Loading...
08/03/2004 City CouncilAugust 3, 2004 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 51h Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor Michael Plunkett, Council President Jeff Wilson, Councilmember Mauri Moore, Councilmember Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Richard Marin, Councilmember Deanna Dawson, 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 Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director Brian McIntosh, Acting Parks & Recreation Dir. Noel Miller, Public Works Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Dave Gebert, City Engineer Darrell Smith, Traffic Engineer Frances Chapin, Cultural Resources Coordinator Scott Snyder, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Cindi Cruz, Senior Administrative Assistant Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL Approve 7i27/04 (B) APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 27, 2004. Minutes Approve (C) APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #72867 THROUGH #73032 FOR THE WEEK OF Claim Checks JULY 26, 2004, IN THE AMOUNT OF $367,840.06. Approve 26- Lot Formal (D) FINAL APPROVAL OF A 26 LOT FORMAL PLAT USING THE ECDC PROVISIONS Plat (Viking I FOR A TOWNHOUSE SUBDIVISION. THE PROJECT WILL BE RECORDED AS Heights) I VIKING HEIGHTS. (APPLICANT: VIKING HOMES / FILE NO. P-2003-66). Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 1 Findings— (E) APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING A CLOSED RECORD REVIEW ShiAppeal HELD ON JULY 6, 2004 OF AN APPEAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION (AP-04-74) TO APPROVE THE PUBLIC FACILITY DISTRICT'S REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A MASTER PLAN FOR THE OLD EDMONDS HIGH SCHOOL SITE. (APPELLANT: NATALIE SHIPPEN / FILE NOS. ADB-04-01, 2004 Budget CU-04-02, AND AP-04-74) Status Report (F) MID -YEAR, 2004 BUDGET STATUS REPORT. Public Works Emergency Response/ (G) AUTHORIZATION TO SIGN A STATEWIDE PUBLIC WORKS EMERGENCY Mutual Aid RESPONSE/MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT. Agreement Res# 1069 (H) RESOLUTION NO. 1069 SUPPORTING EDMONDS SEEKING STATE LEGISLATIVE Funding ACTION TO ADDRESS FUNDING FOR MUNICIPAL TRANSPORTATION Transportation INFRASTRUCTURE Infrastructure Change to I COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO Agenda ALTER THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA TO MOVE ITEM #6 TO ITEM 0A. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mission, 3A. DISCUSSION AND ADOPTION OF CITY OF EDMONDS MISSION VISION VALUES AND Vision, 2004 STRATEGIC PLAN. Values and Strategic Plan Administrative Services Director Dan Clements recalled at the City Council retreat this spring, a draft mission, vision and values statement was developed and the Council asked staff to return with an implementing strategic plan which was provided to the Council and the public in June. The community has had several weeks to provide feedback on the plan. COUNCILMEMBER MARIN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO APPROVE THE CITY OF EDMONDS MISSION, VISION, VALUES AND 2004 STRATEGIC PLAN. Councilmember Dawson noted one of the City's values was high quality public safety — police, fire and emergency medical services. She recalled this was discussed at the retreat but was not reflected in the plan. She questioned whether the plan should state that value more directly or whether direction from the Council stating that was a value and continuing to provide the current level of service was a goal and priority of the Council was sufficient. Mr. Clements noted Police Chief Stern and Fire Chief Tomberg drafted a public safety goal that could be inserted into a revised strategic plan; further details regarding the goal may need to be drafted. He suggested adopting the plan and staff return with better defined public safety goals and objectives. Councilmember Dawson agreed, noting the importance of public safety to the City Council. At Mayor Haakenson's request, Fire Chief Tomberg read the public safety goal that could be added as Section I under Draft Council Financial. Stability Policy Statement, "Continue funding and staffing public safety departments at levels sufficient to serve the community in a timely and effective manner." AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO ADD "CONTINUE FUNDING AND STAFFING PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENTS AT LEVELS SUFFICIENT TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY IN A TIMELY AND EFFECTIVE MANNER" AS SECTION I UNDER DRAFT COUNCIL FINANCIAL STABILITY POLICY STATEMENT. Councilmember Marin commended staff and the Council on the work that was done at the retreat and accomplished since the retreat. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 2 THE VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. THE VOTE ON THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3B. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Ceiling Rowena Miller, 8711 182na Place SW, Edmonds, recalled two weeks ago five developers were invited Height to make a presentation to the Council regarding the need for higher first floor ceiling heights for retail Presentation; development. She noted what they were really discussing was lifting the restriction on building heights as Opposing Opiniona developer was allowed any height they wanted on the first floor of buildings but a taller first floor would result in only two stories. She suggested the Council invite those with an opposing opinion to make a presentation. Mayor Haakenson declared a brief recess. Edmonds 3C. UPDATE ON THE EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS BY THE EDMONDS PUBLIC Center for the FACILITIES DISTRICT BOARD. Arts Kjris Lund, Project Manager, explained the intent of her presentation was to provide an annual report on the progress of the Edmonds Public Facilities District (PFD) with regard to the renovation of the Edmonds Center for the Arts. She recalled one year ago the Capital Campaign Committee was established, a committee that includes community leaders from Edmonds and South Snohomish County. She explained the capital campaign effort had been very successful to date. The first year of the campaign was the quiet portion of the campaign, when individuals were asked for donations in a one-on- one manner. Over the past year, the PFD Board has created materials describing the project, held seven receptions in homes of donors to increase interest in the project, made presentations to boards of organizations who may have an interest in the facility, and conducted tours of the facility for donors. Ms. Lund noted two campaigns have occurred within the capital campaign as a result, 1) the Olympic Ballet held a fund raising event last January and are embarking on an effort to name the stage for John Wilkins, and 2) the Frank DeMeiro family is undertaking an effort to name the theater after him using his extensive network of contacts. She reported over the last year, $2,994,812.41 has been raised, an outstanding beginning for the capital campaign. Ms. Lund announced today the PFD Board received a check from Snohomish County in the amount of $1.6 million and invited County Councilmember Gary Nelson to the podium. Snohomish County Councilmember Gary Nelson thanked the Council for continuing Edmonds' rich legacy of nurturing and showcasing the arts. He also commended the PFD Board for their efforts and consistently fulfilling the Council's expectations. He explained four years ago the Snohomish County Council established a Neighborhood Improvement Program Fund that returned the Real Estate Excise Taxes (REET) to the cities in a proportionate share that they were generated, primarily for projects that established parks, assisted with historic buildings, etc. He noted there was originally a park project in the Edmonds area and when that opportunity failed, a decision was made to allocate the funds to the Edmonds Center for the Arts. Ms. Lund explained another part of the fundraising effort was individuals donating to the campaign. Over 220 people have made donations and pledges of stock to the campaign. She explained the PFD's goal was to reach $1 million in funds from private individuals by the end of August. The total today is $935,000; pending contributions from Washington Bank and a family will bring the total to $995,000. She encouraged audience members to assist the PFD in reaching that goal. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 3 Ms. Lund explained another important part of the capital campaign was applying to foundations and government sources for funds. She noted the PFD hired former Parks & Recreation Director Arvilla Ohlde to assist in developing requests to foundations. Ms. Ohlde assisted in developing a request to the Tulalip Tribe; the PFD was informed the Tribe would be granting funds to the project in an amount to be revealed at an event on August 5 at the Tribe Headquarters. Ms. Ohlde will also be assisting with requests to a list of foundations that were identified. She offered to email the list of foundations to Councilmembers to determine whether Councilmembers had any contacts with any of the foundations. Ms. Lund explained the PFD's original fundraising goal was $6.5 million; based on the funds received to date, $3.5 million remains to be raised. This amount would be sought via continuing individual requests as well as pursuing foundations and governmental agencies. The PFD was considering a construction loan primarily because many of the pledges are multi -year pledges and the PFD would face an increase in. costs due to inflation if they waited until all the funds are received. She noted the pros and cons of a construction fund were being analyzed and the PFD was discussing the issue with the City finance department. She assured the PFD would keep the Council informed as progress continues with regard to that analysis. Ms. Lund explained this spring the PFD was forced to close certain uses of the stage due to the condition of the rigging and stage equipment. That equipment was not originally identified for replacement as part of the renovation and the approximately $200,000 cost has been added to the renovation costs. She noted the PFD planned to pursue fundraising specific to the purchase of that equipment. Ms. Lund reported the PFD sold the Anchor House and library properties, have completed design and construction drawings and the City's land use review process. The PFD will be submitting construction drawings to the City later this month. Ms. Lund noted the facility has continued to be used during the fundraising effort by organizations such as the Storybook Theater, the Cascade Symphony, Edmonds Community College, Olympic Ballet and the SnoKing Chorale. On September 30, the PFD has scheduled a special event to kick-off the public phase of the campaign. She noted the PFD was seeking donations of all sizes, and was also seeking additional assistance on the capital campaign. Further, the PFD was discussing partnering on the operation of the facility with Edmonds Community College as well as discussing a marketing and booking plan. She commended the members of the PFD Board and expressed their appreciation for the newest member, Dave Earling. She displayed renderings of the renovated lobby and auditorium, noting additional visuals were on display at the facility. Councilmember Marin asked the total amount the PFD had raised to date. Ms. Lund replied the total was slightly more than $12.5 million. Mayor Haakenson thanked Snohomish County Councilmember Gary Nelson for his and the County Council's support of this project. Safety 4. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY CONCERNS AND REQUEST FOR Concerns at STOP SIGNS AT 76TH 76`h Ave. W AVENUE WEST AND MEADOWDALE BEACH ROAD, AND Ave. / Meadowdale POTENTIAL COUNCIL ACTION. Beach Road Traffic Engineer Darrell Smith described existing site conditions at 76t'' Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road. He stated there are two long narrow roadways that intersect, rolling terrain, and no sidewalks to either the north or east of the intersection. He reported there were two reported accidents in the past three years at this intersection. Further, 76d' Avenue has approximately 176 vehicles traveling Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 4 north and southbound during peak hours and Meadowdale Beach Road has approximately 151 vehicles during peak hours, and various levels of speeding occur along 76th Avenue. Mr. Smith explained considerations for an all -way stop warrant include the following: five or more correctable accidents in a 12-month period and minimum traffic volumes including a minimum of 500 vehicles and pedestrians per hour passing through the combined intersection or minimum of 200 vehicles and pedestrians traveling through the intersection from the minor leg (Meadowdale Beach Road). Mr. Smith reviewed staff s recommendation that all -way stop warrants are not presently being met and the Development Services, Fire, and Police Departments did not support the installation of an all -way stop at 76`h Avenue and Meadowdale Beach Road at this time. Staff encouraged police enforcement in this corridor that focused on speeding. Councilmember Dawson asked if there was any data regarding the number of pedestrians traveling through that area, recognizing that the public's concern was primarily pedestrian safety. Mr. Smith answered pedestrian counts were taken during peak periods. He acknowledged there were pedestrians and bicycles in the area but not necessarily at that intersection. Councilmember Dawson commented pedestrian traffic may be less than it could be because people don't feel safe walking. She concluded staff did not find significant enough pedestrian activity to warrant the all -way stop. Mr. Smith agreed. Councilmember Dawson noted this issue was advertised as stop signs but extended into a discussion of walkways in the area. She noted the majority of public comment was of two minds with regard to a stop sign but they really wanted a walkway. At Councilmember Dawson's request, Development Services Director Duane Bowman referred to his July 29 memo, noting the walkway was highly ranked in the Sidewalk Plan but funding for the estimated $548,000 cost (in 2002 dollars) was not currently available. He noted there were no funds allocated for design and it was not the type of walkway that successfully qualified for grant funding as it was not a school walkway, therefore it was likely the City would need to fund the walkway with local funding. He noted with the passage of I-776, the City lost approximately $350,000 per year in ongoing revenue; therefore, Fund 112 did not currently have any funds for walkways. He noted staff planned to make a presentation to the Council on Fund 112 later this month. Councilmember Dawson pointed out the cost of this walkway project exceeded the existing revenue streams into Fund 112 for all transportation projects. Mr. Bowman agreed. Councilmember Dawson asked Mr. Bowman to describe the in -lieu of sidewalk fund. Mr. Bowman explained the City used to collect revenue as in -lieu -of payments for walkway purposes; the City has expended funds that were collected in this area for walkway projects. He noted the amount collected was very small in comparison to the cost of this walkway. Councilmember Dawson recalled questions that were raised regarding specific allocations for this walkway project. Mr. Bowman indicated his research was unable to find that information. Engineering has records of property owners who have made payments to the in -lieu -of fund but those walkway funds have been expended and the City no longer collects in -lieu -of walkway funds. Councilmember Dawson asked whether the funds collected were expended in that area although not on this particular walkway project. Mr. Bowman answered they were not necessarily expended in that area but were spent on walkway projects. Funds collected in this manner typically must be spent within six years or returned with interest. Councilmember Dawson noted that of the walkway projects, this was the top priority. Mr. Bowman agreed, stating it would be a priority following the other projects that were in design or had grant funding. He pointed out walkways near schools were better able to compete for grant funds. One of the proposals for the Fund 112 was a process for including walkway in the funding mechanism but it would take approximately three years' allocation to have sufficient funds for this walkway project. He stated funding allocations were Council policy decisions and the CIP would be Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 5 where the specific projects were identified. He recalled projects to be funded from Fund 112 was discussed at the Council retreat, including street overlays, walkway, road stabilization and street maintenance. Councilmember Dawson stated a dedicated funding source needed to be identified for transportation projects to avoid their being continually delayed. Mr. Bowman agreed that would be necessary unless the State Legislature took action to allow cities to form a Street Utility that would generate local funds for street maintenance. Councilmember Moore inquired about the liability issue of installing or not installing a stop sign. City Attorney Scott Snyder explained a problem may arise if the City installed an improvement for which there were not adequate warrants. He noted there were two aspects of Washington law that created a problem for the City; Washington is a comparative negligence state which means if a person is injured, the courts compare the relative negligence of the parties involved. When the City installs improvements that are not within traffic warrants or do not meet the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) guidelines and design parameters, the City is negligent by definition. Mr. Snyder provided two examples, the first occurred approximately 18 years ago when an individual, passed out behind the wheel of their car after drinking when the car was partially parked at the City's waterfront and across the railroad tracks. A train hit the car and a claim was filed against the City because the striping on the pavement was not in conformance with WSDOT regulations. The City was a very small percent liable but the costs were transferred to the City despite the overwhelming contribution of the driver. Mr. Snyder described a similar situation that occurred in South Snohomish County in which a young man took his motorcycle from 0-90 mph in 300 feet, ran a stop sign and broadsided a car. Unfortunately the intersection did not have sufficient warrants for a stop sign and Snohomish County was found liable and the case was eventually settled. He concluded anytime the City installed a traffic improvement that was not designed in accordance with State standards or installed under State warrants, the City became the virtual insurer of that intersection and if any loss occurred, the City would be held accountable for some portion of that liability. Councilmember Wilson asked staff to describe warrant analysis. Mr. Smith explained the federal government assisted in producing the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and numerous statistical studies have been conducted by colleges and traffic organizations to determine the warrants. He noted he was part of the Urban Traffic Engineer's Council who meet quarterly to discuss issues such as this. Councilmember Wilson clarified the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices was used throughout the United States. Mr. Snyder explained when someone claimed another was negligent and liable for damages, if it was an individual, attorneys referred to the reasonable man standard, did a person act reasonably? When the issue was professional conduct, the test was whether the actions that were taken were done in accordance with generally accepted practice; in this case the standards and warrants set the standard for determining negligence. Councilmember Wilson asked what the City would do if it chose not to follow the warrant analysis process, how would a defensible decision be made on these types of requests. Mr. Smith answered he was unsure whether a defensible program could be developed. He anticipated decisions would then be made by traffic engineers deciding the best way on a case -by -case basis which would make comparisons difficult. He explained he was obligated to install safety improvements at the worst intersections first; if he installed safety improvements and some intersections and ignored other worse intersections, that would also be a liability issue. Councilmember Wilson asked how much was accumulated in the life of the in -lieu -of fund for sidewalk improvements. Mr. Bowman was uncertain the amount and offered to provide that information to the Council. Councilmember Wilson noted the amount would be useful information for the Council. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 6 Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. He noted the Council office received six telephone calls regarding the stop sign at 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road — Julie Davis and Jean Mitchell in favor of the stop sign and Karen Flyvin, Francie Dailer, John and Ulaine Johnson and John Becker opposed to the stop sign. The City Clerk received 12 emails over the past five days — Phyllis Wiggins, Mary Caryl, Gil and Janet Thiry, Louise Gerth, Kathleen Johanson, Lourdes Becker, Jody Spiro, Brian Moll, Richard Van Saun, Richard and Gail Hankenson in opposition and Jim and Karen Carson in favor and Henry Chang and Sherri Knopik asking for safety improvements. Mayor Haakenson advised the Council was also provided a petition tonight signed by 14 residents who were opposed to the stop sign. The Council also received a letter on. July 30 from Jeanie Anderson who was in favor of the stop sign. Michael King, 1.6711 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, displayed a photograph of the intersection looking south on 76th Avenue W and identified Meadowdale Beach Road, a blind curve, a school bus stop and the location where pedestrians crossed the uncontrolled intersection. He noted Mr. Smith did not address speeds or sight distance in his presentation. He referred to an accident report of a vehicle traveling 60 mph that flipped, explaining a vehicle traveling 60 mph would only provide a pedestrian 2 seconds to clear the intersection. At 40 mph a pedestrian had only 3.5 seconds to clear the intersection, the speed he estimated most vehicles traveled. Staff s report stated multiple field visits observed vehicles driving 35 mph and that the desired sight distances were not met. The report also states if minimum stopping sight distances were not met, a solution would be an all -way stop although stopping sight distances appear to be adequate at the posted speed. The report also states sidewalks on Meadowdale Beach Road were warranted. He displayed a photograph of a bicyclist on the roadway, commenting there was nowhere for the cyclist to exit the roadway. Mr. King then referred to a conversation several years ago with the City Engineer who showed him plans for a walkway and estimated costs. He questioned the statement that there was no funding for walkways when it appeared the City had funds for other projects. He concluded a stop sign would help by slowing vehicles, but the most important improvement would be sidewalks. Ken Case, 7601 Ridge Way, Edmonds, expressed interest in learning about the reasons for a stop sign and was pleased Mr. Smith and the Community Services/Development Services Committee did not recommend installation of a stop sign. He noted there were other intersections in the area that should have stop signs such as Meadowdale Beach Road & Olympic View Drive or 176th where it crossed Olympic View Drive or Homeview Drive. He agreed with Mr. Smith and the Community Services/Development Services Committee decision that a stop sign was not warranted at 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road. Jeanie Anderson, 16727 74'h Place W, Edmonds, stated 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road can at times be dangerous for pedestrians. Although she enjoyed walking in the neighborhood on a daily basis, she avoided the later afternoons and evenings due to high speed motorists. She supported an all -way stop at the intersection due to the blind corner and because the speed limit on 76th changed from 30 mph to 25 mph at that corner and a stop sign would assist in slowing traffic. She referred to the intersection of North Meadowdale Road and 76th Avenue W which was an all -way stop which she found a safer intersection. She commented other traffic calming solutions such as additional flagged speed limit signs in both directions on 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road and increased police enforcement of speed limits during afternoon and evening hours should be considered. The December 2002 Comprehensive Walkway Plan recognized the need for pedestrian facilities in this area and designated them as Priority 1. She suggested an unpaved trail or meandering path may be more appropriate than a paved sidewalk to maintain the semi -rural character of the area. With regard to walkways being unfunded projects in the current budget, she suggested funds be sought from unspent or unexpected revenues such as funds from the waterfront walkway project that was under budget or fines paid by Triad Development. With regard to maintenance of pedestrian facilities, she identified several that were not being maintained including a short section of path west of the entrance to Eagles Nest and Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 7 remnants of a hillside pedestrian trail further east on Meadowdale Road. She concluded the City should either maintain those facilities or ensure other responsible parties maintained them. Sandy Eastly, 16858 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, acknowledged a stop sign was not a quick fix for sidewalks to the park, pointing out at the end of the road was the park that many people liked to walk to and many used the railroad tracks because of the inability to walk on the street. She noted the majority of those who were opposed to the stop sign lived north of the stop sign and much of the traffic from 76th turned up Meadowdale Beach Road and they would not be as badly affected because there was already a stop sign at North Meadowdale Road. She noted traffic traveled 30 mph in front of her house because the speed limit did not change to 25 mph until North Meadowdale Road. She suggested a stop sign would assist in controlling traffic, noting there were numerous pedestrians that used the street. Steve Conroy,16717 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, commented on the sidewalk that was rebuilt on SR 524 up Olympic View to Perrinville and then to Meadowdale Beach Road, pointing out it discontinued in front of their house and continued up Meadowdale Beach Road to the park. He questioned why the sidewalk was discontinued in front of their house, noting this was one of the most hazardous areas of that road for pedestrians due to blind corners, hills, driveways and excessive speeds. He stated he had been hit six times in front of his house while jogging, had witnessed many automobile accidents in that area and had seen pedestrians harassed by vehicles that did not slow down. He could not be convinced that this was a safe stretch of roadway and there was no justification for not continuing the sidewalk in the area. He acknowledged a stop sign at 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road was not the answer. He noted stop signs at both 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road and at 171 st and Meadowdale Beach Road may be more effective at slowing traffic due to two stop signs in close proximity. He asserted the City Council was charged with protecting citizens' health, safety and welfare pointing out a lack of police enforcement on a regular basis. He concluded there was a high volume of pedestrian traffic in this area and a sidewalk was needed right now. He questioned why there was a 3-way stop at North Meadowdale Beach Road where there was virtually no traffic. Ralph Puchalski, 7810 175th Street SW, Edmonds, noted he had been run off the road at the intersection of 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road and supported the installation of an all - way stop. He described walking on the sidewalk on 76th Avenue West and crossing the road at 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road to face oncoming traffic. He agreed with the comments regarding difficulty crossing the street due to limited sight distance. He asked for a show of hands from the audience who were in favor of making 76th Avenue West a safer road to walk; a majority of the audience raised their hands. He asked how many were in favor, if there were no funds for police enforcement, of a stop sign at the intersection; several members of the audience raised their hands. Kirstin Foote, 7810 175th Street SW, Edmonds, described walking on 76th Avenue West to the park, noting that area of 76th was the primary arterial for their neighborhood to reach Meadowdale High School or the park. She avoided walking between 8:00 — 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 — 7:00 p.m. due to dangerous conditions. She questioned the statement that pedestrian traffic was not considered high at this location, pointing out whenever she walked she encountered at least a dozen other pedestrians. The intersection of 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road was the most dangerous intersection in this area and she always ran across due to the limited sight distance. She did not walk across this intersection with children but drove to her destination with children because she found it too dangerous. She suggested more people may be driving along this stretch of roadway because it was not safe to walk and more may walk if it were safer. She favored the stop sign because the sidewalk alternative did not seem to be a possibility in the near fixture and recommended installation of sidewalks in this area be a top priority. Grant DuBois, 16721 76th Avenue W, Edmonds, commented anyone who was opposed to the stop sign did not live in the immediate area. He referred to accidents that have occurred at the intersection and Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 8 questioned when the pedestrian volume data was collected. He offered to put in his section of sidewalk and questioned whether the City would charge him for a permit. He spoke in favor of the stop sign as well as a sidewalk. Seyed Daniellie, 7821 175th Street SW, Edmonds, referred to the statement regarding minimum traffic volumes, explaining the code was designed to improve the safety of citizens and if read properly, the city had responsibility to install stop signs if the volume was more than 500 vehicles or pedestrians per hour but that did not mean the City could not add a stop sign if volumes were less than 500. He stated that stretch of road was dangerous and adding an all -way stop would improve the safety. He commented on the inability to walk with his grandchildren in this area due to safety concerns, pointing out that regardless of the city's budget, pedestrians had to be a priority. He reiterated 500 vehicles/pedestrians was the minimum, if the volume was less, common sense should be used to determine the need for a stop sign. Lori Dressler, 15714 75th Place W, Edmonds, commented the photographs that were displayed of the bicyclist and the jogger in the street were not near this intersection but on a dangerous section of 76th Avenue West that needed sidewalks as did Meadowdale Beach Road. She was dismayed that a 3-way stop was being considered as a solution to pedestrian safety when what was needed was sidewalks. She acknowledged more drivers traveled the speed limit and stopped at the stop signs when police were in the area but the addition of two unnecessary stop signs would not have the effect that the presence of police officers did. She relayed her understanding that because funds were not available for sidewalk, the stop signs would be an affordable action. She noted action simply for action's sake would not be appreciated by Meadowdale residents. If the Council could not identify sufficient funds for sidewalk, she encouraged the Council not to waste money on stop signs that were neither wanted nor needed. She encouraged the Council to support the recommendations of the Traffic Engineer, Fire Department and Police Department and vote against a stop sign on 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road. She submitted signatures of 14 Meadowdale neighbors who are opposed to the stop sign, noting the signatures were provided to her, but had she solicited signatures, she could have gotten many more. John Quast, 15714 75th Place, Edmonds, President of the Meadowdale Community Club, offered their support for the Traffic Engineer's study that indicated a 3-way stop was not justified at the intersection of 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road. The Meadowdale community recognized the need for sidewalks and supported building them on Meadowdale Beach Road as well as on 76th and 751h Avenues. He noted this was a recognized public safety issue that a stop sign would not address. With regard to the belief that a stop sign would act as a speed reduction device, the neighborhood's experience indicated this was not effective. He used 751h Avenue W and North Meadowdale Road, currently a 3-way stop, as an example and explained those who were sensitive to pedestrian traffic drove the speed limit and stopped at stop signs; those who were not ignored signs and traveled in excess of the speed limit. He described Meadowdale's experience with speed bumps, noting they were very effective at slowing emergency vehicles and were not recommended. He understood the building of sidewalks was difficult, expensive and that funds were not currently available; however, the need was for sidewalks not a stop sign. He urged the Council to support the Traffic Engineer's recommendation and vote against installation of a 3- way stop at 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road. Bea O'Rourke, 434 3rd Avenue S, Edmonds, cited the dangerous conditions at 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road, recalling the meeting where many expressed safety concerns with this intersection. Although she agreed there was a major problem, she did not believe a stop sign would solve the problem. What she perceived at the meeting was that the residents in the area wanted sidewalks not a stop sign. She recalled several residents spoke of having contributed to a fund for the sidewalk which now appeared had not been designated to a specific project. She relayed her observations that many drivers speed and ignore stop signs. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 9 Jennifer Mantooth, 7220 North Meadowdale Road, Edmonds, noted her observations indicated there was sufficient traffic at the intersection to warrant a stop sign. She also supported a sidewalk in the area. She questioned why some property owners were not required to install sidewalks when their homes were constructed. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, asked whether the warrants were satisfied for the stop sign and crosswalk at Frances Anderson Center and for the traffic circle on Dayton. He felt the City had a responsibility to provide safety and if sidewalks could not be constructed, perhaps the shoulders could be widened, the speed limit lowered, or regular police patrols provided. He noted a full curb, gutter, sidewalk was not necessarily required, even a 2-person wide asphalt pathway may be adequate. Ray Martin, 18704 94th Avenue W, Edmonds, pointed out this area needed sidewalks; stop signs were only a bandaid. He suggested options for identifying funds for the sidewalks such as the $75,000 per year allocated to the Alliance, the $100,000 per year Economic Development Director's salary, and $500,000 for five years of the Traffic Engineer's salary. He concluded the funds were available, it was up to the Council to determine who benefited, the staff or the citizens. Marsha Koons, 7111 Meadowdale Beach Road, Edmonds, referred to several houses in the area that were not required to install sidewalks and questioned why some were required to install sidewalks or provide in -lieu -of funds and others were not. She noted Eagles Nest was required to install trails but they were now impassible. Ed Farmer, 7350 Meadowdale Beach Road, Edmonds, commented most of the people who did not want the stop sign lived to the north. Meadowdale Beach Road as well as other roads in the area need walkways. He referred to a letter his niece wrote 14 years ago as part of a school project describing her concern with walking on this road and the City's assurance that something would be done. He referred to the residents who have contributed to sidewalks, questioning how long the residents would have to wait. He noted there were sidewalks to the south and north. He recalled the high school track team used to jog by their house but did not any longer, likely because they chose a safer route. He urged the Council to take some action, at least increase police patrols. He concluded the residents in the area should determine whether there was a need for a stop sign. He agreed sight distances were especially bad when vehicles were speeding. He supported the stop signs, sidewalks and increased police enforcement in the area. Jeffrey Jones, 16919 76th Place W, Edmonds, commented there was a great deal of traffic that used the area as a short cut. He suggested limiting the cut -through traffic in their neighborhood. He noted the amount of traffic had increased significantly over the past six years and speeds often exceed 40 mph. He suggested the speed limit be reduced to 25 mph further south and/or the short-cut from Olympic View Drive be made a less passable route via lower speed limits or other methods. Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO EXTEND THIS ITEM FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. In response to issues raised by the public, Mr. Smith advised the traffic warrants were met for the all -way stop at 71h & Main Street. There were sidewalk projects that had been designed that were awaiting funding such as the 164th Avenue walkway project. He explained Engineering and Development Services ceased collecting in -lieu -of fees in favor of installing sidewalks at the time of development. He thanked the audience for participating in tonight's discussion, emphasizing his intent was to make the community as safe as possible. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 10 Mr. Snyder referred to the question regarding the City's liability to the pedestrian, explaining it was the same issue with the stop sign — did generally accepted engineering practices call for a walkway at that location. He referred to another funding mechanism available under State law, Local Improvement Districts (LID). A LID for sidewalks did not typically assess the greatest expense to those adjacent to the road and could use a district approach that would, with the assistance of an appraiser, determine who would benefit from a walkway. Councilmember Orvis provided a reminder that the Council would be discussing funding sources for roads and sidewalks at the August 24 Council meeting. Responding to Councilmember Wilson, Mr. Smith explained there were two different sidewalk designs, concrete with curbs, gutters and ADA curb ramps as well as asphalt sidewalks in areas where it was felt they would blend with the characteristics of the community. Councilmember Wilson recalled the estimate for the 76th Avenue West sidewalk was $500,000 and asked what type of sidewalk was envisioned. Mr. Smith answered he had not reviewed the sidewalk plans but had been told there was asphalt as well as a timber plank elevated walkway. Councilmember Wilson inquired about the constraints that made a walkway on 76th Avenue West a difficult project and whether there were alternatives for some type of walking path. Mr. Smith answered the primary issue was lack of space due to the steep side slopes. He envisioned a paved sidewalk structure, likely asphalt. He agreed a walkway could meander where it was cost effective and aesthetically appropriate. He noted to provide maximum pedestrian safety, a curb was desirable. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the full right-of-way width was available along 76th Avenue West. Mr. Smith answered he would need to research that issue, noting if the roadway surface was widened, the sidewalk could be placed on either side. Councilmember Wilson referred to Ms. Anderson's assertion regarding neglected pathways. Mr. Bowman answered the walkway on Meadowdale was public and has not been maintained. The pathway to 72nd was initially established as a public pathway to be maintained by Eagles Crest. The pathway has fallen into disrepair; there has been interest in reopening it but it is extremely steep. Councilmember Moore asked whether consideration had been given to lowering the speed limit from 30 mph to 25 mph. Mr. Smith answered the classification of the roadway changed at Meadowdale Beach Road, thus the reason the speed limit changed at that location. He noted staff continually reviewed speed limits throughout the City. Councilmember Moore asked whether lowering the speed limit would help. Mr. Smith answered most people drive at a speed at which they feel comfortable; what kept them in compliance was enforcement, not a sign. He recognized the need for appropriate, visible signage. Councilmember Moore recalled the Community Services/Development Services Committee discussed how to ensure people were aware they were speeding; enforcement was one method, another was drawing attention to the speed limit such as via orange flags. She asked whether flagged speed limit signs would be an option on 76th Avenue West. Mr. Smith offered to research whether there was appropriate signage on 76th Avenue West and ensure the signs were visible. Councilmember Moore noted the issue appeared to be sidewalks and pedestrian safety and agreed a stop sign was not warranted. In an effort to provide more protection to the area, she suggested further consideration be given to flagged speed limit signs. She inquired whether pedestrian walkway stripes could be painted on 76th Avenue West to remind drivers this was a pedestrian crossing. Mr. Smith acknowledged that had not yet been considered. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 11 Councilmember Moore asked how the pedestrian volumes were measured. Mr. Smith explained staff stood at the intersection and counted pedestrians two different times, at the end of April 2004 during a warm spell at approximately 2:00 — 3:00 p.m. and in 2003 during a similar time period. Councilmember Moore referred to the comment that the 500 vehicle/pedestrian minimum did not mean that the city could not install a stop sign. Mr. Smith explained his interpretation of the Manual on. Uniform Traffic Control Devices and the application of all -way stop signs was that minimum meant minimum. He noted there could be an instance where an intersection operated very efficient and there was no accident data. However, usually when volumes increased, statically the number of accidents also increased. Councilmember Moore asked staff to comment on police patrols in the area. Police Chief David Stern stated there were several neighborhoods that had similar interests and an effort was made to have police patrols in those neighborhoods as often as possible. The Police Department did not have sufficient staff to station an officer in those neighborhoods on a semi -permanent, everyday basis. He offered to discuss with the Traffic Officer ways to get more enforcement in the Meadowdale area. He reiterated there were other neighborhoods with similar concerns. Mayor Haakenson asked how many officers were on duty at any one time in the City. Chief Stern stated a maximum of six, frequently it was less. Councilmember Wilson inquired about the cost of the pedestrian activated signal on 212th adjacent to the high school. Mr. Smith replied that type of in -ground system with runway lights cost $40,000 - $70,000. Councilmember Wilson noted an in -ground system likely would not be effective due to the sight distances. Mr. Smith agreed, explaining there were also above ground systems that could be considered that were more cost effective. Councilmember Wilson observed there were concerns expressed both with visibility crossing the street as well as walking along the street and asked whether a pedestrian activated signal had been considered. Mr. Smith answered that type of control device had not been considered for this location. Areas where that type of system has been installed were primarily school zones. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the traffic analysis included any study of the origin/designation of vehicles. Mr. Smith answered it did not. Councilmember Wilson commented on the issue of speeding, questioning whether it was the neighbors or pass through traffic that was speeding. Mr. Smith commented on a national level, a very high percentage of the speeding offenders were the local residents. Councilmember Wilson acknowledged it was difficult for some residents to learn that the warrants did not justify a stop sign. He asked whether staff was willing to consider alternatives for an interim fix to address the high cost of a full sidewalk and the costs associated with a LID process. Mr. Smith responded a LID process to assess the costibenefit ratios would be very involved because of the need to show that the sidewalk would create a financial benefit to the properties in the LID. Councilmember Wilson asked whether the funding of a LID could be supplemented by the City. Mr. Snyder explained the Council could initiate a LID or residents could initiate an LID by petition that met the required percentage of property owners to proceed. The next step would be to hire an appraiser to determine the benefit and area. He noted it was not typically the properties adjacent to the street that received the greatest benefit; a tiered approach was used that determined those closest did not have as much benefit, the next tier had the primary benefit and those furthest away had some benefit. Usually a portion of the benefit was general to the City at large and a portion to the properties in the district. He advised the City could supplement the project. Councilmember Moore asked staff to comment on the remark that the requirement to install or contribute to sidewalks was erratic, some property owners making improvements to their property were required to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 12 install sidewalks and others were not. Mr. Bowman agreed in the past that appeared to be the case, there was erratic enforcement of that code requirement. Since he became the Director, in -lieu -of funds had not been collected, either a sidewalk was required or it was not according to established criteria. He noted there was no ordinance establishing the collection of in -lieu -of funds instead of requiring the installation of sidewalks. COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO EXTEND THIS ITEM FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Dawson clarified the issue before the Council was the stop sign. She pointed out the potential danger for pedestrians of an unwarranted stop sign where drivers may not obey the stop sign but pedestrians relied on the stop sign and may step into the intersection only to have a driver run the stop sign. Councilmember Dawson commented that was one of the reasons a stop sign was not installed when the warrants were not met. Mr. Smith agreed, noting there were intersections where stop signs were warranted and the number of accidents increased in the first few years following installation of stop signs. Councilmember Dawson requested staff schedule this issue on a future agenda for discussion of traffic controls, less expensive options for a walkway, a LID funded partially by residents and partially by the City. Councilmember Dawson clarified when the Council discussed how expensive a walkway would be, they were not saying they would not do it but that was one of the reasons it had not been done yet and was the reason the Council could not agree tonight to install a walkway. Mr. Bowman advised this was a budgetary issue for the Council to decide; the Council sets the priorities via the CIP. Hearing no further questions for staff, Mayor Haakenson remanded the matter to Council for action. COUNCILMEMBER DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, TO DIRECT STAFF NOT TO INSTALL AN ALL -WAY STOP AT EITHER THE 76TH AVENUE WEST AND MEADOWDALE BEACH ROAD INTERSECTION OR THE 76TH AVENUE WEST AND 171ST STREET SW INTERSECTION. Council President Plunkett suggested if the Council was not going to recommend installation of the stop sign, no action was necessary. Mayor Haakenson countered that staff had been working on this for two years and it was time to put the matter to rest by directing staff to either install a stop sign or not install a stop sign. Council President Plunkett disagreed any action was necessary as it was obvious staff did not intend to install a stop sign. For those who supported the stop sign, he noted the matter was discussed twice by the Community Services/Development Services Committee, two reviews by the Engineering Department, ample opportunity for supporters to speak to their neighbors but unfortunately, the warrants were not met. He thanked staff, the Council and the residents for their effort on this matter. Councilmember Marin commented he was interested in exploring the concept of a stop sign and was surprised to see this much opposition to the stop sign. He noted most people think teenagers were the ones speeding; however, the truth was much of the speeding was done by the residents of the neighborhood. He encouraged the residents to the north and south of the intersection to slow down. He acknowledged the intersection may be unsafe and would continue to be unsafe until the funds to improve it could be identified. He concluded the Council understood that sidewalks were needed in this area. Councilmember Wilson encouraged neighbors to respect each other and their neighborhood. He pointed out the warrant analysis depoliticizes decisions regarding traffic control devices. If the Council were to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 13 make a decision based on the testimony tonight, 29 people were opposed and 12 were in favor; however, that was not how such decisions were made, they were made via technical analysis of the need for the improvement. Although some may dispute staff s data and findings, the Council relied on the Traffic Engineer's expertise in that field to evaluate the data and make a recommendation based on his analysis rather than emotion. The Council recognized residents' concern with safety in this area and he was hopeful staff could identify options to address issues in this area, budget for the improvements and possibly implement some improvements in phases. Councilmember Wilson referred to a neighborhood where stop signs that were not warranted and his observations of vehicles that did not stop at the stop sign because most of the time they did not see another car and did not see the need to stop. This was his greatest fear in using a stop sign to solve a problem that did not warrant that as a solution. He agreed an unwarranted stop sign could create a false sense of security by creating the illusion that it was safe to cross when drivers may ignore the stop sign. He expressed his support for staff's recommendation not to install a stop sign and looked forward to identifying a long term solution to sidewalks and pedestrian safety in that neighborhood. Councilmember Olson thanked the residents who spoke to the Council regarding the stop sign, pointing out it also raised the issue of sidewalks. Councilmember Orvis restated that the Council would be discussing funding sources at the August 24 meeting. Mayor Haakenson clarified the Council would be discussing whether to use funds from the Parks Improvement and Acquisition Fund to fund street and sidewalk improvements. He noted this was a value judgment for the community — whether to continue to support parks or fund improvement projects. Mayor Haakenson asked staff to describe what it would take to build the 76th Avenue West walkway project. Mr. Smith answered the public would need to stop voting for initiatives that eliminated transportation funding. In the last two years approximately $700,000 that would be used for walkway and roadway improvements had been lost due to the passage of initiatives. Mayor Haakenson commented no one heard more about traffic issues in the city than he. He recalled residents in Westgate had a similar discussion with the Police Department, Mr. Smith and Development Services 2-3 months ago and similar problems exist all over the city and elsewhere — too much traffic and people driving too fast. He noted the solution was not to put a stop sign on every corner or install speed bumps at every intersection although there may be appropriate locations. He noted the same neighbors that complain about speeding then complain because receiving a ticket. He summarized the Council and staff took this issue very seriously but it was a problem everywhere and a solution needed to be identified. Mr. Smith commented the City had the technical expertise in-house to design walkway projects. This project would be challenging due to geotechnical issues in the Meadowdale area. In response to Mayor Haakenson's question regarding what would be needed to build the 76th Avenue West walkway project, he said clear direction from the Council was needed to make the project happen. He noted the direction from Council over the past two years has been to cut back and reduce transportation services in the community which staff has done. Mayor Haakenson asked how the 76th Avenue West walkway project could be constructed. City Engineer Dave Gebert explained the first thing was money, which represented a significant amount of the Capital Improvement Program. Next, the walkway needed to be designed. He acknowledged some design had been done in the past; that design would need to be reviewed and completed. He agreed some of the design could be done in-house although a consultant may be required for a portion. He estimated design would take 6-12 months with construction the following year. He reiterated the first step would be identifying funds for the project. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 14 Mayor Haakenson pointed out the challenges such as slopes, drainage ditches, right-of-way issues and deciding on which side of the roadway to place the walkway. Mr. Gebert advised the existing design was to have the walkway on the west side of the street which would require retaining walls, a footbridge due to a steep slope, etc. He clarified it was not as simple as painting stripes, putting down gravel and laying asphalt; the project would need to address drainage issues, slopes, etc. Mayor Haakenson asked staff to comment on the voter -approved initiatives that have resulted in the loss of funds that were previously used for overlays. Mr. Gebert explained the City used to receive approximately $350,000 per year via the $15 collected from the vehicle registration fee; 1-776 eliminated the $15 portion of the vehicle registration fee and the City lost $350,000 per year or 46% of the city's recurring annual revenue into the Transportation Capital Project Fund. As a result, the city has reduced overlays drastically and only does walkway projects for which the city has obtained grants. He noted staff had not applied for grants in the last year because the city did not have the resources to provide the matching funds. Mayor Haakenson asked how many sidewalk projects the city had done in the past 3-4 years. Mr. Gebert answered 2-3, most were projects with a significant amount of grant funds. Mayor Haakenson clarified sidewalk were not being built all over the city. Mayor Haakenson pointed out the priority was walkway projects that provided access to schools. With regard to the promise made 14 years ago to Mr. Farmer's niece, Mayor Haakenson apologized that none of the current Council was in office and staff had been unable to find any evidence regarding that promise. Mayor Haakenson noted there were sidewalk projects underway that had grant funding; this project did not have any grant funding and it was unlikely it would qualify for grant funding. He asked if this project would be at the top of the list if funding existed. Mr. Gebert answered yes. Counciimember Moore pointed out Item H on the Consent Agenda was a resolution supporting Edmonds seeking State Legislative action to address funding for municipal transportation infrastructure. Mayor Haakenson recalled the Speaker of the House blocked the Street Utility tax every time it came to a vote last year. Councilmember Wilson suggested discussion regarding interim solutions to address this issue be scheduled on the September work meeting agenda prior to the budget process. Council President Plunkett scheduled the matter for the September 28 Council meeting. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT PLUNKETT OPPOSED. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Jennifer Mantooth, 7220 North Meadowdale Road, Edmonds, encouraged the Council not to use acronyms during their discussions as many audience members were unfamiliar with them. Building David Dwyer, 18709 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, voiced his support for increasing the height of Heights the first floor retail but not for increasing overall building heights. He commented increasing the height limits would hurt the small town appeal as well as residents whose views would be impacted. His grandparents' view of the ferry was eliminated and now their view of the Olympics was being obliterated by a new condominium building. He encouraged the Council when making a decision regarding Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 15 increasing building heights in the downtown area to remember that the City's small town character, locally owned stores and neighborly people was a function of building heights. orting Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, asked who residents should call to report suspected Sus picious terrorist activity, explaining there was no Homeland Security in Snohomish County. He relayed the ctivi experience of someone who observed a blimp flying over the city displaying the word Sanyo and the person's inability to get a number for Homeland Security from a 911 operator or directory assistance. Upon finding a number for Homeland Security in Seattle, they found only the opportunity to leave a message was available. This person then called the FBI and reached a person who took the information. He summarized there was no way to report suspicious activity in a timely manner in Snohomish County. He suggested the City be an activist in addressing this issue. Police Chief Stern advised the public had two options, calling 911 and the SnoCom dispatch should take the information; the second option was the FBI's 24-hour terrorism hotline in their Seattle office. Mayor Haakenson requested Mr. Hertrich have whomever relayed this story to him contact Chief Stern regarding the response he received from SnoCom. 6. MAYOR'S COMMENTS 5 Tuesday Mayor Haakenson provided a reminder that the fifth Tuesday, August 31, was the Community Outreach Community Meeting in Council Chambers where the public could speak with the Council regarding any issues. He Outreach Meeting noted the Council was seeking input on what type of businesses they would like to see in Edmonds — in downtown, on Hwy. 99, in Westgate, or in Perrinville as the City was interested in seeking out those businesses. 7. COUNCIL COMMENTS Council President Plunkett advised Councilmember Wilson offered to provide a draft agenda memo for the Council for the September 28 work session. Council President Plunkett advised he would be driving his daughter to Boston beginning this weekend; therefore, for the meetings of August 10 and 17, any items for the agenda or discussion regarding the agenda should be directed to Council President Pro Tem Dawson. Councilmember Dawson announced Edmonds Night Out on Thursday, August 5 and wished her husband a Happy Birthday on August 5. With no further business, the Council meeting. was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. G H ENSON, MAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes August 3, 2004 Page 16 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex 250 5' Avenue North 7:00 - 10:00 p.m. AUGUST 3, 2004 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 July 27, 2004. (C) Approval of claim checks #72867 through #73032 for the week of July 26, 2004, in the amount of $367,840.06.* *Claim checks may be viewed electronically at www.ci.edmonds.wa.us. (D) Final approval of a 26 lot Formal Plat using the ECDC provisions for a Townhouse Subdivision. The project will be recorded as Viking Heights. (Applicant: Viking Homes / File No. P-2003-66). (E) Approval of Findings of Fact regarding a closed record review held on July 6, 2004 of an appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision to approve the Public Facilities District's request for a Conditional Use Permit for a Master Plan for the old Edmonds High School site. (Appellant: Natalie Shippen / File Nos. ADB- 04-01, CU-04-2, and AP-04-74) (F) Mid -Year, 2004 Budget Status Report. (G) Authorization to sign a statewide Public Works Emergency Response/Mutual Aid Agreement. (H) Proposed Resolution supporting Edmonds seeking state legislative action to address funding for municipal transportation infrastructure. 3. (15 Min.) Update on the Edmonds Center for the Arts by the Edmonds Public Facilities District Board. 4. (60 Min.) Public Hearing on neighborhood safety concerns and request for stop sign at 76th Avenue West and Meadowdale Beach Road, and potential Council action. 1 Page 1 of 2 1 CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA August 3, 2004 Page 2 of 2 5. Audience Comments (3 Minute Limit Per Person)* 'Regarding matters not listed as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings. 6. (15 Min.) Discussion and adoption of City of Edmonds Mission, Vision, Values and 2004 Strategic Plan. 7. ( 5 Min.) Mayor's Comments 8. (15 Min.) Council Comments ADJOURN °arking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at (425) 771-024,' vith 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations. The Council Agenda as well as a delayed telecast o, he meeting appears on cable television Government Access Channel 21.