Loading...
10/22/1991 City CouncilTHESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO OCTOBER 29, 1991 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Tuesday, October 22, 1991 The work meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naughten at the Library Plaza Room, 650 Main Street, Edmonds. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor Jack Wilson, Council President Steve Dwyer, Councilmember Roger Hertrich, Councilmember Jo -Anne Jaech, Councilmember Bill Kasper, Councilmember John Nordquist, Councilmember Jeff Palmer, Councilmember rnNCPNT AarmnA ABSENT Amanda Foote, Student Rep. STAFF Peter Hahn, Community Srvc. Dir. Arville Ohlde, Parks & Rec. Mgr. Bob Alberts, City Engineer Jim Walker, Asst. City Engineer Noel Miller, Public Works Supt. Rhonda March, City Clerk Brent Hunter, Personnel Mgr. Scott Snyder, City Attorney 'Barb Mehlert, Recorder COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items are as follows: (A) Roll Call (B) Approval of Minutes of October 15, 1991 (C) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM JEFFERY J. HILL ($191.34) AND ELEANOR M. STUESTALL (AMOUNT UNKNOWN) (D) ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 724 TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM CENTENNIAL FUND TO MUNICIPAL ARTS FUND FOR COSTS RELATED TO CITY OF HEKINAN ART COLLECTION ($2,027) (E) ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 725 TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND TO GENERAL FUND FOR THE COST OF EVALUATING PROPERTY ($20,027) (F) ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 726 TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND TO GENERAL FUND FOR LEGAL EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEFENSE OF CITY CODE LIMITING TERMS ($21,124) (G) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AGREEMENT WITH NAKANO DENNIS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS FOR THE CITY PARK MASTER PLAN ($18,074) BUDGET INPUT/REQUESTS FROM COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS Library Board Funding Request Peggy Olson, 7901 206th P1. S.W., Edmonds, President of the Library Board, presented the Library Board's funding request. Ms. Olson stated the Library Board is very concerned with the appear- ance of the Library, both inside and outside. Ms. Olson requested additional maintenance outside be established as well as additional custodial help within the Library building. Ms. Olson introduced Kathy 'Turner, Edmonds Librarian. Ms. Turner said in the first nine months of 1991, the library has surpassed 1990's traffic by 14.5%. This increase of business in the li- brary has brought on an increase in litter, as well as damage to the inside of the library. Ms. Turner said she has talked with Tom King, Facilities Supervisor, and he estimated that two additional hours from City custodial staff could be added to the existing four hours, resulting in a 50% increase in the amount of time spent in the downstairs portion of the library. Councilmember Kasper inquired on how that affected the outside, and Ms. Turner replied that it doesn't. Ms. Turner said there exists an increasing amount of litter outside the library build- ing, which needs to be addressed. Ms. Turner distributed a copy of a memo to the Council which contained the Library's budget item requests, which was forwarded to Art Housler, Administrative Services Supervisor. Ms. Turner said the Library has $26,000 already approved to re -carpet the downstairs, and noted the carpet is approximately 10 years old. Ms. Turner said it was preferred to carpet the Library in Decem- ber of 1992. Councilmember Palmer inquired on preliminary estimates for the carpet, and Ms. Turn- er replied the low end is $26,000 and the high is $61,000. C�eCouncilmember Palmer requested Facilities Supervisor, Tom King, prepare a memo to the Council addressing the items covered under his budget, such as providing labor for cleaning the Library, etc. which Ms. Turner mentioned. The Council proceeded to discuss the budget line items, and thanked Ms. Turner for her time. Korean War Veteran Memorial Committee Funding Request Jean Belcher, representing the Korean War Veteran's Memorial Committee, thanked the Council for taking time to hear her request. Ms. Belcher noted there were a number of Korean War Veterans in attendance this evening. Ms. Belcher explained the memorial represents the last remaining trib- ute to be placed on the Capitol campus in Olympia to honor war veterans of the Korean War. Ms. Belcher said the Committee is travelling to cities, counties, organizations, and corporations to solicit funding and expressed the urgency of this, due to the fact the war happened over 40 years ago. Ms. Belcher said of the $250,000 goal which has been set for the completion of the memorial, almost $75,000 has been -raised or committed to date. Ms. Belcher said the Committee is request- ing $1250 from Edmonds, which is 1/2 of 1% of the project goal. She noted this identical amount has been requested from other cities as well. Ms. Belcher referred to a packet of information provided to the Council which stated different Cities and corporations who have contributed to the memorial, or are planning to contribute. Ms. Belcher introduced Jack Holman, Committee Mem- ber and Korean War Veteran. Mr. Holman proceeded to give background on the Korean War. Mr. Holman explained the memorial will have two purposes: 1) To express the enduring gratitude of Washington State citizens to the 118,000 Washington State personnel who served in the armed forc- es, and 2) The memorial will provide a permanent reminder of the sacrifices of the 472 Washington State personnel who gave their life and those who are still listed as missing or POW's. Councilmember Jaech inquired if memorials exists for all the other conflicts or wars, and Ms. Belcher replied affirmatively, with the exception of the Korean War and the current Gulf issue. Council President Wilson inquired if the design has been made, and Ms. Belcher replied affirma- tively. The Council discussed the request and expressed their gratitude to Ms. Belcher and all of the Korean War veterans. It was the consensus of the Council that the Memorial is an important project, and deserves every bit of consideration for funding from the City of Edmonds. Historical Society Funding Request Joy Cain, 520 Forsythe Lane, representing the Historical Society, referenced the information the Council had concerning the Historical Society's funding requests. The requests included a Fire and Security System in the building, as well as installation of a telephone system in the Li- brary's elevator. Ms. Cain noted a formal proposal has been received for the elevator phone in the amount of $455.00. Ms. Cain noted that a price for the Fire and Security system has not yet been established, and Mayor Naughten replied that City staff could help narrow down the cost for the proposed system. South County Senior Center Connie Passey, Executive Director, South County Senior Center, referenced a recommended list of facility improvements, requiring attention for 1992 at the Senior Center. Ms. Passey said she would like to request $25,080 from the City of Edmonds, which is a 10% in- crease over last years' request. Ms. Passey identified two special projects which the Center would like assistance from the City. Ms. Passey said one of them is the addition of a concrete 1Ox12 dumpster pad with an enclosure for a dumpster. Ms. Passey explained at present time, the dumpster is located by the Thrift Shop, and seniors have run into those dumpsters both physically and with automobiles. Ms. Passey also said the dumpster pad would be much more aesthetically pleasing now that the parking lot construction is nearly completed. The other special project she would like City help on is rekeying of the building. Ms. Passey explained the building has not been been rekeyed in years, and in the interest of safety, it needs to be done. Ms. Passey referenced four additional projects,. which have been forwarded to Boeing Employee .Good Neighbors for funding. Ms. Passey stated those projects total $56,736, whish would be a nice addition to the value of the Senior Center building. Ms. Passey said if the funding does not materialize from them, the Senior Center will be looking to the City of Edmonds for assistance. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if Ms. Passey is asking for assistance for all six items, and Ms. Passey replied affirmatively, if Boeing Employee Good Neighbors does not choose to participate. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 October 22, 1991 Councilmember Hertrich inquired if any of the requested work can be done in house by City Staff, and Mayor Naughten said it is possible, however, the projects would have to be reviewed by Staff to determine the feasibility. Mayor Naughten inquired if Ms. Passey has talked with Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Manager, concerning possible grant money available for the handi- capped enhancements, and Mr. Passey replied affirmatively, however, the deadline for applying for these funds has expired, and will not open up again until 1993. Councilmember Jaech inquired if surrounding cities such as Mountlake Terrace and Lynnwood provide financial assistance to the Senior Center, and Ms. Passey replied operating money is received from those cities. Ms. Passey noted 75% of the Senior Center's consumers are Edmonds residents. Ms. Passey reviewed the amounts requested from the various cities: Brier, $1513; Lynnwood, $19,300; Mountlake Terrace, $3740; and Woodway, $589. Mayor Naughten thanked Ms. Passey for her presentation, and inquired if any other organizations were present that wished to address the Council on budget requests. Betty Mueller, 209 Casper Street, Edmonds, offered assistance to the Council with regards to outdoor maintenance at various locations within the City. Ms. Mueller explained she works on the South Snohomish County Diversion Court, and is constantly trying to find jobs for the youth who are required to perform community work for various reasons. Ms. Mueller said the children range in ages from 16 to 17 years old, and would do a good job for the City. Ms. Mueller said the only stipulation is they must be supervised, and if this could be worked out, it would save the City money, as there is no fee involved. Mayor Naughten inquired on the availability of the youths to perform the outdoor maintenance, and Ms. Mueller replied Monday through Friday after school, which is either 12:00 or 2:00 p.m., and all day on Saturdays and Sundays. Ms. Mueller will supply additional information to the Mayor and Council. Mayor Naughten thanked the various committees for taking the time to present their funding re- quests to the City, and noted each request will be considered in the budget process. Councilmember Wilson noted that two other groups will be presenting funding requests: the Edmonds Visitors Bureau on November 4, and the Sister City Commission on November 12. REVIEW OF YOST POOL COVER DESIGN VIABob Alberts, City Engineer, said the design for a bubble cover for Yost Pool is complete. Mr. Alberts noted Staff did not review covering systems other than the bubble type. Mr. Alberts noted the bubble design is 115 feet by 103 feet and 40 feet high. A height variance is required and is scheduled to be reviewed by ADB on November 6, 1991, however, that date might be changed so the ADB can accommodate the Postal Service review which has recently come up. Mr. Alberts said if this happens, the height variance issue will be rescheduled for the first part of Decem- ber. Mr. Alberts presented a view foil to the Council showing the basic layout of the bubble cover. Mr. Alberts noted the bubble would be attached to the existing structure in that there would be a fabric cover for individuals travelling from the locker room to the bubble. Mr. Alberts explained the bubble is divided into three sections which will ease installation and removal procedures. Mr. Alberts also noted the cover is constructed in such a way so that it may be used as a tennis court cover in the future, if that is ever desired. With regards to heating inside the bubble, Mr. Alberts noted there are a couple of items that need be addressed which include 1) Consultant needs to take a look at the operation of maintaining the bubble at 85 de- grees, and 2) Consultant needs to review if the 85 degree maintaining temperature will meet the Washington Energy Code. Mr. Alberts asked for approval of the design concept pending an energy cost review by the pool consultant. Councilmember Nordquist inquired if this has been run through the Health Department with regards to the moisture factor, and Mr. Alberts replied negatively, however, Mr. Alberts noted the City has met the criteria the Health Department provided. Council President Wilson inquired on the time line with regards to the energy cost review, and Mr. Alberts replied the height variance issue will be addressed in late November, so all ques- tions should be addressed by then. Councilmember Kasper inquired on the amount of clear footage from the edge of the pool to the balloon edge, and Mr. Alberts replied six feet. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 October 22, 1991 Council President Wilson asked Mr. Alberts when he would like this issue re -addressed at a Coun- cil meeting, and Mr. Alberts replied the second full Council meeting in December, which is Tues- day, December 17th. COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO DECEMBER 17, 1991. MOTION CARRIED. REPORT ON REQUEST FOR FTE AS OUTDOOR RECREATION COORDINATOR Arvilla Ohlde, Parks and Recreation Manager, said she presented a proposal to the Community Ser- vice Committee on October 8th with regards to the hiring of a full time employee for an outdoor recreation position within the Parks division. Ms. Ohlde explained the recent part-time Beach Ranger has resigned, and she feels it would facilitate better planning and be on base and ready to go on January 1, 1992, if she was able to hire a full-time person immediately for the remain- der for 1991. Ms. Ohlde feels there is an immediate need to have all the 1991 beach education programs organ- ized and prepared for schedule distribution to the schools by January 1, 1992. The part-time coor- dinator, in the past, has worked half of November and all of December to prepare for the program start. Ms. Ohlde said the current situation is a unique opportunity to look at the option to fill the full-time position. Ms. Ohlde reviewed with the Council the details of the costs for the remainder of 1991, which is $4,600 for 1.5 months if the full.time position was authorized by Council. Ms. Ohlde explained there is money available to fund this position for the remainder of 1991, due to various savings realized from positions within the Parks division that did not cost as much as was anticipated in the budget. Ms. Ohlde said the City saved $9,000 alone when the Arts Coordinator position was vacant for two and a half months, and proceeded to give other examples. Ms. Ohlde said the Community Services Committee wanted a clarification of what the title or posi- tion really was. Ms. Ohlde wanted to make sure the Council knew this was not a request for a full time Beach Ranger. Mr. Ohlde explained the beach portion is an element of the position, but there are many elements involved, such as environmental, preservation, and education. Ms. Ohlde said this position would provide for the environmental recreations programs, beach ranger pro- gram, outdoor recreation activities and events, environmental grant applications, high ac- tive/adventure programs. Ms. Ohlde said this position would be classified as an NE-10, and at the entry level for an NE- 10, the cost to the City would be $39,767 for 1992, including benefits. Ms. Ohlde feels this entire amount could be recovered through various programs, and proceeded to review revenue predic- tions which would recover the costs. Ms. Ohlde said by broadening the position to an Outdoor Recreation position, the City has the ability to have that person marketing and bringing in reve- nue which is fee based. Ms. Ohlde reviewed the revenue predictions that were included in the Council packets, and dis- cussed the expansion of present fee based programs, as well as the addition of new fee based programs. Councilmember Hertrich inquired on the history of the fees that are charged for the programs offered through the Parks and Recreation Department. Councilmember Hertrich wanted to make sure the fees are competitive with other cities, and keep up with inflation. Ms. Ohlde replied the fees are kept competitive. Council President Wilson asked what the current expenses are to operate the Beach Ranger Pro- gram. Ms. Ohlde said a total of $34,000 was budgeted, with $4,000 of that money used for materi- als. Ms. Ohlde said that entire amount was not spent, however, and said approximately $18,000 was spent in salaries and $4,000 in supplies and services.. Councilmember Palmer complimented Ms. Ohdle.on the thoroughness of her presentation and said he was glad that the proposed position could have a 100% recovery. Councilmember Palmer, however, expressed concern over some of the proposed programs, such as rock climbing and fishing trips. Councilmember Palmer felt these were fairly hazardous kind of activities, and questioned the City's liability potential. Ms. Ohlde said the programs or topics that looked like high impact, can go through the City's Risk Management insurance pool before hand to gain clarification. Ms. Ohlde said the City could also work with a corporation, in example, REI, through a cooperative program, with the City gaining a percentage of return as a result of contracting through them, which would leave the corporation with the liability, not the City. Ms. Ohlde mentioned there were many day excursions that could take place with little or no risk, such as trips to the Olym- pic Mountains, flower observations, etc. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 October 22, 1991 Councilmember Hertrich said Ms. Ohlde listed bike safety programs as a revenue producing program, and reminded Ms. Ohlde this is being covered by the Police Department. COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE IMMEDIATE HIRE OF FULL-TIME OUTDOOR RECREATION COORDI- NATOR IN THE PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION FOR THE REMAINDER OF THIS YEAR AND AMEND THE 1991 BUDGET TO REFLECT 7 FULL TIME EMPLOYEES IN DIVISION 640. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST SECONDED FOR DISCUSSION. Councilmember Nordquist expressed his concern the Council is up against the budgetary process, and he would like this discussion held over until December 4th, when the Council can review the budget. Councilmember Nordquist feels there are some budgetary problems as Council President Wilson has expressed in the past, and would like to hold off for a time. Council President Wilson concurred with Councilmember Nordquist. Councilmember Wilson said Ms. Ohlde has a very strong case, however, he is committed to no new hires because of problems the City is facing, and feels this discussion should be part of the budgetary process. Given the comments that Councilmembers made, COUNCILMEMBER PALMER WITHDREW HIS MOTION, and agreed to review the position in the budgetary process. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST WITHDREW THE SECOND TO THE MOTION. It was the consensus of the Council to continue the program on a part time basis with the under- standing that the Council will address the full time position during the budgetary process. REPORT FROM STAFF TO COUNCIL ON POST OFFICE DEVELOPMENT © Mayor Naughten said there has been numerous calls to the Mayor's Office as well as to Councilmem- bers from citizens regarding the Post Office development in Perrinville. Mayor Naughten said at the last Council Meeting, it was decided that Staff would contact Post Office Officials to dis- cuss these concerns once again, and report back to the Council with the current development. Mayor Naughten said Staff, Councilmember Palmer, and himself did meet with the Post Master, Tom Snyder, on October 21, and reviewed the plans at present. Mayor Naughten said the meeting went well, and asked Peter Hahn, Community Services Director, to review the meeting. Mr. Hahn noted there were at least three representatives from the Postal Service present tonight, including the Post Master, Tom Snyder, and Ken Kirkpatrick, Manager of Design and Construction for the Postal Service. Mr. Hahn also noted there were a number of citizens present who live in the immediate vicinity of the postal office project. Mr. Hahn proceeded to give the Council a chronology of the details surrounding the Postal Service project in Perrinville. Mr. Hahn said the Postal Service representatives have consistently held the position that as a Federal agency, the Postal Service is not subject to local regulation. City Staff contacted Congressman Miller, and after intervention by Congressman Miller, the Postal Service agreed to modify -its site plan. With regards to the on site stream, Mr. Hahn credited Jim Walker, newly appointed Assistant City Engineer, with the preservation of that stream, as Mr. Walker did significant research and put forth much effort in order to have the Postal Service daylight the stream versus culverting, as the Postal Service originally planned. Mr. Hahn pointed out that in late July, City Staff pointed out to the Postal Service there were other engineering concerns, as well as design requirements. Mr. Hahn also said the ADB held a meeting on October 2, 1991, addressing issues of great importance to the immediate neighborhood such as landscaping, elevations, fencing, egress and ingress. Mr. Hahn said no representative from the Postal Service appeared at that meeting, and the neighbors assumed the Postal Service did not care about the concerns of the citizens. In summary, Mr. Hahn said the position the Postal Service held is they are unwilling to do many of the things that the neighborhood wanted; they reserved the right to exclude themselves from the process because the position has been that they do not need permits and approvals from the City, however, at the same time, they say they are willing to abide by the City's code and com- ments, but to the extent that they can do that. Mr. Hahn said Councilmember Palmer met with Post Master Tom Snyder on Friday, October 18, 1991 to discuss these issues, and on October 19, Mr. Hahn met with three neighbors to discuss the same issues. Concerning the meeting on October 21, 1991, Mr. Hahn said that meeting addressed the neighborhood concerns. Mr. Hahn said at that meeting, the Postal Service expressed their willingness to take the points of the ADB Meeting on October 2, 1991, one by one, and address each one in detail. Mr. Hahn noted the Postal Service seemed to be sensitive to those needs which included better EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 October 22, 1991 screening, landscaping, and revision of ,traffic patterns.,, Mr. Hahn said the most important re- sult stemming from the meeting is the Postal Service said they were willing to be scheduled for an ADB Meeting as soon as this can be arranged. Mr. Hahn said this can be accomplished by ad- dressing this issue at the ADB Meeting on November 6, 1991. Mr. Hahn said it was his hopes the Council would allow the citizens in the audience to speak so they could express their views, as they have done a significant amount of research, which he feels is important. Mr. Hahn said it is the neighborhood's view that while the Postal Service may have a point of view where they are not subject to local or state regulation, they do have their own internal Post Office procedures, and it is the citizens' position that their own proce- dures were not followed to the letter. Mr. Hahn said the bottom line is the Citizens are interest- ed in asking the Council to approve an injunction against the Postal Service. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO OPEN THE POSTAL SERVICE ISSUE TO THE PUBLIC, ALLOWING 20 MINUTES FOR TESTIMONY. Under discussion, Council President Wilson inquired how Councilmember Kasper wished to allot the 20 minute time period. After.Council discussion, COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL - MEMBER WILSON TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ALLOT 10 MINUTES TO THE POSTAL SERVICE AND 10 MINUTES TO PEOPLE NOT FROM THE POSTAL SERVICE. MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, THEN CARRIED. Councilmember Dwyer asked Mr. Hahn if there are other issues to be resolved other than ADB is- sues, and Mr. Hahn replied affirmatively. Mr. Hahn explained part of it has to do with providing redundant water service to get adequate water flows, and believes those concerns are being ad- dressed. Mr. Hahn said other than that, the ADB should address the majority of the concerns. Mr. Hahn reiterated, however, the citizens will probably say the Postal Service does not have a right to go ahead with their plans because of a flaw in the process, both with NEPA requirements, and their own internal procedures. Councilmember Palmer said a basic problem the City may be running into time and time again, is the Postal Service is claiming exemption from all local codes, therefore not having to comply with anything, and asked City Attorney Scott Snyder if this statement was correct. City Attorney Scott Snyder said Councilmember Palmer is correct in his statement. Mr. Snyder explained this issue has been before the City since approximately March. Mr. Snyder said he was contacted by Mr. Hahn in March of 1991 and asked for an opinion regarding the position of the Postal Service that the City did not have regulatory zoning over the authority. Mr. Snyder said that was re- searched, and in general, the results agreed with the Post Office. In May of 1991, Mr. Snyder notified the Council of the lack of NEPA notification to the City. At that time, Mr. Hahn wrote the Post Office a letter and got them to confirm their position that this was excluded or exempt from the NEPA process; in other words, they had made their own determination. In summary, the Council in effect, has adopted an approach of negotiation through Staff to achieve mitigation and to try and bring the Post Office into procedures. Mr. Snyder proceeded to give a chronology of events leading up to the present situation for the benefit of the audience. Mayor Naughten opened up the hearing portion of the meeting. Jeff Jones, 18119 76th Ave. West, said he got involved with this issue when he found he and other neighbors might have some input as to the aesthetic look of the Post Office. Mr. Jones said he and other neighbors appeared at the ADB Meeting on October 2, only to find out Postal Service Representatives were not present. Mr.. Jones said this fostered anger in the neighbors, as appar- ently, the Post Office did not feel it was important to find out how the people surrounding the facility felt about the facility, particularly since the neighbors will have to look at this facility every day. Mr. Jones said if the Postal Service would have shown some interest in work- ing with the neighbors, all of this wouldn't be necessary. Mr. Jones said he and neighbors have done significant research on the project, and noted the Postal Office has claimed they are cate- gorically exempt based on the fact they are under 30,000 square feet, however, Mr. Jones said there is a section of the Federal Register indicating they are exempt, unless unusual circumstanc- es exist, which Mr. Jones feels is the case in this particular instance, due to the creek and the human environment. Mr. Jones said it is his contention that the Postal Service does fall under NEPA, and something has to be done now, as they have already started digging. Councilmember Palmer inquired on .the unusual circumstance clause in the Federal Register and asked if the Register defined what an unusual circumstance was, and Mr. Jones replied he didn't find anything that explained what an unusual circumstance might be. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 October 22, 1991 Councilmember Palmer brought up the wetlands issue, and referenced a letter dated June 21st from Mr. Kirkpatrick saying the Postal Service conducted a biological study and engaged in wetlands analysis. Councilmember Palmer asked what definition the Federal Government used with regards to wetlands. Mr. Jones replied the Postal Service told him the file has been lost which had all the information regarding environmental issues. Dianne Eckert, 18223 76th Ave. W, said she contacted law students at the University of Washing- ton, as well as the State and County concerning possible legal action against the Postal Ser- vice. Mr. Eckert said it was the consensus that the City of Edmonds be the one to pursue legal action, if necessary. Ms. Eckert said one of the points that came up, is that it was post time, however, she feels that new issues have come up. Ms. Eckert went on to discuss her research with the Council. Ken Kirkpatrick, Manager of Design and Construction for the Postal Service, said he thought the Postal Service had answered all the questions when the Postal Service met with the Planning De- partment to negotiate and mitigate all existing problems that were on board at that time. Mr. Kirkpatrick noted he was on vacation when the ADB Meeting was held on October 2, 1991. Mr. Kirkpatrick noted he has been in contact with the Postal Service's attorney and environmental staff, and the advice that was given him is that the Postal Service is categorically exempt from local regulations. Mr. Kirkpatrick said a wetland study was performed on the site, and since it involved less than 1/10th of an acre, it was not deemed to be significant. However, the Postal Service wanted to be a good neighbor and left the stream, which in his opinion, is a storm drain, open down as far as possible across the property without disturbing the existing structure. Mr. Kirkpatrick feels this was a big concession on the part of the Postal Service, and cost a large sum of money. Mr. Kirkpatrick said the Postal Service has agreed to other concessions in the interest of being a good neighbor, such as revising entrances and exits to the satisfaction of the neighbors. Mr. Kirkpatrick said the Postal Service is also working with the local neighbors on the aesthetic look of the building, and Mr. Kirkpatrick feels the Postal Service has done more than their share in the interest of being a good neighbor. Councilmember Dwyer said he has heard the position of the Postal Service in that they are exempt from local zoning requirements, however, Councilmember Dwyer asked if there is any reason why the Federal Attorney could not provide the Council with a rationale with why the Government believes that to be true. Councilmember Hertrich referenced the good neighbor aspect, and said the Post Office will be located in a residential neighborhood and retaining a good neighbor image is of utmost importance on the part of the Postal Service. Councilmember Hertrich mentioned the Postal Service is rely- ing on its legal right, however, they are dealing with people and should be sensitive to their needs since it is located in a residential area versus commercial zone. Councilmember Hertrich would like to see this worked out on a non legal basis, where the Postal Service really makes an attempt to address the concerns of the citizens. Tom Snyder, Post Master, 8204 182nd P1. S.W., Edmonds. reiterated that noise and traffic concerns are being mitigated at present time. Post Master Mr. Snyder reviewed the truck schedules and what the Postal Service is doing with regards to keeping the noise level down, as to not disturb the neighbors. This includes re-routing the 40 foot trucks from 4:30 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. so that they do not go down 76th Avenue at all, using instead, Olympic View Drive. Post Master Tom Sny- der then reviewed other traffic concerns, and assured the Council the Postal Service is doing everything under their power to blend in with the community. Councilmember Hertrich expressed his concern over the width of 76th, with regards to the ability of the Postal trucks and the turning radius that exists. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the Postal Service planned to widen 76th, and Post Master Tom Snyder replied negatively. Post Master Tom Snyder felt there would be no problem with regards to the turning radius. Councilmember Palmer thanked Post Master Tom Snyder for his cooperation in trying to mitigate neighborhood concerns. Councilmember Palmer addressed some traffic revisions that possibly would save the Postal Service money, thus, the Postal Service would have funds available within their budget to mitigate items the neighborhood has deemed important. Councilmember Palmer stated the Postal Service is willing to come back to the ADB to go through their process, and asked Mr. Snyder if that meant the Postal Service will abide by the recommendations. and Post Master Tom Snyder replied they will comply as much as it wouldn't add additional costs to the project, and it also depended on what the request is. As far as aesthetic changes, Mr. Snyder does not see any problems complying. COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON, TO DEFER THE YOST POOL PROJECT FROM THE NOVEMBER 6TH ADB AGENDA TO A DECEMBER ADB AGENDA, SO THE POSTAL SERVICE PROJECT CAN BE HANDLED ON THE NOVEMBER 6, 1991 ADB AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 October 22, 1991 * see 10-29-91, pg. 1 (reference only) Mayor Naughten thanked the Postal Service Representatives for coming, as well as the neighbors. Councilmember Dwyer left the Council meeting at 9:30 to discuss Postal issues with citizens present. REPORT ON ANDERSON CENTER WINDOW REPLACEMENT PROJECT Noel Miller, Public Works Superintendent, stated a sample window has been installed recently. Mr. Miller noted this is the second sample window that has been installed, and it has been deter- mined it is of sufficient grade and style per the ADB, and would like to proceed with window replacement. Mr. Miller said it has been determined the window replacement should be done in three phases based on the different areas of the Anderson Center. Mr. Miller explained the first phase would encompass the main building structure from sub first floor windows up to the third story. Mr. Miller noted the second phase will encompass the west wings, and the third phase would encompass the north side of the complex, along Main street. Mr. Miller said approximate cost estimates for the first phase would be $100,000, and noted there is $114,000 available in the budget at present time to accomplish Phase I. Mr. Miller noted that Phase II is estimated at $80,000, and Phase III is estimated at $70,000. Mr. Miller noted that these estimates are probably on the high side. Councilmember Nordquist questioned the request to go out for bids, as Mr. Nordquist thought it might be too soon, if the windows will not be installed until 1992. Mr. Miller replied said Staff is asking authorization to put together a specification packet, so it will be bid ready. Councilmember Nordquist clarified Staff will not be going to bid until Spring of 1992, and would like the funds carried over into 1992, and asked Mr. Miller if this was the case, and Mr. Miller replied affirmatively COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH, TO CARRY OVER THE $114,00 INTO 1992 AND AUTHORIZE STAFF TO PREPARE THE SPECIFICATION PACKAGE FOR WINDOW REPLACEMENT FOR THE ANDERSON CENTER. Under discussion, Councilmember Jaech said the proposed window replacement program for the Ander- son Center has been an on -going process, and wants assurance that this time, the work will be completed and not .be pushed aside because of other City projects. Council President Wilson asked what the time line is between Phases, and Mr. Miller replied a complete phase would be done each year. Council President Wilson asked Mr. Miller if he is con- cerned that the type of window chosen now, might not be available in the future, and Mr. Miller said it didn't present a problem, because each phase has a different architectural style window. Councilmember Palmer inquired why the City did not purchase all the materials at one time to assure uniformity, and to save future costs, and Mr. Miller replied each phase deals with a par- ticular architectural style. Mr. Miller said Phase I deals with the large windows, which would encompass one bid. Mr. Miller said Phase II will compass smaller windows which are much more accessible. Councilmember Palmer questioned the difference of window estimations over a two year period, and inquired why a 66% increase in two years for window costs, and Mr. Miller said he reviewed the costs, and said the estimates put before the Council tonight are probably on the high side, and past estimates were not totally accurate. Councilmember Hertrich complimented City employee Jim Roberts and Staff for taking the time to research different styles of windows, and commended Staff for a job well done. MOTION CARRIED MAYOR Mayor Naughten said that City Attorney John Wallace has suggested that because the tenants are not paying rent on 212th, that eviction notices be sent immediately. This is the property that was condemned at the Public Works site. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON TO PROCEED WITH EVICTION PROCEEDINGS. MOTION CARRIED Mayor Naughten referenced the dedication of the Wastewater Treatment Plant with over 300 people ry P touring the plant, and mentioned it was a great success. U' EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 October 22, 1991 COUNCIL City Attorney "Scott Snyder asked the Council for authorization to share his research and corre- spondence file regarding the NEPA and SEPA issues with the neighbors of the Postal Service facili- ty, should they ask for them, and it was the consensus of the Council to authorize the City Attor- ney to do so. Councilmember Nordquist expressed his pleasure over the comments people made at the dedication of the Treatment Plant. Councilmember Hertrich asked.if any.Councilmember would like to join him for the purpose of meet- ing with Lynnwood Councilmembers to discuss the odor problems at the Lynnwood Treatment Plant. It was the consensus of -the Council that several Edmonds Councilmembers have already done that, and �P Councilmember Hertrich is free to do so also. Councilmember Kasper referenced the meeting on Saturday, October 19. Councilmember Kasper said that it was the consensus of the four Councilmembers who were still left at the end of the meet- ing that the meeting be held again so all Councilmembers would be present. Council President Wilson said he would look into it and get back to the Council with a proposed date. The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. ** THESE MINUTES ARE SUBJECT TO OCTOBER 29, 1991 APPROVAL THE OFFICIAL SIGNED COPY OF THESE MINUTES IS ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 'R ONDA J. LA CIR.XYAN C, PI/-9M ZAY 0 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES **These minutes actually approved 11-4-91 Page 9 October 22, 1991 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY -COUNCIL PLAZA MEETING ROOM -LIBRARY BUILDING 7 :0 0 - 10:0 0 P. M. OCTOBER 22, 1991 WORK MEETING - NO AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION CALL TO ORDER FLAG SALUTE 1. CONSENT AGENDA (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 15, 1991 (C) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM JEFFREY J. HILL ($191.34) AND ELEANOR M. STUESTALL (AMOUNT UNKNOWN) (D) PROPOSED RESOLUTION 724 TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM CENTENNIAL FUND TO MUNICIPAL ARTS FUND FOR COSTS RELATED TO CITY OF HEKINAN ART COLLECTION ($2,027) (E) PROPOSED RESOLUTION 725 TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND TO GENERAL FUND FOR THE COST OF EVALUATING PROPERTY ($20,850) (F) PROPOSED RESOLUTION 726 TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND TO GENERAL FUND FOR LEGAL EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEFENSE OF CITY CODE LIMITING TERMS ($21,124) (G) AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AGREEMENT WITH NAKANO DENNIS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS FOR THE CITY PARK MASTER PLAN ($18,074) 1. BUDGET INPUT/REQUESTS FROM COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS FOR 1992 2. REVIEW OF YOST POOL COVER DESIGN 3. REPORT ON REQUEST FOR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE FOR OUTDOOR RECREATION COORDINATOR 4. REPORT FROM STAFF TO COUNCIL ON POST OFFICE DEVELOPMENT 5. REPORT ON ANDERSON CENTER WINDOW REPLACEMENT PROJECT THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND (60 MINUTES) (20 MINUTES) (20 MINUTES) (30 MINUTES` (30 MINUTES PARKING AND MEETING ROOMS ARE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE THESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO NOVEMBER 4,1991 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES October 29, 1991 The special meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Council Presi- dent Jack Wilson in Room 115 of the Francis Anderson Center, 700 Main St, Edmonds. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor Jack Wilson, Council President Steve Dwyer, Councilmember Roger Hertrich, Councilmember Jo -Anne Jaech, Councilmember William Kasper, Councilmember John Nordquist, Councilmember Jeff Palmer, Councilmember Amanda Foote, Student Representative CONSENT AGENDA STAFF Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor Rob Chave, Planning Manager Peter Hahn, Community Services Dir Bob Alberts, City Engineer Rhonda March, City Clerk Jacqui Austin, Office Admin. Scott Snyder, City Attorney Buzz Buzalsky, Fire Chief Barb Mehlert, Recorder Councilmember Hertrich requested Item (B) be removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Kasper requested Item (C) be moved to the end of the meeting for discussion. COUNCILMEMBER NORD- QUIST, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. The ap- proved items are as follows: (A) ROLL CALL k ,' (D) APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE 2854 AMENDING OFFICIAL STREET MAP AND VACATING 275 FEET OF ALLEY EAST OF 7TH AVE. S. BETWEEN SPRUCE AND HEMLOCK STS. (APPLICANT: MCBRIDE, ET AL/FILE ST-3-91) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 22, 1991 (ITEM (B) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA) Councilmember Hertrich said there was an omission to the minutes, and he would like the Council Assistant to listen to the Council tape of October 22, 1991 and include his comments regarding the Perrinville Postal Office Construction. Per Councilmember Hertrich's request, the following information is added to public record: Councilmember Hertrich referenced the zoning at the current Postal Construction site. Councilmem- ber Hertrich said it was indicated in a letter sent to the Council on October 17, 1991 from a Mr. Jeff Jones, that the Postal site was a multi -family residential site and it was changed to neigh- borhood business. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if that included the whole section, and Peter Hahn, Community Services Director, replied the only part that was changed in the rezone was the 1 horse corral. Councilmember Hertrich inquired on the hours of operation in a neighborhood busi- ness according to City code. Councilmember Hertrich thought it was 11:00 p.m. until 6:00 a.m., unless they applied for a conditional use permit, and Mr. Hahn replied that sounded correct. Councilmember Hertrich indicated the hours of operation for the Post Office in Perrinville will intrude into the the night time close down time in a BN zone, which. is 11:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Councilmember Hertrich said if this facility opens up before 6:00 a.m., will they be required to apply for a conditional use permit, and Mr. Hahn replied the hours of the Post Office operation will be 4:30 a.m. until 6:00 p.m. Mr. Hahn said the position of the Postal Service is they do not have to get local permits, which includes a conditional use permit. Councilmember Hertrich expressed his concern that the business is located in a residential area which has more restric- tions applied to that business. AUDIENCE PORTION Council President Wilson inquired if anyone from the audience wished to address the Council on any issue. No member of the audience came forward. Council President Wilson closed the audience portion of the Council Meeting. Mayor Naughten arrived at the Council Meeting at 7:10 p.m. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING SETBACK ADJUSTMENT TO REDUCE 25-FOOT rrT ry - c CCCT TA Aki AM A nc IC T 1 N i3Rn(1 7a A F_ W_ _1_I_ANT : CLA EN E C P N: Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor, noted the matter before the Council is an appeal on a decision of the Hearing Examiner, which was an appeal of a Staff decision relating to a setback adjust- ment. Mr. Wilson stated the applicant is Helen Mae Deller, represented by her daughter, Heidi Marier, and the appellant in both instances is Clarence and Tina Capon. Mr. Wilson explained the issue under appeal is a request by Helen Mae Deller for a Setback Adjust- ment to allow a deck addition to be located within 12-feet of the east property line of the sub- ject. The subject property is an existing -residence located on a corner lot, of which both the south and east property lines are adjacent to public rights -of -way. Mr. Wilson said the request- ed deck addition is located on the east side of Mrs. Deller's residence. The appellants (Mr. and Mrs. Capon) are owners of the adjacent property located to the west of the subject property. Mr. Wilson explained that on October 3, 1991, the appellants, Clarence and Tina Capon submitted to the Planning Division a letter of appeal of the Hearing Examiner's decision on a appeal of a Setback Adjustment granted to Helen Mae Deller (appellee). The appeal filed with the City Coun- cil is a direct response to the September 20, 1991 decision of the Hearing Examiner to uphold the approval of a Setback Adjustment for a deck addition granted to the appellee by the Planning Divison's Hearing Officer for the residence located at 23800 74th Ave. West. Mr. Wilson referred to an exhibit within the Council Packet, which showed the configuration of the proposed deck. Councilmember Dwyer said the original application appeared to be for a reduction of a setback from 25 to 16 feet. Councilmember Dwyer noted the decision seems to reduce it from 25 to 12.5 feet, and asked Mr. Wilson if these statements were correct. Mr. Wilson replied the intrusion was up to 16 feet into the setback yard and the approved reduction was to 12-1/2 feet because in their setback adjustments, it can only be approved up to half the required setback. Councilmem- ber Dwyer referenced the letter marked Exhibit D from Mrs. Stella Boecher, who states that if this deck and hot tub are placed where the applicant requests, then the Dellers would be able to look down from their deck and hot tub right in her windows. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the deck was built without a setback adjustment, would this statement by Ms. Boecher hold true. Mr. Wilson replied the property slopes from the west to the east and the way Ms. Boecher describes her property, she lies further east of Ms. Del ler's property, which is down hill, therefore, any structures built on the Deller property are all going to be above grade or higher up. Mr. Wilson said with regards the issue of being able to see into Mrs. Boecher's windows, he doesn't believe that issue was ever fully resolved or the facts were fully drawn out. Councilmember Nordquist brought up the fact that Ms. Boecher's residence is across the street on the lake, which would abut the access to the lake, which is really below street level to some degree. Council President Wilson asked Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson if the proposed structure ob- structs any view at all in any other direction, and Mr. Wilson replied that the issue of view lost is one of the reasons why Mr. Capon is appealing the decision. Mr. Wilson said Mr. Capon feels the proposed structure and possibly, the security fence would have an impact on their view. Mr. Wilson said to some degree the proposed structure will be visible within Mr. Capon's view corridor to the lake, however, Council President Wilson pointed out this is different than view blockage. Councilmember Palmer asked Mr. Wilson if Staff determined that the shape of the lot was irregular or had a non -typical frontage orientation when they did their review of the proposal, and Mr. Wilson replied the two decisional issues are 1) Is it a creative design, and 2) does it preserve a natural feature on the property. Mr. Wilson said Mr. Bissell, Code Enforcement Technician, did not seem to make a conclusion with regards to preservation of natural features. Councilmember Palmer explained that in the City Code Book, under Setback Adjustments, it splits it into two areas, which he had just mentioned. Councilmember Palmer said he is trying to find out whether a determination was made solely on preservation of natural features or creative design, and whether there was some decision by staff that this was an irregular shaped lot. Mr. Wilson said the conclusions were based on creative design and not an irregular shape of the lot. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if Mr. Bissell made on on -site visit and determined if there was view loss, and Mr. Wilson replied that Mr. Bissell did perform a site investigation on the sub- ject property, but Mr. Wilson has no way of knowing exactly where Mr. Bissell stood on the proper- ty when he made his determination. Mr. Wilson noted that Mr. Bissell generally looks at a situa- tion from as many different angles as possible. The Council proceeded to review various exhibits with the packet. After a review of the exhib- its, Mayor Naughten opened the public portion of the hearing. Heidi Marier, 1338 N. 150th, explained she is the representative for the applicant, Helen Mae Deller as well as her daughter. Ms. Marier stated this is the third appeal on her mother's deck and hot tub. Ms. Marier said all of the matters that were brought forward in the first two ap- EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 October 29, 1991 peals were investigated and debated. Ms. Marier noted six neighbors have testified the deck and hot tub location are acceptable as designed. Ms. Marier addressed the issue of a letter written by Ms. Boecher which said that if the proposed deck and hot tub were built in the requested location, people would be able to look in her win- dows. Ms. Marier responded there exists a great slope of the land, and there is a six foot hedge which grows up on 74th West, and the only way somebody could look over that down into Mr. Boecher's yard is if you used a ladder. Ms. Marier said the City's Planning Department reviewed the original design and recommended changes for compliance to the City's code for a setback ad- justment to allow a 12-1/2 foot setback, and to allow the addition of a deck to an existing deck. Ms. Marier noted these conditions were incorporated into a revised design. Ms. Marier also said a land survey was completed, and furnished to the Planning Department per instructions of the Hearing Examiner. Ms. Marier addressed the issue of lost view that Mr. Capon has stated. Ms. Marier stated views are not the issue in a setback, rather the issue is whether the deck meets the setback require- ments, which it does according to the City's Planning Department and the Hearing Examiner. Ms. Marier submitted photos marked "Exhibit 1" to the Recorder, Barbara Mehlert, for distribution to the Council. The photographs depicted the existing deck from several different areas, includ- ing Mr. Capon's property. Ms. Marier said the pictures show that very little view is lost, if any, as Mr. Capon has suggested. Ms. Marier said Mr. Capon has suggested the deck be built in the back yard. Ms. Marier said if she was to build back there, the land would have to bulldozed, two Magnolia trees would have to be cut, and open space would thus be destroyed. Ms. Marier submitted photos marked "Exhibit 2" to the Recorder, Barbara Mehlert, for distribution to the Council. The photos depicted the back yard, where Mr. Capon has suggested the deck be built. Councilmember Palmer referenced the Exhibits which made reference to the open space between the four houses. Councilmember Palmer inquired if the applicant would be willing to record a cove- nant in favor of the City designating that feature to be preserved, and Ms. Marier replied affir- matively. Walt Sellers, Attorney for Clarence and Tina Capon, who reside at 7410 McAleer Way, Edmonds, said he is representing them on this appeal. Mr. Sellers set up two exhibits, Marked "Exhibit 3", which is the Proponents Proposal, and "Exhibit 4"; the Appellants Alternative Plan. Mr. Sellers proceeded to review Exhibit 3 with the Council. Mr. Sellers noted the City's Planning Department stated the Capons have no view, and it is Mr. Sellers opinion they were incorrect when they made this assumption. Mr. Sellers said the proposed deck and hot tub location would present a view obstruction to the Capons. Mr. Sellers said it was his opinion the applicant could place the deck down within three feet of the ground, which would not be in violation of any setback guide- lines. Mr. Sellers said the applicant wants the deck to be built higher to take advantage of view, and that is what the real issue is. Mr. Sellers introduced Stuart Clark, a licensed Real Estate Appraiser, 313 Prospect Street, Seattle. Mr. Sellers asked Mr. Clark to explain to the Council his findings with regards to the matter at hand. Mr. Clark said he made a preliminary inspection of the property, and concluded there would be a minor view coridoor loss, approximate- ly 10 to 15%, to the Capon property. Mr. Clark distributed a written report to the Council which included his findings of fact to the City Council. Mr. Sellers asked Mr. Clark if he found any economic losses as well to the Capon property, and Mr. Sellers replied affirmatively, and estimat- ed the loss in view would result in 10% to 15% of the total estimated $40,000 real estate value. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if there was a view loss from the house proper or the house and the deck, and Mr. Sellers responded there was a slight loss from the house. Mr. Sellers referred to "Exhibit 4" which illustrated the Appellants Alternative Plan. Mr. Sellers said this exhibit showed an alternative, in that the deck could be moved three feet to the north, thus eliminating any problems, as Mrs. Deller would get her deck, and Mr. Cappon's view would be restored. Mr. Sellers believed this matter should be remanded and the applicant should be required to move the deck three feet to the north. Councilmember Hertrich inquired on the location of the hedge, and Mr. Sellers referred the ques- tion to his client, Mr. Capon. Clarence Capon, 7410 McAleer Way, stated there were some overgrown shrubs located on the right of way. Councilmember Hertrich inquired as to the height of the hedg- es, and Mr. Capon replied they vary in height from five, six feet on up. Councilmember Nordquist inquired on the covenant on the Garvie property and asked if that was something the Garvies' yielded to, and Mr. Sellers replied he was not familiar with the actual language of the covenants. Randy Garvie, 23816 74th West, said he has spoken at previous hearings on behalf of Mrs. Deller. Mr. Garvie said he feels the deck is an asset to the neighborhood and he has no problems with it EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 October 29, 1991 whatsoever. Mr. Garvie noted he has four large windows which overlook Mrs. Deller's deck, and feels it does not present a problem for him. Referencing the issue of views, Mr. Garvie said the proposed deck and hot tub does not cause a loss of view to anybody. Robert Wayston, 23734 74th West, suggested that a representative from the Council go and view the subject at hand. Mr. Wayston said there is no view loss to any parties as a result of the deck 'Mrs. Deller wishes to build. Dane Stoke, 7403 McAleer Way, stated he is not affected by the building of the deck, however, he and other neighbors have written a letter stating that the proposed deck and hot tub does not present any problems in the neighborhood. Mr. Stoke brought up the fact that the deck concept was included in the original plans of the house where it stands today. Ms. Stoke said the Dellers have met the setback criteria and should be allowed to continue. Heidi Marier, representative for the applicant reviewed Exhibit 1, which showed the existing deck. Ms. Marier addressed the issue of view, and reiterated there is no loss of view. Ms. Marier also stated the house her mother lives in was originally built by Mr. Capon, and it seems to her if he was so concerned with view, this subject would have come up years ago. Councilmember Dwyer asked Ms. Marier if she thinks it is reasonable to consider Mr. Seller's suggestion that any additions should be built three feet to the north, and Ms. Marier replied the deck is 95% completed. Councilmember Dwyer asked Mr. Marier to start from the premise that it was not 95% completed. Ms. Marier replied it would not work as there is a slope of the land, which is one of the reasons the contractor planned the hot tub in its present location. Councilmember Palmer referenced the appellant's alternative proposal, and asked Ms. Marier if she could get the same square footage as her original proposal, but have the deck three feet to the north, would that be a viable option. Ms. Marier's son replied negatively due to the fact that the steps at that distance would have to be at a greater angle, and his grandmother is elderly, and would not be able to maneuver up and down the steps. Councilmember Palmer commented that the appellant is claiming they are incurring somewhere be- tween a $4,000 and $6,000 loss to their view if the deck is constructed as proposed, and Council - member Palmer said he doesn't know if the applicant has shown interest in moving the deck to the point of financial participation. Ms. Marier replied they have changed many of their original plans to come into compliance with City standards. Councilmember Nordquist asked if the original south lot line of the deck is the same line that exists today, and Ms. Marier replied affirmatively. Councilmember Nordquist said it is his under- standing that the concern is the view down that corridor. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the meeting. Councilmember Dwyer suggested the Council as a whole visit the property and view it for them- selves. Councilmember Dwyer feels a•collective visit to the property might be better than trying to discern whether or not there is a view loss, and a variety of other concerns. Councilmember Dwyer said if view loss is determined to be a factor, then it is relevant. Ms. Marier and Mr. Capon gave the Council permission to enter upon their property, respectively. Councilmember Palmer stated a visit to the property would be a good idea. Councilmember Palmer also noted he has some additional concerns regarding the Hearing Examiner's decision and believes those can be addressed later on in the process. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO HAVE THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT CHOOSE A DATE WITHIN SIX WEEKS FOR THIS MATTER TO RETURN ON THE AGENDA, AND IN THE INTERIM, STAFF IS TO ARRANGE A SITE VISIT TO EITHER OR BOTH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES. MOTION CARRIED, with Council President Wilson voting no. City Attorney commented for the benefit of the parties involved and the public, that when the Council comes to view the property, 'it should be -understood they will not be there to take testi- mony or respond to questions or comments. CONTINUED HEARING ON APPROVAL OF HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PROPOSED 5-LOT PRD/s0B9rvMT1N 7 18208 76TH AVE. W. L MA EL N RD-2-90 -2-90 AND ,AI CONTINUED HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PROPOSED 5-LOT APPLICANT: H MA BELT FILE N-25-90/P-2-90 Jeff Wilson, Planning Supervisor, distributed information to the Council which consisted of infor- mation regarding the new site plan. Mr. Wilson said he also has a copy of a letter sent to Mr. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 October 29, 1991 Bob Tjossem, attorney and representative to the applicant, Mr. Belt, from Mr. Dick Meyers, who works with Shapiro and Associates, which is the firm that conducted the wetlands analysis. Mr. Wilson noted that analysis was received today, and distributed a copy of the letter to the Coun- cil. Councilmember Palmer noted the Council is about to be presented with a new proposal for a 4 lot subdivision versus a 5 lot PRD previously presented. Councilmember Palmer asked City Attorney Scott Snyder at what point does a revised application considered to be a new application, and Mr. Snyder said that is a factual decision for the Council to make. Mr. Snyder said one thing the Council may wish to consider is whether all preliminary procedures reviews that were conducted from SEPA through Staff reviews have adequately considered the issues as they relate to 4 as opposed to 5 lot subdivision. Councilmember Jaech said she was looking at the letter that Mr. Wilson just distributed, and realized that Mr. Tjossem, attorney representing Mr. Belt, is listed on that letterhead. Council - member Jaech said she deals with a trust, and Mr. Tjossem is co -trustee of the trust, and wanted to disclose that fact. City Attorney Scott Snyder said it is not an automatic disqualifier under the Conflict of Interest statute, and asked if there were any members of the public present that would object to Councilmember Jaech's participation in the proceeding. No one in the audience objected to Councilmember Jaech's participation. Planning Supervisor, Jeff Wilson, noted this subject was last reviewed by Council in December of 1990. Mr. Wilson said the proposal before the Council consisted of two items; 1) presentation to the Council on a recommendation by the Hearing Examiner to approve a 5 lot PRD for Mr. Belt, and 2) at the same time, The Council also considered an appeal of the Hearing Examiner's recommenda- tion regarding the 5-lot PRD subdivision proposal. Mr. Wilson referenced the Council minutes from the December, 1990 meeting, and said the Council had continued the item until additional information was provided. Mr. Wilson said the scope of that information related to the issues surrounding presence of wetlands on the subject property. Mr. Wilson noted there has not been any additional information presented to Staff prior to this hearing, and basically the packet of information before the Council is the same packet that they reviewed in December of 1990. Mr. Wilson stated the information that Staff received in looking at the revised proposal for a 4-lot PRD provided the additional wetlands that was requested, however, Mr. Wilson feels that he would like additional information in order to evaluate the new site plan proposal. Mr. Wilson said he would like a delineation of the wetland boundaries, along with the field notes. Mr. Wilson noted that because that information is not available at present time, Staff is unable to make a recommendation regarding the new proposal. Mr. Wilson stated it would be a Staff recom- mendation to continue the hearing until the additional information is received. Councilmember Hertrich stated he would like to discuss french drains, specifically the one on the upper right hand part of the subject property. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if this drain would be closed in, and Mr. Wilson deferred the question to City Engineer, Bob Alberts. Council - member Hertrich said he brought this question up because the City has made quite an effort in the area of daylighting of streams whenever possible. City Engineer, Bob Alberts, presented a view foil to the Council which showed the existing french drain located on the eastern property line. Mr. Alberts noted that according to engineering requirements, you cannot build a structure within 10 feet of that drain. In response to Council - member Hertrich's question concerning daylighting, Mr. Alberts stated he believed the intent was to leave it open and not build within 10 feet. Councilmember Hertrich asked Mr. Alberts if he needed information concerning this subject, and Mr. Alberts replied negatively. Councilmember Palmer asked City Attorney Scott Snyder if this was the appropriate time for the Council to make a decision whether they consider this to be a new application versus a continua- tion of the existing application, and Mr. Snyder replied if the Council felt the matter should be remanded or tabled, those would be nlrn debatable motions that would take precedence. Councilmember Hertrich asked if a conflict existed, as Mr. Wilson indicated more information is needed for Staff to make a decision, and Mr. Alberts doesn't feel any more information is need- ed. Mr. Alberts replied that Planning and Engineering are looking at what they need from two different positions. Councilmember Hertrich assumed Mr. Wilson was looking for additional infor- mation regarding wetlands and boundaries, and Mr. Wilson replied affirmatively. Council President Wilson said he would like to continue the hearing in order to receive all the necessary information. Councilmember Kasper asked Planning Supervisor Jeff Wilson if he had previously asked for this information, and Mr. Wilson replied affirmatively. Mr. Wilson referred to the minutes of Decem- EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 October 29, 1991 ber 4, 1991, and reviewed the request of the applicant at that time. Mr. Wilson said the Council motion was to gather additional wetlands information. It was noted in the December 4th minutes that "Councilmember Hertrich asked Staff how to proceed in obtaining the information, and Plan- ning Director Mary Lou Block said she WoUld request the applicant to have its engineering firm conduct a wetland delineation or hire another firm with expertise in wetland delineation". Mr. Wilson stated the minutes reflected a statement by Councilmember Dwyer; "Councilmember Dwyer clarified the motion allowing the hearing open only to hear additional information regarding wetlands, but the motion did not require anyone expend any amount of money to obtain that informa- tion". City Attorney Scott Snyder said before the Council reached a decision, it was his suggestion the Council listen to the applicant in light of Councilmember Dwyer's comments previously. Mr. Sny- der said basically, the Council had continued this hearing for a limited time to gather informa- tion. Mr. Snyder said some of this information has been provided. Councilmember Kasper inquired as to who activated this hearing again, if all information has not been received, and Mr. Wilson replied the applicant had requested this continued hearing. Mr. Snyder commented it was important the Council not change the rules mid -stream and continually ask for new information from the applicant. The Council discussed the issue of continuing the hearing to another date or continue on this evening. Mayor Naughten suggested to continue the entire hearing and in the mean time, let the people testify who were present. Mayor Naughten said at that time, the Council could make a decision as to whether enough information has been gathered. Councilmember Palmer was concerned that the wetland information that Staff asked for has not been received to the degree that Staff wished. Councilmember Palmer said he would like the Council to hear from the applicant and ask specific questions having to do with this information rather than going straight to another delay of un- known dimension. Mayor Naughten asked Councilmember Palmer if he wanted the Council to hear only from the appli- cant on one specific issue, and Councilmember Palmer replied he did not want to delay the entire proceeding as suggested. Mayor Naughten clarified his position that the Council hear from the applicant, appellant, and public, then the Council can make a decision as to whether the hearing should be continued. City Attorney Scott Snyder said the Mayor might want to remind the public present that this is a continuation of a previous hearing called for to gain specific evidence requested by the Council, and the parties involved might find themselves out of order if they repeat prior testimony. Bob Tjossem, 1313 Market Street, Kirkland, Attorney, representing the applicant, Mr. and Mrs. Tom Belt, distributed copies of the December 4th, 1991 Minutes to the Council regarding this sub- ject. Mr. Tjossem reviewed those minutes with the Council and pointed out the wording of the motion on Page 9 at the top stating "COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER TO OPEN THE HEARING TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT OR STAFF TO PROVIDE INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO WETLANDS". Mr. Tjossem said "Allow" is the key word, as the motion did not request any specific information. Mr. Tjossem also noted the area of the December 4th minutes where Councilmember Dwyer made the following statement: "Councilmember Dwyer clarified the motion allowed the hearing to be open only to hear additional information regarding wetlands The motion did not require anyone expend any amount of money to obtain the information. He said the motion simply defined the scope of what may be testified to at the next hearing." This information is located on Page 9, paragraph 7 of the December 4, 1991 minutes. Mr. Tjossem also quoted Councilmember Palmer's statement included in the December 4, 1991 min- utes, page 9, paragraph 8, "Councilmember Palmer inquired, then, if Staff was not directed to gather any particular information if the Council would await information from either the appli- cant or the appellant. Councilmember Dwyer said a directive was not given to anyone. He said, however, it would be incumbent upon Staff, the applicant or the appellant to produce that informa- tion if it was at their disposal." Mr. Tjossem said it was his opinion that Council continued the hearing to allow people to gather information if they so desired. Mr. Tjossem said the applicant has obtained a wetland reconnais- sance, and it is Mr. Tjossem's opinion it delineates the general line of the wetland area, and Mr. Tjossem said he doesn't see the need to spend the additional $2,000 to $3,000 to define the line. Mr. Tjossem said what the applicant did in light of the reconnaissance, which the Council has before them, is make a new proposal which reduced the 5-lot PRO to a 4-lot PRD. Mr. Tjossem reviewed with the Council, the plans for the previous 5 lot PRD, as well as the new 4-lot PRD. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 October 29, 1991 Mr. Tjossem noted the previous 5-lot PRD indicated a 25 foot setback from the stream, with every- thing west being open space. Mr. Tjossem noted the new 4-lot PRD allows for much better siting of the four houses. Mr. Tjossem noted the new 4-lot PRD allows for a 50 foot setback from the stream. Mr. Tjossem stated this revised plan allows the four houses to be further away from the stream. Mr. Tjossem noted the new proposal of a 4-lot PRD is an enhancement over the previous 5-lot PRD and the information provided concerning this proposal should be enough for the Council to make a decision. Mr. Tjossem introduced Mr. Dick Meyers, Wetland Mitigation Specialists for Shapiro and Associates, Inc. Mr. Tjossem said Mr. Meyer will address the issue of the need or lack of need for further delineation. Dick Meyers, 506 2nd Ave, Seattle, Wetland Mitigation Specialist, said he has done an approximate wetland boundary, and has not been requested to perform studies which would actually delineate that boundary. Mr. Meyers said there is a difference between delineation and wetland reconnais- sance. Mr. Meyers referred to the exhibits of the proposed 4-lot PRD. Mr. Meyers noted that mitigation for wetland impacts resulting from the development could include enhancement of the existing wetland area through planting of additional coniferous trees, in order to hasten the process of natural succession from a primary deciduous forested wetland to one that supports a greater variety of trees and thus a more diverse habitat. A small amount of wetland could be created near the south property line by shortening the existing french drain and installing a level spreader that would encourage sheet flow of the drainage water and greater soil saturation. Mr. Meyers noted the under development proposal, a majority of the wetlands would be preserved, and the creek would be protected by a 50-foot buffer. A limited amount of mitigation for impacts to the wetlands appears to be possible to offset the intrusion of two of the houses into the wetlands. Councilmember Hertrich asked if they were going to create wetlands and dry up or fill in other areas where it would be wetlands, and Mr. Meyers said that is possible. Councilmember Hertrich asked Mr. Meyers to describe the difference between the delineation process and the process Mr. Meyers used. Mr. Meyers responded a wetland reconnaissance is a less specific look at the site, which may or may not flag an actual line. Councilmember Hertrich asked if the wetland reconnais- sance included a certain criteria, and Mr. Meyers said the reconnaissance is more on a general level, where vegetation, soil, and hydrology are looked at, but a detailed study is not per- formed, however, in some eases, field notes are collected. Mr. Meyers noted a delineation is a much more involved process, where the field notes are evaluated and incorporated into a report which gives a conclusion about the field notes. Councilmember Hertrich asked Mr. Meyers if the results from the field work are available for Staff to review, and Mr. Meyers said the notes by themselves don't mean very much. Councilmember Palmer inquired if a reconnaissance is generally less specific than a delineation, and Mr. Meyers responded affirmatively. Councilmember Palmer inquired on the accuracy between the two. Mr. Meyers said it depended on the level of the reconnaissance. Mr. Meyers said on this specific reconnaissance, it is between 70% to 90% accurate. Mr. Meyers noted it is hard to determine the accuracy until a delineation is performed and evaluate the data that was gathered. Mr. Meyers explained to the Council if he was requested to complete the wetland delineation, then that would be completed, then he would overlay that with the proposed improvements to the site and come up with a calculation with how much square footage was affected by the improvements. Mr. Tjossem noted he doesn't feel it is a legal obligation on the part of the applicant to per- form a delineation, but the applicant is willing to commit as a condition of approval. Councilmember Hertrich inquired if the delineation process completely eliminated the majority of the area where the two center houses were going to be, could that be mitigated, and Mr. Meyers said at this point, it is hard to say what the exact mitigation calculations would be, but he said it appears at this time to be possible. Councilmember Palmer asked what the distance is between the 50-foot buffer and the nearest struc- tures, and Mr. Meyers replied approximately a minimum of 20 feet. City Attorney Scott Snyder interjected the fact the City has only a 15 foot setback requirement as a substantive generalized requirement that is applicable to all development in the City across the board. Any development, particularly one that is located in an environmentally sensitive area, and has wetland implications, are subject to SEPA review, and specific mitigation measures can always be imposed in response to observed environmental conditions that are project specific. Councilmember Hertrich inquired, under SEPA do you have to approve the proposal before that route is taken, and Mr. Snyder said he feels that is the issue the Council is struggling with now. Mr. Snyder said there are two ways to deal with it. The Council could remand it if they feel there EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 October 29, 1991 is not sufficient information, or the responsible official is always free to pull the mitigated declaration of non -significance and request further information. The ability of the SEPA official to do this, however, ends when a permit is issued. Mayor Naughten opened up the public portion of the public hearing. Marilyn Adams, 7310 Soundview Drive, representing the appellants, William and Pamela Harold,noted William and Pamela are only two of several appellants who oppose the proposed subdivision. Ms. Adams distributed a letter to each Councilmember, that stated the opinion of several appel- lants. In essence, Ms. Adams said the appellants were pleased that the 5 lot subdivision was reduced to a 4 lot subdivision, however, several outstanding requirements have yet to meet the appellants approval. Ms. Adams noted there were several conditions that should be met before any permits are issued including: Supplying a wetlands delineation map showing current boundaries; Producing field notes of any wetlands study; Identifying all locations where water emerges on the site; and, Provide plans for erosion and sedimentation control consistent with the proposed De- partment of Ecology storm water management manual. Ms. Adams urged the Council to consider this information, and requested that the wetlands informa- tion received be verified by the Washington State Department of Ecology. Ms. Adams also stated the City's Planner has indicated that he has not yet received essential information necessary to make an informed decision on these issues. Mayor Naughten inquired if any other member of the public would like to speak on this issue. Dean Rodnick, 6724 188th, expressed his concern over the subdevelopment, due to the fact, in his opinion, it would greatly affect the wildlife in the area. Mr. Rodnick said that wetlands also plays a key factor in this issue. Mr. Rodnick believes no building whatsoever should take place in the proposed area. Councilmember Palmer asked Mr. Rodnick how it would affect the wildlife. Mr. Rodnick replied the runoff from sewage, and other water runoff would eliminate the current stream system. Mr. Rodnick noted salmon used to run through the stream years ago, however, that is not the case today. Mr. Rodnick also commented that rapid erosion is taking place in that valley, and there- fore, no building should take place. Mr. Tjossem encouraged the Council not to require a wetlands delineation. Mr. Tjossem stated he admits the proposed houses intrude into the wetland, however, Mr. Tjossem said his client is proposing to mitigate that and comply with the State and City requirements on erosion control. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the meeting. Councilmember Dwyer said this hearing originally came to the Council to approve a Hearing Examin- er's recommendation for a 5-lot PRD. Councilmember Dwyer asked if it is sufficient to call it a modified Hearing Examiner's recommendation, since it is now a 4-lot PRD. City Attorney Scott Snyder said the Council could condition the approval on reduction from 5 to 4 lots, so the re- quest -to amend seems to be within the general range of approval that the Council could have given to the original appeal. Mr. Snyder said the Council could approve it as a modified or amended application. Councilmember Dwyer asked if this was approved by Council, what would be the impact of the Council taking action on the SEPA process. Mr. Snyder said if the City granted the per- mit, the City would be putting an end to ability of the Staff to conduct a SEPA review. Up until a development permit, the responsible official can pull the SEPA determination based on new evi- dence. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if there is any fashion in which City can avoid a good faith dis- agreement three or four months from now, whether the mitigation was sufficient. Mr. Snyder said his understanding of the application is what the Council has is a PRD approval and a preliminary subdivision plat approval. As with all subdivision plats, when the interstructure is complete, it would come back to the Council fbr fin31 approval: Mr. Snyder said his opinion, which could be built into the findings could include the fact that the applicant has gone through a formal subdivision process, has amended down to 4 lots, where it might be subject to short subdivision requirements, it has been reviewed as a formal subdivision, conditioned as a formal subdivision, and would come back to the Council for final approval. Councilmember Dwyer assumed then, that this would not be the last time the Council would review this issue. Mr. Snyder suggested the Council require the delineation of the wetlands program and the SEPA mitigation review as a condi- tion of preliminary plat approval, when that was done and the interstructure was complete per City plan, the final approval, based on that review would be required before the final subdivi- sion plat was approved and before building permits would be issued. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 October 29, 1991 Mr. Snyder said the Council would have to carefully scrutinize the findings that he prepares, because when you are dealing with a preliminary versus a final plat, it differs in that a final plat is not discretionary, it is basically a check list. Councilmember Palmer inquired if the check list portion would be something the Council would be able to review to the degree of making adjustments, or would it be an acception or denial of the list. Mr. Snyder said there are two ways the Council could approach the issue. The Council could ask to see the delineation up front in order to determine what the mitigation measures are, and that could be accomplished two ways; refer it back to the responsible official for their review, or ask to see it before it is approved. The other method would be to craft into the findings and approval of this PRO, a requirement that is more procedural which is who does the delineation study, what issues does it address, and what are the results to be, and then you could go down and check it off. Councilmember Hertrich addressed the wetland issue. Councilmember Hertrich said he is dealing with an unknown as he doesn't know how much mitigation would be required, as he doesn't know how much wetlands actually exists. Councilmember Hertrich stated nothing would be able to be built if the whole property was found to be a wetland, and inquired on the boundaries of the wetland. Mr. Snyder reiterated if the Council approves this, basically what the Council is doing is review- ing the preliminary plat conditions, and the alternative is to use SEPA, which is a more open ended up participatory approach. Councilmember Kasper commented that this will be not be converted to a short plat, it is a modifi- cation of the plat as originally presented, and Mr. Snyder agreed with Councilmember Kasper. Councilmember Dwyer stated his preference would be to pass a resolution giving intent of a motion the Council would want to pass, and ask City Attorney Scott Snyder to draft a motion that would include all of the Council's concerns. Councilmember Dwyer said this motion could come before the Council at the next meeting for passage. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, THAT THE COUNCIL RESOLVE TO PASS A MOTION WHICH CALLS FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION WITH THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION BEING MODIFIED FROM FIVE LOTS TO FOUR LOTS AND INCLUDE AN ACCEPTANCE OF RELIANCE UPON THE APPLICANT'S STATEMENT THAT THEY WILL FURTHER DELINEATE THESE WETLANDS AND THEN MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF BUILDING THE FOUR STRUCTURES AS PROPOSED. Under discussion, Councilmember Hertrich noted that the motion doesn't address the possibility in his opinion, the fact that the property as a whole might be considered wetlands, and no building would be able to take place. Councilmember Dwyer said if that case can be made from what materials are available, he would consider it, however, if a case can't be made, a decision must be made which would produce the best possible result. Councilmember Hertrich feels not enough thought was put into the process, and more studies should be done with regards to wetlands. Councilmember Hertrich believes wetlands cannot be mitigated. Councilmember Kasper said he seconded the motion because it is a PRD,'and the City does not have a wetlands ordinance, however, at some point, maybe the City may need one. Councilmember Kasper said he feels the Council has gone as far as they can go. Councilmember Palmer agreed that Councilmember Dwyer's approach is a good one, as far as it ac- cepts the applicant's conditioning of delineation actions. Councilmember Palmer addressed Coun- cilmember Hertrich's concerns and said there is information entered into the record from Shapiro and Associates which includes their reconnaissance and the line they have delineated indicated, had a 70 to 90% accuracy factor, so the likelihood of the entire site being a wetland is almost completely eliminated, if that accuracy is accepted. Councilmember Dwyer made reference to` the Kinuteg of December 4, 1990 which illustrated his evalu- ation of the project:"Councilmember Dwyer asked Mr. Snyder in terms of a public benefit, if the Council was involved in a balancing act whereby they would search for a benefit and balance it against potential detriment, or if the Council was searching only for a benefit. Mr. Snyder said the working of the ordinance states that the application must establish a clear public benefit, and it was not a balance test". Councilmember Hertrich stated it is a fact that some of the proposed houses will settle upon a wetland. Councilmember Hertrich said without a delineation process, you don't know where the line is, and thus it makes it difficult to know what you are really dealing with. With regards to Councilmember Dwyer's comments on public benefit, Councilmember Hertrich said you have to weigh what the public benefit is in regards to natural streams, waterways, and wetlands. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 9 October 29, 1991 Councilmember Dwyer said he asked that question to City Attorney Scott Snyder and reiterated it is not a balancing process, in terms of whether or not they have met the criteria of a PRO. MOTION CARRIED with Councilmember Hertrich voting no. City Attorney Scott Snyder said while he is drafting a motion, he assumes the Staff will also consider whether the information which has been provided is new significant information, which should or should not result in withdrawal of the MONS. Mr. Snyder said this is a staff decision made independently of the Council. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTI -FAMILY RECYCLING PROGRAM Peter Hahn, Community Services Director, introduced a new staff member, Ms. Jacqui Austin, Office Administrator. Mr. Hahn noted that Ms. Austin has been involved in the recycling program in the City of Edmonds, and will be addressing the Council on the multi -family recycling. Ms. Austin noted on May 24, 199 , Ordinance 2775 was passed, which outlines the recycling program in the City of Edmonds. Subsequently, the City obtained a grant from Snohomish County for $50,000. There remains a balance of $27,800 from this grant which is due to expire December 31, 1991. Ms. Austin stated that because the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission did not grant temporary rates until July 30, the implementation date for the multi -family recycling pro- gram was delayed. The effects of the delay included difficulty in procuring an adequate supply of containers and providing financial information to interested associations and manager. Ms. Austin said implementation procedures are now proceeding, and both hauling companies have printed informational material for disbursement to the multi -family associations and managers, Ms. Aus- tin noted educational information has also been printed for disbursement to the residents of these dwellings. Ms. Austin said the remaining $27,800 of the $50,000 grant from Snohomish County will lapse, if not expended by December 31, 1991, and suggested ways that this money could be used to promote multi -family recycling within the City of Edmonds. Ms. Austin provided the Council with four suggestions: 1) Purchase 6 1/2 gallon promotional bins. Ms. Austin noted these bins could be used by multi- family residents to store and then carry recyclable materials to the central recycling contain- er. One of the main difficulties faced by residents of multi -family dwellings is storing recycla- ble materials and then transporting it to a bin. If these bins were available to the residents, the recyclables could be taken to the central recycling container on the way to the resident's car in the morning. Ms. Austin noted the cost of providing these bins would be approximately $159000. 2) Hire a part-time/non permanent assistant to assist the hauling companies. Mr. Austin stressed this would be non permanent, and estimated the cost to be $10.00/hr for nine weeks for a total expenditure of $1,440. Ms. Austin said this person would work one day a week at each of the two hauling companies. 3) Second Information Mailing. Ms. Austin said a city-wide informational mailing was done in the spring for a cost of $5,800, however, Ms. Austin didn't .think there was enough time to distribute a second mailing. 4) Purchase Informational Refrigerator Magnets. Ms. Austin said the magnet would include recy- clable information and could be purchased for a unit price of 26 cents. The purchase of 6,000 magnets would be $1,700. Councilmembers discussed various ways in which the grant money could be expended effectively. Council President Wilson inquired on what is done with all the recyclable materials. Don Nicholson of Sound Disposal responded that at the present time, many recyclable materials are stockpiled, especially glass and plastic, however, plants are being built to handle all the recy- clable materials, and the market for recyclable materials will be a lot stronger five years down the road when the plants are completed. Councilmember Palmer suggested expending funds to hire a person to create design standards for the multiple.family structures, which would be forwarded to the ADB for approval. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO EXPEND APPROXIMATELY $1700 ON THE MAGNETS, AND EXPEND FUNDS TO ESTABLISH DESIGN STANDARDS FOR ADB REVIEW WITH REGARDS TO RECY- CLING AT MULTI FAMILY STRUCTURES. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10 October 29, 1991 A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, COUN- CILMEMBER PALMER, AND COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST VOTING IN FAVOR; COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, COUNCILMEM- BER DWYER, AND COUNCILMEMBER HERTRICH OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO EXTEND THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS TO PURCHASE NEW AID CAR (ITEM (C) ON CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Kasper inquired why the aid cars seem to wear out so fast, and asked about City maintenance of the vehicles. Fire Chief, "Buzz" Buzalsky, replied they haven't been maintained they way they should, however, the unit needs to be replaced, due to excessive repairs, and costs. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO APPROVE ITEM (C). MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL Council President Wilson noted Port. Ludlow is offering a retreat packet that is substantially lower than their regular rates. The one catch is there could only be one menu selection for all retreat participants. Council President Wilson asked the Council if they would like consider this as a possible Council/Staff retreat site for 1992. The consensus of the Council was not to consider Port Ludlow as a possible retreat site under those conditions. Council President Wilson noted the current date for the retreat is still set up for February 14 and 15, however, Council - member Kasper will be out of town that weekend. The retreat details will be decided at a later date. t^ Councilmember Palmer said there is a problem in the Perrinville area with regards to the roads n being left muddy by the trucks hauling earth out of the Post Office site, and asked Staff to take `j'l� whatever action is possible in order to have them clean up the roads after those trucks leave the site. Councilmember Hertrich noted he recently had occasion to be in the vicinity of the Lynnwood Sew- age Treatment Plant, and experienced very strong odors permeating from the plant, and he feels this poses a serious health problem. Councilmember Hertrich reiterated his desire to get togeth- . er with the, Lynnwood City Council to discuss the issues. Councilmember Hertrich said he was recently in the area of 80th, and said a school bus went speed- ing down 80th at approximately 40 miles an hour. Councilmember Hertrich feels the police don't have the citizens afraid of the law, and they are speeding. Councilmember Hertrich also said this same instance happens on Meadowdale Road, and it is not just the school buses, but everyone. Councilmember Dwyer thanked City Attorney Scott Snyder for providing a memo to the Council regard- ing Regulating Contractors on Federal Government project. Amanda Foote, Student Representative, apologized for being absent the last two meetings, however, she has been home ill. The meeting adjourned at 10:09 p.m. THESE MINUTES ARE SUBJECT TO NOVEMBER 4, 1991 APPROVAL. THE OFFICIAL SIGNED COPY OF THESE MINUTES IS ONE FILE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE RH NDA J. MARCH, CITY CLERK R EN; MAYOR EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11 October 29, 1991 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY -,COUNCIL OCTOBER 29, 1991 SPECIAL MEETING LOCATION: ROOM 115, FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 700 MAIN ., EDM ND , WTSRTNUTW CALL TO ORDER FLAG SALUTE 1. CONSENT AGENDA (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF OCTOBER 22, 1991 (C) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS TO PURCHASE NEW AID CAR (D) PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2854 AMENDING OFFICIAL STREET MAP AND VACATING 275 FEET OF ALLEY EAST OF 7THAVE. S. BETWEEN SPRUCE AND HEMLOCK STS. (APPLICANT: MCBRIDE, ET AL / FILE ST-3-91) 2. AUDIENCE 3. HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION REGARDING SETBACK (30 MINUTES) ADJUSTMENT TO REDUCE 25-FOOT SETBACK TO 16 FEET TO ALLOW A DECK ADDITION AT 23800 74TH AVE. W. (APPELLANT: CLARENCE CAPON; APPLICANT: HELEN MAE DELLER / FILE NOS. A-12-91/AP-12-91/AP-18-91) 4. CONTINUED HEARING ON APPROVAL OF HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION (60 MINUTES) REGARDING PROPOSED 5-LOT PRD/SUBDIVISION AT 18208 - 18218 76TH AVE. W. (APPLICANT: THOMAS BELT / FILE NOS. PRD-2-90/P-2-90); AND CONTINUED HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION REGARDING PROPOSED 5-LOT PRD/SUBDIVISION AT 18208 - 18218 76TH AVE. W. (APPELLANT: WILLIAM AND PAMELA HAROLD, ET AL; APPLICANT: THOMAS BELT FILE NOS. AP-25-90/P-2-90) 5. REPORT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTI-FAMILY•RECYC{.ING PROGRAM (20 MINUTES) 6. MAYOR 7. COUNCIL THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND PARKING AND MEETING ROOMS ARE HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE