Loading...
03/16/2010 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES March 16, 2010 At 6:30 p.m., Mayor Haakenson announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding negotiations for the purchase of real estate. He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 30 minutes and would be held in the Police Training Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Haakenson, and Couneilmembers Bernheim, Orvis, Plunkett, Fraley - Monillas, Buckshnis, Peterson and Wilson. Others present were City Attorney Bio Park, Community Services /Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton, Finance Director Lorenzo Hines and City Clerk Sandy Chase. At 7:00 p.m., the Mayor announced to the public that an additional 30 minutes would be needed in executive session. The executive session concluded at 7:26 p.m. The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Steve Bernheim, Council President D. J. Wilson, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley - Monillas, Councilmember Strom Peterson, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Graham Marmion, Student Representative 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief John Westfall, Fire Marshal. Stephen Clifton, Community Services /Economic Development Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer Frances Chapin, Cultural Services Manager Rob English, City Engineer Bio Park, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Mayor Haakenson relayed the City Attorney's request to remove Item J from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 1 A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 9, 2010. C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #117634 THROUGH #117725 DATED MARCH 11, 2010 FOR $409,569.88. D. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM BRAY REALTY ($607.58). E. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN CITY OF EDMONDS LODGING TAX COMMITTEE TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT GRANTING THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY VISITOR'S BUREAU $6,000 FOR TOURISM PROMOTION AND SUPPORT OF VISITOR SERVICES TO PROMOTE EDMONDS. F. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN CITY OF EDMONDS LODGING TAX COMMITTEE TOURISM PROMOTION AGREEMENT GRANTING THE EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS $10,000 TO ATTRACT VISITORS TO EDMONDS THROUGH ADVERTISING AND PROMOTING DOWNTOWN EDMONDS AND ANNUAL CULTURAL EVENTS /FESTIVALS IN THEIR 2010/2011 SEASON BROCHURE. G. CONTRACT WITH ORCHID CELLMARK FOR DNA TESTING. H. APPROVAL OF 2010 TAXICAB OPERATOR'S LICENSES FOR LOW FARE, NORTHSOUND TAXI INC., AND YELLOW CAB OF WASHINGTON, INC. L REPORT ON BIDS OPENED MARCH 2, 2010 FOR THE BNSF UTILITIES UPGRADE PROJECT AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO INTERWEST CONSTRUCTION, INC. ($1,059,341.33). ITEM J: AMENDMENT OF EMC 5.05.121 AND 5.05.123 (POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG) TO ALLOW FOR AN APPEAL PROCESS SHOULD A DOG BE DECLARED "POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS." City Attorney Bio Park explained revisions were made to clarify that any appeal of a declaration of a dangerous dog was heard by the City's Municipal Court Judge rather than the Hearing Examiner. On page 2, ECC Section 5.05.123(E) the reference to the Hearing Examiner should be changed to the Judge of the Edmonds Municipal Court. COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE ITEM J AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The item approved is as follows: J. ORDINANCE NO. 3786 — AMENDMENT OF EMC 5.05.121 AND 5.05.123 (POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG) TO ALLOW FOR AN APPEAL PROCESS SHOULD A DOG BE DECLARED "POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS." 3. APPOINTMENT OF MIKE POPKE TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT BOARD Joe McIalwain, Executive Director, Edmonds Public Facilities District /Edmonds Center for the Arts, thanked the Council for its past support of the Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA) which inhabits a 1939 building that was the original Edmonds High School, Edmonds Junior High, Puget Sound Christian Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 2 College and now the ECA. The ECA is in the midst of a great season of theater, music, dance, and comedy and its audiences and support is growing. Two Boards oversee the facility, a non - profit ECA Board and the Public Facilities District (PFD) Board. Dave Earling resigned in January after serving six sears on the PFD Board. He thanked Dave Earling for his leadership on the PFD Board, noting the ECA would not be where it is today without his efforts. Mr. Mclalwain relayed the PFD Board's recommendation to appoint Mike Popke to fill the vacant position. Mr. Popke is the General Manager /General Sales Manager of Lynnwood Honda. He was active early in the ECA as a member of the Capital Campaign Committee and served as President of the ECA Board in 2007 and 2008. Mr. Popke's leadership, business knowledge, familiarity with the ECA and passion for the mission make him the perfect candidate. On behalf of the entire ECA organization, Mr. Mclalwain offered their full support for Mr. Popke's appointment. Councilmember Plunkett expressed his support for the appointment of Mr. Popke to the PFD Board. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO APPOINT MIKE POPKE TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT BOARD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING AMENDING THE SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM IN ORDER TO ADD A PROJECT: RECONSTRUCTION OF DAYTON STREET FROM THE RAILROAD TRACKS TO SUNSET AND RESURFACING OF 220TH BETWEEN 84TH AND HIGHWAY 99. Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss explained a federal 2010 Jobs Bill will soon be approved to fund transportation projects. The purpose of the Bill, similar to the 2009 Stimulus Package, is to create additional jobs. The Snohomish County Tomorrow Infrastructure Coordination Committee (ICC) meets monthly to discuss transportation issues. At a recent meeting, the ICC developed a list of recommended projects and contingency projects in anticipation of the passage of the Jobs Bill. The total allocated funds anticipated for 2010 is approximately $14.4 million, the amount allocated in the 2009 Stimulus Package. Projects are ranked based on readiness for completion and number of jobs created. The recommended list contains the Dayton Street Reconstruction and the 220th Street Overlay. The contingency list contains the Downtown Street Lighting and Sidewalk Replacement projects. The Dayton. Street Reconstruction and 2201h Street Overlay projects ranked highly because design for both projects is nearly complete. In order to fund the Dayton Street Reconstruction and 220th Street Overlay via the 2010 Jobs Bill, they must be added to the City's Six -Year Transportation. Improvement Program (TIP). Adding the projects to the City's TIP will allow Washington State Department of Transportation to amend the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program if the federal funds become available. These projects meet Goal V (Prioritize and finance transportation improvements for the greatest public benefit emphasizing transit, demand management, and maintenance of current facilities) of Section 15.25.010 of the adopted 2009 Transportation Plan since it is a maintenance preservation project. Staff recommends amending the TIP to add Reconstruction of Dayton Street from the railroad tracks to Sunset and resurfacing of 220th between 84th and Highway 99. Mayor Haakenson clarified the City could not qualify for stimulus funds if the projects were not included in the TIP. Mr. Hauss agreed. Council President Bernheim asked why the projects were not included in the City's Six Year TIP when they were ranked so highly in the 2010 Jobs Bill. Mr. Hauss clarified the TIP identifies funding for Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 3 overlays over a six year period but specific locations are not identified. Council President Bernheim asked if the Downtown Street Lighting and Sidewalk replacement were included in the TIP. Mr. Hauss they were included in the Six Year TIP but not funded in 2010. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, spoke in favor of the proposal to reconstruct Dayton and resurface 220th. He expressed concern with the inclusion of signals at Walnut & 9th and at Main & 9th in the TIP. He was also concerned that the signal at Walnut & 9th was described as a traffic safety signal installation but the Main & 9th signal was described as a signal to reduce injury and potential property damage accidents. He was also concerned that the 212th intersection at Five Corners was described as design and construct intersection improvement when it was common knowledge the project was a roundabout. He suggested the TIP clearly state the Five Corners intersection improvement was a roundabout. Mayor Haakenson assured any intersection improvement project would require Council approval. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, commented staff did a good job identifying projects for the 2010 Jobs Bill. He cautioned the federal government would be verifying that the funds were used appropriately. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO THE SIX -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (2010 -2015) AND ADOPT THE RESOLUTION NO. 1223. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED TITLE 18 AMENDMENTS TO ALLOW USE OF CITY RIGHT -OF -WAY FOR BISTRO AND OUTDOOR DINING AND PLACEMENT OF ART IN CITY RIGHT -OF -WAY. Mayor Haakenson advised the Community Services /Development Services Committee reviewed the proposed amendment and requested staff present it to the full Council for review and approval. City Engineer Rob English explained the proposed amendments would address outdoor dining within the City right -of -way and placement of art in the City right -of -way. A permit was issued last summer for fencing and tables and chairs for a downtown restaurant to provide outdoor dining. Upon installation of the fencing, the City received several citizen complaints about the lack of sidewalk clearance between the fencing and the back of curb. He displayed a photograph of the outdoor dining area. Staff researched the code in six other cities with regulations regarding outdoor dining that addressed the following: • Sidewalk clearance • Barrier definition • Allowable times for right -of -way use • General & exclusive use of right -of -way • City permit process • Right -of -Way use fee • Other approvals Staff defined two categories of use: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 4 General — Outdoor table and chairs with no barriers and open to public use. Also includes temporary objects such as planters, signs, benches, etc. Exclusive — Use of right -of -way to serve customers at the exclusion of the general public. For General Use, the following code provisions would apply: • Sidewalk clearance — 5 feet minimum • Barriers — None • Allowable Times o <24 inches from building, items can remain in right -of -way o >24 inches from building; items must be removed by 11:00 p.m. or close of business, whichever is earlier • Street Use Permit Fee $100 • Annual Renewal Fee $30 For Exclusive Use, the following code provisions would apply: • Sidewalk clearance — 5 feet • Barriers — Temporary objects (stanchion, rope, fencing or planters) • Allowable Times o <24 inches from building; items can remain in right -of -way o >24 inches from building; items must be removed by 11:00 p.m. or close of business, whichever is earlier. Barrier must be brought inside building • Street Use Permit Fee $100 • Annual renewal fee $30 • Right -of -Way Use Fee $1.05 /square foot + 12.84% Leasehold tax (per month) • Other Approvals — Washington State Liquor Board & County Health Mr. English explained the $1.05 /square foot right -of -way use fee was based on the vendor agreement approved for the vendor near the ferry holding lanes. He provided photographs of examples of barriers /stanchions used for outdoor dining. Mr. English reviewed proposed code changes related to art work in the right -of -way: • Incorporates existing permit submittal requirements into Chapter 18.70 • Provides definition of art work • Review by Edmonds Art Commission • Outlines submittal requirements for permit • Review criteria Councilmember Plunkett commented the Council was interested in as much outdoor dining and outdoor amenities as possible. He asked if staff had pushed the envelope as much as possible to allow that to occur or could more be done. Mr. English responded the proposed changes would provide guidance for processing applications. The initiative for businesses to pursue outdoor dining would need to come from the businesses themselves. Councilmember Wilson commented the Council wanted to do everything possible to bring this experience to Edmonds and it was clearly in the public and economic interest to do so. He suggested providing less guidance and more flexibility. He questioned the proposal to require barriers to be removed by 11:00 p.m. and suggested it be close of business. He suggested the right -of -way use fee may be a disincentive and unless there was a state law, that be eliminated with a finding the use was in the public interest. He also suggested the submittal requirements be lessened such as not requiring an elevation design. He Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 5 asked how much detail an applicant would be required to provide. Mr. English answered they would need to provide information regarding the style of the barrier and dimensions to allow staff to evaluate their proposal. Councilmember Wilson suggested providing a checklist for the applicant to complete. He concluded although the guidelines were well- intended, he preferred to eliminate some of them to make it as easy as possible. He was willing to listen to complaints about clutter on the sidewalks because of the benefits outdoor dining provided the community. Council President Bernheim asked if the proposed 5 -foot sidewalk requirement applied to bistro dining. Mr. English advised it did. Council President Bernheim recalled the outdoor dining at the restaurant next to the theater provided approximately 40 inches of clearance. Mr. English answered under this proposal, that restaurant would need to move their barrier closer to the building to provide 5 -feet of clearance. Council President Bembeim asked the standard sidewalk width downtown. Mr. English answered it was 8 -9 feet. Student Representative Marmion asked why the barrier and table and chairs beyond the 2 -foot area would need to be brought inside the building rather than simply moved inside the 2 -foot area. Mr. English answered only the barrier needed to be brought inside, the table and chairs needed to be moved against the building in order to minimize clutter and for safety reasons. Councilmember Buckshnis asked how a 5 -foot distance was determined. Mr. English answered 44 inches was the City's current requirement; the 5 -foot requirement was based on staff's research of other cities and the complaints the City received that there was not enough clear zone. Councilmember Buckshnis observed the barriers that restaurant utilized were permanent. Mr. English answered under the proposal, permanent installation would not be allowed; the barrier would need to be temporary and movable. Councilmember Plunkett referred to the restaurant downtown that had outdoor dining last summer and suggested removing the parking space in front of the restaurant to allow more space for pedestrians. Mr. English responded he preferred to keep citizens on the sidewalk to prevent pedestrians from negotiating the 6 -inch vertical curb. From a liability standpoint, it was preferable to provide a clear zone on the sidewalk. Councilmember Wilson referred to the $1.05 /square foot right -of -way use fee and suggested renting a parking space in front of a business for tables /chairs. Mr. English agreed that could be considered, relaying concern with delineating the parking space to prevent vehicles from parking there and placing pedestrians in closer proximity to the travel lane. With regard to whether the City was required to charge for use of the right -of -way, City Attorney Bio Park explained if the Council found allowing businesses to use the sidewalk provided a public purpose such as revitalizing the downtown area, it could be argued there was no gift of public funds. Councilmember Plunkett asked the Community Services /Development Services Committee whether they considered these suggestions. Councilmember Peterson answered the Committee discussed the Right -of- Way Use Fee and preferred that be discussed by the full Council. The Committee wanted the full Council . to discuss the matter to balance the current 44 inch requirement, the distance required by other cities and the width of the City's sidewalks, benefits to the community and safety concerns. Councilmember Peterson noted the vendor near the ferry holding lanes who was charged the $1.05 /square foot right -of -way use fee did not pay property taxes such as a downtown business owner would. He asked if that could be considered in the gift of public funds. Mr. Park explained a leasehold excise tax must be charged when there was rental /lease of City property that is non - exempt. Even if the City decreased the rental/lease rate to zero, the leasehold excise tax would be calculated on the market rate. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 6 Councilmember Peterson asked how the $1.05 /square foot right -of -way use fee was determined. City Clerk Sandy Chase explained it was based on the rate the Port was charging a similar vendor. That agreement is in its second year and the rate was increased 3% last year. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Betty Larman, Edmonds, commented she was from France where people enjoy eating outside. The problem in Edmonds is the sidewalk widths; when the wine bar had its outdoor enclosure, people occasionally had to walk in the street and the sidewalk was very crowded when the people were entering and exiting the theater. She suggested the City adopt a policy allowing as many eating establishments as possible to have outdoor dining areas but retain the 5 -foot sidewalk clearance. She suggested in conjunction with the monthly art walk, an area downtown be closed to traffic after 5:00 p.m. to allow restaurants to have outdoor dining. She referred to a report by former Economic Development Director Jennifer Gerend that stated Edmonds was not bold enough. Ms. Lannan agreed with Ms. Gerend's comment and encouraged the City to think outside the box and to be daring. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, commented staff has addressed the issue of sidewalk clearance many times. He suggested this proposal was an effort to increase revenue and to retain businesses. He suggested the overpass over the railroad tracks extend into downtown. Ruth Arista, Edmonds, referred to Section 18.020 Applications, Item 7 Encroachment Permits which requires ownership or evidence showing the applicant to be the agent /owner of record, and questioned whether outdoor dining would require an encroachment permit or street use permit. If it is an encroachment permit, ownership information may not be available as the business may not own the space and the building owner may not be available or interested in participating in the application for outdoor dining. With regard to the Review Section, Item B, that states in the definition of art work that paintings may not be located in the right -of -way, she questioned how a mural or a painting on a building would be considered. She questioned whether the $1.05 /square right -of -way use fee and the leasehold tax applied to the shop /restaurant space or the outdoor dining area on the sidewalk. It was her understanding the Liquor Board required permanent fencing for businesses to serve alcohol in an outside area. Do H. Kim, Edmonds, expressed concern with the requirement to move barriers and tables and chairs from the right -of -way by 11:00 p.m. particularly on weekends, and preferred it be the close of business. He explained businesses would need to begin removing the outdoor area 15 -30 minutes prior to 11:00 pm. He suggested Edmonds establish a theme for downtown, commenting many people only knew Edmonds as a place to take the ferry to Kingston. He suggested developing Edmonds as a destination and developing a theme would attract visitors. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, agreed with Mr. Kim's comment that the time outdoor items needed to be removed should be close of business rather than 11:00 p.m. With regard to art work in the right -of -way, he pointed out the sign code addresses wall graphics which are not located in the right -of -way. He assumed the definition of art work in the right -of -way did not include the side of a building. If there was a conflict, a wall graphic should be reviewed by the Architectural Design Board. He pointed out bicycles were often parked along the fencing installed downtown around the outside dining area which further reduced the sidewalk area. He supported the proposal not to allow permanent barriers as well as the other proposals recommended by staff. Autumn Hegley, Edmonds, commented outdoor dining was an attraction for many people; she and her husband travel from Everett to Capitol Hill where there are numerous outdoor dining areas that allow customers to interact with passersby, enjoy the weather, etc. Outdoor dining areas create a vibrant atmosphere and cities that provide that space draw visitors from long distances. She suggested rather than Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 7 requiring that a 5 -foot clearance be maintained, the City consider extending the sidewalk into the parking spaces outside a cluster of restaurants, possibly with the restaurants participating in the cost. She also suggested the City consider a parking garage as well as signage directing drivers to parking. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. Mr. English explained of the six cities staff researched, 2 had a 6 -foot clear zone (Seattle and Kirkland) and the other 4 had a 5 -foot clear zone (Bellingham, Everett, Anacortes and Mt. Vernon). With regard to the right -of -way use fee, Seattle charges $1.54 /square foot; Kirkland has an annual fee of $654 plus $0.73 /square foot charge, Bellingham and Anacortes have a $50 annual fee, Everett charges $0.45 /square foot and Mt. Vernon charges a $100 annual fee. In response questions, Mr. English explained the right -of -way use fee would be charged on the right -of- way space that is used, not the building square footage. With regard to the comment that 11:00 p.m. was too early to require items to be removed from the right -of -way, Mr. English explained many downtown areas are adjacent to residential condominiums and staff felt 11:00 p.m. would be an appropriate time for outdoor activity and the associated noise to cease to avoid disrupting the residential uses. With regard to whether outdoor dining was a street use permit or an encroachment permit, Mr. English explained it was a street use permit and ownership information would be required. Art work in the right - of -way requires an encroachment permit. With regard to the comment that the Washington State Liquor Board required a permanent barrier, Mr. English explained they did not require the barriers be permanently anchored. In response to Ms. Larman's suggestion to close the street, Mayor Haakenson explained that ability already exists; merchants currently have the ability to submit an application to the City to close a street. Councilmember Plunkett advised he wanted people to be able to drink on the City's streets. Mr. English . assured as long as the restaurant had the appropriate liquor license and barrier that would not be prohibited. Councilmember Buckshnis asked if there was a fee for the encroachment permit for art work in the right - of -way. Mr. English advised the encroachment permit fee was $290. Cultural Services Manager Frances Chapin clarified an encroachment in the public right -of -way would be for a sculpture that was affixed to the right -of -way, not a mural or application of an artistic element to the wall of a building. She explained a definition of art work was added after the Community Services /Development Services Committee meeting due to their interest in including a definition. The intent was to distinguish between art work that would encroach into the right -of -way, typically a sculpture, and to incorporate the Visual Artists Rights Act definition of art work. Councilmember Wilson requested staff respond to Ms. Arista's question regarding a painting on a building. Ms. Chapin responded if art work were affixed to the building, it would not encroach into the right -of -way. Councilmember Wilson suggested visual art work could extend into the right -of -way. Ms. Chapin responded it likely could be defined as a sculpture. Staff could further refine the definition. Councilmember Wilson asked how far an item could extend before triggering the sign ordinance. Mr. English answered once something encroached into the right -of -way, an encroachment permit was required. Councilmember Wilson suggested that may need further clarification to avoid limits on creativity and to avoid applying the sign ordinance to art work. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 8 Councilmember Orvis advised the Community Services /Development Services Committee referred code language regarding murals to the Planning Board. The goal of that effort is to allow words on a mural as long as they are not related to a commercial entity. Ms. Chapin clarified that was part of the sign code. Councilmember Peterson asked whether a flat right -of -way use fee would address the market value of the use of the right -of -way. Mr. Park answered it would depend on if the fee was for the permit or rental for the use of the public property. A leasehold excise tax is not charged on a permit fee but would apply to the rental of the right -of -way whether a per square foot fee or a flat fee. Councilmember Peterson expressed concern with the staff hours required to calculate a per square foot fee versus an annual flat fee. Mr. English reiterated of the cities staff researched, three had a per square foot fee and three had a flat fee. The reason staff proposed a per square foot fee was to account for the difference in the size of the frontage used by businesses. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas commented a per square foot fee would be more equitable than a flat fee. She was supportive of clarifying the requirements and was hopeful outdoor dining spaces would bring more visitors to the City. Council President Bernheim supported allowing barriers and tables /chairs to remain in the right -of -way until close of business, noting it could be changed if this became problematic. He suggested the City could proactively promote street closures and occasionally close the blocks around the fountain to allow outdoor music and dining. He was supportive of imposing a reasonable right -of -way use fee as the merchants would realize benefit from the outdoor seating area. He also supported establishing a mechanism to allow seating areas in parking spaces, suggesting a temporary platform could be used to extend the sidewalk into the parking space. He suggested establishing a mechanism whereby merchants could petition the City to occupy a parking space to maintain the 5 -foot clearance. Council President Bernheiln commented his suggestion was consistent with his 10 -year plan that he presented at the January 2008 retreat to add benches and wider sidewalks downtown by removing a lane or parking or traffic and deed it for pedestrian /dining uses. He noted this could be a nice addition without a large investment. Councilmember Wilson suggested sending the proposal back to the Community Services /Development Services Committee for consideration of the Council's comments. He also offered to work with another Councilmember to revise the proposed amendments to incorporate the Council's comments. Councilmember Plunkett supported eliminating the 11:00 p.m. removal of items, eliminate the per square foot right -of -way use fee, lessen the submittal requirements so that a merchant did not have to hire an architect/designer to illustrate the enclosure, and to clarify the definition of art work. He questioned if the Community Services /Development Services Committee considered the proposed amendments from the viewpoint of making downtown a festive place. Community Services/ Development Services Committee members indicated they would be willing to consider the proposed amendments. Council President Bemheim suggested approving the proposed amendments to promote art work display and bistro dining for businesses that could accommodate the requirements and the Council could continue to refine the amendments. COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED TITLE 18 AMENDMENTS TO ALLOW USE OF THE CITY RIGHT -OF -WAY FOR BISTRO AND OUTDOOR DINING AND PLACEMENT OF ART IN THE CITY RIGHT -OF -WAY. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 9 Councilmember Peterson expressed support for moving forward to allow businesses to take advantage of the ability to use the City right -of -way. He was satisfied with either the Community Services /Development Services Committee reconsidering the amendments or Councilmembers working with staff on further refinements. Council President Bernheim suggested passing the ordinance with an amendment to remove the 11:00 p.m. requirement and bringing additional changes such as allowing occupation of parking spaces to the Committee in the future. Councilmember Wilson expressed concern with approving the amendments knowing they needed to be revised. Council President Bernheim supported approving the proposed amendments so that the businesses that have adequate space could begin planning now. Councilmember Wilson offered to work with Councilmember Peterson to refine the amendments. COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM WITHDREW HIS MOTION WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. Councilmember Plunkett agreed with allowing Councilmembers Peterson and Wilson to expedite the changes. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas inquired about the current regulations. Mr. English answered the current encroachment permit required a 44 -inch clearance. If an application were submitted today under the current requirements, there was the potential for more complaints. Councilmember Orvis observed the current code was also vague with regard to exclusivity. Mr. English advised if alcohol is served, the Liquor Board requires barriers. Council President Bemheim explained his intent was a solution would be presented to the Council within . three weeks. It was the consensus of the Council to continue the public hearing to April 6. 6. CONTINUED TO APRIL 20 2010 - PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED CHANGES TO EDMONDS CITY CODE 5.05.060: DOGS ON PUBLIC GROUNDS 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Jack Faris, Edmonds, thanked the Council for their work and echoed Ms. Larman's comment for the Council to think boldly. He expressed support for Agenda Items 11 and 12, particularly the Economic Development Commission's recommendation to develop a comprehensive and bold vision for Edmonds that balances economic development, financial sustainability, esthetics and environment. As a member of Imagine Edmonds, he relayed they are encouraged about four game- changing elements, 1) opportunity to marshal more positive energy around a vision for the future of Edmonds which can be via broad -based support for win - win -win solutions, 2) opportunity to enlist citizens' remarkable creativity, 3) a broad - based process could produce ideas that are not yet envisioned, and 4) the potential philanthropy to play a major role. Imagine Edmonds is working in cooperation with a nonprofit organization, the Pomegranate Center, on a proposal in conjunction with the Hazel Miller Foundation for funding to enable a community process. Craig Stewart, Edmonds, applauded the Council for their work and the citizens who attend Council meetings and participate in Commissions and task forces. As a participant in Imagine Edmonds, he spoke Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 10 to the role of public /private partnerships and particularly philanthropy. His day job is running a private family foundation in Bellevue. They have supported major public /private partnerships and are currently engaged in a significant public /private partnership involving the State and federal government, Tukwila, Seattle, Highline School District, Museum of Flight and Aviation High School to build a new high school. There are unique opportunities in Edmonds and he encouraged all entities in Edmonds to coordinate and collaborate their efforts. Bob Rinehart, Edmonds, a member of the Chamber of Commerce Board and the PFD Board, expressed support for Agenda Item 12, commenting he was impressed with the work of the Economic Development Commission (EDC) who are representative of the majority of citizens. The EDC has a wide spectrum of viewpoints and two Councilmembers participate as liaisons. The Council charged the EDC with identifying new revenue streams; they worked on foundation building and provided solid ideas and no quick fixes. In all six recommendations the EDC made, Edmonds is the winner. He expressed support for all six recommendations and strongly endorsed the commitment of $100,000 without which little would be accomplished. He also endorsed the recommendation for a full -time Economic Development Director. Don Hall, Edmonds, explained the Lewis Braille School provides a holistic education for children with special needs arising from vision impairment or other multiple challenges. He invited the public to donate and /or bid on items at the Lewis Braille School auction on March 20 at the Senior Center 12:00 — 3:00 p.m. The School's urgent needs include a desktop computer and exercise equipment for special needs children. The School can be contacted at 10130 Edmonds Way or at 425- 776 -4042. They are also collecting Campbell Soup and education labels which can be dropped off at the School or at Garden Gear downtown. Ron Wambolt, Edmonds, referred to Agenda Item #12, commenting he has attended all the EDC's meetings and found them to be a very hardworking group. In addition to their monthly meetings, they have held numerous subcommittee meetings. He urged the Council to adopt the resolution supporting the EDC's recommendations. Next, he referred to the Council's discussion regarding campaign finance reform, noting the $500 limit the Council approved was lower than the $800 limit proposed by the Legislature. He disagreed with a comment that the average contribution in the 2009 campaign was $80, explaining it was actually $171; a total of 750 contributions were made, dividing the total campaign contributions by 750 equates to an average of $171. A $500 limit would eliminate 13 contributions that exceeded $500. A $250 limit would eliminate 31 contributions and reduce the average contribution from $171 to $142. He noted the Council may wish to change the campaign contribution limit in the future. Al Rutledge, Edmonds, relayed Mayor Haakenson spoke to the Kiwanis Club today. With regard to the amendments to allow use of the right -of -way for outdoor dining, he recalled former Mayor Fahey's efforts to organize a December 31 event but the merchants were not interested. He also recalled Old Mill Town's request to close the street for a street dance was not approved and suggested staff research why that request was denied. Next he announced a Food Drive at a Top Foods on March 31 and April 2 -3. Betty Larman, Edmonds, on behalf of the Edmonds Floretum Garden Club, thanked the Council for their support to raise money for the Old Mill Town garden. The Garden Club raffled a quilt and the winner was announced yesterday. She announced spaces are available in the Edmonds Community Garden and Olympic View Water District has agreed to provide the water. She invited a community member with a truck to help her gather cardboard. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to WSDOT's presentation regarding the possible construction of a sky bridge over the railroad tracks. He noted an overhead structure on the shoreline was referred to in the Comprehensive Plan. He suggested the location of the sky bridge be reconsidered, explaining if a Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 11 structure were built in the City -owned right -of -way on James Street, it would land in the park at the old Anderson Marina. Such a sky bridge would allow southbound train passengers to cross the tracks, provide easy access to the Senior Center, and could be used by ferry passengers. He envisioned a continuation of that structure along the James Street right -of -way, over the ferry holding lanes and landing on 2nd Avenue which would provide a connection from the waterfront to downtown, provide a viewpoint, and qualify for the WSDOT's future rails project. He suggested that possibility be discussed with WSDOT. David Arista, Edmonds, spoke in favor of the resolution supporting the EDC's recommendations (Agenda Item 12). He strongly urged the Council to consider making Mr. Clifton the full -time Economic Development Director, noting the City is realizing the impact of the four years that position has been vacant. He urged the Council to make economic development a top priority and to schedule an economic development topic on every agenda. He was excited by Mr. Faris' and Mr. Stewart's interest in being involved and encouraged them and others to bring their ideas to the Council. Autumn Hegley, Edmonds, echoed Mr. Arista's request for the Council to adopt the resolution supporting the EDC's recommendations, noting they are basic, practical suggestions that will provide direction for real action toward generating more activity in downtown Edmonds and making Edmonds a viable community. She commented there is a certain amount of stagnation now and their suggestions would provide a turnaround. Ruth Arista, Edmonds, commented each day everyone has the choice between sitting in one place and taking steps on a journey. Reaching for change is something optimistic, fundamentally inspiring. She expressed support for the roadmap the EDC has created via their recommendations and the proposal for a neighborhood visioning process. She pointed out although the members of the EDC and Planning Board have very diverse backgrounds, they unanimously agreed on these recommendations. She envisioned the recommendations could be a guideline for action, improvement, continuing growth and boosting the quality of life in Edmonds. 8. PRESENTATION ON PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS (PRD). Councilmember Orvis explained Planning Manager Rob Chave informed the Community Services /Development Services Committee of plans to initiate a rewrite of the subdivision code to include elements of the PRD Code. The City currently has a PRD code and a subdivision code; the intent was to combine them which would also involve the Council in appeals. However, because the rewrite may take some time, he questioned whether the Council was interested in an interim ordinance to return the Council to the appeal process on PRDs as well as address the perimeter setback issue raised by Lora Petso. A third option is to accelerate the subdivision rewrite. He inquired about the timeline for the rewrite. Mr. Chave answered staff briefed the Council in late 2009 on issues to be addressed via the rewrite. Staff plans to present the rewrite to the Planning Board in April; it is unknown how long the Planning Board will spend reviewing it. Council President Bernheim commented the primary objective of the agenda item was to clarify the intent to have a perimeter buffer in a PRD that is in addition to the setback requirement of homes adjacent to the perimeter buffer. He asked whether the code currently required a perimeter buffer in addition to the individual unit setback. Mr. Chave answered lot lines and their relationship to the perimeter buffer was an ownership issue. The perimeter buffer could be established as a common tract that the entire subdivision owns via a homeowner's association. Another method is the individual homeowners own their section of the perimeter buffer. It was not important which way the perimeter buffer was established, only that it was clear that there was a perimeter buffer, whether commonly owned or individually owned. It currently could be done either way; if the code were amended to require a Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 12 commonly owned perimeter buffer with no lot lines, the result would be the lot lines would be removed from the buffer area but the useable space would not change. Councilmember Wilson commented the original intent of the PRD when created by the State was a tool to allow for maximum flexibility for parcels with difficult topography or other environmental features. The intent was to allocate the environmentally sensitive areas to the lot total and allow the same number of units but smaller lots and a large conservation area. He wanted to ensure the subdivision regulations continued to provide maximum flexibility for developments with environmental sensitive areas and /or topography challenges. He suggested the City's current PRD ordinance did not adequately reflect the original intent of the PRD legislation. Mr. Chave explained the intent was to provide flexibility for developments with environmentally sensitive areas as well as provide a mechanism for alternative forms of home ownership /development such as cottage housing, zero lot line, etc. The City does not allow attached housing in a PRD but does permit alternate forms of home ownership. For example the standard way of developing a lot requires setbacks on all sides which dramatically reduces the usable area for a small lot; a zero lot line makes the space around the house more usable by concentrating it and having the house on one property line. That type of development cannot be done in a standard subdivision; a PRD is the only option. Mr. Chave explained the PRD ordinance was an alternative form of subdivision but was contained in a separate chapter, making it somewhat confusing. The intent is to combine the PRD regulations with the subdivision regulations, holding density constant but giving more flexibility at the subdivision design phase. Councilmember Wilson suggested staff provide a table identifying tools in the current PRD ordinance versus the subdivision ordinance and the State's intent of the original PRD. He wanted to ensure the benefits of the original PRD legislation were not lost. Mr. Chave suggested staff provide periodic updates to the Community Services /Development Services Committee as the Planning Board's review progresses. COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM, TO DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO CRAFT AN INTERIM ORDINANCE THAT WOULD RESTORE COUNCIL APPEAL TO PRDs AND ELIMINATE OVERLAPS BETWEEN PERIMETER SETBACKS AND REAR SETBACKS AND BRING IT BACK FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSI.DERATION BY THE COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED (6 -1), COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON VOTING NO. 9. PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE SUBJECT OF BUDGET CUTS. Council President Bernheim explained this was scheduled on the agenda as an opportunity to gather public input regarding potential budget cuts. There will be another opportunity to comment at the March 23 Council meeting. Roger Hertrieh, Edmonds, commented the City's budget crisis was similar to that experienced by other cities, counties and states; the need for more revenue, budget cuts and tax increases. He provided the following suggestions: wage increases this year should be very conservative as the City cannot afford to provide raises; employee furloughs should continue or employees offered a choice of layoffs or furloughs; utilize retirements and not filling vacancies as a way to reduce staff; make budget cuts before increasing taxes; and delay a levy another year as residents are unlikely to support a tax increase at this time. Councilmember Orvis spoke in favor of a proforma analysis of the budget which matches fees to the service provided. A proforma analysis was very helpful to the Health Board, allowing the Board to identify programs that pay for themselves and programs that rely on discretionary revenue. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 13 Councilmember Wilson requested a formal presentation on the status of the committee work regarding the City's insurance benefit issue. He explained the current employee benefit plan is being eliminated next year and the City will need to identify an alternate plan. He also suggested staff conduct an actuary analysis of the City's pension and retirement liabilities to its employees. One of the biggest threats to corporations including municipal corporations is the inability to keep up with retirement costs. This information is particularly important since the City's staff has an older average age and what appears to be an above average retirement compensation package. He suggested staff research the cost of hiring a consultant to conduct an actuary analysis. He anticipated the pension and retirement liability was a much larger amount than the City was currently budgeting for. Councilmember Fraley - Monillas explained she recently retired from the State of Washington with 32 years of service. She expressed interest in amending the budget to reduce expenditures in the area of supplies, travel, training, meals, professional dues other than those required by law, etc., a process the State uses to reduce their budget. Reductions in those areas would not affect the community, employees or citizens. She was not comfortable asking the taxpayers for a levy until the City's own house was in order. Mayor Haakenson advised the Council could amend the budget anytime they wished. He urged Councilmember Fraley - Monillas to meet with him to identify cuts she felt could be made in those areas. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested Councilmember Fraley - Monillas and she meet with Mayor Haakenson. As an example, she described cuts her family made while her husband was unemployed. She commended staff for taking furloughs last year. She encouraged citizens interested in learning more about the City's finances to attend the Finance Committee meetings on the second Tuesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. Councilmember Wilson recalled when he was involved with developing the 2009/2010 budget, the total for supplies, travel, professional dues for the eight quarters in the two year budget was approximately $25,000. Only three quarters remain in the two year budget, which significantly reduces the cuts that could be made to those items. Councilmember Wilson expressed frustration with two instances in the budget process. Mayor Haakenson's interim budget cuts in April 2009 included freezing a $300,000 transfer from the General. Fund to an Automobile Replacement Fund. However, in reviewing the budget, he was unable to find reference to that transfer. He would not have supported closing Yost Pool for the 2009 season had he been aware not making that transfer was an alternative. Another source of frustration was the existence of three reserve funds that do not appear in the budget book, two of which he acknowledged were very small. He summarized those details would make the City's finances more transparent as well as would be helpful to the Council in making budget decisions. Councilmember Fraley - Monillas commented whether potential budget cuts were $25,000 or $2500, she had a responsibility to the Edmonds taxpayers to ensure the Council acted in a fiscally responsible manner. She summarized $25,000 may not seem like a lot compared to the City's entire budget but it would fund 25% of the Economic Development Director position. Councilmember Buckshnis anticipated fiscal policies would be completed in the next 2 -3 weeks. One of the policies is a monthly General Fund analysis. I' 1 THE MEETING FOR ONE HOUR. MOTION CARRIED Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 14 10. PROPERTY TAX INCREASE PUT TO VOTERS. Council President Bernheim explained on July 28, 2009 the Council voted 4 -2 to postpone the property tax levy to 2010. According to that action, the Council now has nine months to put a levy on the ballot. In order to put a levy on the General Election ballot in November, the deadline to submit the resolution to the Snohomish County Auditor is August 10. To place a levy on the August 1.7 primary election ballot, the deadline to submit the resolution is May 25. He recommended the Council review the last levy resolution, talk with their colleagues and constituents and decide what to do. Council President Ber ibeim recalled he voted against postponing the levy. Councilmember Plunkett commented he would not be prepared to propose Edmonds residents tax themselves until the Council conducted further review such as Councilmember Fraley- Monillas suggested and until the Council had a better understanding of labor costs. Labor costs over the next five years are projected to be approximately $5 million, approximately a 4.2% increase each year. The Council will also be renegotiating its labor contracts this year. Councilmember Wilson explained his day job involves polling for different groups, in many cases in regard to placing a matter on the ballot in various jurisdictions. This year they are finding the constituency that is likely to vote in November is more less likely to support a levy than the constituency that will vote in August; usually it is the reverse. Every year is an election year; this year it is the congressional election which means approximately $300 million will be spent by republicans to say democrats are terrible, the economy is terrible and that change is needed. That will also likely depress voter support for a tax increase. For those reasons, if the Council wanted to place a levy on the ballot in 2010 that had the maximum opportunity to pass, he recommended it be done in August. To accomplish that, the Council needs to act by May 25. Next year is also an election year for the City of Edmonds and other cities; Edmonds will have four Council positions and a mayoral position up for election. In 2009 the Council voted nine times unanimously to go to the ballot and when it got close to the election, the Council changed its position. It will not be easier in 2011 for the Council to retain its consensus with four Councilmembers up for election and a likely open mayoral seat. Therefore, Councilmember Wilson doubted a levy would be placed on the ballot in 2011 and if the Council wanted to place the levy on the ballot in 2010, it should be on the August ballot rather than November. He acknowledged perfect information would not be available to make that decision; however, if the Council was ever going to address the issue of undersunding and providing more services to the community than the City could pay for, it needed to be done soon. He requested Council President Bernheim develop an ambitious process to allow the Council to reach consensus by May 25, a process that addressed as many of the Council's concerns as possible. He recognized the Council did not want to get to a vote with a fractured Council and/or Mayor. Councilmember Orvis supported placing a levy on the August ballot and supported having a resolution . completed by May 25. He recalled he had supported placing a levy on last year's ballot. He suggested the Council start asking the voters and if the levy were not approved, the Council find out the problem and ask again. Based on the January 25, 2010 numbers, he asked what levy amount would be needed to balance the budget for five years. Mayor Haakenson suggested first forming a levy committee and getting citizens involved. Councilmember Orvis suggested leveraging last year's process. Council President Ber ibeim commented after spending 9 -10 months working on a levy last year, he did not feel the Council needed to convene the levy committee; it was the Council's responsibility to determine the amount. He suggested existing materials could be used to determine that amount. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 15 Councilmember Buckshnis expressed support for a levy. She was doubtful the public would approve a levy without transparent financials. Financial policies are being developed that will include placing financials on the City's website. There are still a number of questions to be answered such as the 4.2- 4.8% per year increase in salaries. She spoke in favor of providing the public information to illustrate the need for a levy. She preferred the Council take its time, not try to rescue but rather reform. Councilmember Wilson pointed out the Council had been doing that for the past year, recognizing Councilmember Buckshnis' position on the Council was a reflection of her active participation in the Citizen Review Committee as well as a candidate. He acknowledged the levy would not be an easy sell . but if the Council felt it was the right thing to do, the Council would need to campaign for the levy. The City is a highly under - capitalized corporation and does not have the money to make the investment to do things smarter, better faster, and leaner. He recalled last year Mayor Haakenson proposed funding for technology upgrades that would not require as much staff, his attempt toward doing things smarter, better, faster, leaner via technology. He summarized there was no more important task for the Finance staff to be working on than this. To Councilmember Orvis' question regarding the levy amount, he suggested after removing the fire related purchases in the levy, the levy amount was approximately $2.5 — $2.7 million. The levy may need to be lower than that, $2 - $2.5 million. Mayor Haakenson explained the City is audited annually, the auditors are here now and finance staff will be busy with them for the next 3 -4 months. Staff is in a budget preparation cycle that typically begins in July and culminates in early October when he presents the 2 -year budget. Therefore, a full set of accurate numbers will not be available until the 2 -year budget is prepared. In addition, the Council will be negotiating labor contracts throughout this year and typically they are not resolved until fall. The labor unions have asked to begin negotiations earlier this year but that is because they want more to recoup what they gave up last year. He concluded the Council would not have labor negotiation numbers until late this year. 11. PROPOSAL FOR CITY COUNCIL TO CONDUCT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS ON ISSUES OF NEIGHBORHOOD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND CITY -WIDE "VISION." Council President Bernbeim referred to the resolution that states in order to solicit vision input from residents, and to elicit neighborhood business center recommendations from residents, the Council resolves to hold seven meetings over the next seven months, each chaired by a different Councilmember and each in a different neighborhood or a different sector. He suggested the seven areas Councilmembers would focus on would be Stevens Hospital, Highway 99, the Downtown Waterfront Activity Area, Five Corners, Perrinville, Westgate and Firdale Village. He suggested holding meetings in these areas where residents could discuss citywide vision as well as the local improvement area. The meetings could be facilitated by third parties or directed by the Councilmember. He referred to the Citizen Levy Review Committee process lead by Councilmember Wilson as an example of an impressive management exercise that illustrated it was possible to have successful, valuable neighborhood meetings without hiring a consultant. Each Councilmember would be responsible for directing his /her own meeting and preparing the results of the meeting and no later than November 30 the Council would meet to articulate the results of the meetings, plans for initiation of Neighborhood Business Centers and a community vision that addresses the balance between quality of life and growth objectives while furthering Edmonds' green initiatives. COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, FOR APPROVAL OF THE RESOLUTION, ENABLING CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO CONDUCT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS ON ISSUES OF NEIGHBORHOOD ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND CITYWIDE VISION. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 16 Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether Councilmembers could hold more than one meeting. Council President Bemheim answered yes. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether Councilmember Fraley - Monillas and she should prepare a summary of the discussion at each of their meetings. Council President Bemheim responded it would be helpful to summarize the content and results of the meetings. Councilmember Peterson applauded the spirit of the resolution, recognizing it addressed some of the EDC's recommendations; however, it seems too much at one time, both Neighborhood Business Development and community vision. It was clear in the EDC's recommendation that those were two very separate issues. Although he applauded Councilmembers Buckshnis and Fraley - Monillas' neighborhood meetings, he did not have the expertise to create a business model for a neighborhood. Initiating a true business center plan requires a professional without any political agenda, an effort that has been successful in Shoreline and in other areas. He preferred not to pass the resolution and seek direction from the EDC regarding how to structure neighborhood meetings. Councilmember Plunkett did not support the resolution, finding it redundant of the work being done by the EDC. He preferred to have the EDC conduct neighborhood meetings as part of their work. Councilmember Wilson echoed Councilmember Peterson's comment about the spirit of the resolution. He preferred to have the EDC oversee this effort and was concerned the Council was not obtaining this level of vision from the EDC. Council President Bemheim explained the purpose of this exercise was not to develop a plan but to solicit input from residents. At the EDC meetings he has attended, the EDC members indicated they are sufficiently representative of the community and outreach to the community or direct input from residents was unnecessary. The shortcoming of past plans was that they did not solicit input from residents. He anticipated it would be helpful to gather residents' input regarding their vision for the City and what they wanted for their local neighborhood and efficient to ask both questions at the same meeting. If the Council did not approve the resolution, he planned to hold a meeting anyway and he hoped other Councilmembers would do the same. He recalled the economic development representatives from Shoreline, Mountlake Terrace and Bothell emphasized the importance of seeking the residents input first and building on those ideas. Mayor Haakenson advised the citizens who live near Firdale Village and Five Corners have already provided input at meetings that staff held in those neighborhoods in the past. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas suggested the EDC implement a citywide visioning process and gather input on Neighborhood Business Centers. The EDC could request Councilmembers attend those meetings. Councilmember Wilson agreed with Councilmember Fraley - Monillas to involve the EDC. He pointed out two very influential people spoke to the Council during Audience Comments, Mr. Faris and Mr. Stewart. Mr. Faris commented on the possibility of a philanthropic public /private partnership. Mr. Stewart, who lives in Edmonds, runs the McCaw Foundation and is interested in establishing a vision for the Harbor Square, Antique Mall, Skippers and DOT properties. Councilmember Wilson pointed out action was likely to take place on three of those properties in the next 3 -4 months; the Skipper's property is likely to change ownership, the DOT property will likely change ownership and efforts are underway to redevelop the Harbor Square property. If the Council waits too long, it will be too late. He suggested scheduling a meeting in late April/early May where each Councilmember would make a 10 minute presentation regarding his /her vision for the community with regard to economic development and invite citizen feedback. He noted previous Councils have attempted neighborhood meetings; turnout has been mediocre and the meetings cannot be taped for television viewers. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 17 UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION FAILED (3 -4), COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM AND COUNCILMEMBERS ORVIS AND BUCKSHNIS VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS PETERSON, FRALEY- MONILLAS, WILSON AND PLUNKETT VOTING NO. 12. RESOLUTION REGARDING CITIZENS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RECOMMENDED ITEMS. Councilmember Peterson explained with the guidance of the 6 recommendations developed by the 17- member EDC, Council President Bernheim and he developed this resolution. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1224 IN SUPPORT OF THE JANUARY 2010 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO AMEND ITEM ONE TO ADD `BY ANALYZING CURRENT STAFFING POSITIONS." Councilmember Buckshnis expressed interest in analyzing staffing before committing funds to the position. Mayor Haakenson explained the Economic Development Director is a funded position in the budget. Mr. Clifton and he have developed a plan to free him from his other responsibilities and allow him to concentrate completely on economic development. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS WITHDREW HER AMENDMENT WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECOND BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO ELIMINATE "AND FUND" IN ITEMS 5 AND 6. Councilmember Buckshnis spoke in support of initiating a business /marketing plan for tourism development and offered to participate in that effort. She also was in favor of initiating a business marketing plan for the City -owned fiber optics network but did not want to fund it yet. Councilmember Peterson explained a funding mechanism was included to avoid unfunded mandates; marketing plans cost money. He recognized Finance Director Lorenzo Hines is working on a business /marketing plan for the City -owned fiber optics network with CTAC's guidance. Councilmember Plunkett commented Mr. Hines was working on a business /marketing plan for the fiber optics and the cost of developing a business /marketing plan for tourism development was unknown. He expressed support for initiating the plans. U 10101110 1 Diem ::: 1 U ► TU COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION BY REMOVING THE LAST PARAGRAPH (NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SHALL FUND THESE GOALS FOR THE FIRST YEAR USING $100,000 FROM FUNDS RECEIVED BY THE CITY FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SALE TO FIRE DISTRICT ONE AND COMMITS TO FIND ONGOING FUNDING FOR THE FOLLOWING YEARS). Councilmember Peterson clarified this funding request was not made by the EDC, it was added by Council President Bernheim and him to provide funding to carry out the EDC's recommendations. He suggested scheduling each of the EDC's recommendations as an agenda item, pointing out some of them will require funding. He envisioned as the EDC delves deeper into each of their recommendations they Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 18 would identify alternative funding sources such as partnerships with the University of Washington, Imagine Edmonds, etc. THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. At Mayor Haakenson's request, Councilmember Peterson read the seven recommendations in the resolution: 1. Ensure that the City's Economic Development Director position can devote full time to economic development activities and adequately fund proposed programs and activities. 2. Develop a strategic plan and commit to reviewing /updating this plan every year, this includes setting goals and continually assessing progress metrics. 3. Initiate Neighborhood Business Center plans for Five Corners (Neighborhood Center), Perrinville, and Westgate (Neighborhood Community Center) in order to position these areas to attract development. 4. Support the process to redevelop Harbor Square with public involvement that recognizes the need to generate revenue while emphasizing environmental /community needs and concerns. 5. Initiate a business /marketing plan for the City -owned fiber optic network. 6. Initiate a business /marketing plan for tourism development. 7. Develop a community vision that addresses quality of life and growth objectives while furthering Edmonds' "green" initiatives. Councilmember Wilson questioned how these items would get accomplished, noting in many cases it was most appropriately done by staff. Mayor Haakenson advised he would handle Item 1. With regard to developing a strategic plan, Councilmember Wilson relayed he was not aware of any city with a strong Mayor - Council form of government that had a strategic plan. In all cases he was aware of where there was a strategic plan, there was a Council -City Manager form of government. He would support the resolution as it expressed the Council's support for the EDC's recommendations but he questioned how the items would be accomplished. Council President Bembeim looked to the EDC to accomplish these items. With the adoption of the resolution, the EDC can be confident these are the topics they should pursue. The Council is giving the EDC guidance and looking to the EDC for answers. He assured the Council was ready to act on good ideas in these topic areas. Councilmember Peterson commented this was the first step to show the Council's support for the EDC. He anticipated the EDC would quickly expand on these ideas and make more recommendations. He explained Council President Bernheim and he added the business /marketing plan for tourism development to the EDC's six recommendations. He suggested the Council could eliminate the recommendation regarding a strategic plan if they wished. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM, TO CHANGE THE RESOLVE PARAGRAPH TO READ, "NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DIRECTS THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION TO FURTHER DEVELOP RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING:" Councilmember Peterson expressed concern this puts the burden on the EDC. The EDC was seeking assurance that the City Council would discuss and act on ideas they propose. He accepted the language to direct the EDC to further develop recommendations but he did not support removing the clause, "the Edmonds City Council shall act." Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 19 Councilmember Wilson expressed concern that the EDC wanted the City Council to commit to doing what they recommend. The EDC was not created to tell the Council to do things they already knew needed to be done; they were asked to focus on revenue and to develop actionable items. He was frustrated the majority of the EDC's recommendations were not actionable. He was opposed to offering a blank check for these items without further information. Councilmember Fraley- Monillas suggested changing "act" to "support" so that the paragraph reads, "Now therefore be it resolved the Edmonds City Council shall support aet on the work of the Economic Development Commission and its recommendations including, but not limited to:" She agreed the Council did not have the ability to implement the seven points and agreed the burden should not be shifted to the EDC to accomplish the recommendations. She suggested passing the resolution voicing the Council's support for the seven recommendations and the EDC and City Council have a dialogue regarding how they would be accomplished. Councilmember Wilson suggested if his amendment passed, another resolve be added to the resolution . expressing the Council's appreciation for the work of the EDC. Councilmember Peterson clarified "act' did not mean approve, it simply meant the Council would take action on it, whether it was to approve or deny it. The Council will be required to take action on most of the EDC's recommendations. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO ADD AT THE END OF THE RESOLVE "AND SHALL ACT ON THE WORK OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION." COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Wilson suggested passing his amendment first and to consider Councilmember Peterson's amendment separately. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON WITHDREW HIS AMENDMENT WITH THE AGREEMENT OF THE SECOND. THE VOTE ON COUNCILMEMBER WILSON'S AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO ADD ANOTHER RESOLVE THAT READS, "NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SHALL ACT ON THE WORK OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND ITS RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING:" Councilmember Wilson explained he was willing to take up every issue the EDC presented but was concerned "shall act" implied the Council would affirmatively act on the EDC's recommendations. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO ADD AFTER POINT 7, "NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL COMMITS TO TAKE UP EACH AND EVERY RECOMMENDATION PROPOSED BY THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WITHIN A 30 DAY PERIOD FOLLOWING ITS FINAL REPORT OF DECEMBER 31, 2010. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 20 Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern with waiting to act on the EDC's recommendations until their final report. She was also concerned with the word act and suggested inserting "consider and act." Councilmember Plunkett was confident the Council President would schedule Council consideration of the EDC's recommendations in a timely manner. Councilmember Wilson offered to eliminate the reference to a 30 day period and the December 31, 2010 date. UPON ROLL CALL, AMENDMENT FAILED (3 -4), COUNCILMEMBERS WILSON AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS ORVIS, PLUNKETT, FRALEY-MONILLAS, AND PETERSON VOTING NO. Councilmember Plunkett did not support the amendment, envisioning act would be interpreted as enact. Council President Bernbeim expressed his support for acting on every recommendation the EDC presents, clarifying act on did not mean enact but to consider and put it to a vote. UPON ROLL CALL, THE VOTE ON COUNCILMEMBER PETERSON'S AMENDMENT CARRIED (4 -3), COUNCILMEMBERS PETERSON, FRALEY- MONILLAS, AND BUCKSHNIS AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT, WILSON AND ORVIS VOTING NO. THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS OF MARCH 9.2010 Community Services/Development Services Committee Councilmember Orvis reported the Committee had further discussion with Climate Solutions; the representative will develop a proposal for consideration by the full. Council. The Committee then discussed the proposed amendments to Title 18 and recommended increasing the fine for illegal connections and asked staff to investigate the fine for illegal tree cutting in critical areas. Review of transportation capital project funding options followed including options for increasing the Transportation Benefit District (TBD) license fee to complete some or all projects. Next, the Committee discussed proposed amendments to traffic impact fees. A partnership with Westgate Elementary to develop upgraded neighborhood park elements at the school site was discussed by the Committee and approved for the Consent Agenda. Draft sign code amendments were also discussed. Finance Committee Councilmember Buckshnis reported the Committee discussed renaming the Cemetery Fund 130 to the Cemetery Improvement and Maintenance Fund. The Committee discussed a proposal to segregate the Fire District 1 funds; this will be presented to the full Council. Staff presented revenue and expenditure trends of the General Fund year -to -date; progress to date is the same as last year. The Committee also reviewed a draft of the fiscal policies. Public Safety Committee Councilmember Wilson reported the Committee discussed a proposed Styrofoam ban including a grandfather clause to allow businesses to exhaust their current supplies. This will be presented to the full Council for discussion. The Committee discussed a contract to touch DNA testing which was approved on the Consent Agenda. Next they discussed amendment to EMC 5.05, which was approved on the Consent Agenda, that allows for an appeal process should a dog be declared potentially dangerous. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 21 14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Haakenson had no report. 15. COUNCIL COMMENTS Council President Bernheim relayed this was the first meeting to extend past 10:00 p.m. this year; a number of important issues had been discussed. During Executive Session, the Council appointed a committee, Councilmembers Buckshnis and Wilson and himself, to further discuss the possible purchase of real estate. Councilmember Fraley - Monillas wished everyone a Happy St. Patrick's Day tomorrow. Councilmember Buckshnis announced the second Town Hall meeting on Friday, March 26 from 6:00 — 8:00 p.m. at the Lund Building at 1840176 th Avenue West. This Town Hall meeting is an opportunity for citizens to tell Councilmember Fraley- Monillas and her how they envision Edmonds. Councilmember Wilson reported he attended the workshop hosted by WSDOT related to the overpass they are proposing to have built in exchange for the parking lot property. A vendor in the audience commented due to the political dynamics, a project was not feasible because the value of the land was not sufficient under the current zoning. The person asked whether there was any political will on the part of the Edmonds City Council to make the project happen. Mr. Clifton accurately represented the Council's position which was not well received by the vendors in the audience. Councilmember Wilson commented the vendors clearly did not feel the Council was interested in being creative or innovative. He suggested the Council may want to develop and communicate their vision to the vendor community via WSDOT or Mr. Clifton. Student Representative Marmion advised the first Council meeting in January lasted until midnight. He thanked Ms. Arista for staying until the meeting was over. On behalf of Edmonds - Woodway High. School he thanked the members of the community who donated to their Battle of the Sexes Food Drive. 16. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 11:41 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes March 16, 2010 Page 22