06/06/2006 City CouncilJune 6, 2006
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
Deanna Dawson, Council President
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Richard Marin, Councilmember
Mauni Moore, Councilmember
Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Ron Wambolt, Councilmember
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
STAFF PRESENT
Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief
David Stern, Chief of Police
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Stephen Clifton, Community Services Director
Brian McIntosh, Parks & Recreation Director
Jennifer Gerend, Economic Development Dir.
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Stephen Koho, Treatment Plant Manager
Dave Gebert, City Engineer
Debi Humann, Human Resources Manager
Don Fiene, Assistant City Engineer
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Sandy Chase, City Clerk
Cindi Cruz, Executive Assistant
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, FOR
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Moore requested Item F be removed from the Consent Agenda.
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO
APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
(A) ROLL CALL
Approve
ints
Minutes (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 30, 2006.
M
(C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #88365 THROUGH #88513 FOR JUNE 1, 2006 IN THE
Approve Claim AMOUNT OF $303,048.30. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS AND
Checks CHECKS #43055 THROUGH #43147 IN THE AMOUNT OF $815,031.88 FOR THE
PERIOD OF MAY 16 THROUGH MAY 31, 2006.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
Tune 6, 2006
Page 1
Reappoint PFD
Board Member (D) REAPPOINTMENT OF EDMONDS PUBLIC FACILITIES DISTRICT BOARD
MEMBER.
Highway 99
International (E) APPROVAL OF A CALL FOR ARTISTS RFQ FOR THE HIGHWAY 99
District INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT ENHANCEMENTS PROJECT PUBLIC ART ELEMENT.
Electrical (G) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN ADDENDUM NO. 1 TO THE
Improvements PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BROWN & CALDWELL FOR THE
at W WTP ELECTRICAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AT THE TREATMENT PLANT.
Res# 1127 (H) RESOLUTION NO. 1127 DECLARING THE NEED FOR THE HOUSING AUTHORITY
Housing OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY TO OPERATE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF
Authority EDMONDS.
Senior Center ITEM F: AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
Geoteehnieal AGREEMENT WITH SHANNON & WILSON INC. FOR THE SOUTH SENIOR
and Structural
Engineering CENTER GEOTECHNICAL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING STUDY ($33,935).
Study
Councilmember Moore expressed her support for this item and urged Councilmembers to approve this
important study. She explained the study would be paid half with City funds via Fund 116 and half by
Snohomish. County. The senior center building has a history of floor settlement; from borings that have
been done, it appears the underlying material is organic such as sawdust, soft wood debris, etc. The study
will consider alternatives for leveling the floors and reducing settlement. Shannon & Wilson listed three
possibilities: 1) continue performing maintenance to level the floors, 2) construct measures to level the
floors and prevent or substantially reduce future settlement or 3) replace the buildings with a new senior
center although the contractor acknowledged this possibly was unlikely given current funding sources.
She urged the Council to be open to alternatives when the results of the study were provided. She
suggested the Council discuss, possibly at a future retreat, rebuilding the senior center in an alternate
location and using the property for a waterfront park.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, FOR
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEM F. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The item
approved is as follows:
(F) AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO SIGN A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH SHANNON & WILSON INC. FOR THE SOUTH COUNTY
SENIOR CENTER GEOTECHNICAL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING STUDY
($33,935).
George and 3. PROCLAMATION IN HONOR OF GEORGE AND RAYCEILLE MCCULLUM DAY JUNE 9
Rayceille 2006
McCallum Day
Mayor Haakenson read a proclamation declaring June 9 as George and Rayceille Day in Edmonds and
urging all citizens to remember those who have lost so much in the devastation of Hurricane Katrina and
consider making a contribution to the residents of Bay St. Louis and the rebuilding of the McCullum's
home. The proclamation advised of a benefit concert on Friday, June 9 at Holy Rosary church at 7:00
p.m. to honor special guests George and Rayceille McCullum and Ben and Elaina Hines (a volunteer who
assisted with the reconstruction of the McCullum's home).
Use of REST to 4. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE POTENTIAL USE OF REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX (BEET)
FundTranspor- REVENUE PROJECTS TO FUND TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS.
tation Projects
City Engineer Dave Gebert explained the City receives Real Estate Excise Tax in two parts, the first r /4%
is REET 1 and the second t/4 Y0 is REET 2. Current State law allows both REST 1 and 2 to be used for a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 2
variety of capital projects including construction, reconstruction, repair and improvement/rehabilitation of
streets, sidewalks, traffic signals, roadways, parks, etc. Current State law also allows REST 1 to be used
for park acquisition but does not allow REET 2 to be used for park acquisition. Historically, the
Edmonds City Council's policy has been to dedicate REET 1 to Parks Acquisition Fund 126 and REET 2
to Parks Capital Improvements Fund 1.25. The proposal to use REET for transportation projects was
intended to be limited to REET 2, Fund 125 and not REET 1 or Fund 126.
Mr. Gebert reviewed the budget versus actual REET 2 revenues, noting the average for 1999 — 2003 was
$725,000 /year. In the last few years due to the strong real estate market in Edmonds, REET revenues
have significantly exceeded projections; $1.02 million in 2004 and $1.4 million in 2005. As of April 30,
2006, REET 2 revenues total $425,000 and projections for the year are that it will exceed $1 million. As
a result of the strong REET revenues, the cash balance in Fund 125 has grown significantly over the past
few years, from $1.4 million in 1999 to over $4.5 million as of April 2006.
Mr. Gebert explained capital project expenditures in Fund 125 have averaged $517,000 per year from
1999 to 2005 with a high year in 2003 of over $1.8 million when the waterfront bulkhead project was
constructed, and a low of $171,000 in 2004. He relayed Parks & Recreation Director Brian McIntosh's
indication that REET revenue into Fund 125 of $750,000 per year would be sufficient to enable him to
execute the foreseeable project requirements in the next six years as well as maintain a significant cash
balance to cover any unforeseen projects. Mr. Gebert displayed a summary CIP for 2006 -2011
illustrating an average of $350,000 per year for small projects; expenditures for known large projects such
as the interurban trail, old Woodway Elementary and old Edmonds - Woodway High School; annual REET
revenues of $750,000; and ending cash balance of over $3.7 million in 2011.
Mr. Gebert recalled staff had previously briefed the Council on the need for an additional $750,000 -
$835,000 in Fund 112 to execute the recommended program — approximately a 30 -year overlay cycle, a
reasonable program of sidewalks, roadway capacity, sidewalks, traffic signals, roadway stabilization,
bikeway, traffic calming, ADA and other related transportation projects. These funds could be provided
via dedicating excess REET over $750,000. Mr. Gebert acknowledged these funds would not totally
solve transportation funding but would assist greatly.
Staff's recommends that beginning in 2006, REET 2 revenues in the amount of $750,000 be dedicated to
the Parks Capital Improvement Fund 125 and annual REET 2 revenues in excess of $750,000 be
dedicated to the Street Improvement Capital Fund 112 for transportation projects.
Councilmember Moore referred to Mr. Gebert's comment that this would not solve transportation funding
and asked what would be an adequate funding level for Fund 112. Mr. Gebert advised the most recent
CIP recommends $835,000 in additional revenues. She referred to scenarios developed by staff, in
Scenario 1, REET 2 revenues average $1 million per year; $750,000 was dedicated to Fund 125, leaving
$250,000 which could be used to reduce the overlay cycle to 45 years. In Scenario 2, if REET 2 revenues
averaged $1.25 million per year, the amount in excess of $750,000 would allow the completion of
walkway projects and reduce the overlay cycle to 45 years. Another option in Scenario 2 would be to
dedicate the entire amount in excess of $750,000 to street overlays which would reduce the cycle to 30
years. She asked what a normal road overlay cycle would be. Mr. Gebert answered staff would be
comfortable with a 30 year cycle; industry standards recommend a 20 -30 year cycle.
Councilmember Moore asked for examples of previously unforeseen park expenses. Mr. McIntosh
recalled the 8"' and Walnut walkway at a cost of $10,000 and the Marina Beach improvement done at the
time of the outfall at a cost of $125,000. Councilmember Moore asked whether the $750,000 would be
sufficient to cover unforeseen park expenses. Mr. McIntosh answered yes, barring any major,
catastrophic events.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
Tune 6, 2006
Page 3
Councilmember Orvis referred to the ending cash balance in the summary CIP of $3.7 million in 2011
and asking whether those funds were dedicated to a future project. Mr. Gebert answered the $3.7 million
cash balance in 2011 was the result of the current cash balance, plus REST revenues of $750,000 per
year, less projected expenditures. He commented it was reasonable to assume the cash balance would
continue to grow at a similar rate in future years. Mr. McIntosh commented major projects have arisen in
the past; for example he anticipated the City would control the Civic Playfields at some point in the
future.
Councilmember Orvis asked whether the addition of a sidewalk project would reduce the cash balance.
Mr. Gebert agreed it would.
Councilmember Wambolt asked whether REET 2 revenues were collected linearly over the year. Neither
Mr. Gebert nor Mr. McIntosh were aware of the regularity with which the funds were received.
Council President Dawson commented the amount of REET revenue the City collected each year was
unknown as it depended on real estate sales; it could exceed $1.25 million per year. She noted it was
unlikely anyone could have predicted REET revenues of this magnitude. She acknowledged REST
revenues could also decrease; however, the $750,000 minimum would ensure funding of Fund 125 was
adequate. She advised consideration was also being given to other transportation funding sources in
addition to the excess REST revenue. Mr. Gebert agreed, commenting there were other significant
transportation needs such as ADA improvements, traffic calming, etc.
Council President Dawson commented the issue before the Council tonight was whether to dedicate
REST 2 revenues in excess of $750,000 to transportation projects; it was not necessary that the Council
identify what transportation projects would be funded. Mr. Gebert answered that would be determined
via the CIP. Council President Dawson observed the Council could give direction to begin with the high
priority walkway projects and shift to funding the overlay program in future years.
Mr. McIntosh acknowledged the use of REET for transportation projects had been a controversial issue
and had come up in 2000 and in 2005. He explained the situation had changed immensely in the past two
years; the revenue in 2005 was 88% higher than the previous year. He noted it appeared many of the
projects funded via the excess REET revenues would be walkway projects which promote health and
safety and correspond with the Parks & Recreation philosophy. He read from the conclusions of the State
Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Planning Guide regarding growing evidence of declining public
health related to inactivity and the need to address the role of outdoor recreation to reverse this decline.
The City's Comprehensive Plan also welcomes all activities that encourage health lifestyles. A second
conclusion in the Planning Guide was that linear activities were the most popular which he noted was
supported by recreation surveys conducted by the City. A third finding was that a significant portion of
all linear activities, especially walking and bicycling, take place close to home on sidewalks, streets and
roads. The City's Comprehensive Plan contains a great deal of language referring to sidewalks and
walkways including that the City should strive to develop more off - street networks that link parks,
schools and other significant features; that sidewalks within the public rights -of -way should be developed
where they serve as a linkage between a neighborhood, park and major trail system; and wherever
feasible, recreation pathways and trails should be located off street, however, streets should be used in
order to complete connections to wherever they are needed.
Mayor Haakenson advised that Mr. McIntosh, engineering staff and he had met over the past several
months and agreed this was an appropriate action. Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation
portion of the public hearing.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 4
Stacy Gardia, Co- Chair, Citizen Advisory Transportation Committee, expressed the Committee's
support for the use of REET funds for certain types of transportation projects, anticipating it could be
accomplished in the spirit of the Council's prior policy and without negative impacts. The Committee
recommended the Council consider using REET 2 revenues for non - motorized transportation projects by
funding trails, walkway and bikeway projects beyond park boundaries and by broadening the definition of
park capital projects to include projects that functioned as linear recreation facilities. The Committee
supported staff's creative proposal for the use of surplus REET 2 funds during times of high real estate
sales, finding the dedication of this funding to be a painless method that would not impact the City's
General Fund. The Committee supported the use of surplus REET 2 funds for non - motorized
transportation projects as well as safety and maintenance of the City's transportation facilities.
John Quast, Edmonds, expressed his support for the proposal, suggesting the excess REET 2 funds be
used for sidewalks and walking paths that improved safety for pedestrians such as a sidewalk between
Meadowdale Beach Park and Meadowdale Beach Road. He commented on accidents that have occurred
and pedestrian hazards in the area. He described attributes of Meadowdale Beach Park including access
to the beach, noting there was no safe access for pedestrians to the park or beach from the south. He
commented children in the area are required to walls on narrow roads with blind curves to reach
Meadowdale Elementary and Middle School and Meadowdale Playfields. He urged the Council to
provide funding for the 75th /76th pathway project and make it eligible for REET 2 funds.
Mike Cooper, President, Transportation Choices Coalition, a group comprised of labor unions,
environmental organizations, businesses, public agencies, and individual citizens, whose mission was to
bring citizens of Washington more and better transportation choices. He relayed the support of the staff
and board of Transportation Coalition for the proposed action to dedicate a portion of REET 2 to
transportation projects and urged the Council to dedicate the majority of the excess to sidewalk and
bikeway projects. He commented the Mayor and Council would be receiving a letter from the Coalition
expressing their support for the 75th /76th Street project. Although the Coalition recognized the backlog of
road projects was a priority of the City, the Coalition felt the use of REET 2 funds for walkways and
sidewalks was appropriate as it would connect parks and neighborhoods with healthy transportation
corridors. He pointed out declining physical activity of Washington residents, concluding that the
creation of neighborhood connections would promote physical activity among all age groups, increase
property values, provide better transportation corridors and create a better community and additional
revenue for the City.
Betty Scott, Edmonds, referred to the description of the safety hazards on 164th Street SW that she
provided at the May 16 Council meeting. She reminded the Council that 164th was the only ingress /egress
for residents and maintenance and delivery vehicles in that area. Acknowledging that 164th was one of
many transportation projects in the City, she pointed out the safety issues posed by children walking
to /from school and the Meadowdale Playfields amid traffic on a narrow road with no shoulders or
sidewalks warranted the City's immediate attention. She submitted a petition with 55 signatures
including one of the neighborhood's newest residents, Senator Paull Shin. She acknowledged the petition
did not contain signatures of all residents near 164th; however, all residents who were contacted signed the
petition. On behalf of the residents who use 164th, she requested the Council specifically fund the 164th
Street walkway project with REET funds this year and direct the engineering department to begin
construction using the plans and design completed and approved in 2003.
Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Orvis asked whether expending ending cash on walkway projects would accelerate the
rate at which those projects were completed. Mr. Gebert answered yes.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
Tune 6, 2006
Page 5
COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON, TO
DEDICATE THE FIRST $750,000 PER YEAR FROM REET 2 REVENUES TO PARK
IMPROVEMENT FUND 125 AND DEDICATE THE EXCESS TO THE STREET
CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT FUND 112.
Councilmember Olson referred to a letter the Council received from the Snohomish County Association
of Realtors expressing their support for this proposal.
Council President Dawson expressed her support, recalling she had been one of the Councilmembers in
past years who wanted these funds to remain dedicated to parks improvements. However, given the
current revenue situation, she found the proposal to be an appropriate action. She relayed the support of
past Councilmembers who explained when the Council policy to dedicate REET 2 to park projects was
adopted, it was not envisioned the revenue would reach this level. She referred to a comment in the letter
from the Snohomish County Association of Realtors that this was a good example of growth paying for
growth. She acknowledged these funds would not solve all the City's transportation needs; however, it
was a method in the interim to complete some projects without seeking additional funds from the voters.
Once the City had a better idea of whether the increased REET 2 revenue would continue, perhaps some
projects could be accelerated.
Councilmember Wambolt commented on the citizens' unanimous support for this proposal.
Councilmember Orvis suggested dedicating funds from the ending cash balance to the first two walkway
projects, 75th Place W /76th Avenue W and 164th Street SW whose project costs totaled $1.2 million. He
commented this would allow those projects to be completed sooner and allow the excess revenues to
accumulate for other projects. He pointed out both projects would qualify for Fund 125 under the
Council's existing policy as they directly affected park access.
COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO ADD
$1.2 MILLION FROM FUND 125 ENDING CASH BALANCE FOR THE FIRST TWO
WALKWAY PROJECTS.
Council President Dawson suggested the Council vote on the first motion and discuss Councilmember
Orvis' suggestion separately.
Councilmember Orvis withdrew his amendment with the agreement of the second.
Councilmember Moore agreed with Councilmember Orvis' suggestion and Council President Dawson's
comment regarding growth paying for growth. She thanked the Citizen Transportation Advisory
Committee for their work and the Transportation Choices Coalition for their suggestion to devote the
majority of the excess to sidewalks and walkway projects.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO USE
$1.22 MILLION FROM THE ENDING CASH BALANCE OF FUND 125 FOR THE 75TH /76TH AND
164TH WALKWAY PROJECTS.
Mr. McIntosh referred to the summary CIP, commenting Councilmember Orvis' proposal would draw
down the ending cash over the next 5 -6 years. He noted staff had not had an opportunity to analyze this
proposal and it may be appropriate to analyze other sidewalk/walkway projects for priority funding.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
Tune 6, 2006
Page 6
Mr. Gebert expressed his support for Councilmember Orvis' proposal, commenting staff intended to
apply for a $200,000 grant for the 1.64th walkway; if successful, the $1.22 million could be reduced to
$1.02 million. He agreed 75`h/76th and 164th walkway projects were at the top of the priority list in the
Transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan.
Council President Dawson was hesitant to take this action without a public hearing on that issue in view
of the previous Council policy to dedicate the funds in the ending cash balance to parks projects. She
suggested another possibility may be to borrow against the ending cash balance to complete the projects
now which may result in savings as it would avoid cost escalation in future years. She acknowledged she
may be in favor of this action following additional staff analysis and public input.
Councilmember Wambolt commented he would likely support this action but wanted further information
for review.
Councilmember Moore commented her intent was to support funding for walkways before road overlays,
however, she agreed with Council President Dawson that it was important to have further staff review and
public input. She requested this issue be presented to the Council again in the near future.
Councilmember Olson agreed, suggesting the proposal be returned to the Council as soon as possible.
Councilmember Orvis withdrew his motion with the agreement of the second. It was the consensus of the
Council to direct staff to return with a proposal to use Fund 125 ending cash balance for additional
sidewalk projects.
Edmonds 5.
Register of
Historic Places
PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PROVISIONS OF EDMONDS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC) CHAPTER 20.45.020 CREATING A
STREAMLINED PROCESS FOR LISTING IN THE EDMONDS REGISTER OF HISTORIC
PLACES PROPERTIES ALREADY LISTED IN THE NATIONAL OR STATE REGISTER (FILE
NO. CDC- 06 -29).
Planning Manager Rob Chave explained this amendment was initiated by the Historical Preservation
Commission who found when they approached property owners regarding registering on the Edmonds
Register of Historic Places, many of them were already on a State or National Register and it was difficult
to explain the need for an extended process when their property was already recognized as an historic
structure. The intent of the amendment would be to streamline the process for listing properties on the
Edmonds Registry that were already on the State or National Registry. He explained the process would
still require Council approval of eligibility and voluntary registration by the property owner.
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. There were no members
of the audience who wished to provide testimony and Mayor Haakenson closed the public hearing.
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, FOR
APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 3598. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Economic
Development 6. REPORT ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND DISCUSSION ABOUT THE POSITION
Report
Economic Development Director Jennifer Gerend expressed her thanks for the opportunity to serve as the
City's first Economic Development Director. She also expressed her thanks to Council President Dawson
and Councilmember Olson for their assistance on the Council Economic Development Committee. She
also expressed her thanks to Mayor Haakenson, remarking what a great staff leader he is and how much
the staff admired him.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 7
Ms. Gerend provided examples of unsustainable lifestyle choices as well as unsustainable economic
development strategies, explaining a sustainable economic development strategy would be to adjust land
use regulations to encourage development that will meet multiple needs (housing, retail, gathering space)
for future generations. She provided and expanded on the following observations:
1) Other cities are making bold moves — Renton (numerous projects), Kent Station, Woodinville
Wine Village, Redmond Town Center, Mill Creek Town Center, downtown Mercer Island. She
commented these projects required significant planning including the creation of subarea plans.
2) SR 99 is not enough — Highway 99 has potential, it also has small lots, limited access and limited
options as far as signal improvements. Redevelopment can be encouraged and there is interest in
more dense development (i.e. Funtasia site). However Highway 99 alone will never be the City's
"cash cow." Moreover every other city is pursuing an "auto row." This is not sustainable
behavior.
3) Edmonds Crossing has been the City's #1 priority in terms of fundraising — Is the City
working commensurately to prepare the land use regulations to encourage timely transit- oriented
development (TOD) opportunities around this major investment? This would include developing
solutions for the former Safeway property and Harbor Square property that would spur
development. She recommended a public, community planning process similar to the planning
process undertaken for Five Corners and Firdale Village.
4) The Edmonds City Council and Planning Board need more 2 -way communication on
priorities — attention to detail early on could be of assistance. She suggested a Council liaison to
the Planning Board.
5) Edmonds does not adequately appreciate its local business community — business retention
actually matters more than recruitment. She suggested Councilmembers drop in to talk with
business owners or attend downtown Merchant's meetings or Chamber meetings.
Ms. Gerend provided the following recommendations:
1) There is good, inexpensive training for elected officials and staff in economic development. She
suggested Councilmembers attend the ACW economic development training or CTED workshop.
2) Aggressively pursue high quality redevelopment in the neighborhood business districts; focus on
design and provide flexibility with height. Allow these to become positive showcases. She
advised a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan changes for Five Corners and
Firdale Village was scheduled at the Planning Board on June 28. She envisioned this as an
opportunity for the Council to champion a significant economic development project outside the
downtown area. She encouraged the Council to resist the urge to lessen the proposed changes as
a compromised approach may not produce the desired incentive for redevelopment. She cited the
importance of considering not only what seemed appropriate for today but also what might be
needed in 30 -40 years, noting if the area redeveloped soon, there would not be an opportunity for
change for several decades.
3) Enact the CG and BR zoning changes recommended by the Highway 99 Task Force.
4) There is no need to vilify economic development. Economic development actually takes the fear
out of development by planning for sustainability. A strong commitment to economic
development can reposition the City's tax base for the future.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
Tune 6, 2006
Page 8
5) Pay attention to streamlining processes. Use the development, parking and traffic regulations in
the downtown to encourage tenant improvements. Use Design Guidelines to provide guidance
for more staff decisions. For example is ADB review and approval needed on Hwy. 99? She
suggested when staff suggested changes, either in the code rewrite or design review process, the
Council asking staff what a more streamlined approach for applicants would be. She noted many
of the City's current regulations addressed new construction rather than tenant improvements.
6) Continue the district branding strategy; the International District and Arts Corridor are examples
of this strategy. The International District has reduced vacancies, revitalized the area and in some
instances, replaced undesirable uses.
7) Explore the expansion of small business district boundaries where there are still opportunities to
do so. An example is Five Corners, one of the recommendations she made to the Planning Board
was to consider an area on 112th on the east side of Five Corners as an opportunity to expand the
business district and create a larger, more developable site for the future. She noted there were
other similar opportunities along Hwy. 99.
8) Consider some small new neighborhood convenience commercial areas. Consider some busy
intersections for small scale, low impact convenience retail.
9) Help the downtown create a Business Improvement Area /District (BIA /BID). Downtown
Edmonds is ideally suited for a BIABID (a special assessment area that generates an annual
budget for promotion, events, and beautification). This model of downtown revitalization has
been provided around the world. She commented requests for ongoing services such as
marketing could be more predictably funded via a BIA /BID.
Ms. Gerend listed major ongoing projects she had been involved in that included neighborhood
commercial area planning (Five Corners, Firdale Village, and other future areas such as Westgate),
Edmonds International District $316,000 grant, Economic Development Comprehensive Plan element,
Hwy. 99 reconsideration of the CG and proposed BR zones, and City newsletter "Update on Edmonds."
Major ongoing services she has provided include planning assistance related to business districts,
community marketing (LTAC, Council funds, County grant), ombudsman -type role on commercial
projects with the permitting process, business retention (including active "defensive" work) and
recruitment, tracking and notification of commercial vacancies, public relations related to
business /tourism community, attend local and regional meetings related to economic development
(Prosperity Partnership, SnoGold 2010, etc.).
With regard to planning assistance, Ms. Gerend explained for Five Corners and Firdale Village, it was
useful to have a separate department sponsor changes to the Comprehensive Plan as the Planning
Department's role is to remain neutral and support the Planning Board and Council. It was more
appropriate for specific, proactive actions to be suggested by the Economic Development Department.
Ms. Gerend reviewed the reporting structure of the existing position, explaining the position reports to the
Mayor with quarterly reports to the Council and more frequent work with Council Economic
Development Committee. The position has no staff. Special commitments include the availability to
work most evenings in addition to regular hours, on average two evenings per week (Council, Planning
Board and other committees). She explained more cities have added the position recently, including
Bothell and Kirkland in the last year. In some cities such as Renton and Kent, other related staff report to
the economic development position and tourism promotion and communications staff are commonly
found under economic development. Most positions, regardless of the size of the city, report directly to
the Mayor or the City Manager.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 9
Ms. Gerend posed several thoughts for consideration:
• While the position reports to the Mayor, the Council's support of the economic development
program helps to determine the scope of services and background needed.
• The Council's ability to work as a team with staff and the Planning Board on economic
development determines largely whether the City "gets its money's worth" out of the position.
With the above thoughts in mind, Ms. Gerend suggested the Council to consider:
What is the Council's commitment to a long -term economic development program in the City?
Is this position simply for marketing to tourists and a little bit of recruitment/retention work, or is
it about repositioning the City's tax base for the future... looking at land use and other issues that
impact economic development? What is the Council ready to support?
If the Council isn't prepared to pursue an aggressive economic development program, what other
strategies will be used to substantially diversify the City's tax base and secure the City's revenue
outlook?
Ms. Gerend concluded these were difficult questions but it may be helpful to gain a consensus on these
issues in order to move forward. She wished the Council and the City all the best.
Councilmember Moore wished Ms. Gerend the best in her new endeavor and upcoming wedding. She
commented the questions Ms. Gerend posed were not difficult but essential and assured the Council could
answer those questions. She noted several Councilmembers did spend time with downtown merchants
and had attended economic development training. Councilmember Moore expressed support for the
liaison to the Planning Board. She agreed with Ms. Gerend's observation that the City may not have laid
enough groundwork with regard to land uses near the Edmonds Crossing project and suggested the
Council make that a priority in the next year.
Councilmember Moore asked Ms. Gerend to expand on her comment regarding not compromising on
proposed changes in the Neighborhood Business Districts. Ms. Gerend commented there may be a
tendency to identify a middle ground between no change and the proposal. She recommended
aggressively increasing the development standards in Five Corners and Firdale Village to encourage
strong design improvements, public gathering places, etc. She pointed out if a compromised approach
was followed, there would not be another opportunity to redevelop the area for decades. For example,
there was currently a 25' foot height limit in the Neighborhood Business Districts and a limited scope of
retail uses; she envisioned increasing the height limit by one story and not significantly changing the uses
would have little affect on development.
Councilmember Moore asked Ms. Gerend to comment on her work with the Development Services
Department. Ms. Gerend explained builders and business owners tended to be hesitant to make
suggestions or complaints directly to Development Services because they needed to continue to work with
that department. They were more likely to provide input to a separate department such as economic
development. She assured there was no retribution by staff, but some people may have that fear, therefore
a separate department for liaison was helpful and it was easier for business owners to comment to her
with regard to processes. She commented it was also easier for an outside person to listen to both sides
and offer solutions.
Councilmember Moore asked whether the City's processes hampered economic development. Ms.
Gerend answered many cities tried to have a single point of contact. For example, the Economic
Development Director could be a liaison between the new property owner of the 6.5 acre Funtasia site on
220"' and appropriate staff.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
Tune 6, 2006
Page 10
Councilmember Moore asked for recommendations on streamlining the process for smaller businesses to
avoid discouraging development/redevelopment. Ms. Gerend answered her first recommendation would
be to retain the Economic Development Director position. She cited the assistance she was able to
provide to Quisno's in Old Mill Town as an example.
Councilmember Moore referred to recommendation #4, pointing out the Council had not vilified her
personally or the position. Some of the Council's frustration has been that they were hungry for
information about not just economic development philosophy but what was occurring in the City. Ms.
Gerend responded the Economic Development Committee was a good addition this year. She explained
there was a great deal of sensitive information that could not be announced in public as well as negative
comments that may be contrary to the image of Edmonds as a business friendly community.
Councilmember Moore asked whether Ms. Gerend felt Edmonds was a business friendly place and
whether her observations and recommendations represented everything the City could do to become
business friendly. Ms. Gerend responded Edmonds was business friendly but there was always room for
improvement. Items currently underway such as the code rewrite would assist the business community.
Councilmember Moore thanked Ms. Gerend for serving as the Economic Development Director for the
past two years, commenting a lot had been accomplished in two years and her work would assist the City
in moving forward.
Mayor Haakenson suggested the Council consider appointing a Councilmember each year to be a liaison
to the business community. He noted this would provide the Council opportunity to learn about issues
that arise.
Council President Dawson expressed her thanks to Ms. Gerend, agreeing the Economic Development
Committee had been helpful. She commented this Council expected more interaction with staff than
many Councils and expected Directors to be more responsive directly to the Council than may be required
in other cities. She suggested continuing the Economic Development Committee with the next Economic
Development Director to provide a bridge between the position and the Council. Ms. Gerend advised in
her former position, she reported to a Board of Directions, similar to a Council, but she had a staff. She
commented on the amount of time reporting requires for an Economic Development Department,
particularly with only one staff member.
Council President Dawson commented the information Ms. Gerend provided was what she had hoped
would be accomplished by this position. She suggested the Council address the issues raised by Ms.
Gerend at a mini - retreat this summer.
Councilmember Marin expressed his appreciation for the work Ms. Gerend had done over the past two
years, particularly her assistance with the Hwy. 99 Task Force.
Councilmember Olson suggested the person hired to fill the Economic Development Director position
have land use experience. Ms. Gerend agreed it was important to have a person with a planning and
economic development background as much of what the position was involved in was related to land use.
Councilmember Plunkett commented one of Ms. Gerend's greatest strengths was working with individual
businesses. He recalled at least two new businesses who said the reason they were in the City was their
interaction with Ms. Gerend. He recognized many businesses located in Edmonds due to the charm and
character of the City and recognized Ms. Gerend's assistance in attracting new as well as retaining
existing businesses. He expressed his thanks to Ms. Gerend for her efforts.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
Tune 6, 2006
Page 11
Mayor Haakenson advised Ms. Gerend's last day would be mid -week next week; he intended to begin the
process to fill the position unless the Council provided other direction.
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO
PROCEED IMMEDIATELY WITH HIRING A REPLACEMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR.
Mayor Haakenson advised a motion was not necessary as the position already existed.
Councilmember Wambolt withdrew his motion with the agreement of the second.
Council President Dawson agreed with Councilmember Wambolt's intent, commenting at different times
there may have been a perception that the Council was not supportive of this position and was unsure in
what direction to proceed with regard to the Economic Development Director position such as whether
the position should be a Director, whether the position should report to the Mayor, whether the structure
of the position should be different, etc. She expressed her support for Mayor Haakenson's intent to
proceed with filling the position. She recommended the Economic Development Committee continue to
provide a liaison between the position and the Council. She suggested in addition to a planning
background, candidates have a background in communications in view of the responsibility for publishing
the City's newsletter. Council President Dawson envisioned the position could become a quasi Public
Information Officer (PIO) for the City.
Councilmember Plunkett referred to a memorandum of April 18, 2006 which clearly identified the
Council's policy with regard to its expectations of the Economic Development Director. He asked
whether Mayor Haakenson planned to present the Council with alternatives to hiring an Economic
Development Director. Mayor Haakenson responded that was not his intent.
Councilmember Moore recalled when Ms. Gerend was hired, her primary task was to recruit new
businesses but had been expanded to include numerous other task. She commented acting as the City's
PIO, as suggested by Council President Dawson, was another full -time task. She suggested creating at
least one other position in the Economic Development Department, noting land use was another large
responsibility of this position.
Councilmember Wambolt recalled the salary range for this position when it was initially filled was
$91,000 - $114,000; however, shortly after the position was filled, the job was reappraised and a new
range established from $69,000 - $86,000, approximately $25,000 lower. He noted this could provide
some additional funding for the position Councilmember Moore was advocating. He supported retaining
the Director designation to avoid the perception that the City was placing less importance on economic
development. He also supported the position continuing to report to the Mayor for the same reason. He
commented with this salary information, he withdrew his suggestion that the person reside in the City.
Mayor Haakenson commented L5 salary ranges had a tendency to increase and decrease. Edmonds was
one of the first cities to establish an Economic Development Director position; as more cities have added
the position, he envisioned the L5 salary range would be higher for this position.
Councilmember Moore inquired about recruitment for this position. Mayor Haakenson answered a
nationwide search had been conducted; the job qualifications included a planning background. An
interview panel consisting of Councilmembers, business owners, etc. reviewed approximately 50
applications and interviewed several. Councilmember Moore asked whether the networks such as AWC
were used. Mayor Haakenson advised the position was advertised via those methods.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 12
Councilmember Plunkett commented the Council may be interested in interviewing the final three
candidates. He suggested when the interview process reached that point, Mayor Haakenson inquire of the
Council's interest.
Councilmember Marin recalled two years ago he participated on the interview team who interviewed at
least eight applicants.
Council President Dawson answered that was the process established by ordinance. The reason it was not
done two years ago was then - Council President Plunkett determined it was not appropriate for the
Council to interview the finalists. Councilmember Plunkett disagreed, commenting that decision was the
consensus of the Council.
Mayor Haakenson advised he planned to proceed with the hiring process.
7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Difficulty Kim Mustafa, Seattle, commented she recently started a business in Firdale Village, Kid Palooza, and
Obtaining a
Business was having difficulty communicating with the City and obtaining her business license. She hired a
License lawyer to decipher the City's requirement for a change of use to Assembly A3, commenting there was no
explanation on the City's website regarding the requirements for that use. She requested assistance with
obtaining her business license. Mayor Haakenson identified Development Services Director Duane
Bowman, commenting he would be happy to answer any questions regarding the change of use.
Jesse Scott, Edmonds, provided several facts relevant to the 75th /76th walkway project. In regard to
walkway comments regarding the park, he clarified the park belonged to Snohomish County and was not in the
City of Edmonds. He displayed a photograph of the well- developed access on the east end of the park ,
explaining this access point included a 50- vehicle parking lot, restroom facilities, picnic benches and a
trail to the beach. In regard to references about access via 75th Street, he displayed a photograph taken at
the north end of 75th Street illustrating signs stating no public access and access for disabled only. He
displayed a photograph of the intersection of North Meadowdale Beach Road and 75th (at the south end)
and the no park access signs and lack of on- street parking. He pointed out if a sidewalk were constructed
and Snohomish County agreed to allow access, it would only be for adjacent residents due to the lack of
parking. He questioned the reference to safety hazards, pointing out 1/3 of the proposed project was a
dead -end street accessed only by residents. Further, the children in this area are bused and do not walk to
school. He commented last night while they were gathering the signatures his wife presented early,
Senator Paull Shin stopped by to add his signature to the petition.
Parking Dorothy Kirk, Edmonds, referred to a letter she received regarding a proposed change in parking in
Restrictions downtown Edmonds. She lives on 5th between Main and Dayton and parks in front. If the proposed
parking restrictions are approved, she will be required to park a block away and if there was no parking in
that location, she would have to park 2 -3 blocks away. She commented this was a safety issue when
returning home after dark or if she needed to carry items from her car. She requested to be allowed to
park in front of her building after 6:00 p.m. Mayor Haakenson advised her comments would be referred
to the Parking Committee.
Parking Sarah Johnson, Edmonds, also a resident on 5th Avenue, agreed with the safety issue described by Ms.
Restrictions Kirk. She explained she had filed a police report in the past when she was followed after parking in the
back of the building. She commented the safety hazards were lessened if she parked in front of the
building. She suggested residents be allowed to park downtown after 6:00 p.m. as most businesses closed
at 6:00 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 13
Economic Quentin Clark, Edmonds, resident, business owner, and Chair of the Chamber of Commerce Economic
DavelopmenS Development Committee, reiterated the Chamber's position in favor of sustaining the Economic
Director Development Director position at its current level. He presented a Certificate of Achievement and
Appreciation to Ms. Gerend in recognition of her high competence and enthusiasm as the City's
Economic Development Director and expressed the Chamber's appreciation for her service to the
community and their best wishes for her future. Mr. Clark added his personal congratulations to Ms.
Gerend and thanked her for her contributions and patience.
Economic Joan Lon staff, Edmonds, expressed her thanks to Ms. Gerend for the tremendous job she did in the
Deveigpment community and commended the Council for hiring Ms. Gerend. She expressed her thanks to Ms. Gerend
Director
for enhancing the City's quality of life, inventorying the vacant spaces in downtown, holding open houses
with businesses and the community, working to attract new businesses to the community, attending
meetings with property owners and listening to their concerns, and coordinating meetings to bring
together the private sector, retailers, businesses and property owners.
Economic Susie Schaefer, Edmonds, Philchuck Audubon Society, recognized Ms. Gerend for her assistance with
Development the Bird Festival, remarking Ms. Gerend would be missed. She hoped the City's next Economic
Director -- ' — T" -- - —, , ,- - ° — ^ — -I,- - °- — ' '- —
Monthly John Dewhirst, Planning Board Member, pointed out the Mayor, Planning Board Chair, Architectural
Meeting of Design Board Chair and other Boards hold a monthly meeting. In the past, the Council President attended
Board chairs, that meeting which assisted with the communication between the Boards and the Council but that had
Mayor and
Council been discontinued in the past 2 -3 years. Unfortunately during that time the Planning Board and Council
President also considered several controversial issues and the lack of direction from the City Council led to a great
deal of frustration on the Planning Board.
Incident With Ray Martin, Edmonds, referred to his report regarding his daughter being stopped by a police officer on
Police Officer
at 220 1' St. Mother's Da y, explaining he wanted his daughter to share his opinion that the Edmonds Police
Construction Department was as good as it gets. He clarified any criticism was aimed at the Mayor and perhaps the
Area Police Chief. He reported his daughter and he met with Corporal Parker on May 30 to discuss the
incident; the officer involved declined to attend. Mr. Martin provided answers to several questions
including probable cause (violation of posted local access signs), number of stops by the officer at that
location (seven — one arrest, four tickets and two verbal warnings), and reason for police presence (safety
— cars traveling too fast on the new, wider road). He cited several factors including the possibility that
tickets would be issued to visitors at several open houses in the area, the real estate agent had moved signs
to accommodate prospective open house customers, the contractor had changed the signs to mean
something less serious without informing the Edmonds Police Department, and there was no construction
occurring on the holiday. He suggested anyone who received a ticket issued in that location on Mother's
Day seek to have it dismissed.
Design Rev,eW Tony Shapiro, Edmonds, suggested the subjective aspect of the ADB's review continue to play a part in
Pr °oess the design review process due to the difficulty in codifying design that addressed all sites. He was
concerned with too much decision- making /subjective analysis done by staff. He agreed property owners
and developers were reluctant to raise issues because they needed to continue working with the
Development Services Department, agreeing it was helpful to have an Economic Development Director to
act as a liaison. He suggested parties be notified that they could forward their concerns to the Economic
Development Director. His impression regarding the Development Services Department in Edmonds and
in other cities was that time was of little concern. He objected to Edmonds' big city syndrome, preferring
the City be sensitive, responsive and flexible. He suggested the City analyze their regulations, for
example building permits expire one year after submission regardless of the complexities of the building
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 14
permit. Another questionable practice is the requirement that all new businesses submit a floor plan
stamped by an engineer or architect.
New Ferry Natalie Shippen, Edmonds, advised in the November 2007 election, the Edmonds City Council would
Terminal ask the voters of Snohomish County to raise their taxes; if approved the money would be spent to build
half of a new ferry terminal in Edmonds. She relayed three questions that were raised by the ballot
measure, 1) how much money would voters be asked to approve for the terminal, 2) exactly what portion
of a terminal would that amount buy, and 3) what was the total cost of a complete terminal. She
explained these questions were posed to the Edmonds City Council because the project on the ballot was
the City's project; the ferry system did not request a new ferry terminal in Edmonds, the City did and
RTID put the funding on the ballot at the City's request. As the Council was asking the voters to fund
half a new terminal, it was their responsibility to explain the details to the voters. She also asked what
kind of taxes would voters be asked to approve and the rate of the tax. She commented RTID had three
forms of taxation — sales tax, vehicle license fee, MVET, tolls and local option fuel tax. She recalled in
2003 RTID selected sales tax, license fee and M. VET with varying rates.
ADB Review g• REPORT ON ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD (ADB) REVIEW PROCESS AND DESIGN
Process and GUIDELINES.
Design
Guidelines
Development Services Director Duane Bowman recalled in March the Council discussed design.
guidelines. As a result of direction provided by Council, Planning Manager Rob Chave and City
Attorney Scott Snyder met with the ADB to discuss the review process and the design guidelines.
Mr. Chave advised Mr. Snyder and he met with the ADB, members of the community including Steve
Bernheim representing ACE, an architect and a developer. The result of the meeting was consensus to
move the ADB to the beginning of the process and using the ADB's recommended guidelines in that
process. Mr. Snyder and Senior Planner Steve Bullock developed an outline of the process which was
confirmed by the ADB at a subsequent meeting. He noted the design guidelines developed by the ADB
would be used to influence the outcome early in the process before a developer was committed to a
design.
Mr. Chave explained in order to proceed the Council would need to refer the following items to the
Planning Board so that an ordinance could be developed for Council review and approval: 1) outline of
revised ADB review process, 2) design guidelines developed by the ADB, 3) guidance on any additional
design standards that should be considered for inclusion in the development code such as landscape
standards and /or massing.
Mr. Chave relayed the ADB preference to implement this process in a phased manner rather than
citywide, beginning with design guidelines and standards for downtown, followed by Hwy. 99. He noted
it may also be possible to develop guidelines and standards in the neighborhood business zones such as
Five Corners and Firdale Village. The ADB preferred to delay development of guidelines and standards
for other areas of the City until there had been an opportunity to meet with those areas and develop
specific guidelines.
Mr. Snyder commented he would draft an ordinance describing the process and criteria for a checklist.
He referred to Mr. Shapiro's comments, agreeing generic, one - size - fits -all standards did not result in good
design. However, he disagreed with Mr. Shapiro's comment regarding subjective decisions, pointing out
that subjective decision - making was contrary to State law and municipalities must develop objective
criteria. The proposed process would allow the ADB to use its expertise to work with developers
cooperatively early in the process to influence design.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 15
Councilmember Moore asked what interpretations would be left for staff if the ADB was involved early
in the process. Mr. Chave answered it would minimize interpretations and in the proposed process, the
subjective portion would be at the beginning where the expertise of the ADB could be applied. At the end
of the process, the administrative code requirements would be applied. Mr. Snyder explained to take
subjectivity out of the process, it would be important for the ADB to render complete written decisions
adopting what they have approved. He cautioned if a project met the decisional criteria, the fact that it
may be objectionable to neighbors, the public, staff or the Council in some other regard would be beside
the point. Mr. Chave envisioned the only portion of the process that would be subjective would be the
early meetings when options and alternatives were being discussed which was an appropriate place for
subjectivity. When the project proceeded beyond options and alternatives, there would be limited
subjectivity and more predictability.
Mr. Snyder acknowledged the subjectivity would be the ADB offering their experience and guidance to
the developer. If a developer refused and the project met the decisional criteria, it would be approved.
He noted that was the dilemma of architectural design review; if the City had a distinctive design program .
such as Leavenworth, mediocrity could be legislated, however, it was difficult to legislate outstanding
design. He commented on trends in design as an example. Mr. Chave recalled the Planning Board held a
public hearing on the downtown zoning regulations; one of their concerns was how the design guidelines
fit into the zoning regulations and were uncomfortable proceeding with the zoning absent the design
guidelines. One of the benefits of forwarding the design guidelines to the Planning Board was to allow
them to consider both.
Councilmember Moore recalled a suggestion that the ADB meet more than once a month. Mr. Chave
acknowledged that issue would arise and agreed the ADB would need to be more flexible such as
establish multiple meeting dates from which a developer could choose.
Councilmember Marin recalled one of the reasons for staff's discussion with the ADB was to ensure the
ADB was comfortable with moving to the front of the process in an advisory role and no longer having a
quasi judicial role. Mr. Chave answered the ADB saw the benefits of moving their review to the front of
the process and were interested and excited about working with the new design guidelines.
Councilmember Marin asked whether any other issue arose in staff's meeting with the ADB. Mr. Chave
responded there was discussion regarding the pros and cons and ultimately everyone agreed this role for
the ADB would be beneficial. Mr. Snyder noted the ADB realized that for a period of time they would be
creating one system and phasing out another and there would be applications reviewed under the old
system while the new system was designed and adopted.
Councilmember Marin inquired about the timetable for Planning Board review. Mr. Chave advised the
Planning Board held a public hearing on the downtown zoning and would be continuing their discussion
at next week's meeting, likely followed by another public hearing. He anticipated the Planning Board
could begin discussion regarding the design guidelines next week and hold a public hearing on both in
July. He anticipated a 3 -4 month review process, acknowledging it would depend on the comments
received during the legislative process. Mr. Snyder observed one of the drafting challenges would be to
ensure this was a streamlined process that did not add time to the process.
Council President Dawson thanked staff and Mr. Snyder for meeting with the Planning Board and
engaging in this process. She agreed with phasing the process neighborhood by neighborhood.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MARIN, TO
REFER THE MATTER TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR REVIEW AND
RECOMMENDATION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 16
C gV4 mwel mpallia 1►91 p1 ►1fIg
Benefit Cone Mayor Haakenson invited the public and Council to attend the benefit concert at Holy Rosary Church on
ert
Friday, June 9 at 7:00 p.m. to honor George and Rayceille McCullum who would be visiting from Bay St.
Louis.
Jennifer Gerend Mayor Haakenson added his accolades to Economic Development Director Jennifer Gerend for her
professionalism and hard work over the past two years. He extended the City's best wishes in her
marriage and future endeavors and assured she would be considered for any future position in the City.
10. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Monthly
Meeting with Council President Dawson agreed with the suggestion that she meet with the Planning Board Chair and
Board Chairs
the Mayor at least monthly. She also agreed with the suggestion for a Council liaison to the business
Council Liaison community or Chamber of Commerce and invited interested Councihnembers to contact her. She
to un t y
Commmmunit recalled Councilmember Olson and she had discussed with Ms. Gerend how the Council could make
businesses feel welcome. She envisioned a liaison could attend grand openings, send a welcome letter to
new business, etc. Mayor Haakenson recalled when he was a Councilmember and had a business
downtown, he often spoke with prospective business owners. He agreed providing business owners a
contact person via the liaison would be helpful.
Marshbairk Councilmember Olson relayed comments in a letter from a resident on 220th that the contractor,
constru °rion- Marshbank Construction, and their crew had been friendly, courteous, helpful and professional during the
220th Project
project and wanted the Council and the public to know they had done a fantastic job.
Councilmember Moore thanked Council President Dawson for following up on the suggestions made
tonight. She suggested the Council develop a process for responding to public comments made during the
Council meeting. She thanked Mr. Dewhirst for his suggestion regarding a liaison to the Planning Board.
With regard to the comment that the City's codes /permits were not available on the City's website, she
Need for More suggested consideration be given to making more information available online. She concluded it was not
to be A vailabl e enough to tell people that Edmonds was business friendly, the City needed to demonstrate they were
Online business friendly. She requested Community Services Director Stephen Clifton respond to Ms. Shippen
with regard to her questions about Edmonds Crossing. Mayor Haakenson commented the information
requested may not be available from RTID as the vote was over a year away. He assured that information
would be disseminated when it became available, likely closer to the time of the election.
Councilmember Marin advised the Council would be holding an informal barbeque sometime this
summer.
Councilmember Moore recognized June 6 as an important day in history, D -Day, advising both her
parents were veterans of WWII.
f f�\ IaZ�11I7U
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 6, 2006
Page 17