Loading...
11/16/1999 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES NOVEMBER 16, 1999 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Barbara Fahey in the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main Street, followed by the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Barbara Fahey, Mayor Thomas A. Miller, Council President Gary Haakenson, Councilmember Dave Earling, Councilmember John Nordquist, Councilmember Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Jim White, Councilmember Dick Van Hollebeke, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Christie Lee, Student Representative 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA STAFF PRESENT Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief Greg Wean, Assistant Police Chief Ray Miller, Development Services Director Peggy Hetzler, Administrative Services Director Rob Chave, Planning Manager Noel Miller, Public Works Director James Walker, City Engineer Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Director Debbie Dawson, Animal Control /Code Enfor. Michael Karber, City Attorney Sandy Chase, City Clerk Jeannie Dines, Recorder Mayor Fahey requested the addition to the Agenda of a discussion item on the City approach to reduce Local Improvement District (LID) 215 and LID 216 assessments if actual costs are below final assessments. Change to COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO Benda ADD A DISCUSSION ON THE CITY APPROACH TO REDUCE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) 215 AND LID 216 ASSESSMENTS IF ACTUAL COST$ ARE BELOW FINAL ASSESSMENTS TO THE AGENDA AS ITEM 7A. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, FOR APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Councilmember Haakenson requested Items B and C be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER, FOR APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED. The agenda items approved are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 1 17� prove (D) APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #35898 THROUGH #37307 FOR THE WEEK OF in, I NOVEMBER 8,1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $385,633.96 rrants nville (E) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE LID Sanitary PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CHS ENGINEERS, INC. FOR Sewer PERRINVILLE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) SANITARY SEWER mprove. IMPROVEMENTS DESIGN PROJECT 8'" Ave. W/ (I REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 78TH AVENUE WEST / 212TH 212" St. SW STREET SW CROSSWALK LIGHTING PROJECT AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF Crosswalk PROJECT WWTP umace (G) REPORT ON QUOTES RECEIVED FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF SHOP FURNACE AT TREATMENT PLANT AND AWARD TO LODESTAR COMPANY, INC. ($5,982, Not Including Sales Tax) Item B: Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of November 6 1999 COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO REVISE THE NOVEMBER 6 MINUTES TO REFLECT THAT COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST WAS ABSENT. MOTION CARRIED. pprove 11/6/99 COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER, Minutes as Corrected TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 6, 1999 AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON ABSTAINED. (Councilmember Haakenson abstained due to his absence from the November 6 meeting.) Item C• Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of November 9,, 1999 Councilmember Haakenson advised he was absent from the November 9 meeting and would abstain from the vote. Council President Miller requested the November 9 minutes reflect the statement he made at the meeting that Councilmember Earling's absence was due to his speaking at a State Transportation meeting in Yakima, Councilmember Haakenson's absence was due to a pre - planned vacation, and Councilmember Approve White's late arrival was due to his attending a, family function. 11/9/99 Minutes as COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN Corrected HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 9 AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBERS HAAHENSON AND EARLING ABSTAINED. Hearing 3. ANNUAL REPORT FROM HEARING EXAMINER RONALD McCONNELL Examiner Annual Ronald McConnell, Hearing Examiner, reported the number of cases he prepared this year has Report increased dramatically and may reach as many as 83. The average number of cases he has prepared over the past three years has been 45 -49. He commented more difficult properties are being developed which results in more complex cases. He, noted there have also been more appeals and requests for reconsideration this year. Councilmember Van Hollebeke asked why there have been more appeals and requests for reconsideration. Mr. McConnell answered a number of the appeals have been SEPA appeals where staff Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 2 has made a Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance (MDNS) and the neighbors want a full EIS. He reiterated many cases are somewhat complex due to issues such as view blockage and the development of sensitive areas. Councilmember' Van Hollebeke referred to a recent situation presented to the Council regarding timing of an appeal and the process of notification. He ,asked Mr. McConnell if there were more effective /timely methods of notifying parties of the Hearing Examiner's decision and for clarifying the timeline for an appeal. Mr. McConnell answered some jurisdictions have a date specific written on the appeal report which may resolve some confusion. Councilmember Van Hollebeke requested Mr. McConnell provide information regarding what other jurisdictions in the area do and make suggestions for improving communication. Mayor Fahey expressed her appreciation to Mr. McConnell for the service he provided to the City during the past year. She advised that Mr. McConnell's request to increase the retainer from $2,835 per month to $3,120 to compensate for the anticipated increase in the caseload has been included in the 2000 proposed budget. She advised Mr. McConnell is under contract with the City for the next three years and he has indicated his desire and ability to continue. Mayor Fahey expressed her appreciation for his knowledge of the City's codes and the competency of his reports. Public 4. PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO EDMONDS COMMUNITY Hearing— DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 0.35 ANIMALS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS PUBLIC ECDC HEARING IS TO GATHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CITY'S LAND USE REGULATIONS Chapter 17.35, GOVERNING ANIMALS. LAND USE REGULATIONS DETERMINE HOW MANY ANIMAL S Animals MAY BE KEPT IN EACH ZONING CLASSIFICATION. THESE REGULATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED FOR MANY YEARS, AND PUBLIC COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE CITY IN RECENT YEARS CONCERNING SOME TYPES OF ANIMALS (E.G. HORSES, CHICKENS) KEPT IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. Mayor Fahey asked if any Councilmember felt they would be unable to participate in the process. There were no disclosures made by any Councilmember. Mayor Fahey asked if any member of the audience . objected to the participation of any Councilmember. There were no objections voiced. Mayor Fahey described the process for the hearing, indicating each member of the public would be given three minutes to speak. Planning Manager Rob Chave explained a citywide mailing had been done to explain and advertise the public hearing. He said the focus of the public hearing was on the land use aspects of the animal regulations. Although the Edmonds City Code (ECC) also contains provisions, formerly known as the ,animal control regulations, pertaining to how animals are kept on property, the land use aspects of the animal regulations addresses the types of animals and the number. The revisions to the land use code that were advertised were the minimum changes the Council wanted to have considered but the intent was to ensure the public had an opportunity to address any of the possible changes being considered. For example, one of the significant changes being considered in the draft is that the keeping of horses would be permitted, grandfathered in, but once that animal died or was removed from the property, that use must cease. The Council is particularly interested in input regarding this provision as another option would be to allow horses or other hoofed animals to be kept indefinitely as long as the land use was established and grandfathered. ,Mr. Chave explained the other significant change to the existing land use provisions is with poultry, which are currently not permitted. They have been considered to be grandfathered in if they existed prior Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 3 to the placement of the prohibition in the land use code. For example, if the use of chickens had been established on a property under Snohomish County regulations and that use continued, the property owner would still be allowed to keep chickens. The draft revisions circulated via the citywide mailer addresses chickens the same as horses; if a grandfathered use existed, it would be allowed to continue as long as those animals remained on the property. 'If a chicken was removed or died, it could not be replaced. He acknowledged. this created interesting enforcement challenges. Mr. Chave advised there was no change proposed in the number of small domesticated animals (dogs, cats, rabbits, etc.) that can be kept, that number remained at three. He said a number of technical /defmitional.changes were also proposed to clarify categories certain animals were in. Councilmember White asked who developed the proposed land use regulations. Mr. Chave answered at the Council's last work session, two drafts were considered, one developed by the Planning Board and one as a result of discussion at the Community Services Committee. At the conclusion of those discussions, it was decided a nearly status quo regarding small domestic animals would be advertised for this public hearing. He said one of the options explored by the Planning Board was expanding the number of small domestic animals allowed to five. Mr. Chave advised that City Attorney Michael Karber had been involved in the drafting of the ordinances and has been involved in discussions with the Police Department and Animal Control regarding their regulations as they relate to the land use code.. City Attorney Michael Karber explained the current code allows three small domesticated animals. A change is proposed to increase the number of small domesticated animals allowed in a multifamily zone from one to three. The rationale for the change. was it was not appropriate to differentiate between multifamily and single family regarding the keeping of small domesticated animals. Mr. Chave said the change also recognizes that most multifamily situations have their own restrictions on pets. Councilmember White did not recall the Council taking a position on the number of small domesticated animals. Mr. Chave agreed this was not the Council's draft; the intent was to seek testimony regarding the issues. Councilmember Haakenson asked if sheep were considered covered animals. Mr. Chave answered yes. He referred to the definition of a covered animal, "hoofed animals usually found on farms including but not limited to horses, ponies, mules, donkeys, bovine animals, sheep, goats, lama and/or swine including pot bellied pigs." He read the definition of small domesticated animals, "animals commonly and normally kept or owned in association with a residential unit. Small domesticated animals.include dogs, cats, rabbits, other similar domesticated animals. Small domesticated animals shall not include poultry or covered animals." Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. Hank Krist, 3 Park Place, Edmonds, said the draft indicated the Council had declared the City a developed urban community, primarily of residential character. With that definition in mind and the current regulations, he encouraged the City to enforce the current laws and prohibit the keeping of all poultry, as the keeping of poultry was more consistent with a farm rather than an urban community. If the City was not willing to prohibit the keeping of all poultry, he recommended further consideration be given to paragraph b of Section 17.35.040 which reads, "in the event that the covered animal or poultry dies or is removed or absent from the premises for a continuous period ' of more than 180 days, the continued keeping of that animal or of a new or replacement animal shall not be permitted. He said this Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 4 section presented enforcement difficulties due to the difficulty in determining when a chicken was replaced. He suggested a resident keeping poultry register the number of poultry with the City and a date 1 -2 years in the future be determined when all poultry would be prohibited in the City. He pointed out the draft did not include a limit on the number of poultry although the number of cats and dogs were limited to three. He felt it was appropriate to also limit poultry to three. He said the limit of three cats /dogs was too low and many families are violating the current regulations. He said horses seem to be well regulated now and did not see a need to change those regulations. Sandra Avanessian, 20505 Maplewood Drive, Edmonds, spoke in opposition to the portion of the draft that prohibited replacement of an animal that died, stating this would deprive her of her constitutional right to enjoy her property. The purpose of the ordinance according to the proposed language was to resolve conflict between the keeping of animals, of various types and the quiet use and enjoyment of property and to establish a balance between the rights of animal owners and other residents of the City. She questioned the use of the word "quiet" as toys, cars and tools are often noisier than animals. She said the City may enact zoning regulations for the public health, safety and welfare, but they must be aimed at achieving a legitimate public interest, be reasonably necessary to achieve that purpose, and not be unduly oppressive to the landowner. She said the ordinance is not the only reasonable method to protect against conflicts and the use and enjoyment of property as the same can be achieved through lot size, etc. She pointed out Seattle does not ban horses or cows in residential neighborhoods but limits lot size and number of animals. She said Bellevue allows horses on some of the most valuable real estate in the city. She said her family purchased their property in 1949 with the expectation of keeping horses as they have done continuously. The lot is sufficiently large and she felt banning a previous use was unduly oppressive. She did not wish to develop her property as she enjoyed the open space and neighbors are likely glad she is preserving the open .space. As the owner and taxpayer of the property, she expected the City to protect her quiet use and enjoyment of her property. Glenn Loboudger, 15920 72M Avenue W, Edmonds, described the loss of a lamb as a result of an attack by two neighborhood rogue dogs. The regulations as proposed would not allow them to replace the lamb. He said they have adequate land for the sheep they have kept on their property for 28 years. He commented people who visited the lambs as children are returning with their children. He recommended the Council allow replacement of a covered animal. Christine Landerholm, 723 Melody Lane, Edmonds, requested the Council respect the right of property owners to determine how their land will be used. She urged the Council to be forward - thinking about the preservation of historic land use, particularly the lot at the end of Melody Lane. She said there are two horses there who do no harm, do not contribute to any noise or air pollution, do not create odors, pose no danger of disease transmission and are a use compatible with residential land use. She felt the horses were beneficial as they contributed to a very unique, pastoral, serene setting in their neighborhood. The proposed land size of 20,000 square feet per animal is sufficient to support adequate waste disposal. The vegetation surrounding the pastureland at Melody Lane is sufficient to prevent run- off and protect Shell Creek. Sarah Landerholm, 723 Melody Lane, Edmonds, who lives next to the horses owned by Ashley Previs and her family, said she likes to visit, ride, feed and groom the horses. She said the horses do not smell bad and do not attract flies. She questioned how anyone could not like the horses and hoped there were no changes made in the law that make owning a horse harder because she wanted to own a horse. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 5 Judy Cody, 9406 216"' Street SW, Edmonds, said limiting each household to three pets was not the solution to animal control. She said the law penalizes responsible pet owners who are able to care for more than three pets and whose pets have not been nuisances. She said there are not enough good homes for all the pets who need them and if some families can accommodate more, they should be allowed to do so. She said in recent years she has encountered more and more lost/abandoned pets. She said the responsibility of finding new homes for lost/abandoned pets was previously done by PAWS but the City has recently contracted with Adix who may not have the same agenda as PAWS. She said license tags were a useless means of tracking citizens' pets and recommended the City contract with local veterinarians to insert chips in all pets via a one -time registration. She also recommended all pets be required to be spayed or neutered. Dayne Richard, 802 Main Street, Edmonds, said he often visits the horses owned by Katie and Ashley Previs. He said the horses could not be a nuisance because they are loving, nice and calm. He questioned why anyone would want the horses to leave. He liked the horses even though they were not his and urged the Council to think about how Ashley and Katie Previs feel about them. He recommended the horses be allowed to stay. Koorash Mansourzadeh, 906 Hindley Lane, Edmonds, said the Previs' horses feel safe on Melody Lane. He said Mrs. Previs has had the horses since she was 12 and questioned why anyone would want to ban horses from Edmonds. He urged the Council not to have horses removed from the City. Derek Huff, 810 Hindley Lane, Edmonds, who lives near the horses, said the horses are a big part of his life. He said it would be a mistake to get rid of the horses as many people enjoy them. If the horses are removed, many people will be disappointed and it would be very sad. He urged the Council to consider the number of people who do not want the horses removed. Arya Mansourzadeh, 906 Hindley Lane, Edmonds, said when he saw the Previs' horses, he knew that Ashley, Loren and Mr. and Mrs. Previs took good care of them. He liked Edmonds because people can keep horses, lamas and other farm animals. He said it would also. be sad if the Previs' horses were removed. He said the horses mean a lot to Mrs. Previs as she has had them since she was a teenager. Curtis White, 9123 206th Street SW, Edmonds, said the proposed animal ordinance was too restrictive. He did not think an ordinance for animals should make the rules the same for a downtown condominium and for houses that have %2 acre of land. Although it may not be appropriate for a person living in a downtown condominium to have two dogs and two cats, it may be appropriate for a person living on a acre of land. This also applied to horses, goats, lamas, cows, chickens or turkeys, animals that currently live in the City. He said the rule should be that animals cannot harm the neighborhood or disturb neighbors. He said .the rules should not prohibit horses if a resident has adequate space for it. Instead, the rules should make residents responsible for how they impact their neighbors. The proposed ordinance does not give animal owners an opportunity to be responsible. He said Edmonds residents are responsible and will be good neighbors; if not, the animal control officer can address it. Ralph Turner, 8716 Talbot Road, Edmonds, spoke in favor of allowing any property owner to keep any of the animals designated as hoofed animals, bovine, etc. if there are strict regulations and they do not harm anyone. He pointed out the lamb Mr. Loboudger lost was as important to him as a dog. He said it was crucial that children have the opportunity to be around animals and objected to depriving them of that experience. He said the definition of Edmonds' as urban is not an achievement and only results in the City becoming a suburb of Seattle. He felt it was more important to preserve open areas to Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 6 maintain some of Edmonds' charm. He said a calf that numerous children petted at the Monroe State Fair is being raised in Edmonds and has solidified the neighborhood. The calf is now 2000 lbs. but is as affectionate as many dogs. He stressed further restrictions should not be enacted and the charm of Edmonds retained by allowing animals in the City. Katie Previs, 19305 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, said she currently keeps horses on Melody Lane and has had horses here since she was 11 years old, over 30 years. She acknowledged keeping the horses is a difficult commitment but it is very important to the children. They haul the horses to other property to ride and were not asking to be allowed to ride the horses in the City. Under the new ordinance, the horses cannot be replaced or another horse purchased. She stressed her family and her animals are her passion and urged the City not to change the regulations. Ashley Previs, 19305 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, one of the owners of the horses on Melody Lane, said it was a bad idea to ban horses from Edmonds because horses have been in the City for over 50 years. As a small child, she loved to visit the horses and now has her own horse and loves riding with her family. She felt it was good to have horses in the community because people like to watch them and feed them. She thanked the people who supported their keeping the horses. Jacob Greene, 303 Skyline Drive, Edmonds, said horses are similar to other pets as they are peaceful and fun to watch. He felt horses should be allowed to stay in Edmonds and urged the Council to allow the Previs to be allowed to keep their horses. Paige Huff, 810 Hindley Lane, Edmonds, said she understood the City was considering a change in the law that would eventually not allow horses to be kept in Edmonds. She said Katie Previs has kept her horses since she was 11 years old and loves them and takes great care of them. She said many people on their street visit and feed the horses. As she has always wanted to own a horse, it is nice to help care for them. She said all horses should be allowed to remain in Edmonds. She compared this matter to voting and the need to consider the majority of votes, which in this instance were in favor of the horses. She said most people want the horses to stay and encouraged the City to consider letting the horses stay. Diana Reed, 704 Melody Lane, Edmonds, said when she first purchased her house in 1967, there were horses, quail, pheasant, nesting Bald Eagles, possums, etc. and it was a wonderful place to raise her daughter. When she returned to the house in 1997, she was delighted to find there were still horses, that the community had grown with more children and Edmonds had not become a suburban community filled with strangers. She said the charm of Edmonds includes the community. She recalled when horses could be ridden in the City and other animals that were kept at businesses in the City. She said the horses are well cared for and add a dimension to the area. She hoped an ordinance would not dictate how landowners could use their property as long as the peace and quiet of the neighborhood was not disturbed. She acknowledged one neighbor in their area -wanted some changes made but now felt the issues that concerned him had been resolved. Tim Crosby, 1028 7th Avenue S, Edmonds, said they have a lot of cats in their neighborhood, many who use their sandbox and their vegetable garden as a litter box. In addition, they have witnessed cats killing birds, causing them to remove their birdfeeder. He referred to health concerns from cat waste. As cats are not licensed and allowed to roam free, he questioned whether they were considered domestic animals or wild animals. He said cats already have cost them money (covers for their sandbox) and an Edmonds Animal Control Officer recently informed him that 75% of their time is spent dealing with cats but there is no revenue from cat licenses. He was told he could purchase a cat trap and Animal Control Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16; 1999 Page 7 would remove the animal, another cost to him and to the City. He questioned what he could do about cats and whether the expenditure on cats was fiscally responsible for the City. Scott Forslund, 20314 84" Place W, Edmonds, said his issue was not about the Previs' horses, it was with the definition of Edmonds as urban residential and the idea that that definition should be promoted and protected. He referred to other areas that are urban residential, each with their own character, and questioned if that was what residents wanted Edmonds to become. He agreed with the .City regulating public properties or improper impacts on public property by private individuals but felt the proposed regulations were bad public policy, may be unconstitutional, were a horrible vision of what the City could still be, and sent a bad message to children about what is important. He urged the City to abandon . the proposed regulations. Jim Adix, 21100 72nd Avenue W, Edmonds, urged the Council not to adopt the new proposal, observing animals mean different things to different people and are a part of everyone's lives. He said they deal with 50 -60 dogs and cats each day that are boarded by their owners. Although the City is urban, it can still have a bit of rural life. He described feeding 100 -300 ducks that visit his property each morning and evening. He encouraged the City to allow residents to keep horses or whatever animal they want. He said many of their customers currently have more than three animals. Mayor Fahey asked Mr. Adix to comment on the keeping of fowl. Mr. Adix said there was no reason why a resident should not keep chickens or other animals. He said children enjoy animals and he did not want the animals to be forced to leave Edmonds. Lynn Adix, 21100 72nd Avenue W, Edmonds, pointed out irresponsible pet ownership was the real issue. She said the existing Animal Control works well in Edmonds and.. residents should use it. She stated people should be required to keep their pets in a responsible manner rather than prohibiting the animal. Alvin Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, said there has been a small increase in animals in the City. He pointed out the City lacked land management standards. Due to potential controversy over whatever alternative is ultimately selected, he urged the Council to base their decision on hard data not opinions and judgment. Elaine Yard, 9209 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, said for many years they have enjoyed both wildlife and domestic animals. She pointed out unfortunate events occur in children's lives and said pets help children occupy their interest and take their focus off those unfortunate events. She urged the Council to remember that everyone has different "likes;" they like Edmonds which is now a small urban town. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, said property owners should have the right to do as they wish on their property as long as it does not constitute a nuisance, health, or safety problem to other citizens. He said the proposed ordinance was a prohibition based on the fact the Edmonds is an urban town. He suggested no animals be prohibited but rather the City strictly enforce nuisance clauses, possibly revising the nuisance clauses to improve enforcement. He agreed the keeping of animals or fowl depended on the property size but said the existing regulations address that issue. Lars Olsen, c/o 561 Pine, Edmonds, found the ordinance to be quite unusual as the ordinance did not regulate horses but referred to them as covered animals. The ordinance did not indicate dogs or cats, they were referred to as small domesticated animals and the ordinance referred to a house as a residential Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 8 dwelling unit. He said the ordinance was couched in definitions. He referred to the Constitution, Bill of Rights and the pursuit of happiness and questioned the Council's authority to regulate private property. If the Council regulated animals in this way, he hoped the people would start a recall petition and remove Councilmembers from office. He recommended the City.not meddle in private affairs and regulate only the corporate affairs of the City. Kevin Clarke, 23924 107 " Place W, Edmonds, pointed out multifamily development is permitted in the BC zone and recommended animal regulations for that zone be considered. He cautioned the City on limiting the number of animals as well as enacting a grandfather clause, pointing out many horses are maintained better than some dogs. He stressed the way animals are cared for is more important than the number or type. He said it was inappropriate to limit pot bellied pigs as many are kept as indoor pets and are nearly as common as dogs. He explained the City is made up of areas previously part of unincorporated, Snohomish County and people moved to those areas because they were semi - rural. He said grandfathering would not be effective even over 20 years and residents should be allowed to keep their animals particularly on larger lots. Carol Hahn, 1031 2" Ave S; Edmonds, said they have always had cats and dogs, and previously had pigs, goats, chickens, ducks, cows, etc. She said children should not have to go to a zoo to see a cow, horse, goat or pig. These animals can live comfortably on numerous lots in Edmonds and should not be restricted to residents who have had them previously. She pointed out there is room for animals on her '/2+ acre property and someone purchasing the property should be allowed to have the animals they are able to maintain. She urged the City to regulate how animals are cared for and not the number and type. Hearing no further comment, Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. She explained the proposed changes were developed as a result of citizen requests, She observed the people who originated many of the proposals and spoke to the Planning Board about them were not present to provide their point of view. She stressed the Council was not necessarily interested in changing the character of Edmonds but were only responding to concerns. She thanked citizens for speaking about the quality of life they would like maintained in Edmonds and thanked the children who participated in the process. She clarified staff is seeking guidance from the Council regarding the proposed amendments. Councilmember White said the purpose of the public hearing was to receive public comment on the public's view and observed the public had clearly indicated their views. He said the ordinance is proposed as a zoning ordinance under the Edmonds Community Development Code, a premise that is erroneous. He objected to the purpose as stated in the ordinance that "the City Council finds and declares the City of Edmonds is a developed urban community of primarily residential character." He observed the issue before the Council is whether Edmonds should "take the first step on a slippery slope" by adopting a zoning ordinance that states in Edmonds certain things cannot be done with property. He said this represented an intrusion into people's fundamental rights to do with their property what they chose. He acknowledged there are limits on what one can do with their property. He said the,question is whether the Council should intrude on the lives of citizens and indicate they do not accept citizens' ability to be responsible citizens and regulate themselves regarding the keeping of animals and preempt their right to even try by passing an ordinance. He pointed out Edmonds City Code (ECC) Section 5.05 defines ,the parameters under which an animal in the City must be kept and is the only ordinance that should govern this issue. He recommended the focus be on regulating the nuisance or impact of keeping animals on neighbors. If a resident allows their animals to become a nuisance, Section 5.05 of ECC Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes .November 16, 1999 Page 9 addresses it. He recommended staff be directed to eliminate the proposed .ordinance and consider Section 5.05 of ECC, expanding if necessary what is allowed and how it is allowed. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said the reason this issue was so concerning to him was because it has been one of the most repetitive items before the Council, during his four year term. as well as has been reviewed by the Planning Board and staff for countless hours. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said he was not opposed to animals and agreed the concept of grandfathering may not be appropriate. His concern was how to protect residents' property rights as well as their right to a peaceful and tranquil life. He said a rooster crowing in the early morning hours or a dog barking incessantly did not represent his idea of peaceful surroundings. He recalled residents arguing that their rights were being. trampled or their freedom being squelched. Although many feel Animal Control should be able to address this issue, Animal Control is one of many items considered for elimination due to funding cuts as a result of I -695. He agreed with Councilmember White's comments and welcomed suggestions so this item could be resolved to the satisfaction of the majority of residents. Councilmember Haakenson said before the public hearing, the idea of disallowing the replacement of a horse that died was ludicrous to him and nothing he heard this evening changed that opinion other than expanding that belief to any covered animal. He referred to an option provided by staff, "horses would still be permitted in single family zones, but only the specific animals that are there now. The land use would be discontinued when the current animals died or were removed from the property. Another option would be to allow any existing horse land uses to continue so long as any horse is kept on the property (i.e. not limit the use to the existing animals, so that existing horse pastures could be continued indefinitely)." He recommended this option be used to include all covered animals, not just horses. He agreed with Mr. Turner's comments regarding the calf that children and adults in the neighborhood watched grow and supported having the calf replaced if necessary. However, the proposed ordinance would not allow replacement. Councilmember White disagreed with the direction Councilmember Haakenson recommended staff take as it continues to tell property owners what they can and cannot do with their property regardless of the size of their property and regardless of the impacts on the neighborhood. He pointed out if someone chose to move into the City and demolished an adjacent house so they would have adequate space for a cow, horse or goat, that would be prohibited by the City's ordinances. Further, the City's ordinances would prohibit the addition of arhorse in the future on a property where a horse does not currently exist. He stressed the creation of a zoning ordinance overstepped what the Council should be considering as this is not a zoning issue but a health and safety issue. Councilmember Haakenson agreed with Councilmember, White's comments and assumed if the property was of a large enough size that, a horse or covered animal would be allowed, it should be allowed whether it was grandfathered or not. Council President Miller shared Councilmember White's concerns and viewed this issue as one of property rights and responsible pet ownership. He recommended the first sentence of 17.35.010 be deleted (The City Council finds and declares that the City of Edmonds is a developed urban community of primarily residential character) and the language in Section 17.35.030 deleted to allow any number of domesticated animals. He said the size of property would determine the number of animals. Regarding the keeping of poultry, he preferred poultry not be permitted. Regarding covered animals, he recommended the last sentence of Section B be deleted (In the event the covered animal or poultry dies or is removed or absent from the premises for a continuous period of more than 180 days, the continued Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 10 keeping of that animal or of a new or replacement animal shall not be permitted.). Council President Miller said he did not favor chickens in a residential area and if anything were limited to three, it should be the chickens. Councilmember White disagreed with Council President Miller, stating there was no difference between the keeping of a chicken, horse, or cow, it was still government telling people what they -can and cannot do with their property. If the chicken, horse, cow, or dog created a nuisance and interfered with the neighbor's right to enjoy his/her property, that should be regulated. He stressed there was no basis to presume the keeping of a chicken would necessarily lead to an offensive interaction with neighbors or have negative effects on the neighbor's property. Council President Miller agreed if the chickens are kept in an area that did not disturb their neighbors but said a number of residents contacted him pointing out the difficulties chickens cause. He said fundamentally he agreed this was an issue of property rights. Councilmember Earling struggled with the issue of someone purchasing a house near a pasture containing an animal and. knowing that animal exists, versus someone purchasing a home, in a neighborhood that does not currently have horses and a horse is later added to the neighborhood, thereby changing the character of a neighborhood. He agreed with Council President Miller's comments regarding the keeping of poultry. He believed fundamentally in private property rights, commenting people have the right to keep animals on their property but people without animals have the right to quiet enjoyment of their property. He said the question is how to police the problem. Councilmember White said it would be appropriate to return this issue to the Planning Board who originally reviewed the ordinance and presented a significantly revised ordinance without input from the Council. Council President Miller disagreed with returning this issue to the Planning Board and suggested it be returned to Council Committee. Councilmember White noted this issue had been reviewed by both the Community Services/Development Services and the Public Safety committees. Council President Miller said he would pursue the matter with the Chair of the appropriate Council Committees. As there was no more discussion regarding this matter, Mayor Fahey declared a brief recess. Upon reconvening, Mayor Fahey advised that during the recess the City Attorney recommended the discussion on the City approach to reduce Local Improvement District (LID) 215 and LID 216 assessments be moved from Item 7A to Item 4A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO MOVED ITEM 7A TO ITEM 4A. MOTION CARRIED. LID 215 and 4A. DISCUSSION ON THE CITY APPROACH TO REDUCE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT LID 216 (LM) 215 AND LID 216 ASSESSMENTS IF ACTUAL COSTS ARE BELOW FINAL ssessments ASSESSMENTS City Engineer Jim Walker explained with the passage of I -695, the City's bond counsel recommended the City close the LIDs prior to doing the project, using best estimates, placing contingencies and establishing the dollar cost at this time. He said the disadvantage is this action locks the price in place and presents some risk to the City although it is believed to be a minor risk as there is sufficient contingency to cover any unexpected events. It was more likely that the entire amount anticipated to be received from residents participating in the LID would not need to be spent. Staff recommends the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 11 I Council inform the residents participating in the LIDS that it was the City's intent to reduce the assessment if costs are lower than established by the final assessment roll. He advised the bond counsel also recommended a Guarantee Fund be established which may save money by making thq bonds more favorable to the market. Councilmember Haakenson questioned the word, "significantly" in the recommended action, "Council moves to express its intent to reduce the assessments proportionately if the actual LID costs for LID 215 and LID 216 come in significantly lower than estimated." City Attorney Karber advised the reason significantly was included was because if the amount was only slightly lower, the administrative costs of determining the proportional reduction in the assessment may not equate to the reduction. Mr. Walker, agreed bond counsel's recommendation was that if the cost was a minor amount, $20 -$30 per resident, more money may be spent processing the reduction. Although it will be a Council decision, staff recommends refunding any significant amounts. COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON, FOR THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR THE COUNCIL TO EXPRESS ITS INTENT TO REDUCE THE ASSESSMENTS PROPORTIONATELY IF THE ACTUAL LID COSTS FOR LID 215 AND LID 216 COME IN SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER THAN ESTIMATED. MOTION CARRIED. Public 5. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2000 BUDGET Hearing on 2000 Budget Administrative Services Director Peggy Hetzler displayed the General Fund revenues /expenditure forecast trend presented to the Council on November 1 illustrating beginning cash of $1.2 million, projected revenues of $21.7 million, expenditures of $22.5 million resulting in an excess of expenditures over revenues of $741,000 leaving an ending cash balance in the General Fund of $476,000. She referred to the revised budget presented following the. passage of I -695 illustrating the decline in revenues due to lost MVET and Sales Tax Equalization funding and not including any new revenue sources or increase in property taxes, and only a modest cost of living increase associated with existing revenue sources. The revised expenditures budget of $20.3 million resulted in an elimination of $2.2 million in expenditures that were originally requested. A significant amount of the reduction was proposed staff reductions. The revised budget included a similar deficiency between expenditures and revenues of approximately $783,000 and an ending cash balance of $434,000. Ms. Hetzler reviewed an itemization of input received from the November 6. Council budget workshop when the Council was presented each department's itemized list of reductions including staff eliminations that would be accomplished via layoffs or the elimination of vacant positions. During the presentations, Council gave direction to proceed with identifying the amount of revenue associated with a 3% property tax increase, a utility tax on the sewer utility, reallocating the existing telephone utility tax from the emergency reserve fund to the General Fund, and calculating the excess in the Emergency Reserve fund that might be available for funding in -2000. The combined total of those revenue sources and the transfer from the Emergency Reserve was $793,500. The Council also directed staff to determine the amount of additional revenue to 1) avoid layoffs in 2000 (approximately $566,000), 2) restore all Public Safety positions including vacant and support positions ($631,000), 3) put in place the Fire Battalion Chief positions ($211,000), 4) restore funding to the Senior Center, Alliance and the downtown flower program ($115,000), 5) increase the Council Contingency, .Fund ($100,000), 6) maintain current service levels ($2,172,230) and 7) maintain current staffing levels ($971,340). Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 12 Ms. Hetzler explained the City's General Fund Emergency Reserve Fund and Council Contingency fund, which will have a combined balance of approximately $2.5 million at the beginning of 2000. She said the City's unwritten policy has been to maintain at least 5% of the General Fund Operating Budget in the' form of emergency reserves. Assuming the budget is $21 million, the required reserves to maintain the '56/o reserve is $1,050,000. Thus there would be approximately $453,000 available for reprogramming into the General Fund. She said the previous overhead identified a slightly smaller transfer from the Emergency Reserve Fund, however, as much as $453,000 would be available from the Emergency Reserve if the Council chose to use those funds. Ms. Hetzler reviewed revenues that are available to the City, explaining the impact of a 1% property tax increase on the median home value in the City of $235,000 would be $5, at 6% the impact would be approximately $31. As the Council approved a 3% property tax increase in 1999 rather than the maximum 6 %, the City has the legal capacity to recapture that property tax funding. She illustrated revenues that can be generated via utility taxes, noting the only utility tax available to the City is on its own internal sewer utility as a tax on a private utility requires a 60 -day notice period before a utility tax can be imposed. She explained an annual business license excise tax of $50 would generate $82,000 and an annual business excise tax of $100 would generate approximately $165,000. She displayed revenues associated with transport fees, noting the City is not currently able to impose those. Revenue from the telephone utility tax has been dedicated to the Emergency Reserve fund in the past but the Council may wish to consider reallocating these funds to the General Fund. An increase in permitting fees will be presented to the Council by the Planning Department at a future meeting. Ms. Hetzler explained approximately $1 million of the $2.2 million in budget reductions submitted by each department to offset reductions in revenue, represented staff reductions. She displayed the total dollar cost of employees that would have to be laid off ($566,000) and the vacant positions that could be eliminated ($405,000) totaling $970,000 in staff reductions. She said that amount did not include the elimination of the Battalion Chiefs which brought the total staff reductions to well over $1 million. Councilmember Van Hollebeke clarified the 1 -6% property tax increase did not represent a 1 -6% increase to a resident's entire property tax, it was restricted to only the City's portion of the property tax. Ms. Hetzler said the City's portion of the existing property tax on a house with a median value of $235,000 was approximately $519. Ms. Hetzler explained funds from a non - resident business license fee, a 3% property tax increase, the utility tax on sewer, reallocation of the telephone utility tax, and a transfer from the Emergency Reserve provides total available resources of $810,000. Based on consensus at the November 15 budget workshop, she developed costs associated with the Council's priority for funding requests. These included the amount to 1) avoid layoffs in 2000 (approximately $566,000), 2) restore funding to the Senior Center, the Alliance and the downtown flower program ($115,000), and 3) restore the Community Services Director position ($104,000), for a .total of $785,000,' leaving $25,300 available for other program usage. Ms. Hetzler recalled another request made at the November 15 budget workshop was the amount necessary to restore the Public Safety vacancies, overtime, and support positions ($251,000): Utilizing the $25,300 available funds, an additional $225,000 would be necessary to accomplish the Public Safety restorations. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 13 Councilmember Plunkett did not recall there had been consensus on the priorities Ms. Hetzler presented. Ms. Hetzler acknowledged consensus may not have been the appropriate term, and stated that this scenario was mentioned frequently. Councilmember Haakenson asked if the funds to restore the Community Services Director position was at the high end of the salary range. Mayor Fahey answered the salary was the mid -range plus benefits, professional memberships, etc. for the position. Councilmember Haakenson requested staff provide the range for the position. Ms. Hetzler displayed how new revenues and funding options impacted the budget, resulting in a deficit of $757,000 that can be addressed via the use of beginning cash, ending the year with an ending cash balance of $460,000. She pointed out establishing no new revenue sources and the Legislature not developing a funding substitute for the Sales Tax Equalization will cause the deficit' to grow to $1 million in 2001 and to $2.4 million in 2002. Ms. Hetzler displayed the US Consumer Price Index (CPI) for August — 2.3 %, the Seattle CPI — 2.9% and the implicit price deflator — 1.42 %. Mayor Fahey opened the public participation portion of the public hearing. COUNCILMEMBER WIHTE , MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO EXTEND THIS ITEM FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. . David Orvis, 21118 77�h Place W #103, Edmonds, spoke in defense of the Battalion Chief and other Public Safety positions that have been identified for possible cuts. Although he understood'the budget was tight, he recommended the human toll of the cuts must be considered. He pointed out cuts in Public Safety can have a human toll on the entire populous of the City. He said it was unfair for the Fire Department to be targeted with the largest percentage.cut in the budget. While other departments have been asked to identify cuts of 8 %, the Fire Department was asked to identify cuts of 13 %, much of this due to the elimination of the Battalion Chiefs and laying off a firefighter. He urged the Council to restore funding for these positions. He stressed the importance of the Battalion Chiefs, explaining new federal safety regulations require four firefighters at a scene before they enter a home. Currently, each fire station in the City has three firefighters; a Battalion Chief was added. so that one station would have four firefighters and to enable the four firefighters to serve as the fourth person if another station with only three firefighters were dispatched to a fire. He said cutting funding to the Battalion Chiefs endangered citizens and the safety of firefighters. He also urged the City to 'consider Police positions, commented the City is making use of attrition to cut the Police budget. He recommended a high priority be placed on restoring the two police officers cut from the budget. Councilmember Haakenson asked Mr. Orvis how he proposed to fund the Battalion Chiefs. Mr. Orvis said several funding sources had been identified. Councilmember Haakenson asked if. he supported increasing property taxes to 6 %. Mr. Orvis answered no, and recommended the funding sources identified be prioritized. Councilmember Haakenson observed the $231,000 funding requirement would require a like cut in another area. Mr. Orvis agreed that would be necessary. He stressed the Fire Department's budget was being cut the most, by .13 %. Al Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, advised he submitted two proposals, one for the flower program and one for Yost Pool. He said the Public Safety positions should be restored. He said Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 . Page 14 another public hearing will be held in December when the Council must vote on the property tax increase. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, disagreed with Mr. Orvis' suggestion to add Battalion Chiefs, pointing out employees should not be added while employees are being cut from other departments. He said this was an opportune time to move forward with Fire Department consolidation. He disagreed with the proposal to restore funding to the Senior Center, Alliance and flower program. Although the Senior Center is a deserving facility, he was uncertain of the funding allocated to that purpose. He disagreed with providing $45,000 in funding to the Alliance when those funds could be used for an essential City employee. He said the flower program has been one of Edmonds best advertisements but has been funded and unfunded numerous times in the past based on budget circumstances. He said the flower program could be funded by a business LID for those businesses that profit from the flowers in.the business area. Kevin Clarke, 23924 107" Place W, Edmonds, pointed out 49% of Edmonds voters voted against I- 695, indicating they were willing to continue to pay the current license tab fees. He said it was an easy political position to run for office and say you will not increase taxes because no one wants to increase taxes. He questioned whether those who have taken that position have ever run a business, commenting he knew what it was like to lay off half his office in one day due to budget cuts. He said the property tax bill on a $235,000 house is approximately $2,200 of which nearly 5% goes to the City of Edmonds. A 6% increase is approximately $31, nowhere near 3% of the entire taxes on a $235,000 home. He said if this fact is clearly demonstrated to the public, they will understand their dollars are simply being transferred to the City and they would likely support a 6% increase as well as recapturing the property taxes not levied last year. An increase from 3% to 6% represents $180,000 in revenue to the City but only a $31 increase in property taxes. He said the City was working hard to reallocate resources based on priorities. Mr. Clarke said the people prioritize the budget. As a business owner at 2 °a and Main, he was willing to pay a $100 business tax to maintain his office in Edmonds. He reiterated if the numbers were explained to residents, they would understand what a 3% or 6% increase meant and how it affected their budget. COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE, TO EXTEND DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Katherine Segura, Edmonds, director of the South County Senior Center, explained the funds allocated to the Senior Center are used for services and programs that benefit seniors in the Edmonds community. The services include health enhancement, preventative programs, college classes, a full -time social worker, a five -day a week hot lunch nutrition program, etc. The Senior Center is requesting $38,000 in the 2000 Budget. She stressed the Senior Center provides a vital service to the community. Elaine Yard, 9209 Olympic View Drive, Edmonds, questioned the substantial reduction in the Fire Department budget in view of fires, shooting, landslides, floods, etc. that may occur in the City. She also questioned reducing funding to the Search and Rescue program and Police to benefit the flower program. She questioned the $75,000 funding for the public art project at the fountain roundabout site when funding for public safety is being sacrificed. Mayor Fahey clarified the $75,000 to replace public art in the downtown is a restricted donation from the art festival community to fund that project. She stressed those funds are not public moneys and cannot be used to fund anything else. If a decision is made not to place public art. in the downtown location, the donor retains the $75,000 to use however they wish. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 15 Mayor Fahey closed the public participation portion of the public hearing. In response to Ms. Yard's comments, Councilmember Haakenson said at the November 15 budget workshop, the Council restored police and fire funding in the budget with the exception of two vacant police officers positions, a part-time vacant cadet position, and not replacing a police staff assistant who is retiring. Those positions and -the three Battalion. Chiefs are the only positions not funded in police and fire. Councilmember Earling said although he has been a strict protector of the City's Reserve Fund, he was agreeable to utilizing some of those funds to ensure jobs could be retained in the City for at least another year. He said retaining jobs was a priority the Council should consider because it is a resource that is highly valued. He supported utilizing the $335,000 conservative amount from the'Emergency Reserve to avoid employee layoffs this year. In response to Councilmember Plunkett's comments regarding lack of consensus on budget priorities, Council President Miller said when he summarized the discussion at the November 15 budget discussion, he stated there was consensus on that scenario and did not hear any objection. He, said four of the seven Councilmembers have begun to identify revenue and expenditures that they can agree upon. The next step is to identify the $225,000 necessary to restore the public safety positions. He was unwilling to take additional funds from the Emergency Reserve Fund as utilizing the $335,000 leaves only 5% or approximately two weeks in operating expenses. He was willing to consider restoring the public safety positions via a property tax above 3 %, acknowledging there was consensus for 3% but was not certain there was consensus for 6 %. He requested any changes in classification of positions be delayed to allow the new mayor to do an assessment during his first 90 days to determine whether any classification or personnel changes should be made. Councilmember Van Hollebeke said the three Battalion Chiefs were new positions and not positions that currently exist. Therefore, not instituting the Battalion Chiefs was not reducing the Fire Department budget. He pointed out all budget considerations have been on the premise that no relief whatsoever will come from the State Legislature, assuming the full impact of I -695 ($1.5 million) is the City's responsibility to remedy. He was hopeful this would not be the case and urged citizens to encourage the State Legislators to develop remedies.. Should the State Legislature identify funding, the City could add positions but the Council's responsibility now is to maintain existing positions. He pointed out Edmonds has fewer employees per capita than any other city in the region and already runs "lean and mean." He said the Council had an obligation to its citizens as well as. its employees to maintain existing positions before adding new positions. COUNCILMEMBER EARLING MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCU MEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED. Citizens to Bill Rengstorf, 821 Laurel Way, Edmonds, provided an update from Citizens to Save the Gazebo. He ave the explained since last appearing before the Council, they have placed petitions in over 78 businesses from azcbo Olympic View Drive to Firdale Village and have collected. many complete petitions and spoken to numerous people who want to save the gazebo. He pointed out the gazebo was on the front page of the most recent edition of The Edmonds Paper. He said the group would remain active and engaged as they Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 16 were energized by the thanks of many people for undertaking an effort to save the gazebo. He. looked forward to the meeting on November 30. Mayor Fahey explained a public hearing regarding art selection for the fountain roundabout is scheduled for November 30. In the past, the City Attorney has cautioned the Council they should not take public testimony regarding an issue that is scheduled for a public hearing when others are not present to respond. She said the Council could not accept testimony regarding that item tonight due to the public, hearing scheduled for November 30. itiz_ to Eva Lano, 8017 212 "' St. SW #5, Edmonds, said Edmonds has been her hometown for 63 years and. she Save the I is proud of the City. After watching everything that has left the City, she said citizens need to build on Gazebo what is left or it will be lost too. She said the gazebo is beautiful and goes with the Carnegie Library that the City is so fortunate to have. She said the gazebo, flowers, light standards, are indicative of a past, more loving and gentle era. She said people move to Edmonds for what has been preserved. azebo Carol Hahn, 10312" Avenue SE, Edmonds, submitted written comments regarding the gazebo as she was unable to attend the public hearing on November 30. She urged the Council to read her letter. Alvin Rutledge, 7101 Lake Ballinger Way, Edmonds, recommended the City adopt an ordinance, similar to one in other cities, regarding teal estate persons on the Council. He advised the Log Cabin b Cabin committee submitted a letter to the Council requesting funding and plans to present further information at the next budget public hearing. Elaine Yard, 9209 Olympic View Drive (also known as Maplewood Private Road #1), Edmonds, stated that residents will be sending Council President Miller a response to his October 19 letter and will continue to attend Council meetings to inform the Council of their progress until "we hit the railroad tracks." Swamp Randy Anderson, 211 Railroad Avenue, Edmonds, announced the Swamp Creek & Western Railroad Creek & ' Club's open house at the Edmonds Amtrak Station on December 11, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. He said Western representatives from the Victoria Clipper and other groups will be at the open house and their 400 -foot Railroad Club's open HO scale layout will be in operation. Other events include Santa and a Toys for Tots drive where donors House of a new toy will receive a coupon for travel on Amtrak. Councilmember White commented their model railroad display layout is fabulous. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, Edmonds, referred to Item #7, and suggested the Council delay any uaget proposals for consultants until the City's budget is settled and it is determined whether there is enough money in the budget. He said when he referred to the restoration of funding for the Senior Center, Alliance, and flower program, he was uncertain of the amount allocated to the Senior Program. Upon learning the amount was $38,000, he endorsed the allocation to the Senior Center less the standard 8% reduction. The balance of the $114,000 should be eliminated from the budget. Regarding Mayor Fahey's comments on the restriction on speaking on a topic that is scheduled for public hearing, he said there is no restriction on subject material unless there is a legal situation that prevented it. He said the only restriction is the three- minute time limit. He felt it was unfair to force those who do not understand the system not to speak. ooaway Kevin Clarke, 23924 107 1' Place W, Edmonds, requested the City's new mayor review the video tape Meadows of, the meeting two weeks ago, particularly City Attorney Scott Snyder's comments regarding citizens in Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 17 C the south end of the City who have "grandstanded in front of the Council." He was offended by a publicly paid employee lecturing him regarding his opportunity to discuss something that is important to him, his house. He agreed residents were incensed that evening but the next day, the trees were cut. The City did not provide him notice that there were plans to cut his tree and questioned if the City.had this right without giving him the opportunity to have it pruned professionally. Now that every tree has been cut in the 20 -foot strip, trees that it was not necessary to remove by their plan, people are driving there to look at the site. These. people are behind his house day and night. He was frustrated because the permit was for emergency access to be constructed as needed and it is not needed. He was frustrated the Council could do nothing about this. He urged mayor -elect Haakenson to determine why elected officials could not help citizens be protected against private enterprise destroying private property. He recommended the Council talk to Mr. Snyder about lecturing citizens who have the right to speak about something that means something to them, their homes. ADB 7. REQUEST TO PROCEED WITH ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD GUIDELINES Guidelines CONSOLIDATION STUDY AND AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Consolida- tion Study Planning Manager Rob Chave explained this issue was discussed with the Community Services/Development Services committee in October including some of the recommendations from the consultant study. The desire to undertake the consultant project to consolidate the design guidelines was highlighted at the committee meeting, a high priority identified by the ADB and the Planning Board. When the Community Services/Development Services committee expressed interest in moving forward with this project, $10,000 in planning professional services was identified that could be allocated to this study. He said these funds had been earmarked for an historical survey but it is believed the ADB study is more important. In discussions with the Finance Department, it appears $15,000 will be left in Planning Department salaries due to administrative changes that have occurred. The balance of the request ($10,000 of the $35,000 total for the study) could be allocated from the $10,000 that was budgeted this year but not .spent for Virtual Reality. The recommended action is to authorize the issuance .of a request for proposals; another alternative would be to delay until the budget process is complete. He said issuing the request for proposal now would allow the project to get underway by the first of the year. Councilmember White observed there was nothing in the RFP that obligated the Council to. accept the proposal. Mr. Chave agreed, noting the RFP could contain language indicating it was subject to available funding. COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN HOLLEBEKE, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR FUNDING AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO DRAFT AND ISSUE THE REP. Council President Miller said he could not support this action, knowing the Council is still trying to resolve issues in the budget including restoring public safety. The City is already using $335,000 from its Emergency Reserve and he could not dedicate $35,000 from what would have been cash carryover to a consultant study. Councilmember Van Hollebeke shared Council President Miller's concern but pointed out the request for proposals did not require spending money, that decision could be made in January. He recalled the Council unanimously stated when Cedar River Associates made their presentation, that this was an extremely well thought out plan and he felt it was a very important step for the City. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 18 Council President Miller did not disagree the study was a good thing but said the timing was very poor. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER OPPOSED. 8. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Fahey congratulated the newly elected Mayor and Councilmembers. She reported she and Mayor -elect Haakenson have already begun working on the transition. He has begun attending Cabinet meetings as well as other meetings he will be participating in as the Mayor. She looked forward to the coming six weeks until he took office. 9. COUNCIL REPORTS xcused COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER VAN bsences HOLLEBEKE, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER HAAKENSON FROM THE NOVEMBER 6 COUNCIL MEETING AND COUNCILMEMBER EARLING FROM THE NOVEMBER 9 COUNCIL MEETING. • MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBERS HAAKENSON AND EARLING ABSTAINED. COUNCIL PRESIDENT MILLER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST FROM THE NOVEMBER 6 BUDGET WORKSHOP. MOTION CARRIED, COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST ABSTAINED. nnual Tree Council President Miller reported the Greater Edmonds Chamber of Commerce's annual tree lighting Lighting ceremony at Centennial Plaza is planned for November 27, beginning with carolers at 4:00 p.m., the tree lighting at. 5:00 p.m. and Santa until 7:00 p.m. Councilmember Earling congratulated his fellow Councilmembers who were re- elected and Councilmember Haakenson . on his election as Mayor and looked forward to working with new Councilmembers Petso and Orvis. He was glad the election was over and hoped everyone was able to move on. Health Councilmember Nordquist reported at a Health District Board meeting this morning, some members District mentioned a presentation made by State Representative Mike Cooper at the Lynnwood City Council regarding the plans for the Legislature, including a possible increase in the sales tax. He suggested Mr. Cooper make a presentation to the Council. He reported the Health District is facing a $2 million reduction in their budget. City Clerk Sandy Chase advised that Mr. Cooper is scheduled to speak to the Council on November 23. Councilmember Haakenson appreciated working with Mayor Fahey. He commented while on vacation °odway in Mesa, Arizona, he met a resident of the Woodway Meadows area who lived on the alley and wanted to Meadows know what could be done about it. Councilmember Haakenson recalled he was told two weeks ago that no trees would be cut in the alley and was awaiting an answer from staff regarding why the trees had now been cut. With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. BARBARA S. FAHEY, MAYOR SANDRA S. CHASE, CITY CLERK «. Edmonds City Council Approved. Minutes November 16, 1999 Page 19 AGENDA ; EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL PLAZA MEETING.ROOM - LIBRARY BUILDING 650 MAIN STREET 7:00 -10:00 P.M. 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER FLAG SALUTE 1. 2. (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) 3. (15 Min.) NOVEMBER 16, 1999 APPROVAL OF AGENDA CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 6, 1999 APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 9, 1999 APPROVAL OF CLAIM WARRANTS #35898 THROUGH #37307 FOR THE WEEK OF NOVEMBER 8, 1999, IN THE AMOUNT OF $385,633.96. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH CHS ENGINEERS, INC. FOR PERRINVILLE LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (LID) SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENTS DESIGN PROJECT REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE 78TH AVENUE WEST / 212TH STREET SW CROSSWALK LIGHTING PROJECT AND COUNCIL ACCEPTANCE OF PROJECT REPORT ON QUOTES RECEIVED FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF SHOP FURNACE AT TREATMENT PLANT AND AWARD TO LODESTAR COMPANY, INC. ($5,982, Not Including Sales Tax) ANNUAL REPORT FROM HEARING EXAMINER RONALD McCONNELL 4. (2 Hours) PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS -TO EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 17.35, ANIMALS. THE PURPOSE OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING IS TO GATHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CITY'S LAND USE REGULATIONS GOVERNING ANIMALS. LAND USE REGULATIONS DETERMINE HOW MANY ANIMALS CAN BE KEPT IN EACH ZONING CLASSIFICATION. THESE REGULATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED FOR MANY YEARS, AND PUBLIC COMPLAINTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE CITY IN RECENT YEARS CONCERNING SOME TYPES OF ANIMALS - (E.G. HORSES, CHICKENS) KEPT IN SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. 5. (20 Min.) PUBLIC HEARING ON THE 2000 BUDGET 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3 Minute Limit Per Person) 7. (5 Min.) REQUEST TO PROCEED WITH ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD GUIDELINES CONSOLIDATION STUDY AND. AUTHORIZATION TO ISSUE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS 8. (5 Min.) MAYOR'S REPORT 9. (15 Min.) COUNCIL REPORTS Parking and meeting rooms are accessible for persons with disabilities. Contact the City Clerk at (425) 771 -0245 with 24 hours advance notice for special accommodations. The Council Agenda appears on Chambers Cable, Channel 46. Delayed telecast of this meeting appears the following Wednesday at noon and 7: 00 p.m., as well as Friday and Monday at noon on Channel 46