01/17/2006 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
January 17, 2006
Following a special meeting at 6:15 for an Executive Session regarding legal and real estate matters, the
Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5t'' Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
Deanna Dawson, Council President
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Richard Marin, Councilmember
Mauri Moore, Councilmember
Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Ron Wambolt, Councilmember
ALSO PRESENT
Brandon Schmitt, Student Representative
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
STAFF PRESENT
Thomas Tomberg, Fire Chief
John Westfall, Fire Marshal
David Stern, Chief of Police
Robin Heslop, Crime Prevention Officer
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director
Brian McIntosh, Parks & Recreation Director
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
Stephen Koho, Treatment Plant Manager
Dave Gebert, City Engineer
Steve Bullock, Senior Planner
Frances Chapin, Cultural Services Manager
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, FOR
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, FOR
APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
(A) ROLL CALL
(B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 3, 2006.
(C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #84800 THROUGH #84942 FOR THE WEEK OF
JANUARY 2, 2006, IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,368,665.13, AND #84943 THROUGH #85177
FOR THE WEEK OF JANUARY 9, 2006, IN THE AMOUNT OF $789,313.24.
APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS AND CHECKS #42413 THROUGH
#42468 FOR THE PERIOD DECEMBER 16 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2005 IN THE
AMOUNT OF $692,487.59.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 17, 2006
Page 1
(D) ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM JAN HELLERAN
($2,500 - 7,500) AND CAROLYN MUNN (AMOUNT UNDETERMINED).
(E) REPORT ON BIDS RECEIVED ON DECEMBER 12, 2005 FOR THE PURCHASE OF
ONE NEW FIRE - RESCUE BOAT AND AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT A BID IN THE
AMOUNT OF $199,869.00 FROM NORTHWIND MARINE, INC.
(F) AUTHORIZATION TO APPROVE 2006 TOURISM PROMOTION AWARDS
RECOMMENDED BY THE EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION.
(G) AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN RECYCLING GRANT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN EDMONDS AND WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
FOR 2006 AND 2007.
(H) AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN A WASHINGTON STATE MILITARY
DEPARTMENT EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT MITIGATION GRANT AGREEMENT,
UP TO A MAXIMUM OF $782,190.00, FOR THE FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER
SEISMIC STRUCTURAL RETROFIT PROJECT.
(I) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH
SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS FOR COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION (CTR)
2005 -2007.
(J) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE SCREENING SYSTEM
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AT THE TREATMENT PLANT.
3. PRESENTATION OF ARSON ALARM FOUNDATION AWARDS TO RITA KONZAK MARK
JANSEN AND JEANNINE JANSEN.
Fire Marshal John Westfall read the Citation Award regarding the two arson fires that occurred in
Edmonds the evening of August 19, 2004 during a rash of arsons in the Seattle and Everett areas. The
vigilance of three community neighbors, Mark Jansen, Jeannine Jansen and Rita Konzak and their willing
testimony was instrumental in incarcerating the person responsible for those fires. He explained both
fires occurred in abandoned structures scheduled for demolition and although unoccupied, the arson fire
created tremendous hazard to responders during fire suppression operations and threatened adjacent
homes. The Jansens were key witnesses in the immediate pursuit and apprehension of the perpetrator,
Kenneth Sloan, and Rita Konzak provided unwavering and confident courtroom testimony identifying
Sloan as the arsonist at those fires. Fire Marshal Westfall recognized Mark Jansen, Jeannine Jansen and
Rita Konzak for their assistance in the conviction of Kenneth Sloan, thereby preserving the safety of their
neighborhood and the greater community.
Tom Drexall, Arson Alarm Foundation, presented awards to Mark Jansen, Jeannine Jansen and Rita
Konzak and thanked them for their assistance in the apprehension and conviction of the arsonist.
4. PRESENTATION BY JONI EARL SOUND TRANSIT CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
Joni Earl, Sound Transit Chief Executive Officer, acknowledged the efforts of Sound Transit
Boardmember Richard Marin and expressed her appreciation. She then reported on the status of Phase 1
projects explaining that Sound Transit's role in transportation was to connect urban centers of the three
county region via express buses, Sounder commuter rail, Tacoma light rail, transit centers, and Park &
Ride lots. She displayed a graph illustrating ridership throughout the region, explaining through
November 2005 Sound Transit had surpassed 10 million riders and she anticipated the final numbers for
2005 would reflect a 3 -5% increase in ridership over 2004. She advised Sound Transit currently carried
approximately 38,000 people per day throughout the region.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 17, 2006
Page 2
With regard to Sounder, she reported a second round trip had been added this year which significantly
increased ridership, more than doubling the 300 -350 riders per day single train ridership. She
acknowledged the current train interruption issues due to mud slides, assuring the safety of the system via
BNSF's monitoring of the hillsides and an advance notification signaling system. Further, a safety policy
prohibited trains from running for 48 hours after a slide. She described bus service provided via
Community Transit to serve Sounder riders during service interruptions. She advised the third and fourth
Sounder trains were scheduled for the end of 2007; Sound Transit is in the process of acquiring the third
easement permit. She commented on the Seahawks and Mariner Sounder service.
With regard to the Edmond station, Ms. Earl advised a design team was planning minimum improvements
to maintain passenger service at the temporary station until the Edmonds Crossing project was
constructed. Cost estimates on the minimum improvements are being prepared and will be presented to
the Sound Transit Board in the next few months to determine how to proceed. She anticipated that work
would be completed prior to the start of the third and fourth trains in 2007. She advised the drainage
issues in the parking lot would be addressed via the temporary improvements.
She reported that the permanent Mukilteo station was approximately 50% through final design and
construction was expected to begin on the north platform this year with service beginning the second
quarter of 2007 and full station and pedestrian bridge in 2009. With regard to the Everett station, she
advised construction on a 440 stall parking structure east of the current tracks and pedestrian bridge
would begin summer 2006.
The ST Express Bus service, operated by Community Transit, carried more than 1.2 million people in the
third quarter of 2006, with bus ridership of approximately 30,000 every weekday. She described
completed Phase 1 projects in South Snohomish County such as the Lynnwood Transit Center and HOV
access ramps and Ash Way Transit Ramp. She reported on the status of other South Snohomish County
Sound Move Phase 1 projects including the Mountlake Terrace freeway station and pedestrian bridge that
is in preliminary engineering with final design due shortly, final design on the Canyon Park freeway
station, and construction on the south Everett freeway station at 112''' was anticipated in 2007. She
summarized Sound Transit was nearly in construction or had completed construction on the final Phase 1
projects in South Snohomish County.
She next displayed photographs of the elevated tracks in Tukwila, light trail tracks south of downtown
Seattle, Beacon Hill tunnel station, downtown transit tunnel, stadium station, and the O &M base. She
described efforts to bring light rail to SeaTac by 2009.
Ms. Earl described the need for Phase 2, explaining 1.2 million more people were expected in the Puget
Sound region by 2030, a 45% employment growth, 45% growth in vehicle miles traveled and all day
congestion were expected which increased the demand for reliable mass transit. She described the
process of identifying Phase 2 projects, beginning with 500 -600 project ideas that the Board reduced to
approximately 130 projects that fit within the Long Range Plan. By working with subareas throughout
the region, the Board further reduced the list to 80 projects. Last week the Board performed the first cut,
reducing the list of projects to 61.
The projects being considered in Snohomish County north corridor were preliminary engineering of light
rail from the King County line to Ash Way, permanent Sounder station at Edmonds Crossing, potential
north Seattle station, Bus Rapid Transit on Hwy. 99 from Seattle to Everett, bus access and transit lanes
on SR 99 and Evergreen Way, link starter line in Everett, HOV access ramps /transit center at Mariner
Park & Ride, ST express route between Everett and Bellevue on Hwy. 527 and a parking garage at
Canyon Park & Ride.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 17, 2006
Page 3
She described the schedule and the Board's request to develop a draft plan by the end of March. As the
list currently contains more projects than funding, the Board asked staff to develop high, medium and low
tax rate scenarios. The Board then plans to take the draft plan out for extensive public review and
comment. If a decision is made to do a ballot measure this year, the Board will need to adopt a final plan
by the end of June. Sound Transit is in discussion with the Regional Transportation. Investment District
(RTID) regarding a joint road/transit ballot measure.
In response to a commonly asked question, why should someone who does not use transit pay for it, Ms.
Earl explained transit benefited you even if you do not use it because each person added to a bus or train
removed their car from the road. She also commented on Transit Oriented Development occurring in the
regional which provides economic benefits.
Ms. Earl explained Sound Transit took their accountability and transparency very seriously and she
provided a list of the reviews that are conducted. She referred to the third quarter 2005 milestones report,
advising the yearend report would be presented to the Board at their January 26 meeting.
Councilmember Moore thanked Ms. Earl for the incredible work she and the Sound Transit Board have
done, commenting on the turnaround of the agency in the past six years.
Councilmember Marin commented on how thrilling it was to see up close what was happening with
Sound Transit. He advised of a ceremony Wednesday morning to launch the tunnel boring machine, and
commented on the advanced technology used in the Beacon Hill tunnel. He noted Sound Transit was
poised to have link light rail from Pine Street to the airport by the end of 2009 and potentially to Everett
in the future.
Councilmember Moore complimented Sound Transit on their improved signage with regard to Sound
Transit dollars at work.
Councilmember Wambolt stated Kemper Freeman, owner of Bellevue Square, was not a fan of Sound
Transit and inquired about his primary opposition. Ms. Earl answered he was a proponent that the region
could build its way out of congestion via aggressive road expansion and he did not view the amount of
people transit carried over a 24 hour per day period was worth the expense. She recalled Mr. Freeman's
statement that public transportation only carries about 2 -3% of the travelers per day which she
acknowledged was correct on a 24 -hour basis. However, during the peak hour, public transportation
carried approximately 40% of the travelers, noting public transportation was needed most during peak
hours.
5. CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OF AN APPEAL OF A HEARING EXAMINER DECISION
REGARDING THE SHORELINE PERMIT APPLICATION TO REPAIR 1 RECONSTRUCT THE
TIMBER PORTIONS OF THE MEADOWDALE MARINA PIER. THE APPEAL IS
SPECIFICALLY REGARDING A CONDITION OF THE RESULTS IN THE LOSS OF THAT
BUILDING'S NONCONFORMING STATUS AND RESULTS IN ITS REQUIRED DEMOLITION.
(APPLICANT /APPELLANT: MEADOWDALE MARINA LLC, VLADAN MILOSAVUEVIC AS
GENERAL MANAGER — FILE NO. SM- 05 -94)
In accordance with the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine, Mayor Haakenson asked whether any
Councilmembers had any conflicts or ex parte communications to disclose regarding this matter.
Councilmember Marin advised he had been in the building 23 years ago.
Councilmember Wambolt advised he had attended the Hearing Examiner's hearing.
Council President Dawson disclosed at least one of the parties of record had contributed to her campaign.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 17, 2006
Page 4
Councilmember Plunkett advised he had been in the building 35 years ago. He noted because campaign
contributions were reported to the State as part of the Public Disclosure Commission, contributions were
already disclosed. However, Councilmembers take the extra step in cases such as this to disclose
contributions made by parties of record. He disclosed he received a $100 contribution to his City Council
campaign from Diana Clay, $25 from Laurie Dressier, and $25 from John Quast.
Councilmember Moore advised she had good friends who were parties of record and therefore would
reeuse herself. She left the building.
Councilmember Olson advised a party of record contributed to her campaign and one of the parties of
record was her campaign treasurer. She advised that would not affect her ability to make a fair decision.
Councilmember Wambolt disclosed that Laurie Dressler and John Quast had contributed to his campaign
but that would not affect his decision in the matter.
Councilmember Orvis advised some of the parties of record may have contributed to his campaign.
Mr. Snyder asked Councilmember Wambolt if he participated in the Hearing Examiner hearing by
testifying or submitting any comments. Councilmember Wambolt answered he had no participation. Mr.
Snyder asked if when he attended, he had taken the Oath of Office as a Councilmember. Councilmember
Wambolt answered no.
As he could be asked to break a tie vote, Mayor Haakenson disclosed he had been on the pier in the past
and had met with the applicant/appellant but that would not affect his ability to make a fair decision. He
asked the Councilmembers whether their disclosures would affect their ability to make a fair and
reasonable decision. Councilmembers answered their disclosures would not affect their ability to make a
fair and reasonable decision in the matter.
Mayor Haakenson asked whether any of the parties of record objected to any Councilmembers' or his
participation in this matter. There were no objections voiced. Mayor Haakenson established time limits
of 10 minutes for staff's presentation, and 20 minutes for the appellant's presentation.
Senior Planner Steve Bullock advised the applicant applied for a Shoreline Permit which was heard by the
Hearing Examiner in November. The Hearing Examiner approved the Shoreline Permit. Tonight's
appeal was related to one condition the Hearing Examiner placed on the project — prior to the hearing it
was not clear how the pier would be reconstructed; at the hearing it was clarified the applicant's plan was
to demolish the northern half of the old timber pier, completely reconstruct it with concrete piles, concrete
pile caps and concrete decking, move the existing timber building on the south half of the timber pier onto
the newly constructed section, demolish and reconstruct the deck where the building had been located,
and move the building back to its original location. The City's code, both the Shoreline Master Program
and the code related to nonconforming buildings /structures address the continuance, retention, and
maintenance of nonconforming buildings and under what circumstances they are required to be brought
into compliance. In this case, because the pier is over water and the current Shoreline Master Program
allows buildings over water only in very limited circumstances, the Shoreline Master Program requires if
a building is moved for any reason, it must be brought into conformance.
Because this issue arose at the Hearing Examiner hearing, the Hearing Examiner asked for a clarifying
memo from staff and allowed the applicant an opportunity for rebuttal. Mr. Bullock advised that letter
was included in the Hearing Examiner decision as Exhibit 9 and 10, pages 1.40 -143 of the packet. He
noted pages 7 and 8 of the Hearing Examiner's decision contained a fairly exhaustive analysis of the
applicant's application, staff's memo, the applicant's response and his analysis of dictionary terms, etc.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 17, 2006
Page 5
used to reach his conclusion that if the building was moved for any reason whatsoever, it must be brought
into compliance which in this case, results in its demolition.
Applicant
David Mann, representing Meadowdale Marina LLC, requested five minutes be retained for rebuttal.
He explained this was an appeal on one narrow issue of the Hearing Examiner's decision. He referred to
page 26 of the packet that contained the Land Use Permit application and a general description of the
existing conditions and the proposed change. He explained the pier was currently constructed with
creosote timbers, timber -fixed pilings, pier decking and the two large buildings, one metal and one wood.
Their proposal was to remove the creosote treated timber piles and caps and wood decking and replace it
with steel pilings and a concrete deck. The trestle approach, rather than the existing solid wood, would be
graded metal to allow sunlight to pass through to the sea bottom. He summarized the proposal would
improve the existing situation by replacing the creosote with steel and concrete, allow more sunlight to
pass through as well as improve public access. He noted their proposal would not change the view as the
existing facilities would remain.
Mr. Mann explained the application process included a biological and environmental evaluation, pages
36 -84 of the packet, and after reviewing the environmental checklist, the City issued a Determination of
Non - Significance, page 119 of the packet which was not appealed. He emphasized that although there
were parties of record to the Hearing Examiner's hearing, the City's Determination of Non - Significance
was not appealed.
Tonight was an appeal of the ruling that as part of construction the existing buildings could not be moved
at all on the pier and if moved at all, they must be demolished. The proposal presented to the Hearing
Examiner was to construct most of the deck, move the buildings out of the way onto the newer decking,
construct the pier underneath the buildings, and move the buildings back. He did not find the Hearing
Examiner's decision, that buildings could not be moved at all and if they were moved they must be
demolished, to be a fair or correct application of the City's code.
He noted a permit may not have even been required, pointing out the State's Shoreline regulations allow
maintenance and repair to existing structures. He noted the State's definition of repair included
replacement of an existing structure. As long as the existing structure was replaced with something that
was comparable in size, shape, etc., a Shoreline Permit was not required. However, Meadowdale Marina
did apply for a Shoreline Permit.
He referred to page 6 of the Hearing Examiner's decision noting there was no dispute that the existing
marina and buildings were allowed uses under the existing Commercial Waterfront zoning and that a pier
structure could be built in that location today under the existing Shoreline Master Program (page 10 of the
Hearing Examiner's decision). He pointed out rebuilding the pier would make it better as it would be an
improvement to the environment and there would be no change to the view. He concluded the Hearing
Examiner approved a complete rebuild of the pier; the only issue was whether the buildings could be
moved during the rebuild.
Mr. Mann explained the Hearing Examiner relied on Section 23.10.220, page 80 of his decision, which
took a very narrow view of nonconforming structures, requiring it to conform with the code if it was
moved. He objected to this narrow view, pointing out the City allowed nonconforming uses to be rebuilt
when damaged up to 75% of their value. The intent of the movement section in the code referred to
moving the overall main use somewhere else and he did not believe it applied to buildings that were on
top of the main use, in this instance, the pier. He recalled referring the Hearing Examiner to Section
17.40.020 regarding nonconforming uses, specifically subsection E, that addressed moving buildings,
stating if a building was moved, it must comply with setbacks. He noted setbacks did not apply in this
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 17, 2006
Page 6
instance and that section did not require a building that was moved to comply with any other provisions.
He concluded Section 17.40.020(E) did not prohibit nonconforming buildings from being moved. He
noted the Hearing Examiner found the Shoreline Master Program was more specific.
Mr. Mann recommended the City's overall code be considered, in particular the nonconforming sections
and buildings on top of a primary use. There were contradictory provisions in the City's code but if read
together they would allow the pier to be rebuilt, the buildings to be moved as long as they remained on
the pier and remained the same size and shape and occupied the same floor space. He concluded it was a
matter of common sense; their intent was to make an improvement to the pier but in the process they
needed to move the buildings out of the way to replace the pier underneath which he said should be
allowed without the penalty of demolishing the buildings. If that was not allowed and the buildings could
not be moved, the pier and decking would remain as they exist today.
Mr. Mann requested the City Council strike the sentence, "Therefore, if the timber structure is to be
moved any distance at all to allow for the reconstruction of the pier on which it is located, the building
may not be moved back to its current location and should be demolished ", which is found in the Hearing
Examiner Conclusion b2 on page 8 and the sentence, "As noted above if the timber structure is moved to
allow for the reconstruction of the pier, the building shall be demolished" be deleted from Condition 3 on
page 11. He requested the Council allow this proposal to move forward, noting it was good for the
community and the pier.
Parties of Record
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, stated he attended the Hearing Examiner hearing due to environmental
concerns but found those concerns would be addressed properly. He disagreed with the Hearing
Examiner's decision, particularly staff's recommendation regarding the narrow interpretation of the Code
in view of the City's intent to save historic structures. He pointed out the Meadowdale Marina was an
historic structure. He provided an example of an historic house building on pilings and the need to raise
the house to construct a concrete foundation, noting this was the same as the request made by the
Meadowdale Marina, move the structure to complete construction. He did not believe the Code meant
moving a building up or over, as long as it was returned to its original location. He found the
nonconforming section of the code too strict and recommended this narrow interpretation be corrected to
allow the history of Edmonds to be saved.
There were no other parties of records who wished to provide comment and Mayor Haakenson closed the
public participation portion of this item.
Mr. Mann had no rebuttal and Mr. Bullock had no further comment.
Councilmember Plunkett referred to Mr. Mann's comment that there were conflicts in the Code and the
Hearing Examiner's indication in his Conclusions on page 8 (b2) that the more stringent of the code
sections should apply. Mr. Bullock agreed the Shoreline Master Program ruled.
City Attorney Scott Snyder referred to Section 17.40.020 regarding nonconforming buildings which states
in part A, definition, a nonconforming building is one which once met zoning standards and site
development standards after construction that no longer conforms to such standards due to enactment of
an amendment to the zoning ordinance of the city. With regard to the provision sited regarding
movement and relocation, paragraph F, he noted that was under this zoning code definition. He also
referred to Section 23.10., the introduction to the Shoreline Master Program, which contains in section
.010 - .045 basic information regarding the applicability of the Shoreline Master Program and relationship
of the Shoreline Master Program to other documents and how to use the Shoreline Master Program.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 17, 2006
Page 7
Councilmember Plunkett referred to the comment that the proposal was similar to moving an historic
home, explaining staff and the Hearing Examiner were strictly interpreting the code due to the
applicability of the Shoreline Master Program for the pier, which differed from a home on land.
Councilmember Orvis spoke in favor of upholding the Hearing Examiner's decision, agreeing with the
strict enforcement of the Shoreline Master Program and the Hearing Examiner's interpretation of the
code.
COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON, TO
UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION AND DENY THE APPEAL.
Council President Dawson commented if the nonconforming ordinance or the Shoreline Master Program
was too strict, changes must be made legislatively. If the intent was to allow buildings over water, the
code needed to be changed as the code did not currently allow that use. The only way to read and
interpret the Code was as the Hearing Examiner did and require the building be demolished if the building
were moved in any way.
Councilmember Marin spoke in favor of the motion, acknowledging the applicant had good intentions
and what was proposed sounded reasonable; however, the combined codes overruled the proposal.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Christin Leupold, Edmonds Police Foundation, referred to the Police Foundation's fundraiser to
purchase a second K -9 unit. She advised the goal was $40,000 and $10,000 had already been raised. She
invited the Edmonds community to contribute via mailing donations to the Edmonds Police Foundation,
K -9 Unit, P.O. Box 303, Edmonds, WA 98020. She explained that the Edmonds Police Foundation was a
not - for - profit organization that had 501(c)(3) status; therefore contributions were tax deductible. She
commented on the 55 retail partners in the community who were collecting donations and had K9 wrist
bands and car cutouts. The names of those contributing $25 or more would be published in the Police
Foundation's ads every three weeks unless anonymity was requested. She concluded the success of the
campaign depended on the generosity of the Edmonds community and she urged the community's
support.
7. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS OF JANUARY 10. 2006.
Finance Committee
Councilmember Olson reported the Committee appointed her as Chair. The Committee also discussed a
modification to vacation accrual that would allow non - represented supervisors to accrue the same amount
of vacation as division level managers. Following discussion, the committee agreed to continue this item
to the February meeting.
Community Services /Development Services Committee
Councilmember Plunkett advised the Committee discussed the 8t" Avenue walkway between Alder and
Walnut which the Council discussed at their November 15 meeting and directed staff to increase
markings and engage in discussion with one of the property owners on the southeast side who would need
to allow people to walk on their property. Subsequent to the Council's discussion, that property owner
was less interested in having people walk on his property and staff began to consider other alternatives.
The Committee recommended the full Council consider a proposal to expend $17,000 to construct a
pathway through the center of the right -of -way to connect Alder and Walnut streets.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 17, 2006
Page 8
Public Safety Committee
Councilmember Marin advised a citizen requested the City consider regulating pit bulls. The Police
Department reported to the Committee that breed-specific regulations had been overturned in a number of
cases and there was already an effective State law regarding dangerous dogs that had been used
successfully. The Police Department recommended and the Committee concurred that the existing
regulations were sufficient. The Committee then discussed the Public Safety element of the
Comprehensive Plan and agreed (1) Council President Dawson would locate examples of Public Safety
Comprehensive Plan elements from other communities, and (2) the Police and Fire Department would
provide language outlining the actions taken via the current budget and language outlining future strategic
goals for consideration at the February meeting.
8. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Haakenson had no report.
9. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Dawson suggested March 3-4 for the Council retreat and invited Councilmembers and
the public to contact her with topics for the retreat.
Councilmember Plunkett suggested holding the retreat in Edmonds which would allow citizens to attend.
He also recommended recording the retreat for future access to discussions by the public and the Council.
Councilmember Orvis agreed with Councilmember Plunkett's suggestions.
Councilmember Marin commented on the possibility of linking light rail to Northgate by 2016 and if
plans to do 30%of design in ST2 were successful, the system was poised to be built to Ash Way by 2020.
10. ADJOURN
With no further business,the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:10 p.m.
GARY HAAKENSON,MAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
January 17,2006
Page 9
Aligh
AGENDA
4;1..-:. iteEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
III Ii- Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex
250 5th Avenue North
7:00 - 10:00 p.m.
JANUARY 17, 2006
6:15 p.m. - Executive session regarding legal and real estate matters.
7:00 p.m. - Call to Order/Flag Salute
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Consent Agenda Items
A. Roll Call
B. Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of January 3, 2006.
C. Approval of claim checks #84800 through #84942 for the week of January 2,
2006, in the amount of$1,368,665.13, and #84943 through #85177 for the week
of January 9, 2006, in the amount of $789,313.24. Approval of payroll direct
deposits and checks #42413 through #42468 for the period December 16
through December 31, 2005, in the amount of$692,487.59.
D. Acknowledge receipt of Claim for Damages from Jan Helleren ($2,500-7,500),
and Carolyn Munn (amount undetermined).
E. Report on bids received on December 12, 2005 for the purchase of one new
fire-rescue boat and authorization to accept a bid in the amount of$199,869.00
from Northwind Marine Inc.
F. Authorization to approve 2006 Tourism Promotion Awards recommended by
the Edmonds Arts Commission.
G. Authorization for Mayor to sign Recycling Grant Agreement between Edmonds
and Washington State Department of Ecology for 2006 and 2007.
H. Authorization for the Mayor to sign a Washington State Military Department
Emergency Management Mitigation Grant Agreement, up to a maximum of
$782,190.00, for the Frances Anderson Center Seismic Structural Retrofit
Project.
I. Authorization for Mayor to sign Interlocal Agreement with Snohomish County
Public Works for Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) 2005 - 2007.
Page 1 of 2
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
JANUARY 17, 2006
J. Authorization to call for bids for the Screenings System Improvement Project
at the Treatment Plant.
3. (10 Min.) Presentation of Arson Alarm Foundation Awards to Rita Konzak, Mark Jansen
and Jeannine Jansen.
4. (20 Min.) Presentation by Joni Earl, Sound Transit Chief Executive Officer.
5. (60 Min.) Closed Record Review of an appeal of a Hearing Examiner decision regarding
the Shoreline Permit Application to repair/reconstruct the timber portions of
the Meadowdale Marina Pier. The appeal is specifically regarding a condition
of the Examiner which states that even a temporary relocation of the timber
building results in the loss of that building's nonconforming status and results
in its required demolition. (Applicant/Appellant: Meadowdale Marina LLC,
Vladan Milosavljevic as General Manager/ File No. SM-05-94)
6. Audience Comments (3 Minute Limit Per Person)*
*Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings.
7. (15 Min.) Report on City Council Committee Meetings of January 10, 2006.
8. ( 5 Min.) Mayor's Comments
9. (15 Min.) Council Comments
ADJOURN
Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities.
Please contact the City Clerk at(425) 771-0245 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations.
A delayed telecast of the meeting appears on cable television-Government Access Channel 21.
Page 2 of 2