20170815 City CouncilEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES
August 15, 2017
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Dave Earling, Mayor
Thomas Mesaros, Council President
Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember
Michael Nelson, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
Dave Teitzel, Councilmember
Neil Tibbott, Councilmember
CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SA IX TE
STAFF PRESENT
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir.
Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir.
Shane Hope, Development Services Director
Scott James, Finance Director
Dave Turley, Assistant Finance Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Jeff Taraday, City Attorney
Scott Passey, City Clerk
Andrew Pierce, Legislative/Council Assistant
Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council
Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds. He announced audience comment would be limited to 2
minutes per person. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present.
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
4. PRESENTATIONS
1. LEGISLATIVE SESSION WRAP-UP 2017
Jennifer Ziegler, the City's lobbyist/government affairs specialist, reported:
• Session overview
o Continue to have close margins between republicans and democrats in both chambers
o Final biennium to fulfill state funding obligations for basic education most estimates are
between $3 and $3.5 billion
o Significant disagreement on funding for collective bargaining agreements
o Disagreement on major policy issues, including paid family leave, the Hirst decision and the
I% property tax cap
o Concerns regarding Sound Transit motor vehicle excise tax rates
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 1
o At 195 days, the longest legislative session in State's history.
2017 legislative session results
o Transportation budget
- Only minor changes to the Connecting Washington Package
- No statutory changes to Sound Transit's governance or MVET valuation schedule
o Operating budget
- Passed June 30" — narrowly avoiding a government shutdown
$43.7 billion biennial budget
$2.6 billion in new revenue
- Increase in K-12 spending of $7.3 billion over 4 years
o State shared revenues
- Streamlined sales tax mitigation
- Fire insurance premium
- LEOFF 2
- Liquor Excise Tax Account
- Liquor Board Prof its
- Marijuana Revenues
o Policy Items
- Public Works assistance account
- Paid family leave
- A resolution to the Hirst decision
o No capital budget (Senate would not pass without acceptable solution to Hirst decision)
- Unfunded: Edmonds Waterfront Center - $2.25 M
- Unfunded: Edmonds Waterfront Development - $500,000
Edmonds legislative session priorities
o Move forward with Highway 99 funding
- Accelerated $1 million in 2017-12019
o Funding for Waterfront Crossing Alternative
- $700,000 in 2017-19
o Capital Request for Frances Anderson Center
- $319,000 in final compromise proposal — passed House, not Senate
o Public Records Cost Recovery and Privacy
— Allows charge for electronic records
— Changed definition of public records; requests for "all records" and bot requests are not an
identifiable request in the Public Records Act
— Jurisdictions/agencies that spend $100,000+/year responding to requests must report 17
data points to the joint legislative review committee annually
o Invest in funding to support services that address homelessness and affordable housing
- Four-year extension of document recording fee
- Allow use of REET 2 revenue for housing for a short period of time
Next steps
o Possibility of 4' special session
o Begin building 2018 legislative session agenda
Councilmember Teitzel asked if the Hirst decision could potentially affect property owners in Snohomish
County and Edmonds in particular. Ms. Ziegler answered yes, explaining the issue of water laws and GMA
is incredibly complicated. Her understanding was some banks are not lending on some property as a result
of the decision.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 2
With regard to the use of REET revenue for housing, Councilmember Johnson explained from July 1, 2017
to June 30, 2019, cities can use REET 2 tax funds for acquisition, construction, improvement or
rehabilitation of facilities to provide housing for the homeless. In order to use this authority, cities must
demonstrate they have or will have adequate funding for all capital projects in their capital facilities plan
and must not have adopted any regulation on that revenue. She asked whether Edmonds would qualify to
use REET 2 funds. Ms. Ziegler answered that may be better answered by Ms. Hope, Ms. Hite or Mr.
Williams. Councilmember Johnson requested further information.
Councilmember Buckshnis requested the PowerPoint be provided to Council prior to the meeting in the
future. She asked if there was balance in the Public Works Trust Fund. Ms. Ziegler answered loan
repayments were still going back into the fund but no new tax revenue was placed in the fund. The General
Fund took approximately $250 million in this biennium out of the fund but there was an expectation the
capital budget would put new money back into the fund but the capital budget was not passed.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked about marijuana revenue, noting Colorado has a great deal of operating
revenue from marijuana sales. Ms. Ziegler advised the legislation that was passed had a $12 million cap; if
revenues are $18 million over the forecasted amount, local governments would get another $18 million. A
portion is distributed based on the number of retailers and a portion based on population.
With regard to the Hirst decision, Councilmember Buckshnis said the Tribes are very interested in resolving
this; in their opinion this has been an issue for a long time. She was hopeful the Hirst issue could be resolved
so that a capital budget could be passed.
Mayor Earling thanked Ms. Ziegler for her work in Olympia during the past year; commenting she been a
great investment for the City.
2. JUNE QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT
Assistant Finance Director Dave Turley provided questions and multiple-choice answers to a quiz that
would be revealed at the end of his presentation. He reported:
• Diagram of Washington State Unemployment by county
o Unemployment one of best indicator of economy
o Snohomish County's unemployment rate is 4.1%
• Robust Housing Market
o HeraldNet reports: Snohomish County home prices reach new high — again.
o Seattle Times reports: King County home prices grow $100,000 in a year for first time; West
Bellevue jumps 41%
• The other side of the coin:
o Healthcare costs are projected to rise 10% to 15%
o How many more years will the economic recovery continue?
General Fund revenue 2017 compared to 2016
Fund Name 6 Mos 2016 6 Mos 2017 Difference
Total General Fund $20,334,355 $20,280,036 ($54,319) -0.3%
Total General Fund and Subfunds $21,079,376 $20,748,512 ($330,864) -1.6%
• Graph comparing General Fund revenue 2017, 2016 and budget
o Chart of Sales Tax by category
■ Six months ending 6/30/17 YTD $3,524,666 in sales tax revenue
• Retail automotive biggest source
■ Construction trade second largest source
• Chart of Sales Tax revenue by category 6 months ending June 30, 2017 change from 2016....
• General Fund expenditures 2107 budget compared to actual
Fund Name I YTD 2017 1 YTD 2017 1 Difference
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 3
Graph comparing General Fund expenditures 2017, 2016 and budget
Mr. Turley concluded, the City is right where we expect to be financially at mid -year. While the local
economy continues to be strong, we need to remain careful with the City's resources and play for the future.
He revealed the answers to the quiz questions (answer in bold):
1. Approximately how many paying customers attended the Taste?
a. 5,000
b. 9,000
c. 12,000
d. 20,000
2. Many people (e.g small children) did not have to pay to get in. What was the estimated total
attendance?
a. 9,000
b. 15,000
c. 25,000
d. 44,000
Finally, how many kegs of beer were sold during the Taste?
a. 13
b. 53
c. 130
d. 1,300
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the Investment Portfolio Summary in the June Quarterly Financial
Report, commenting finance staff is doing a great job.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas requested the PowerPoint be provided to Council in advance of the
meeting in the future.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (Limited to 2 minutes per person)
Sally Wassall, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, thanked the Council for removing angle parking on
Sunset Avenue, commenting vehicles parked there were an eyesore, created obstacles, and it was unsafe
for other drivers. She also thanked the Council for reducing the 4 -hour parking limit to 2 -hours but
unfortunately neither that, the 20 -mph speed limit nor no parking 10 p.m. to 8 am. is enforce When calling
the police to complain about cars parked after 10 p.m., she was asked if the vehicle was causing a
disturbance. The vehicles are disturbing to her because she is concerned they are waiting to break into her
house. When they moved to their house in March 1959, there was an approximately 5.9' bike path and
adequate space across the street to get safely in/out of their driveway. Now there is a 10'+ walkway and a
parking space close to the end of their driveway, making it difficult to get their 16-3/4 foot Chevy Lumina
in and out of their driveway. A plumber visiting their home recently had trouble getting in/out of the
driveway due to the parked cars and charged an extra $125 for a difficult location.
Jim Perkins, Edmonds, Pt. Edwards resident, said regardless of where one lives, there is concern with
safety. During the day, the demonstration garden and its pathways are very nice, but the area is very dark
at night and it is a matter of time before something unfortunate happens. He hoped safety was a priority
throughout Edmonds. Currently the residents of the 261 units at Pt. Edwards, soon to be 60+ more units in
the new building, are a priority. He referred to an article in the Beacon referring to million -dollar condos,
assuring most of the 261 units are not million -dollar units. He suggested if the author of that article had a
problem with people living in $1 million homes, Edmonds must be a challenging work place for him/her.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 4
Budget I Actual
Total General Fund and Subfunds
1 $20,506,708 1 $20,031,484 1 $475,224
Graph comparing General Fund expenditures 2017, 2016 and budget
Mr. Turley concluded, the City is right where we expect to be financially at mid -year. While the local
economy continues to be strong, we need to remain careful with the City's resources and play for the future.
He revealed the answers to the quiz questions (answer in bold):
1. Approximately how many paying customers attended the Taste?
a. 5,000
b. 9,000
c. 12,000
d. 20,000
2. Many people (e.g small children) did not have to pay to get in. What was the estimated total
attendance?
a. 9,000
b. 15,000
c. 25,000
d. 44,000
Finally, how many kegs of beer were sold during the Taste?
a. 13
b. 53
c. 130
d. 1,300
Councilmember Buckshnis referred to the Investment Portfolio Summary in the June Quarterly Financial
Report, commenting finance staff is doing a great job.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas requested the PowerPoint be provided to Council in advance of the
meeting in the future.
5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS (Limited to 2 minutes per person)
Sally Wassall, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, thanked the Council for removing angle parking on
Sunset Avenue, commenting vehicles parked there were an eyesore, created obstacles, and it was unsafe
for other drivers. She also thanked the Council for reducing the 4 -hour parking limit to 2 -hours but
unfortunately neither that, the 20 -mph speed limit nor no parking 10 p.m. to 8 am. is enforce When calling
the police to complain about cars parked after 10 p.m., she was asked if the vehicle was causing a
disturbance. The vehicles are disturbing to her because she is concerned they are waiting to break into her
house. When they moved to their house in March 1959, there was an approximately 5.9' bike path and
adequate space across the street to get safely in/out of their driveway. Now there is a 10'+ walkway and a
parking space close to the end of their driveway, making it difficult to get their 16-3/4 foot Chevy Lumina
in and out of their driveway. A plumber visiting their home recently had trouble getting in/out of the
driveway due to the parked cars and charged an extra $125 for a difficult location.
Jim Perkins, Edmonds, Pt. Edwards resident, said regardless of where one lives, there is concern with
safety. During the day, the demonstration garden and its pathways are very nice, but the area is very dark
at night and it is a matter of time before something unfortunate happens. He hoped safety was a priority
throughout Edmonds. Currently the residents of the 261 units at Pt. Edwards, soon to be 60+ more units in
the new building, are a priority. He referred to an article in the Beacon referring to million -dollar condos,
assuring most of the 261 units are not million -dollar units. He suggested if the author of that article had a
problem with people living in $1 million homes, Edmonds must be a challenging work place for him/her.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 4
He urged the Council not to compromise the project and make bees and snails more important than people's
safety.
David Richman, Edmonds, retired biologist, said he was well aware of the effects of lighting on wildlife
as he used to collect insects for a museum and often took advantage of lights to attract insects. He suggested
the Council seek a solution that is advantageous to all, taking into account the location on the edge of the
marsh and the demonstration garden as well as giving consideration to wildlife. He recognized the need for
safety but felt there were ways to address the situation such as were used in Tucson, Arizona where residents
wanted clear skies for astronomical observation. He submitted a list of references and a statement to the
City Clerk.
Mike Mitchell, Edmonds, expressed support for lighting on Pine Street. They were unaware of the lighting
issue until he read in the newspaper that lighting would be installed on Pine Street. When he told his wife,
her comment was good, I don't feel safe down there due to concern with stumbling in the dark. His wife is
a member of a walking club that walks in area parks where birds, bugs and slugs happily coexist. The
proposed lighting will only be on one side in a small area; with all the concern being expressed, no one has
suggested removing lighting on SR -104. He felt the proposal for three light posts was reasonable and he
requested the Council adopt that proposal.
John Pauls, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, recalled several months ago the City Council approved
modifications to parking on the south end of Sunset Avenue. He felt the change to parallel parking was
brilliant and helped enormously; the street is much calmer due the wider driving lane, there is no honking
as drivers exiting angle parking and the 2 -hour parking limit doubled the available parking. Parking is
available almost any time except at sunset but not enough parking could be built to satisfy that demand.
Widening their driveway helped enormously. Changes now need to be made at the north end; after dropping
off a friend at the north end, he found it difficult to exit her driveway. He urged the Council to give the
residents on the north end of Sunset the same consideration.
Crystal Lanning, Edmonds, agreed with Mr. Pauls' comments. She said the proposal for parallel parking
at the north end of Sunset does not work for a number of residents and complicates access to their homes.
Staff applied a turning path template to each driveway to ensure a design vehicle could enter and exit every
driveway. This is not a one size fits all solution; they will be unable to back their truck and trailer in/out of
their driveway if cars are parked across the street in front of their house. Drivers seem to park as long as
they want and there have been numerous accidents, particularly on the north end and drivers are unaware
which lane is for cars and which is for pedestrians. She recalled hearing in another meeting that people who
park on Sunset bring revenue into the City because they shop and eat in town; she has yet to see people
with packages returning to their parking spaces, mostly she sees people sitting in their cars reading, eating,
and napping. She suggested configuring the solution in a manner that addressed everyone's concerns about
congestion, safety and emergency response.
Shirley Pauls, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, thanked the Council for their decision to change parking
on the south end of Sunset; it is much calmer, people are more relaxed, it is easier to enter and exit parking
and there always seems to be parking available. The 2 -hour parking improves the availability of parking
for people who walk on Sunset instead of commuter parking. The parallel parking also makes it easier for
residents to get in/out of their driveways and no parking after 10 p.m. reduces partying. However things
that still need to be addressed include, 1) speeding, 2) wrong way drivers, and 3) construction vehicles
parking at the north end.
Jim Wassall, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, thanked the Council for removing the hazardous angle
parking. He expressed concern with the proposed parking spaces staff painted on Sunset next to the
walkway. The proposed spaces have no reason for being there other than they help people get out of
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 5
driveway and go north but there is no consideration given for entering their driveways. Another issue is the
sidewalk on Sunset is on private property, not City property.
Cindy Easterson, Bothell, President, Pilchuck Audubon Society said they value and appreciate the special
partnership with the City at the native plant demonstration garden and wildlife area north of Pine Street.
This small area provides habitat for wildlife and is a tool for teaching the public about the value of natural
spaces. She thanked staff for the opportunity to respond to the proposed options for lighting on Pine Street
and to comment from a wildlife perspective. She requested more time to consider options consistent with
preserving the natural space. Growing up in rural eastern Washington and spending evenings under the stars
led to her love for the natural world. Living in constant artificial light and the ever-present light pollution
in western Washington, she questioned equating darkness with fear and the threat of danger and why light
was equated with safety. She assured studies show people are not safer by the intrusion of light and that
wildlife is harmed by artificial light. For example, the common Black -capped Chickadee is dependent on
the natural rhythms of light and dark; in the spring, lengthening days stimulate physical changes in the bird
that help it successfully breed. She asked the Council to allow additional time to consider a better solution
for Pine Street lighting.
Glenn & Heather Safadago, Edmonds, 2nd Avenue N resident, said 2"d Avenue is a beautiful street whose
residents range from young families to seniors, a very active group and many people use the street as a
strolling path. He expressed concern with the proposal to allow drivers to turn left from Caspers onto 2nd
Avenue which would create a loop and he feared a non-stop flow of cars. He was opposed to the proposal
due to the possibility of putting children in harm's way.
Suzie Schaefer, Edmonds, a volunteer coordinator for the demo garden, recalled in May the Council
delayed the installation of lighting on Pine Street at her request due to damage to the garden. She was
hopeful the City would develop an imaginative plan for lighting for people that did not have a negative
effect on wildlife. She was disappointed staff had not developed a better plan and that both options have
issues. She suggested motion -activated lights at foot level was a good option but has not been explored.
She acknowledged she does not work for Public Works but nor does Public Works work with wildlife. She
requested the Council not make a decision and continue to work together on a solution that will protect
wildlife.
Bill Taylor, Edmonds, resident of Breakwater on 2nd Avenue N, relayed his understanding there are plans
to remove the barrier at the north end of 2nd Avenue to allow north—south traffic. He expressed concern
with the safety with that configuration and submitted photos taken today and as well as satellite photos. He
explained the problem created by a hedge at the south end of 2"d Avenue that hides pedestrian traffic.
Approximately 22 children live on 2"d Avenue between Edmonds and Caspers as well as a woman who is
sight impaired and a lot of people walk in the area.
Marilyn Lindberg, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, relayed the width of the street at the end of her
driveway is 30 feet; 10 feet for the walkway and 8 feet for parking, leaves 12 feet for traffic. When a car is
parked opposite her driveway, it takes her three maneuvers to back her compact car out of the driveway. A
18 -feet wide fire truck would not be able to access her house with parked vehicles. She concluded 12 feet
is not adequate to back out of a driveway or to provide space for emergency vehicle access.
Kiersten Christensen, Edmonds, representing the Downtown Alliance (ED!) Board, said the proposed
amendments to the BID code and the bylaws reflect current practices and conditions. The original
documents were approved four years ago; the changes were reviewed and approved at the July Board
meeting. She was excited about what the Alliance's Board can accomplish to keep the Edmonds downtown
business district prosperous, vibrant and lively. She relayed the Board's support for the Council approving
the proposed amendments.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 6
Johanna Molloy, Edmonds, representing the Breakwater Condominiums on 2"d Avenue, expressed their
concern about the proposal to make 2"d Avenue a 2 -way street. Safety is their primary concern; 22 children
and several elderly people live on 2nd Avenue and often walk in the street because there are only partial
sidewalks. She submitted photographs illustrating the sight issue at the corner. Residents have approached
PUD and the City; PUD has offered to take down the tree and replant. There are as many walkers on Sunset
as there are on 2 n but there are no sidewalks on 2"d Avenue. She questioned the reason for this proposal
and expressed sympathy for the Sunset residents whose views are blocked by parked cars. She suggested
having a contest for the most creative promenade for Sunset Avenue.
Jim Hendricks, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, appreciated the work that has gone into trying to figure
out the walkway and parking. He recommended when the parking is finalized, consideration be given to
view corridors for residents as parked cars obstruct views.
Al Zahnow, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, thanked the Council for changing the parking limit from
4 hours to 2 hours but recommended the time limit be enforced. He commented on the difficult exiting his
driveway.
Tom Gabel, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, commented the changes made to parking have upset all
the residents on Sunset. Their primary issues are the lack of a consistent plan, lack of enforcement, parking
not clearly marked, and wrong way traffic. He described difficulty exiting and entering driveways with the
new parking spaces. The addition of the walkway eliminated spaces and now parking spaces are being
crammed back in; the geometry has not changed, only the interpretation has changed. He encouraged the
City to develop and execute a plan and then enforce it, particularly after 10 p.m.
Francois Madath, Edmonds, 2nd Avenue N resident, commented many children live on 2nd Avenue, often
crossing the street to visit friends and to play. He expressed interest in clarity in any future plans. Many
residents of 2nd Avenue are concerned about the process on Sunset Avenue. The residents of 2"d Avenue do
not want cruising from Sunset Avenue to 2"d Avenue. They already experience speeding on 2nd Avenue;
allowing drivers to turn onto 2nd Avenue will create more problems which has happened in the past. He
encouraged the Council to listen the residents on Sunset and on 2nd Avenue.
Lena Maul, Edmonds, 2"d Avenue N resident, agreed with her neighbors' comments. When her family
moved to 2nd Avenue 5 years ago, they were attracted by the 1 -way traffic that helps keep her 3 children
safe and allows them to foster relationships their neighbors. If traffic becomes 2 -way, safety will be
impacted greatly for residents and children as well as for many people who walk on 2nd Avenue daily.
Views from her dining room include the street and Puget Sound; the most coveted seats are those with a
view of the street. She agreed Sunset Avenue was a fantastic street; 2nd Avenue was probably the second-
best street. She suggested learning from the process on Sunset to maintain the small town feel of 2nd Avenue
for everyone to enjoy walking, their neighbors and safety.
Mayor Earling declared a brief recess.
Rick Hedges, Edmonds resident of Sunset Avenue, expressed concerned with the proposed parallel
parking spaces that include a space in the middle of his driveway, making it extremely difficult to back out.
The proposed parking includes a space in front of his driveway and two in front of his neighbor's house. A
nearby pole makes entering/exiting nearly impossible. He urged the Council to reconsider any parking on
the north side of Sunset, and have only a travel lane.
Tom Graff, Edmonds, member of the Pt. Edwards HOA Board, and Board liaison to the grounds staff,
said he loves plants and embraces bees and wildlife but acknowledged there is a safety issue on the
sidewalk. He occasionally walks to catch transit before 7 a.m. in the winter when it is dark, icy and slippery.
Women living at Pt. Edwards will not walk in that area at night; it is not an issue of getting mugged but
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 7
slipping because that area is wet, icy, and dark in the winter. He said the City should be encouraging Pt.
Edwards residents to walk into downtown; if he drives, he is unlikely to come downtown. He encouraged
the City to provide lighting, pointing out SR -104 is lit. Pine Street is a busy arterial and needs to be safe
place to walk. The large halogen light at the hatchery impacts wildlife and should be eliminated.
Rich Pettit, Edmonds, Pt Edwards HOA President, said anything to improve the walkability of Edmonds
is beneficial to the community. Residents benefit from walkability; however, during the winter, walking is
restricted to daylight hours so residents do not go downtown for dinner or other evening activities unless
they use a flashlight and are willing to tolerate a dark environment. With regard to wildlife, he pointed out
Pt. Edwards has deer and coyotes and he recently saw a family of woodpeckers foraging near the new
building under construction, undeterred by construction activity. He concluded wildlife are very adaptable
to things that affect their environment.
Cheryl Stewart, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue resident, said since the walking path was put in place, there
has been a constant problem with parking, safety and ability for residents to use their driveways. She relayed
two separate occasions when visiting friends backed out of her driveway into an illegally parked car. Once
when backing out of her driveway, she nearly hit a pedestrian strolling on Sunset Avenue. Cars drive on
the walking path at night, not realizing it is a walking path. Another issue is the ability for delivery trucks,
garbage trucks and emergency vehicles to drive down the street. She proposed utilizing the sidewalk, the
parking strip and 18 inches of the current roadway to create a 9 -foot walking path.
Bryan Stewart, Edmonds, Sunset Avenue N resident near the pump stations, said when pump station
maintenance is being done, they cannot exit their driveway. When vehicles are parked in front of his
driveway, it is difficult to enter/exit his driveway in his Camry and impossible with his full-sized van.
Maintenance people park on the east side of the street opposite the parked cars and drivers often drive on
the walkway to get around them. He acknowledged there has always been a problem with parking on the
north end of Sunset but there is space for 4-6 parking places that are not opposite driveways. He appreciated
what the City did at the south end of Sunset to make it safer and he wanted more parking on the north end
but not in front of driveways.
Theresa Riley, Edmonds, Pt. Edwards resident, said Pt. Edwards is a community of walkers. One of her
first experiences after moving to Pt Edwards was walking into downtown for the Halloween celebration
and walking home alone after dark. In the area where the lights are proposed, she was frightened by a dark
van with no windows parked in this area. She called a friend at Pt. Edwards to ask that she stay on the phone
until she reached the condominiums and to call 911 if something happened. Tonight when she was leaving
at 6:45 p.m. to come to this meeting, she decided to drive because it would be dark when she returned. She
urged the Council to seriously consider installing lights in that area, even one light. A member of the Nature
Conservancy and proponent of preserving wildlife, she recognized a solution needs to consider the safety
of people as well as the needs of animals/insects.
Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, suggested an HOA be formed on Sunset Avenue. He recalled the City used to
have a citizen parking committee that addressed parking problems. With regard to public safety, he
suggested forming a crime watch committee.
James Fahey, Edmonds, 2nd Avenue N resident, said he was old enough to know the reason for the current
configuration of 2nd Avenue. He concurred with his neighbors' comments and urged the Council to consider
addressing wrong way traffic at Caspers and to improve signage.
Larry DeYoung, Edmonds, 2nd Avenue N resident, referred to the Sunset Avenue fiasco, stating he would
hate to see the same thing happen on 2nd Avenue. When vehicles are parked on both sides of the street, the
available width is 19 feet, not enough for 2 -way traffic. Regarding signage onto Caspers, he suggested a
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 8
flashing 25 -mph sign similar to the sign near the 76 station. He suggested a simple solution such as more
signage, patrolling the area for wrong way drivers, and enforcing parking restrictions.
Doug Maclaren, Edmonds, 2nd Avenue N resident, agreed with previous speakers, emphasized how much
residents love their children and how much people love walking on their street. He put a petition in front of
their house Sunday morning explaining the potential to open 2nd Avenue N to 2 -way traffic and got 35
signatures from walkers. People trying to avoid the ferry traffic backup on Main & 3rd speed down 2nd
Avenue. He suggested either speed bumps or lowering the speed limit to 20, anticipating 2 -way traffic
would be a disaster. He suggested improved 1-way/dead-end/do not enter signage instead of the existing
residents only signs. He also recommended installation of a flashing sign on the crosswalk on Caspers and
7th
Will Magnuson, Edmonds, 2nd Avenue N resident, expressed support for retaining the current
configuration. He has seen Councilmembers walking on 2nd Avenue enjoying the safety and serenity. The
current configuration at the north end was intended to address speeding and drag racing.
Bonnie VanWyke, Edmonds, 2nd Avenue N resident, said 2" Avenue North is a wonderful place to live,
but residents have to park on the street and there are even more parked cars on market days, when there is
a beautiful sunset, etc. In addition, the sidewalks are not contiguous so people often walk in the street. The
street is well utilized by walkers, dogs, the elderly, etc. and it should stay the way it is.
6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL,
TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda
items approved are as follows:
1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2017
2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF AUGUST 8, 2017
3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS
4. AMENDMENTS TO DOWNTOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT BY-LAWS
PUBLIC HEARING
1. RESOLUTION TO DESIGNATE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA AS RESIDENTIAL
TARGETED AREA
Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty explained later on the agenda, the
Council will be discussing and potentially implementing the Highway 99 Subarea Plan. One of the
incentives identified in the plan to help attract redevelopment to the corridor, hopefully including market
rate and affordable housing, is Multi -Family Tax Exemption (MFTE) program. That program has already
been implemented in Westgate as well as in other cities.
He recalled on July 18, 2017 the Council passed a Resolution of Intent to designate the Highway 99 Subarea
as a residential targeted area for implementation of the MFTE program and notice of this public hearing.
This is the opportunity for the public to comment on the designation of the Highway 99 Subarea as
residential targeted area for implementation of the MFTE program and at the conclusion of public hearing,
for the Council to designate the Highway 99 Subarea as residential targeted area for implementation of the
MFTE program.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 9
Mayor Earling opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
George Keefe, Edmonds, a member of "the Edmonds Housing and Stability Coalition, speaking as an
individual, urged the Council to increase density in the subarea to permit more residential housing, more
market rate, more affordable and particularly more low-income housing. He also encouraged the Council
to require landscaped paths in the subarea for the benefit of residents and workers as well as nearby
Tom Hayes, Edmonds, expressed appreciation for the effort to upgrade the Highway 99 corridor and the
comprehensive work done so far. Maximizing the availability of housing and services to those in need
should have a prominent role in development. He referred to Shoreline as inspiration; Ronald United
Method Church teamed with Compass Housing and Hopelink to provide low income housing options and
services by making 60 units available. During a recent community block party, he toured the facility, finding
it very impressive, offering a food bank, opportunities for job searches, training, interviewing skills, etc.
Edmonds Lutheran Church is talking with Compass Housing to provide housing options. Many 5013c
organizations in addition to Compass Housing do this work throughout region; Compass Housing and
Shoreline's facility serves as a great models. He concluded the City should take every opportunity to make
housing and services available to the community.
Carolynne Harris, Edmonds a member of the Edmonds Housing and Stability Coalition, recalled at the
last Hwy 99 Subarea open house, some people were not aware there was an issue with homelessness and
housing in Edmonds. There are 150 known homeless children in Edmonds and many more in hiding. It
takes four years to get a Compass Housing project underway; the City needs to do something now for the
children because the schools and local charities bear the burden.
Dominic Rambes, Tekin & Associates, property owners of the Denny's property at 8431 244 St. SW,
recalled they described their situation to the Council a couple weeks ago. They submitted and received land
use approval; five days later they were told they were not vested and must resubmit using the new
regulations. He requested time for their project to be vested, more time for them develop a full set of
construction documents and submit for a building permit. It was his understanding if the Council votes
tonight, the regulations become effective in five days.
Alvin Rutledge, Edmonds, suggested since Denny's closed, there should be a report from the Police
Department about crime in that area.
Hearing no further comment, Mayor Earling closed the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about the Denny's property. Development Services Director
Shane Hope relayed her understanding Tekin & Associates were going to submit for a building permit this
week. Their proposal is to demolish the existing building and build single story retail set back from the
street. If the Council adopts the ordinance, the new regulations will be effective 5 days after publication
which is typically 7-10 days after the Council takes action. If the project is submitted for a building permit
before that time, the end of this week or early next week, it will not subject to the new regulations.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1391, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, TO DESIGNATE THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA AS A RESIDENTIAL
TARGETED AREA FOR THE PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING A MULTIFAMILY TAX
EXEMPTION PROGRAM AND IT WOULD BE APPROVED AUGUST 15, 2017. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. ACTION ITEMS
1. PROPOSED RESOLUTION SUPPORTING MERGER OF SNOCOM AND SNOPAC
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 10
Council President Mesaros explained several jurisdictions have approved resolutions in support of the
merger. The packet includes two resolutions, one reflecting unanimous support and the other if there is not
unanimous support. He reminded the resolution of support does not approve the merger, ILA or bylaws. He
thanked Police Chief Compaan for his work on the Joint Task Force.
Mayor Earling advised Lynnwood City Council unanimously approved the resolution last night. Chief
Compaan said the resolution is very similar to what the Lynnwood City Council passed last night.
Chief Compaan advised the Joint Task Force has been meeting for over a year and are close to presenting
a draft ILA to member agencies for consideration. Tonight is an update of the April 4 presentation and the
resolution. He summarized it would be helpful to the process to have cities who are supportive of
consolidation to go on record via approval of the resolution of support. He introduced Terry Peterson,
Executive Director, SNOCOM, and Kurt Mills, Executive Director, SNOPAC.
Mr. Peterson reviewed:
Three separate entities:
o SNOPAC Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) — Formed in the 70's, located in Everett, a
consolidated 9-1-1 Center serving roughly 70% of Snohomish County's population.
o SNOCOM PSAP — Formed in the 70's, located in Mountlake Terrace, consolidated 9-1-1
Center serving roughly 30% of Snohomish County's population.
o Snohomish County Emergency Radio System (SERS) — Formed in the 90's, Emergency Radio
System, group responsible for the voice radio system used by police, fire and 911 countywide.
Map of Snohomish County, jointly service area, area served by SNOCOM and area served by
SNOPAC
Background
o A serious service deficiency exists within a Jointly Served Area (JSA) covered by
FDI/SNOCOM and SCSO/SNOPAC
■ Excessive 9-1-1 transfers resulting in delays to emergencies
• Includes an imbalance of funding in relation to workload
o County E911 funded a three-part study completed in March 2015 which concluded
"...significant opportunity for efficiency and effectiveness gains through consolidation... "and
would address the existing 9-1-1 transfers issue. It included several other options including
virtual consolidation and co -location
o A Snohomish County Joint Task Force (JTF) was formed to further consider these options
Why are we are looking at consolidation?
o 2016: 44,000 Transfers
■ 66% within the JSA
• 34% along borders
■ 1 out of 5 (33,433) SNOCOM calls transferred to SNOPAC
• I out of 50 (10,249) SNOPAC calls transferred to SNOCOM
• Average 21 second delay, over 11 days of hold time a year
■ Significant life/safety issue for the public and for police and fire service providers
Joint Task Force (JTF)
o Includes Operational and Board Representatives from SNOCOM, SNOPAC & SERS and an
independent facilitator with consolidation experience
• Formed in early 2016 at direction of SNOCOM & SNOPAC Boards
■ Multiple process check -points through Joint (SNOCOM/SNOPAC) Board Meetings to
validate process and direction
■ SERS is ex -officio until PSAPs make a decision about consolidation
■ Open transparent process with regular updates to stakeholders including sharing documents
online
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 11
Mr. Mills reviewed:
• Primary Decision Points
1) Service Levels: Goal of eliminating SNOPAC/SNOCOM Transfers.
2) Costs: Consider opportunities for cost savings. Labor savings over time through attrition.
3) Resiliency/Redundancy: Current two PSAP model offers important resilience and goal not to
lose this.
4) Governance: Structure which ensures a fair voice for diverse group including police/fire,
large/medium/small agency
• Multiple Solutions Evaluated
o Evaluated a number of options focused on service levels and resolve SNOPAC/SNOCOM 9-
1-1 Transfer problem
• Includes two other options that attempt to address transfers through routing and procedural
changes
• Concluded both options have significant operational and fiscal impacts to the PSAPs
• Status of Primary Decision Points
o Excessive 9-1-1 Transfer: Annual 9-1-1 transfers of 45,000-50,000 is a serious problem
• SNOCOM/SNOPAC Transfers are completely eliminated through consolidation
• Maintain or improve service levels and eliminate other operational inefficiencies present
in a two-PSAP setting
o Cost: Both Boards sought ways to decrease costs
• Projected savings of just under $IMM annually
• Labor savings recognized over time through attrition (estimated within 2 years)
o Resiliency/Redundancy: Current two-PSAP environment provides good resiliency
• Maintain existing fully -equipped SNOCOM facility as warm backup (secondary location)
• Prepaid rent through 2023
o Governance
• Consensus reached on board make-up and general set of rules.
Mr. Peterson reviewed:
• Estimated One -Time Transition Costs:
o Consensus on majority of governance issues
• The County and all local governments which are police or fire service providers, or which
contract for service, can join.
• 15 member board
— 10 Police Seats
— 5 Fire seats
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 12
Low Est.
Hl Lgh Cyst.
Office space Renovation
$ 500,000
$ 750,000
Organizational/Team Building/Reorganization
$ 30,000
$ 50,000
Phone system (reconfigure as Multi -Node)
$ 30,000
$ 50,000
Contract Negotiations
$ 90,000
$ 120,000
Recorder Modifications
$ 5,000
$ 10,000
New ILA Development
$ 15,000
$ 30,000
Corporate Structure Legal Review
$ 4,000
$ 6,000
Technology Transition (reconfiguration)
$ 30,000
$ 125,000
Contingency
$ 50,000
$ 100,000
Radio Console Reorganization (MCC7500)
$ 15,000
$ 20,000
Parking Needs at SNOPAC
$ 50,000
$ 250,000
Total
$ 819,000
$ 1,511,000
*Matrix Consulting Study estimated transition costs at between $229,500 & $372,500
Governance
o Consensus on majority of governance issues
• The County and all local governments which are police or fire service providers, or which
contract for service, can join.
• 15 member board
— 10 Police Seats
— 5 Fire seats
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 12
— Board members selected by caucuses of large, medium & small agencies
— Plus 1 non-voting board member selected by contract agencies
— Elected and operational staff serve on board
Supermajority vote on key decisions: 70% and at least 1 fire vote
- Supermajority Vote Items
Adding a new member
Terminating a member
Amending the ILA (unless unanimous consent required by law)
Amendments to bylaws
Approving the budget if it exceeds last year's budget by a rate over CPI -U + 4%
Capital expenditures exceeding $500,000
—� Dissolution or merger/consolidation of the agency
Hiring the Executive Director of the Agency.
1 year of "rate smoothing" for those significantly impacted by new assessment
formula
Rate Smoothing
o New assessment formula projected to provide savings for most
o One agency expected to see 30+% increase
o Rate smoothing used to reduce the "pain" associated with change of assessment formula
Those agencies seeing 9% or greater savings will contribute up to 30% of that savings in
2019 to those agencies seeing 9% or great cost increase
Next Steps in Process
o Detailed financial reviews (completed)
o May thru July — Individual agency briefings (mostly completed)
o Over the summer — Work on new Interlocal Agreement, transition budget, timeline
o Sept — Joint Board review and advisory position on new ILA
o Oct thru Dec — Depending on Joint Board Action, individual agencies re -briefed and have
decision whether to sign on to new ILA
o New agency could start work as early as Jan 2018, operating out of two physical locations
(SNOPAC & SNOCOM's existing facilities)
o Jan 2019 merging of operations into single facility with existing SNOCOM facility
transitioning into a warm backup.
Councilmember Teitzel asked the annual cost to maintain the warm backup site. Mr. Peterson estimated
$220,000/year which includes power, water, facility, equipment and worst-case scenario of market rent.
Councilmember Teitzel asked how common it was for an emergency telephone system to have a backup
site. Mr. Mills answered it was not particularly common but there are examples of medium and large
communities with backup sites. There have been numerous occasions when the backup has been used in
Snohomish County; it is usually seamless to first responders and the community. Having a backup site is
also important because the PSAPs host all the technology for fire, police and corrections.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1392, SUPPORTING THE CONSOLIDATION
OF SNOPAC AND SNOCOM PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS (PSPS).
Council President Mesaros commented it has been a privilege to represent the City on the SNOCOM Board
since he joined the Council in March 2014. This is a great step forward; his personal goals were to improve
service at no extra cost; the process resulted in improved service with savings of $1 million year. Edmonds'
savings will be approximately $250,000 annually after 2019.
Councilmember Nelson, SERS Board Member, commented on how smoothly this process has gone,
especially considering how many cities are represented. He commended the governance structure with 15
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 13
members and a broad and flexible representation from elected officials and emergency professionals. As
someone who has had to be transferred after calling, be assured it was an awful experience. He
wholeheartedly supported consolidation.
Councilmember Johnson said although the presentation indicated there would elected officials on the
Board, it appears they are not elected officials but fire and police. Mr. Peterson answered there would be
representation from fire and police agencies; there is a requirement for a mix of elected and operational
personnel on the Board. Councilmember Johnson asked how elected officials would be selected. Mr.
Peterson answered there will be a caucusing process; Edmonds is in the third caucus which is shared with
Marysville and Lynnwood and is based on the percentage of population as it relates to the entire County.
Those three agencies will collectively share three seats, at least one of the three be an operational person.
The caucusing processing would occur in April every year with two-year appointments. The initial
caucusing process will occur January 15, 2018 should consolidation move forward; the initial
representatives will serve 2+ year terms until April 2020.
Councilmember Johnson observed only one operational person was required from the three cities. Mr.
Peterson agreed. Councilmember Johnson asked how the other caucuses worked. Mr. Peterson explained
there are 3 other caucuses, one dedicated to the Snohomish County Sheriffs Office and because the
unincorporated portion of Snohomish County represents 40% of the population, SCSO has 2 seats; of the 2
seats, one is operational staff or SC SO. The second caucus is Everett who has 2 seats, 1 must be operational.
The third caucus is Edmonds, Lynnwood, Marysville with 3 seats. The fourth caucus is the remaining 8
smaller cities who share 3 seats; 1 of which must be operational.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. ADOPTION OF SUBAREA PLAN ZONE MAP AMENDMENTS. DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS, AND PLANNED ACTION FOR HIGHWAY 99 AREA
Development Services Director Shane Hope introduced John Fregonese, Principal, Fregonese Associates.
Mr. Fregonese explained the City Council last reviewed the Highway 99 Area Plan and proposed code
updates on July 31. The focus of tonight's meeting is adoption of the Plan, Development Code/Map and
Planned Action.
Mr. Fregonese described:
• Planning process and timelines
• Extensive Public Outreach
o Numerous meetings with Planning Board & City Council
o Meetings with key property owners
0 3 public open houses
0 4-5 mailings about the project, each to nearly 2200 addresses
o Press releases
o News media articles
o Announcements via email list
o Technical advisory committee meetings
o Ongoing website info
o Facebook posts
0 5 Public hearings
o Misc. communication with interested parties
March 2016 public workshop
■ November 2016 open house
• Community Values
• Distinct Subdistricts
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 14
o Major local and regional destinations on Hwy 99
o International District
o Health District
o Gateway District
• Subarea Plan: implementation strategies, policy recommendations and actions
o Planned Transportation Improvements
• Current Zoning Map
o The only difference between CG and CG2 is the height limit (CG = 60' and CG2 = 75')
o Many current zones are remnants from the county's antiquated zoning
o Some zones do not match with the parcel boundaries
• Proposed Zoning Map
o The proposal is to change these zones to the consolidated CG zone
o Incorporate design standards that will increase vitality and ensure transition into neighborhoods
o More predictable outcomes for community
• Zoning Map & Development Regulations - Goals
o Vitality and livability
o Sustainability
o Consistency with subarea plan
o Reasonable balance of requirements and options
• Site development standards - General 16.60.020
o Pedestrian area - required adjacent to street and composed of three zones: streetscape zone,
pedestrian zone and activity zone
o Comparison of pedestrian area requirements
• Required in existing CG regulations? - no
• Required in proposed CG regulations? - yes
o Comparison of dimensional requirements
Existing CG Chapter I Proposed CG Chapter
Height 60-75' 75' max*
Street setback 4' min. 5'/10'
Side/rear setback 0/15 0/15
Stepback No additional stepback Additional stepback required for upper
required for upper stories stories adiacent to single familv
Site development standards — design standards 16.60.030.A. LE
o Illustration of 15' setback with 10' landscape buffer
o Additional building stepback with adjacent to RS zones
o Photo example of across -the -street transition illustrating streetscape zone separation provided
by street and
o Minimum 5 feet wide type IV landscaping is required along all street frontages where parking
lots abut the street
o Access and vehicle parking
• All off-street surface parking shall be located to the side or rear of the primary building,
except as otherwise specifically allowed by this chapter, and shall be screened from
sidewalk by a wall or plantings between 2 to 4 feet in height
• Outdoor parking areas shall comprise 40% or less of the public street frontage area within
100 feet of the primary street for the lot or tract and, on corner lots, may not be located at
the corner. Requirements of this subsection do not apply to permitted auto sales uses
• High parking requirements can impede development
• Proposed regulations aimed to encourage transit -oriented development options
— 0.75 parking spaces per residential unit less than 700 sq. ft.
— 1.25 parking spaces per residential unit of 700-1100 sq. ft.
— 1.75 parking spaces per residential units greater than 1100 sq. ft.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 15
- Guest parking: 1 space/per 20 units
o Required electric vehicle charging stations
■ One or more electric vehicle charging stations must be provided for all new development
that includes housing (to serve 10% of required parking spaces)
■ Each electric vehicle charging station typically serves two vehicles
• 1 station/10 required residential stalls plus planned capacity to double that amount in the
future
o Required bicycle storage spaces
■ Bicycle storage spaces for multifamily housing, excluding housing for assisted living or
other specialized facilities, shall be provided for residents
■ 1 bicycle storage space for each residential unit under 700 square feet and 2 bicycle storage
spaces for each residential unit greater than 700 square feet
- 50% reduction for bikes stored in common spaces if additional racks are available for
guests
o Paths within parking lots
o Pedestrian and transit access
Site Development Standards - Site Design and Layout 16.60.030.0
1) Pedestrian Oriented Design
• At least 50% of a building's fagade facing the primary public street shall be located within
20 feet of the property line where the primary street frontage exists.
• Building must include a prominent pedestrian entry on the primary frontage
• Vehicle parking shall not be located within the first 20 feet of the primary street frontage,
other than as allowed for vehicle sales use.
2) Alternative walkable design area option
• For sites with unique constraints.
• At least 50% of the building's fagade facing the primary street shall be located within 60
feet of the front property line
3) Exceptions process for pedestrian and walkable design options
■ Exemptions may be allowed by hearing examiner to provide for design flexibility that still
encourages pedestrian orientation and efficient land uses under following criteria:
- Property is located within 300 feet of highway interchange or has unique pedestrian
access constraints
- One or more buildings are located facing the primary street frontage
- The development provides business and pedestrian areas near the primary street
frontage and likely to be active through the day/evening.
- Not more than 50% of required parking within first 20 feet of property
- At least 25% of required amenity space is located to connect building to the street
- Where a site has multiple buildings, amenity space should be located between
buildings to allow shared use
- One or more buildings on the site must have at least two stories of usable space
o Amenity Space
• An area equivalent to at least 5% of the building footprint shall be provided as amenity
space.
• If a vehicle parking area is being added to the site without concurrent development of a
building of at least 2,000 square feet, amenity space must be provided to equal at least 5%
of additional parking area.
o Building Design and Massing
■ On the primary frontage, 50% of the building fagade between 2 and 10 feet in height shall
be comprised of windows or doors that are transparent
o New standard for vehicle parking within buildings
■ On primary frontage, no vehicle parking within first 20 feet of building facing street
How do proposed regulations encourage sustainable development?
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 16
o Examples:
■ Bicycle storage
■ Electric vehicle charging
■ Wider pedestrian areas
■ Not excessive vehicle parking (transit friendly)
■ Amenity space
■ Stormwater management
■ Compact development
■ Landscaping and street trees
o Concept illustration of possible redevelopment
Mr. Fregonese reviewed a proposed change to sign code
• Revision to 20.65.045
o Limit freestanding signs (such as monument signs) to maximum height of 14 feet in this district
o Require freestanding signs to be counted as part of total maximum sign area for this district
Mr. Fregonese reviewed the Planned Action Ordinance (PAO):
EIS, analyzing environmental impacts was issued for Highway 99 area plan.
• To make future project review easier, a draft Planned Action Ordinance has been prepared. It
reflects the EIS assumptions & mitigation
• Planning Board held public hearing & recommended Council adoption of PAO
• City Council held public hearing on PAO on July 31
Mr. Fregonese recommended the Council adopt ordinances for the Subarea Plan, Zone Map and
Development Regulations, and Planned Action.
Ms. Hope explained there are two versions of the Zone Map and Development Regulations in the Council
packet; the only difference is Attachment 2 provides for the normal process of adopting development
regulations; following adoption and publication, the regulations are effective in 5 days. The regulations in
the ordinance in Attachment 3 are the same but it states any project that had design review approval within
a certain timeframe, they are grandfathered under the older regulations if building permits are submitted by
September 30. She acknowledged there were pros and cons to the ordinance in Attachment 3; if the Council
wants the vision to happen, it would be preferable to adopt the regulations with minimal delay but there is
one project with unique circumstances where the applicant is pretty far down the path of a project although
they knew several months ago this process was occurring.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if that much bike space, one space for each unit, was warranted.
Ms. Hope answered more spaces are required for 2 -bedroom units, and the spaces can be reduced by 50%
if common area for bike storage and bike racks for visitors are provided. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas
commented it seemed like a lot of space for bike storage given that people will not ride on Highway 99.
Ms. Hope said the intent was to allow for the possibility to store bikes. Bike storage can be design in
multiple ways such as storage space for each unit that could accommodate a bike.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the applicant already down the path and asked if that was only
Mr. Rambes' project. Ms. Hope said others are thinking about projects but theirs is the only project with
initial design review approval and as far as staff knows, that is the only project affected. The ordinance in
Attachment 3 would allow them until September 30 to submit a building permit and the ordinance in
Attachment 2 contains the standard timeframe. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented that area is
the gateway to Edmonds and it will be important for it to look nice/appropriate.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the PAO as a blanket SEPA for the Highway 99 corridor and
asked if the SEPA was only for the Highway 99 subarea. Ms. Hope answered the EIS done under SEPA
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 17
looked at the Highway 99 subarea and made assumptions about what could be developed and potential
environmental issues. There are few critical areas so the EIS looked primarily at traffic and aesthetics,
transit, pedestrian opportunities, etc. The EIS found if certain mitigations are done such as transportation
safety improvements and continued transit, many of the issues will be mitigated. In addition, new design
standards provide stronger standards than the current code. The EIS also considered police, fire and utility
services and determined that could be met in ordinary ways.
Ms. Hope explained the EIS determined it was possible to do X amount of housing, commerce, facilities,
etc. and mitigate for traffic and other issues. The ordinance states if the code is followed and development
is allowed at the scale envisioned, there will be sufficient mitigation. A significant project may have
separate requirements. Rather than a piecemeal approach to SEPA where each project does an EIS, this was
an effort to look at the area in a holistic way. She acknowledged not every city is able to do a Planned
Action and this is a big step for Edmonds. Mr. Fregonese advised the EIS considers not only residential
units but also development of medical facilities.
Council President Mesaros relayed his understanding of the September 30 effective date in the ordinance
in Attachment 3. Ms. Hope says the ordinance is effective in the standard timeline; any development project
in the Highway 99 corridor that received design review approval July to August would have until September
30 to submit a building permit. Council President Mesaros asked why September 30 was selected and if it
could be September 15. Ms. Hope said September 15 would be acceptable; the applicant advised staff they
would submit this week but September 15 or 30 would provide them additional time.
With regard to Councilmember Fraley-Monillas' comments about bicycle storage, Council President
Mesaros relayed when using light rail in Seattle, he often sees people taking their bikes on light rail as well
as on Sounder. He pointed out the ability to take the new 228' to the new light rail transit center opening
in 2019. Ms. Hope remarked the Swift route is Community Transit's highest route for travel as well as for
bicycles.
Councilmember Buckshnis said she still has concerns with the PAO, remarking it is very new to Edmonds
and the Council only had one meeting to discuss it and it did not go through committee. Further, the Council
never completed its discussion regarding development agreements. She asked if all three ordinances needed
to be approved at the same time. Ms. Hope answered the Council could adopt the Highway 99 Subarea Plan
and the development regulations and put the PAO on Consent Agenda or remove the reference to
development agreements from the PAO.
Councilmember Johnson referred to a letter the Council received today from Arca, a planning and
architectural firm, that raised a concern about building fagades and included a photograph of the new
development on 196th in Lynnwood. She previously mentioned her concerns with that massive fagade and
staff offered to investigate. Ms. Hope said that issue was addressed in the Q&A in the agenda memo; the
proposed code requires articulation and breakup of the fagade.
Councilmember Johnson said the building on 196" has minimal articulation or breakup of the fagade; the
building appears massive from the sidewalk. Ms. Hope agreed the City does not want a massive wall; the
regulations require a top and base, articulation, choice of building elements, as well as fagade articulation.
She assured Edmonds' regulations are different than Lynnwood's. Mr. Fregonese pointed out the setback
would be larger, there would be a pedestrian area in the setback and landscaping, as well as amenity space.
Councilmember Johnson said it was not difficult to drive around and see examples of architecture she liked
and did not like. She expressed concern with a new sidewalk amenity at the corner of 212" & Highway 99,
basically a brick semicircle with benches and a garbage can where she has never seen a pedestrian. Another
example is the basalt sculpture garden on 1961 & Highway 99 where she has never seen anyone. She
summarized those were amenity spaces no one wanted to use and wanted to ensure Edmonds was not
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 18
creating that type of requirement in the code. Ms. Hope answered it is a balance; the City Council wants
amenity space associated with development. The code requires 5% of the building footprint be amenity
space but it does not all need to be in front of the building; some of it can be located wherever it make sense
for the development. For example, a mixed-use building may want some amenity space near the entry
conductive to pedestrian activity but other amenity space may be for use by residents/tenants.
Councilmember Johnson referred to a study on the use of public spaces by William Whyte in NYC. Mr.
Fregonese recalled it included sun, water, people watching, food, etc. and has been influential in design.
The code requires green in the amenity space, seating areas; in between buildings in an appropriate location.
Councilmember Johnson pointed out in the medical district, the Swift station is called the gateway station;
however, the plan has the gateway station at Safeway. Ms. Hope offered to work with Community Transit
on that.
Councilmember Johnson referred to a suggestion that large projects include pathways between the building
and the sidewalk network. She suggested going further; as there will be bicycle storage and bicycles on
transit routes, having a parallel bike route and connections between bicycle routes/paths. Although bicycles
are not encouraged on Highway 99, people do ride bicycles on Highway 99 and there is nothing to prevent
it. Ms. Hope said she will continue working with engineering as plans are updated.
Councilmember Johnson referred to screening parking in buildings and whether second floor parking would
be visible from street. Ms. Hope said no revision was proposed to the code. Parking generally occurs on the
first level; the second stories are required to have glazing and it was unlikely there would be parking. She
concluded that change could be made but she felt it was an unnecessary step at this point. Councilmember
Johnson referred to the Everett Clinic near the Edmonds Park & Ride where the first two floors are parking
and the top floor is glazed. Ms. Hope advised the glazing requirement at the first and second level would
help avoid that.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:30 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1),
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Highway 99 Subarea flan
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 4077, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN AS AN ELEMENT OF THE
CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ATTACHMENT 1. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Development Code Changes
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 4078, ATTACHMENT 3, AN ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE EDMONDS
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE, AMENDING CHAPTER 16.60 ENTITLED "CG —
GENERAL COMMERCIAL ZONE," AND ECDC 20.60.045 ENTITLED "FREESTANDING SIGNS
— REGULATIONS," REZONING CERTAIN PROPERTY TO CG — GENERAL COMMERCIAL
ZONE.
Councilmember Johnson asked what would be different if the proposal occurred under the new code. Ms.
Hope answered it likely could not be built in the same place, it is proposed to be built 90 feet from the street
with parking in front. The building would have to be moved forward and amenity space and pedestrian
frontage provided. Councilmember Johnson asked if it would be an expense to the property owners to meet
the new code. Ms. Hope answered yes, they would be required to redesign to submit under the new code.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 19
City Attorney Jeff Taraday pointed out they would also have to obtain another design review approval; they
already have design review approval.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Planned Action
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 4079, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING A PLANNED ACTION FOR THE
HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA, PURSUANT TO THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT,
REMOVING THE SECTION RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the impact of removing the section related to development
agreements. Ms. Hope answered there is a section of the code related to development agreements, this
would remove reference in the Planned Action to development agreements. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas asked if staff planned to return to Council with an amendment related to development agreements.
Ms. Hope answered at some point but not immediately. She concluded development agreements were a
rarely used tool.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3. AMENDMENTS TO MULTI -FAMILY TAX EXEMPTION CODE PROVISIONS
Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty reviewed:
• History
0 1995 — State Legislature created the Multi -Family Tax Exemption (MFTE) program
o RCW 84.14
o To help spur redevelopment in lagging urban centers
o Fulfill GMA goals to encourage in -fill development in existing urban centers, thereby reducing
sprawl and promoting "smart growth"
• How it works:
o MFTE provides incentive to developers to invest in "residential targeted areas"
o Residential targeted areas — mixed-use centers designated by cities in Comp Plans or Subarea
Plans to receive greater density of multifamily and commercial development
Residential targeted areas
o Often called "urban villages" or "urban centers" —
■ Walkable
• Amenity -rich
■ Transit -supportive
■ Mixed-use areas
o Intended to accommodate future growth in housing and employment
o Designated by cities through Comp Plans or Subarea Plans per GMA
Barriers to development
o Notwithstanding a city's plans, transformation to "urban village" can be fraught with
challenges
o Challenges include:
• Competition from higher -rent locales (e.g., Seattle, Bellevue)
• Complications with urban redevelopment
— Unwilling property sellers
— Need to aggregate multiple properties
— Existing long term leases
— Environmental remediation
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 20
■ These factors can stall transportation to phned-for mixed use centers for decades!
The MFTE program is one small tool to provit an incentive to developers and investors to
overcome these challenges and encourage developent of multifamily and mixed-use projects
No increase in taxes to taxpayers
o Even though a project may be partially exenf from property tax, existing taxpayers see no
additional burden.
o Exempted taxes simply do not accrue during k exemption period
o Upon completion of the exemption period, b entire project is taxed and full tax revenue
accrues
o Programs reach
Program's Reach
o Many cities near Edmonds have implemente6MFTE including Seattle, Everett, Lynnwood,
Kenmore, Shoreline, Marysville, Mountlale:Terrace as well as several other cities in
Washington
o In fact, because of program's widespread aplkation Statewide, many developers have come
to consider the MFTE program as a necessarltool to help overcome the challenges of urban
redevelopment in all but the highest-rent housg markets
MFTE in Edmonds
o In July 2016 Edmonds City Council implemebd the MFTE in Edmonds
o Starting with Westgate Mixed-Use Zone
0 12-year exemption period if the project inclu(!b at least 20% of units as affordable to rent or
buy to low- and moderate-income household flow-income = 80% ofAMI; moderate-income
= 115% of AMI)
Program basics
o MFTE Program is applicable to:
o Projects containing at least 20 dwelling units
o Exempts residential improvement value ONLY'
o Nonresidential (commercial, e.g.) improvemeivalue is NOT exempt
o Land value is NOT exempt Edmonds progranprovides
Proposed amendments
o With experience implementing the program iWestgate, amendments to the code provisions
are appropriate at this time.
o Definitions of low- and moderate-income hotaholds
Proposed definition change requires thamlte calculation of low- and moderate-income
households be based on Snohomish Coul: median family income (MFI), as reported by
US Census and using HUD methodologyXOT the King-Snohomish metro average, as is
the case with existing code language, imptted from the State statute.
R This will put the corresponding rental ratemore in line with local market
■ Example
- The rent + utilities limit for a 2-bedrim unit for a 3-person household earning 80%
of median family income, using Sire statute definition and method, would be
$1.728/month
- While the rent + utilities limit for a 2kdroom unit for a 3-person household earning
80% of median family income, calduted using the Snohomish County MFI as
proposed in these amendments, wou#be $1,543/month
o Required split between low- and moderate-inane affordable units
• The existing code language, imported frotthe State statute, requires that a MFTE project
include 20% of its units "affordable to Is- and moderate-income households," with no
required split between the two types of uii.
• These amendments propose that the pact include a 50-50 split between these two
categories of units, such that the 10% of thenits would be made affordable to "low-income
households" and 10% to "moderate-incorehouseholds."
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 21
o Adding Highway 99 Subarea as new residentipd area
■ These amendments propose to add the ne fgnated Highway 99 Residential Targeted
Area as the City's second area where thelorogram is offered to encourage planned
redevelopment, including market -rate an&le housing
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, INDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO.J1N ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING POR11F CHAPTER 3.38 OF THE EDMONDS
CITY CODE MULTI -FAMILY TAX EXEMPTIONRAM.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed concern with iiinoderate-income housing, commenting
the intent of lower rent housing was to address lower Vrners. She asked how a person earning
minimum wage benefitted from this. Mr. Doherty answer4rogram was created over 20 years ago as
tool to get development to happen in areas where developiplanned. When it was originally created,
there was nothing about affordable housing; the 8 -year a*with no affordable housing and 12 -year
exemption if 20% of the project is low- and moderate- i vas added later. This is not a program
designed specifically to provide the lowest income housin*ogram to bring projects to a community
and for a portion of the project to include housing for l#noderate-income households. The City
Council made that decision last year when it was imphl in Westgate and offered the 12 -year
exemption if 20% of the project was low- and moderate inc! said MFTE is not a low-income housing
program, it is a program to bring desired development to cities in areas where it has been planned
and as a result, provide some affordable units.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the 50/50 ween low and moderate housing. Mr.
Doherty said the State's language has no split; the devel*es that decision. The State's language
states 20% must be affordable to low- and moderate-inco*.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked for an example oild moderate -income levels. Mr. Doherty
referred to the example in his presentation, explaining 8&dian is considered low, up to 115% of
median is moderate. There are other levels below low, thils is not intended to address those levels.
The rent + utilities limit for a 2 -bedroom unit for a 3-p*sehold earning 80% of median family
income, calculated using the Snohomish County AMIlosed in these amendments, would be
$1,543/month. The other 10% of the units could be no hiti115% of median income.
For Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, Mr. Doherty explaidof median income in Snohomish County
is low income; 30% of gross income is the limit on gross l#rent and utilities).
Councilmember Tibbott said the 30% is rent plus utilities. -kdinator for Affordable Housing Alliance
confirmed $200/month for utilities is appropriate so the r&% of median is about $1300 month. To
get that lower rental rate, the tenant has to qualify. Mr. Deed, adding that the building owner has
to confirm every year that the tenants still meet the qualifb Councilmember Tibbott recalled at the
Parks, Planning & Public Works Committee, committee 6 were provided a comparison of Metro
AMI and Snohomish County AMI. The director of the Wonsortium considered this a boon for
affordable housing in Edmonds.
Councilmember Tibbott asked if any other cities ha* a 10%/10% split. Mr. Doherty no.
Councilmember Tibbott commented this represented action. Mr. Doherty said reflecting the
Snohomish County AMI in the calculation is also new. Co6nber Tibbott was very supportive of this
program.
Councilmember Nelson asked if the split could be 150Ad 5% moderate income. Mr. Doherty
answered that could be done. Edmonds is the only commu#iplement Snohomish County AMI; most
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 22
communities simply implemented the State language. Every tweak that requires the developer to do more
than in other communities takes the City further from a level playing field. Councilmember Nelson
observed it previously was 20% and a developer could choose the split; the proposal is a compromise with
a 10% split. He asked if increasing the split to 15%/5% or 18°/x/2% was unreasonable. Mr. Doherty
answered Edmonds is already doing more by using Snohomish County specific income and a higher
percentage. He summarized the more that is required, the less incentive it provides.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if the split could be changed to 15%/5% in the future. Mr. Doherty
answered staff could review and propose a change at any time. Mr. Taraday clarified it not apply
retroactively to projects that had already been built and sign a covenant.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:50 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1),
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO.
4. AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 3.75 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
Economic Development/Community Services Director Patrick Doherty reviewed:
• Background
o RCW 35.87A provides for business improvement districts municipalities "(t)o aid general
economic development and neighborhood revitalization, and to facilitate the cooperation of
merchants, businesses, and residential property owner which assists trade, economic vitality,
and livability"
o In January 2013 Edmonds City Council established Downtown Edmonds Business
Improvement District (aka "Downtown Alliance") adding new Chapter 3.75 to ECC
o Now over four years the Edmonds Downtown Alliance Board and City staff have identified
the need for various non -substantive updates to Chapter 3.75 to reflect current practices and
conditions
o The following amendments were approved by the Downtown Alliance Board at their July 13,
2017 meeting:
• 3.75.010 - Adds "modification of boundaries" to this section in recognition of the potential
for the EDBID to expand.
■ 3.75.040 - Expands the nomenclature for the second, lower -dues -paying classification of
businesses previously denominated simply as "by appointment" businesses to include
"and/or office -based" and adds new examples such as: professional service firms, assembly
or production of goods, corporate offices, etc.
3.75.070 - Adds a clarification that assessments for members in newly expanded areas of
the EDBID will pay their dues after the first full quarter after inclusion in the EDBID.
• 3.75.075 - Removes reference to the original effective date of the ordinance for the one-
year exemption of new businesses from paying dues to a simple reference to "new
businesses" on an on-going basis.
■ 3.75.120 - Removes references to the initial Mayor and Council appointment/confirmation
of EDBID Board members. Updates language regarding the required annual report and
allows for submittal of the annual report by October 31 st of each year, rather than October
1st. This allows for more work to be accomplished in each year about which to report, as
well as dovetail more closely to the City's annual budget process.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO
APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 4081, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, ADDING AMENDING PORTIONS OF A NEW CHAPTER 3.38 TO OF THE
EDMONDS CITY CODE, TO ESTABLISH THE MULTI -FAMILY TAX EXEMPTION
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 23
PROGRAM. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
5. PINE STREET LIGHTING DISCUSSION
Public Works Director Phil Williams referred to a comment during Audience Comments that Public Works
does not care about wildlife or does not know anything about wildlife. He and staff are very attuned to
wildlife, in fact, he has a BS in wildlife biology and a Masters in aquatics biology so he is in a good position
to work with staff to balance natural resource issues with the infrastructure issues that are his primarily
responsibility. He reviewed:
• Background:
0 2014/2015 Point Edwards residents express safety concerns regarding conflicts between cars
and pedestrians as well as general security along Pine Street
o November, 2016 -Council authorizes $20,000 for street lighting on lower Pine Street west of
SR104
o Late 2016 -early 2017 -City staff works with Snooped on a proposal to install street lights.
o May, 2017 PW staff begins installation of lights
o May 2, 2017 Council puts project on "hold" pending further discussion and discussion of
options.
o Last 60 days PW Staff has researched three different lighting options: a package from SnoPUD,
a package from Sternberg and bollard style lights
o Tonight staff is recommending a lighting option
o Photographs of area where conduit was installed where demo garden meets the existing
sidewalk
Options:
o SnoPUD Option
• Three poles —35' mounting height
• 161' spacing
■ 50w LED Acuity Roadway Type II (oval) 3,000 deg. K
• Equivalent to 118w HPS
• Choice of house -side shield or light trespass shield (most aggressive)
■ City installs buried conduit (halted)
• PUD install and maintain fiberglass direct -bury poles and luminaires
■ Monthly charge approx. $6.00 each
■ Photograph of the light fixture and an installation with shields
• Installation Cost: $12,772
• Aerial view of proposed pole locations on Pine Street
o Sternberg Option
• 5 poles -13.5' mounting height
• 82' spacing
■ 32w LED Roadway Type IV (round) 3,000 deg. K
• Equivalent to approx. 80w HPS
• No additional house -side shield or cut-off available
• City does entire installation including concrete bases
■ City owns and maintains system —buys power from PUD
■ Drawing of lighting and specs
■ Cost: $10,876
• Aerial view of proposed pole locations on Pine Street
• Drawing of IES patterns — no house -side shield
o Bollard Lighting
• Photographs of options
■ Example: Lumens — Aluminum Flat Panel LED Bollard path light
— 36-40 inches tall
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 24
- 20 lights 15' spacing at $165 plus tax = $3,623
- Optic control and box = $250
- Conduit and supplies = $300
- 3 employees/3 days plus vactor truck = $2,000
- Total $6,173
Considerations
- Light only on the sidewalk
- No light at the Unocal entrance
- No light where cars leave SR -104 onto Pine Street
- Nowhere in Edmonds have we used pedestrian scale lighting (bollard style) in the
public ROW
- Staff feels more conventional street lights will do a better job lighting the street and
sidewalk and can be shielded to protect the marsh and demo garden
- For those reasons staff is not recommending the use of bollard lighting for this
application
• Light fixture in the hatchery could be better shielded and security provided via a motion detection
light
• Discussion and recommendation
o Initial cost is similar, affordable
o Choice between a city -owned and operated/maintained system vs. a system where SnoPUD is
responsible for O&M and replacement
o Concern regarding the IES footprint of the Sternberg Type N fixture without an additional
shield
o Recommend SnoPUD
Councilmember Tibbott clarified in the SnoPUD option, the shields would on the north side so it would
shield light from entering the demo garden. Mr. Williams agreed, explaining the shields snap into place;
the lights would be mounted with the shield on the north side and additional shielding could be added in
the field. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his understanding that the SnoPUD lights would be 161 -feet west
of the garden and 168 feet to the east. Mr. Williams advised the spacing can be adjusted. Councilmember
Tibbott asked the installation timeline for the three options. Mr. Williams answered SnoPUD would be
much quicker; the Sternberg lights have a 12 -week lead time on delivery of the poles. He was not certain
the lead time for the bollard lights. Councilmember Tibbott commented the bollard lights are used primarily
in a garden or park to light a path.
COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO
USE THE SNOPUD OPTION AND MOVE THE LIGHT 10 FEET TO THE EAST, 155' FROM THE
FIRST LIGHT.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL,
TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO 11:10 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER
JOHNSON VOTING NO.
Councilmember Buckshnis commented the Council has received harsh criticism about dragging their feet.
She assured the residents of Pt. Edwards are part of the community; the process takes time and requires
involving all the stakeholders. It evident to her why this was being fast -tracked but she preferred to slow
down and look at all the options. She asked whether motion detection streetlights had been considered,
commenting there were some in her neighborhood, Mr. Williams did not recommend that as cars turning
onto Pine Street from SR -104 need to see what's in the street ahead and motion detection lights would be
very distracting. He had not seen motion detection done with streetlights. He concluded the most
conventional way to light a street and sidewalk is with streetlights. He anticipated a significant amount of
light could be shielded from the demo garden and still do a good job lighting the street.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 25
Councilmember Buckshnis commented in Wisconsin lights are on timers; citizens turn on the light and it
stays on for 15 minutes. Mr. Williams said a motion sensor would be very helpful on the hatchery light.
Streetlights have photo sensors that turn the lights on and off. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the
light at the hatchery lights only the pond. She emphasized things take time; Sunset has taken two years. She
expressed concern with fast -tracking this project and not allowing all the stakeholders an opportunity to
have input. She expressed concern one Parks, Planning and Public Works Committee member was still
asking questions, yet the Council was being asked to take action tonight.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented bollard lighting is only seen at malls and it is not used to light
much more than a sidewalk. She asked whether requests for streetlights could be handled similarly to
requests for traffic calming. Mr. Williams explained any citizen who wants a light on their street can call
the City; if there is a PUD power pole, staff asks the neighbors and if there is general consensus that
additional light is needed, PUD installs the light and the City pays the electricity. In this area, there are no
PUD poles, all the power to Pt. Edwards and the pump station is underground. Councilmember Fraley-
Monillas concluded adding streetlights is typically an easier process than traffic calming. Mr. Williams
agreed.
Councilmember Nelson said the reason he voted for this project in November 2016 was the same reason he
supported it now, to ensure adequate lighting in that area. Challenges arose when staff realized the lights
had to be installed on the other side of the street and when the demo garden was mowed which he assumed
could be mitigated. Mr. Williams explained Public Works removed a small strip of plants next to the
sidewalk to install the conduit; the area has recovered well and plant material will continue to grow.
Councilmember Nelson appreciated staff looking at other options, commenting the pause resulted in some
changes. Mr. Williams said the SnoPUD option is very similar to what would have been installed. The
pause has resulted in a useful conversation and an opportunity to educate staff about the demo garden. He
recognized the concern with light into the demo garden, commenting on the need to balance that with safety.
Councilmember Teitzel commented a couple months ago an LED streetlight was installed at the end of his
alley; the light is very directional down toward the sidewalk. Even without shielding, the SnoPUD option
does a very good job directing the light; with shielding it will be even more effective. He expressed support
for the motion.
Councilmember Johnson asked how the shields will prevent light going into the demo garden as well as
light the sidewalk. Mr. Williams explained the shields prevent light shining in that direction and direct it to
the ground. The Sternberg lights have a much bigger light pattern. Councilmember Johnson pointed out the
demo garden is adjacent to the sidewalk. Mr. Williams said the pole will be next to the sidewalk, the arm
is 6 feet long, approximately to the curb. He did not envision much light would go toward the demo garden.
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. UPON ROLL CALL, VOTE ON
THE CALL FOR THE QUESTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS AND
COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS JOHNSON, NELSON,
FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS AND TIBBOTT VOTING NO.
Councilmember Johnson asked whether lighting projects like this were usually in the CIP. Mr. Williams
answered the City did not do many lighting project; this is the first one since he has been at the City other
than the lights installed on Main Street. Development typically installs streetlights in accordance with
frontage standards or a citizen requests a light and staff works with PUD.
Councilmember Johnson recalled a project on Hwy 99 for additional street lights. Mr. Williams asked if
she was referring to the grant funded project in the International District. Councilmember Johnson said no,
there is a project for additional lighting in a very dark area of Hwy 99 where there are no crosswalks and
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 26
there have been several accidents. She asked if the Pine Street lights should have been in the CIP. Mr.
Williams was uncertain, noting this was included as a decision package in the budget.
Councilmember Johnson said in her experience the reason for the CIP and TIP is to avoid politically based
projects, one person pushing a project in their neighborhood. This was a proposal as part of the 2017 budget.
Mr. Williams said, from a department perspective, staff normally approaches lighting via a partnership with
PUD. Sometimes that process is simply adding a light to a pole; in this case there are no poles so poles and
lights had to be installed. He was unsure it was a big enough project to be included in the CIP.
Councilmember Johnson wanted to avoid this happening in the future, a Councilmember putting forward a
decision package that has not going through the normal staff vetting and budget process. Mr. Williams said
he submitted that decision package based on the level of interest and emails from residents. Councilmember
Johnson did not recall seeing that in the 2017 budget. She expressed concern with taking action tonight
without information about the budget process. She recalled at the first Parks, Planning & Public Works
Committee meeting, no information was provided. A third option, bollards, that she has been requesting
was presented tonight. She recalled the original concern was pedestrian safety and a request was for
pedestrian lights, more of a bollard style than streetlight. Mr. Williams advised the votes on Pine Street
lighting discussion occurred during the 2017 budget process on the following dates and times:
• November 15, 2016, 49:15, vote 2-5.
• November 22, 2016 1:38:00, vote 4-2-1.
As a result of the November 22, 2017 vote, he proceeded with the project which included poles and
streetlights. He recalled Councilmember Johnson asked about bollard lighting during the November
discussions and more recently; his technical analysis is bollard lights are not sufficient to meet the needs
for lighting in that area.
Councilmember Johnson referred to Pilchuck Audubon Society's request for additional time to determine
the needs of wildlife. Mr. Williams said their only request has been for more time, nothing about the light
type. Motion sensor lights were mentioned but he did not find that appropriate for the public right-of-way.
Councilmember Johnson expressed support for pedestrian movement in all neighborhoods, promoting
pedestrian safety and encouraging lighting wherever appropriate. However, the Parks, Planning & Public
Works Committee disagreed whether the information was complete; therefore, she is unable to make a
decision tonight.
Councilmember Buckshnis said the Pine Street lighting was a Council amendment. Mr. Williams said he
submitted it originally but it did not make it into the budget.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 11:25 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1),
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO.
MOTION CARRIED (5-1-1), COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO AND
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS ABSTAINING.
6. SUNSET AVE PARKING
Public Works Director Phil Williams reviewed:
• Task: Determine where additional parallel parking may be located along the roadway.
• Challenge: Additional Parking may impact adjacent driveways
• Method: Conduct turning study at each driveway where additional parking is proposed.
o Turning radius templates based on large passenger vehicle
o Turning radius templates applied to each driveway, entering and exiting
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 27
o Turning radius templates applied site wide
o Potential parking identified using the turning radius templates
Ingress/egress issues
o Causes:
1. Substandard driveway widths
2. Substandard driveway aprons
3. Driver expectations and performance
4. Large vehicles
o Solutions:
1. Upgrade certain driveway aprons to better allow access
2. Limit additional parallel parking to 7-9 new spaces
Interim Solutions — planning level cost estimate
1. Improve driveway access $46,000
2. Add parallel parking/misc restriping $ 1,100
3. Wrong-way driving reduction $20,800
4. Walkway physieal sepamte $1H;90
5. Misc Signage $ 8,000
Total (2018 decision package being prepared) $75,900
Mr. Williams displayed an aerial view of Casters Street and 2"d Avenue N and curbs preventing left and
right turns. He did not agree with the assumption that traffic would increase on 2"d Avenue N as drivers
going south would take 3rd Avenue N, a much quicker and convenient route to downtown. To the concern
that drivers would use 2"d Avenue N to travel north to avoid traffic, it is currently legal to drive northbound
on 2"d Avenue North and turn right onto Caspers. He did not expect cruising to be an issue.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said 2nd Avenue N was used for cruising in the past and she was not
interested in opening it to 2 -way traffic. She commented there must be a way to block vehicles from entering
2"d Avenue. Mr. Williams suggested physical modifications at 2nd Avenue and an ordinance stating drivers
cannot go past a certain point except to reach specific addresses. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed
support for that suggestion. Mr. Williams pointed out drivers then need a way to get back out.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said people can turn around in driveways. Mr. Williams said homeowners
do not like that.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas expressed support for adding 9 parking spaces on Sunset Avenue. She
often drives that loop and agreed there needs to be additional striping done on Sunset to prevent vehicles
from parking on the walkway as well as increased police patrols.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL,
TO EXTEND THE MEETING TO 11:40 P.M. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER
JOHNSON VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON,
TO KEEP 2ND AVENUE NORTH THE WAY IT IS.
Mr. Williams clarified 2"d Avenue N is not a one-way street, it simply has restricted access from Caspers.
Councilmember Buckshnis supported leaving 2"d Avenue N the way it is and using signage to address any
issues.
Council President Mesaros suggested installing a "local traffic only" at 3rd & Caspers. Mr. Williams agreed
additional signage could be installed at that location. Council President Mesaros suggested a solution could
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 28
be reached using the local perspective from 2od Avenue N residents and Mr. Williams' professional
perspective. He said flashing lights may not be good solution for nearby residents.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-
MONILLAS, TO ADD AN ADDITIONAL NINE PARKING SPACES TO SUNSET AVENUE.
Councilmember Tibbott assumed the nine parking spaces would include funding for striping and additional
signage on Caspers. Mr. Williams agreed. Councilmember Tibbott expressed support for the motion.
Councilmember Johnson recalled when this was presented to the Parks, Planning & Public Works
Committee, it was for discussion only. Mr. Williams advised the intent was discussion at the committee
meeting and forwarding it to Council for action. Councilmember Johnson recalled staff was analyzing
whether the additional nine spaces were possible. Mr. Williams said staff was comfortable nine additional
spaces could be provided, possibly talking with homeowners about driveway aprons and returns. He agreed
with Jim Wassall there were locations on Sunset that the sidewalk in on private property. That is an
historical artifact that should be addressed someday. Councilmember Johnson asked if the additional nine
spaces were contingent on the driveway modifications. Mr. Williams answered they were not contingent
but adjustments to the curb returns would make them more comfortable.
Councilmember Nelson said he will oppose any additional parking on Sunset, expressing his profound
concern with the lack of a physical barrier separating pedestrians from cars after seeing cars inadvertently
driving on the pathway.
MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER NELSON VOTING NO.
COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON MOVED TO PUT A DO NOT ENTER SIGN AT THE
BEGINNING OF CASPERS AND HAVE AN ACCOMPANYING REGULATION THAT ALLOWS
LOCAL RESIDENTS TO ACCESS CASPERS BUT NOT A SIGN AS IT IS NOW STATING LOCAL
ACCESS ONLY. DIED LACK OF A SECOND.
Mr. Williams preferred not to have such strict limits on the signage.
9. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
Due to the late hour, this item was delayed to a future meeting.
10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
11. COUNCIL COMMENTS
12. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION
PER_RCW 42.30.1 10(1)(i)
This item was not needed.
13. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION
This item was not needed.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 29
14. ADJOURN
COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT
MESAROS, TO ADJOURN THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
The Council meeting was adjourned at 11:38 p.m.
r �
DAVID 0. EARLING, MAYOR
Com''
5 PA EY, CITY G
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
August 15, 2017
Page 30