Ostrom noted that granting variances is covered in the code. If the ADB were given powers as .described last week, essentially, there would be no code at all. He said he doe~. not understand what variances.have to do with the proposals from the PlBnning Board, since they ~te ~~aluated on specific prini~ples. Mr. Boye replied that specifics set down in a sign code, such as the 14 foot limitation~ would mean the Hearing Examiner would say no everytime to a request for a variance from that. Councilmember Ostrom read from. the City Code regarding variances. He said he does not understand what would be done differently for the ADB to apply the principles than the Hearing Examiner. Mr. Boye said the Planning Board wishes to have the chance to be more defini- tive and relaxing on the si.gn height on. J-li,ghway. 99. Co.uncrlmemb~r. Dwyer .~sk~d. if anyth_ing would prevent the Planning ·Board froni'considering these issues regard1ess of what the Council does this evening. He said the people who had received benefit from the actions taken at last week's meeting should not be prevented from receiving those rights while the Planning Board deliberated on recom- mendations:· Mr. Boye answered that nothing would prevent the Council taking action; however, the Planning Board would prefer to provide a complete and proper package instead of amending the code for the next few months. Ken Mattson, P. 0. Box 234, Chairman of the Planning Board, said four general areas were being considered in revision of the City Code: l. The Sign Code. There are several areas within the City that are separate and unique such as,Highway 99, SR104, Five Corners, Westgate, etc. Possibly the code .needs to be adjusted to fit each area. 2. The ADB. The possibility of expariding the list of membership qualifications, adding a local artist, sign maker or sign painter, etc., involving a more rounded viewpoint of signs in general. 3. ADB Criteria. At this point any criteria is vague and there was agreement at the ADB -Planning Board joint meeting that rationale must be explained for decisions made. 4. Review of Nominees for Board appointment. Tranditionally appointments are friends of the family or political appointments, but he suggested that qualifications should be examined more closely. He reiterated that the Planning Board had included the flexibility of the ADB in reviewing the sign code. He said the current code consists of guidelines, with provision for modification by the ADB. Mr. Mattson recounted that the Planning. Board had assumed the premise that the ADB did not exist when they began looking at revision of the sign code. They attempted to take into account every possible circumstance that might exist on Highway 99 and found they would have to spend three years to accomplish this and would have a sign code twice as thick as the City code; or some group of skilled individuals would have to be given the ability to look at a case by case basis and make decisions. He also asked.that the Planning Board be given.the opportunity to send better sign information to the Council foi review. Councilmember Kasper asked if Mr. Mattson believes the Council acted in bad faith in passing Ordinance 2427 last week. Mr. Mattson replied that if he were a new member and-something li.ke_ that ,~ad.happen~d,"he w_ould.h.av? asked what was. going on; however, he was not surprised, shocked or out~aged, just believe~ th~ Planriing Board should h~~e the oppor- tunity to look at the sign code in light of this circumstance. In response to ·another question from Councilmember Kasper, Mr. Mattson said he had heard the statement that the Hearing Examiner is concerned about consideration of these matters, but he did not know that to his own knowledge, but would not surprise him if that were the truth. Mayor Naughten. said Items 2, 3, and 4, should be moved to June 19. He noted that Item 4 is the appeal of the ADB approval of a _sign .on the proposed Ed~onds National Bank by Hertrich. The Mayor had receiyed.a call from the Edmonds National Bank requesting that this be continued to June 19. Councilmember Jaech said there is a problem in moving Item 4 since this is similar to a hearing that was before th~ (ouncil concerning the Shoreline Marina Expansion project earlier in the year. At that time., Mr. Hertrich had requested a continuance because he would not be present on the date of the hearing. The Council chose to go ahead at that time regardless of the appellant's presence. She also said, in addition to the question of fairness, that the date set should be agr~eable to both parties. At this point, Councilmember Ostrom asked why Items 2 and 3 were being moved. Mayor Naughten replied that those items would be moot if Item (G) on the Consent Agenda were to be approved or they would have to be continued if Item (G) were continued since they all tie together. Councilmember Ostrom!in responding to a statement from Councilmember Kasper, said Item 4 had been continued by the Council until the sign code issue had been resolved. In response to a question from the Mayor, Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, the appellant, said the date of June 19 would not be agreeable to him. He asked that he be given the opportunity to speak at this time. City Attorney John Wallace said it was up to the Council· if they wanted to open the hearing or continue to another date. ·If the hearing is operied, the appellant and anyone else wishing to speak may do so and the hearing could then be continued to another date, giving the respondents an oppor- tunity to listen to the tapes and, pre~ent their testtmony at that time .. ,The.problemrin resolving the matter in its entirety at this time would be whether the respondent received an ind'ication that there would be a continuance. In response to a question, Richard Johnson identified himself as being from the bank but indicated that he did not represent the bank in this matter. Councilmember Jaech outlined the Council's rationale for concluding the hearing.on.the Shoreline;=:f~arina Expansion project and asked if the Council is· not be inconsistent in their treatment of the situatation. She I I I I I I I I I I May 15, 1984 -continued satd. a metbod should.be decided upon and a~hered to. She asked if the respondent had been given indication that the hearing would be continued. Mayor Naughten said the letter had been received during the day .and he had also received a phone call from.the Bank, during whiCh he had told them the.next possible date would be June 19. Councilmember Hall suggested that the fact of the Bank's absence would constitute assumption on their part that the hearing would be contin~ed. ·She said the delay has been caused because the Council has not decided whether.the ADB will be allowed the necessary powers and this has resulted in the current confusion on the state of. the appeals. She suggested this ~atter be concluded this evening. She also asked that the Council members listen to the Planning Board members, remand the sign code to the Planning Board, and make a philosophical statement on the ADB dealing wi~h-modificat~ons versus variances and then thi~ type of embarrassing . situation will not reoccur. Councilmember Kasper said he had moved for c;:ontinuance of the Marina project hearing because the reason for the appeal was very clear. .even though the appellant. was not present. .COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, JHAT. JTEMS.2, 3, AND 4 BE MOVEO TQ JUNE 19. Mr. Wallace recommended that the hearings be postponed in accordance with the motion, subject to Mr. Hertrich's ability to .be in attendance on that .date. He added that this type 9f thing could be taken care of in the future to avoid the situation now before the Council. MOTION CARRIED. Counci'lmember Dwyer noted that his vote in favor of the motion was because he believes the Council was wrong during the hearing on the Marina Expansion in not continuing the matter to a later date. COUNCI.LMEMBER JAECH MOVED,. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, THAT THE APPELLANT BE ASKED IF THE JUNE 19 DATE IS AGREEABLE. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL VOTING NO. 387 Mr. Hertrich said he would be unable to attend the June 19 meeting and .asked to be allowed to present his testimony at this time, then continuing the hearing to allow.the Bank tQ.present their testimony. He noted.that he had been at every meeting to present his testimony and asked for the opportunity now. · COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, THAT THE PREVIOUS MOTION BE RE- CONSIDERED AND THE COUNCIL HEAR TESTIMONY ON ITEM 4 AT THIS MEETING, CONTINUING THE HEARING TO JUNE ·19 TO HEAR THE ABSENT PARTY. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Nordquist arrived-and joined the otber members of the Council. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED,. SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, THAT THE HEARING ON APPEAL OF ADB APPROVAL OF SIGN ON NORTH FACE OF PROPOSED EDMONDS NATIONAL BANK BUILDING AT 125, 137, AND 145 3RD AVE. S. BE OPENED. MOTION CARRIED. Planning Director Mary Lou Block read the staff report which contained background information on thi.s appeal, the application, elevations, sign design, and minutes of the ADB meeting of January 4, 1984 and City Council meetings of February 7, February 28, and March 7, 1984. Mr. Hertrich. distributed excerpts from the. minutes of ADB meetings of January 4 and February -1, 1984. At this point, Mr. Wallace interrupted to give.Councilmember Kasper an opportunity to speak. Councilmember Kasper .decl~red .that several of the Ban~'s stpcljp;ders were _his customers, and though he. did not know if there were any controlling int~rests, he stepped down f~om participation in the matter and 1-eft the room. · Mr. H.ertrich continued that his reasons for appealing the ADB decision are that the. 20' sign does not confo(m to the 14'. height limit stated for the.downtown zone. He stated that the people of Edmonds. have never indicated they want 20' signs all over the city. In addition to the 20' non- conforming height, the applicant gave erroneous information in his application for the 20' sign height. It. is apparent that there are no trees on the south side of Rainier Bank or.on the north side of the appli.cant's property. A hedge exists on the· southwest corner of Rainier Bank property with a height of approximately 7 1 and there is one deciduous tree on the fence li~e~ There are some trees on the west side of the Rainier building between the building and the sidewalk. The appli- cant's property c~n be viewed from the. intersection .of 3rd and Main, the main view blockage is the Rainier Bank Building. Mr. Hertrich .read an excerpt from the ADB minutes of January 4, 1984 in which the applicant had said a lower sign would .be blocked from view by a row of existing trees on the south edge of Rainier Bank. property. He then read a statement from the February 1, 1984 ADB minutes in which Mr. LaFon said "it was obvious that most Board members had not visited the site or they would not have voted as they did. He said it was the Board's responsibility to visit these sites to make good decisions and believed .they should make every effort to do so. In response to a question from Mr. Hintz, Mr . .LaFon. said the Bank had. argued that a hedge blocked the View of the sign from the 3rd and Main intersection. He said the hedge does not block any view.11 ,Asked if he were at the meeting, Mr. Hertrich replied that he did not remember if he were present on February 1. Mr. Hertri_ch then said the code does require that signs are to be .small, low level, oriented to pedes- trians. He said he was bothered by the assumption that a person has a right to advertise acro~s another person's property; the City does not guarantee that to anyone. He said he appealed the ADB decision because the information provided that Board was erroneous, in that there.was no view blotkage, and the decision was based upon the fact that there was; also, a 20' sign does not meet the ?tandards of the code. Since no one else wished to speak on this matter, th~ hearing was. closed~ COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY. COUNCTL:MEMBER'OSTROM·;,":;'THAT THE HEARING BE CONTINUED UNTIL JUNE 19.· MOTION CARRIED. . . .· . . . ·. HEARING ON PROPOSED 21-LOT SINGLE FAMILY PRO AND SUBDIVISION AT 16400.68TH AVE. W. (PRD~l-84, P-1-84/FIRST SECURITY REALTY SERVICE CORP.) . . . . . Ms; Block.stated that the Hearing Examiner, on April 5, 1984, conducted a. public hearing on this proposed Planned Residential.Development. On April 24,. 1984, the Hearing Examiner issued his report outlining his findings of fact, conclusions an recommendations. She said the Hearing Examiner recommends approval of PRD-1-84 and P-1-84, subject to the conditions listed in his report. Ms. 388· May 15, 1984 -continued Block then read portions of the Hearing Examiner's report and indicated that the Planning Department staff recommends approval with the addition that any clearing other than building ~ad and yard areas will be conducted only upon approval of the Department of Engineering and Department of Planning. She noted that.· the compensation to the City in the form of lot 9 for vacation of 164th St. S.W. would reduce this to a 20..:.lot PRD . .rather than a 21-:-lot PRO. She also outlined the history of the property. Mr. Kasper returned to the Council table. Councilmember Jaech said there had been a letter from Jack Linge which prompted some questions. She asked if the prior PRO appli~ation involving attached single-family residences were in any way connected to this application. Ms. Block answered that this application is a totally different development proposal and bears no relationship to the other. Ms. Block also said that traffic problems in the area had been addressed. Mr. Wallace responded to a question from Councilmember Jaech by saying that a declaration of nonsignificance has been determined by a responsible official of., the,City' ~nd1~,the\;Counc.H would be concurring with that finding. Ms. Block explained that the hammerhead turn around by lot 9 does encroach on City right-of-way, but w0uld also encroach on City right-of-way if it extended into lot 9 and by extending as it does it prdvides use of lot 9 by the Meadowdale Community Clubhouse. De Ang Lang, Subdivision Management, Inc, 16031 ll9th Pl. N.E., Bothell, "representing the applicant, described the public hearings that had been held with the neighbors of the proposed project. He listed the concerns expressed and .the attempts of the applicant to address the same. The concerns of traffic, parking, size of the lots, the trail that exists on the property, sidewalks, clearing of the property, and that all neighbors in the area be notified of any hearings. The applicant also had presented several designs for development at these meetings and the design selected had also been the One best received by those present at the meetings. Councilmember Kasper asked if all sewerage would go into the Lynnwood lines. Mr. Lang said the new, proposed trunk the City of Edmonds is installing will go past their property from the N. Meadowdale Rd. Mr. Adams clarified that the property is not located in the moratorium area, but no building permits would be issued for constructio~ on the property that would be served by the new sewer lines until the moratorium has been 1 ifted by the City Council.. He added that there are other portions of the proper:ty that can be served by the Lynnwood lines on 68th. He said the new trunk line should be finished by August of 1984. He also said the previous PRO had constructed some lines to be connect- ed on 68th and those could be used f6r·the upper section. Councilmember Kasper asked if Mr. Lang would be. supervising the construction of the developmenti since there had been difficulty in another developmE;!nt .on a steep site, the City would 1 ike to make sure of the qualifications of ·the developer. Mr. Lang replied that he would be supervising unless he were fired. '... •,. ' '' •, . -,,., :_ .. ' . ,,,., ' Mayor Naughten declared the hearing open. I I Ann Linge, 6970 160th St. S.W., said she was present representing h~r parents. She expressed I appreciation for Mr. Lang's work with the neighborhood. Ms. Linge said the Herald had announced that the meeting this evening was a closed meeting with no audience participation which might have discouraged some neighbors from attending and speaking. She expressed concern regarding access and the amount of traffic that wi1·1 be·added notwithstanding the decrease in the number of units planned. She noted that a major concern is that single family units, non-attached, be maintained. She asked th.at the Council insure that a clustered home concept not be allowed for consideration on this property. Ms. Linge also indicated their desire to maintain large lot sizei. She said the additional parking would help at the Community Club, but the overflow exceeds the planned 15 spaces. She asked that the width of the roads allow parking for not only cars, but boats and R.V. 's and that parking be provided within the development. She said they would like to maintain a quality neighbor- hood. She ended by asking the Council to address the concerns of the neighborhood in their con- sideration of the proposal. Mr. Lang said he had shown the present development plan to Ms. Linge earlier and said she was pleased. He said the road wi.dths were proposed at or about the City standards. As to the R.V. parking, it would not be allowed on the lots. Off-street parking in the project should not be a problem since double car garages are planned as well as two car parking in the driveway. Since no one·else wished to speak, Mayor Naughten closed the hearing. Councilmember Jaech questioned whether the Hearing Examiner had used the proper section of the Community Development Code in rendering his report. Mr. ·wall ace and Ms. Block assured her the proper sections were used but that an apparent typo9raphi ca 1 error had resulted in a di fferen.t section being shown .. Ms; Block indic.ated that' the requ·1remetits'mentioned i'ti the re'port 'are ·referred to in Section 20.35. She indicated that the sections of the code, 20.35 and 20.75, were referred to in the staff report as well. Mr~ Wallace said if there were any doubt, the Council could include a statement to the effect that the Council finds that all the ~riteria of 20.35 relating to PRD's have been met by th~ proposal, if the Council moves to approve the project. Councilmember Jaech read from the Community Development Code, Sections 20.35.040 and 20.35.050 and Ms. Block responded to each point as read, indicating.that the requirement had been met. At one poiht, she noted that development of the property as single family residential cou.ld. conceivably allow 27 units. She also indicated that.approval of the project as presented would prohibit any other type of construction, such as an attached sin~le family residence. Councilmember Hall said she was familiar with the site and the PRO concept. She believed the PRO will provide the variety which Ms. Linge had mentioned. She said she would vote for the develop- ment. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED ·BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND THE CONCLUSIONS PRESENTE~ TO THE COUNCIL BY THE HEARING EXAMINER, THAT THE 21-LOT SINGLE FAMILY PRO AND SUBDIVISION AT 16400 68TH AVE. W. (PRD-1-84, P-1-84/FIRST SECURITY REALTY SERVICE CORP.) BE APPROVED; ALSO BASED ON THE FACT THAT CHAPTER 20.35 REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN MET, AND ADDITIONALLY THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ALSO APPROVE ANY CLEARING OTHER THAN OUTLINED IN THE REPORT. MOTION CARRIED. . I I I I I I May 15, 1984 -continued Meeting was recessed fo~ ten minutes· at 9:50 p.m. · HEARING ON APPEAL OF ADB APPROVAL OF REVISED LANDSCAPING PLAN. FOR RICHMAR CONDOMINIUM AT 536 .·· MAPLE ST. (APPELLANT: ROWLAND) . . - . Councilmember Kasper· said he is involved in the financing of the project and excused himself from conside~ation of the question. He stepped down and left the room. Ms. Block reported that the appellant and the applicant have agreed to a modified landscape plan, a copy of which is before the Council. The agreement was. reached in conjunction with the other affected nei~hbors. If the Council ·ap~roves thi~ pl~n as submitted, the property owner has agreed to revise the landscaping immediately. She said the Planning Department recommends approval of the revised plan, making it unnecessary to go back to the ADB. - In response to a question from Councilmember Jaech, .. Ms. Block said. the original plan, approved by the ADB a year ago, caused.,concern among~the neighbors. The Planning Department had received calls as .. had Mr. Johnson, the owner, regarding some birch trees, and theJplan went back to the ADB for approval to remove tho~e trees. However, the neighbors concern was rtot the birch. trees but the Austrian pine trees and tbeir growth rate~ Mrs. Rowland appealed the ADB approval concerning the Birch trees and the staff felt it was an opportune time to resolve the matter through a coope~a­ tive effort of the neighbors', Mrs. Rowland and Mr. Johnson. Mayor Naughten Op1ned the hearing. Helen Wood, 555 Alder, living next door to the condominium, said she had been concerned about the pine trees growing so fast and interrupting her view. ~She favors the revised plan. Since no one else wished to speak, the hearing was closed. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER.OSTROM, THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE THE REVISED LANDSCAPE PLAN AS PRESENTED CALLING FOR THE MOVING OR REMOVAL OF THE PINE TREES AND VINE MAPLE, TO BE REPLACED WITH RHODIES OR DWARF SCOTCH PINES. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Hall said this would normally go back to the APB for approval. The Council is approv- ing the plantings and.H·they.~·,should:grow in:·the way, she does not want the ADB to bear the blame. Mayor Naughten thanked the neighbors, Mr. Johnson, and the staff for working out the agreement. Councilmember Jaech suggested the Council should look at the form which is used that calls for the trees to be planted in sensitive areas that are fast 1rowing. She asked that the form be reviewed and brought before the Council for approval. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2429 AMENDING: CHAPTER 17.40 RELATING TO NONCONFORMING SIGNS AND AMENDING CHAPTER 20.~0 REGARDIN~ MODIFICATIONS TO SIGN.CODE [Item (G) on.Consent Agenda] Councilmember Kasper returned to the Council table. Councilmember Kasper said he had pulled Item (G) because he wante~ to amend .the ordinance and add height to the ordinance. .COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED. BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, ORDINANCE 2429 BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE. THE WORDS 11 THE·HElGHT OF THE SIGN SHOULD BE LIMITED TO THE TOP OF T8E PARAPET ON A FLAT-ROOFED BUILDI°NG AND THE DRIP LINE ON A PITCHED-ROOFED BUILDING. 11 .Councilmember Ostrom asked where the amendment would be placed in. the ordinance .. Councilmember Kasper said he did not know where the amendment would fit in the ordinance. The.Council had voted down the 14' limitation on attached signs last week; however, the Countil did not address the subject of his motion, which would cover situations such as Harbor Square. Mr. Snyder said wall-mounted signs are covered in Chapter 20.60.045 of the proposed ordinance; however, another provision in the sign code, not before the Council this evening, sets a limitation of 14' for attached signs. Mr. Wallace suggested that the motion should be restated instructing the City Attorney to redraft the appropriate ordinance to include the provisions of the motion before the Council. Councilmember Ostrom pointed out that there is a provision for a 14' limitation on attached signs now in the code. Councilmember Kasper said he is not willing to amend the sign code and allow a 14' limitation to apply to every building in the City regardless of the height of the building. All of the problems should be addressed. He corrected his motion to direct the City Attorney to address this along the lines of an ordinance and· apply it to the proper sections of the code. Councilmember Kasper also said he was not willing, in situations where a business has no other signs, ·that the attached sign should be limited to 14' on a building that may be 25' or 30' high. He does ·not want to restrict the ability to properly sign a building without going to a Hearing Examiner. Councilmember Kasper stated that the ordinance in question should be held in abeyance until the City Attorney can return with a method of attac~in~ the height situation. . . . Councilmember Ostrom requested clarification of the motion. Councilmember Kasper said he was requesting the Attor_ney to address the method of stating within the code that the sign height would not be limited on attached signs on buildings where there are no freestanding signs. Councilmember Hall requested a restatement of the motion. The original motion was read by the Recorder. · A ROLL eALL VOTE WAS.TAKEN, COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS JAECH, OSTROM, HALL, DWYER, WILSON, AND NORDQUIST VOTING NO. MOTION FAILED. . COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, THAT THE ORDINANCE NOT APPLY TO ATTACHED SIGNS. THAT ATTACHED SIGNS BE MEASURED TO THE TOP OF THE PARAPET ON A FLAT-ROOFED BUILDING AND TO THE DRIP LINE ON A PITCHED-ROOF BUILDING. THAT ATTACHED SIGNS WILL BE LIMITED TO THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING~-Councilmember Hall suggested that deleiion of the 14' limitation on attached signs might be an easter way to state the motion. Councilmember Kasper replied that he would not want the sign ~o exceed the parapet and drip line. May 15, 1984 -continued Councilmember Ostrom raised a point-of-order. He said the ordinance befor~ the Council does not specify a .14 .. :.limitation; that 1 imitation is contained in a separate part of the code. He said the motion is not addressing Item (G). · Councilmember Kasper noted that the discussion during the meeting last week was concerned with freestanding and attached signs and the 14' limitation .for attached signs. Mr. Wallace said the amendment would apply· to Section 20~60.020, sLlbparagraph B, which is being dealt with in one of the amendments and is within the scope of his attempt to amend the ordinance. MOTION FAILED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING YES .. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17.40 OP THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING TO NONCONFORMING SIGNS AND AMENDING CHAPTER 20.60 REGARDING MODIFICATIONS TO THE SIGN CODE. Councilmember Kasper re.iterated that he will vote against the motion for reasons stated earlier in the evening. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER KASPER VOTING NO. MAYOR Councilmember Jaech raised a point-of-order, stating that Items 2 and 3 on the agenda had been continued to a later date. She asked if, now that the sign code ordinance had been passed, a heating must still be held on these items.· Mr; Wallace replied that hearings would still have to scheduled since the ordinance is riot effective yet and will not be until five days after posting and is still subject to Mayoral veto. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL- MEMBER. JAECH, TO CONTINUE ITEM 2, HEARING ON APPEAL OF ADB DENIAL OF EXISTING SIGN AT THE EDMONDS THEATRE, 415 .MAIN ST. (APPELLANT: MAYO); AND ITEM 3, HEARING ON APPEAL OF DENIAL OF EXISTING FREESTANDING SIGN AT DAIRY QUEEN DRIVE:--IN RESTAURANT AT 7530 212TH S. W. (ADB..,63-83) (APPELLANT: OLMSTED) BE CONTINUED TO JUNE 19 .. MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2430 REGARDIN~ MEETING HOURS AND CONDUCT OF CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS . [Item (F) on ~Q~sent Agenda] · Mr. Wallace· ~o~~ected the wording of Ordinance 2430~ On.Page 1, eighth line, ''such adjournment is extended by" strike two words "a supra" and insert "an affirmative vote of a" leave the word "majority" adding the words "of the Council as a whole plus one.11 Strike the next line. On the next page, Section 2, i.n the quoted portion, the third line which begins "the attorney shal 111 insert the words "be· required to"; . COUNC.JLMEMBER OSTROM MOVED; SECONDED BY COUNCIL- MEMBER JAECH, TO MAKE.THE ABOVE CHANGES. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, THAT THE COUNCIL APPROVE ORDINANCE 2430. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Naughten announced a meeting of the Association of Snohomish County Cities on May 31. The Mayor said he would be appointing Rick May to the Arts Commission. The Council will interview Mr. May at 6:45 p.m. on May 22. ·· · Mayor Naughten proclaimed the week of May 20-26 as National Public Works Week in Edmonds. The Mayor presented an application for a liquor license from Jack Pot Food Market, on Highway 99, a Class EF license. The application has been investigated-and approved by the Police Chief and the Council should recommend approval or disapproval of the license, which then goes to the state for final approval. COUNCI.LMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, THAT THE .COUNCIL RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND THE .APPLICATION BE FORWARDED TO THE STATE FOR CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Naughten noted that 60 years ago, then-Mayor Engels proclaimed the day of May 16 as a holiday in Edmonds because of the first sailing of the ferry between Edmonds and Kingston. COUNCIL Council President Jaech said Edmonds has another silver medal winner, Linda Marquardt, for Karate and suggested the City give her a resolution of commendation for this achievement. She suggested Ms. Marquardt be contacted to set a date for the award. Council President Jaech read a letter.from Harold E. Ayers, stating that Frank Frese, Post 66i American Legion, Edmonds, invites.members of the Edmonds Council to participate in the Fourth of July parade. Transportation will be provided and the Council is asked to advise how many will be needing the transportatipn. Participants are asked to be at the Legion Hall at 1:30 on the day of the parade .. Anyone interested should contact Mr. Ayers at 22429 lOOth Ave. W. Council President Jaech said information pertaining to disclosure statements has been gathered by the Council Resource Person. Another item for Council consideration is in Section l.04.020 regarding attendance records.. .Council President Jaech read that section· and said a certain · member of the ADB had missed four meetings. City Clerk Jackie Parrett said she keeps a record of the attendan~e of all Board Members, the information being taken from the Minutes of the meetings. She noted that she had checked the attendance just two days ago and no one has missed more than two meetings .. Some.of the absences are excused, and only an unexcused absence is referred to .in the Section read by Council President Jaech. Councilmember Hall reported that. she and the Mayor had attended the 75th Anniversary of Edmonds Senior High School. She said it was quite a gathering and a good time was had by all. In addition, she took part in a student forum conducted by a facilitator dealin~ with the Classroom and Philosophies of Education in 2001. Councilmember Hall noted that former City Clerk Irene Varney Moran would be honored at Governor Spellman's office as the first Certified City Clerk in the State. I I I I I I I I I May 15, 1984 -continued r Council member Kasper asked .Council member Nordquist if' he·would be willing to ask for reconsideration of Ordinance 2427, since he.was on the prevailing side. Councilmember Nordquist responded that he would be willing to ask for .reconsi~eration since Councilmember Kasper had indicated that all the facts had not been explored. Countil member Kasper said that some of the new Councilmembers had not had opportunity to know all the facts when they were a~ked to vote on the Ordinance. When the subject of criteria for the ADB was broached on April 17, he said he was asked not. to pursue it until the sign code process was completed, and then before that was completed, the ordinance was passed. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO RECONSIDER THE. ORDINANCE. Council member Wi 1 son said, as a new member, he had not· been ready to deal with the issue when it was raised not having been involved prior to membership on the Council. . . . . . . . Councilmember Ostrom raised a point-of-order, asking if a motion to reconsider must be seconded by a member of the prevailing side. Mr. Wallace indicated that ·was not necessary. Councilmember Jaech stated her position in regard to the ordinance, indicating she has no problem with it. Councilmember Hall said she would.vbte for the motion based on the fact the Council has honored past requests for time for additional study_ of issues, as well as the plea of the Planning Board given earlier in the evening. Councilmember Wilson not~d that the ADB .had been given indication that the Council would meet with them again and that the meeting had not taken place. Councilmember Hall read an excerpt from the December 6, 1983 touncil minutes incwhich.a letter from Warren LaFon was quoted resulting in the motion by Mr. Gould to set a meeting between the Council and the ADB. Councilmember Ostrom, quoting.from the same :letter, said .he had no objec- tion to the ADB retaining aesthetic issues. He said the criteria for granting·variances do not involve aesthetics or design. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN, COUNCILMEMBERS KASPER, HALL, AND WILSON VOTING YES; COUNCILMEMBERS JAECH, OSTROM, DWYER, AND NORDQUIST VOTING NO. MOTION FAILED. There being no further business to come before the Council, meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. ~~-?1+ LARirs:NAGHTEN, Mayrk . · May 22, 1984 -Work Meeting The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naughten in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor Jo-Anne Jaech Laura Hall Steve Dwyer Lloyd Ostrom Bill Kasper Jack Wilson John Nordquist ABSENT Brian Stewart, Student Rep. STAFF PRESENT Art Housler, Finance Director Bobby Mills, Actg. Pub. Wks. Supv. Pat LeMay, Personnel Director Mike Stark, Systems Analyst Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Dan Prinz, Actg. Police Chief · Steve Simpson, Parks & Rec. Dir. Jack Weinz, Fire Chief Jim Jessel, Prope~ty Manager Mary Lou Block, Planning Director John Wallace, City Attorney Scott Snyder, City Attorney Shirlfe Witzel, Recorder Councilmember Nordquist was ·not present during the early part of the meeting, arriving at 8:00 p.m. during discussion of the City Annexation Policy. CONSENT AGENDA Items (C) and (D) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda included the following: (A) Roll call. (B) Approval of Minutes of May 15, 1984 . . PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2431 REGULATING PAWNBROKERS AND SECOND HAND DEALERS [Item (C) on Consent Agenda] Councilmember Kasper questioned how the City deals with perpetual garage sales. City Clerk Jackie Parrett commented that the City has never required a permit for garage sales which last only a day or two. · COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2431 REGULATING PAWNBROKERS AND SECOND HAND DEALERS. MOTION CARRIED.