Loading...
19781024 City Council Minutesr: 25 = October 17, 1978 - continued 1 I is 7 zone. He said that in the 1.975 survey the people had'expr.essed.a desire for strict controls on RM development. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED; WITH COUNCILMAN.NAUGHTEN VOTING NO. COUNCILMAN GOULD THEN MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH A NEW RM-D ZONING, AND'THAT IT BE THE DOWNTOWN MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL ZONING AS STATED IN ALTERNATE #3 PRESENTED BY THE STAFF; THAT IS, REQUIREMENTS.ARE A MINIMUM OF 2900 SQ. FT. PER UNIT, MAXIMUM OF 15 UNITS PER ACRE; MAXIMUM 30' PITCHED ROOF OR 25' FLAT ROOF; SETBACKS --CHOICE OF: 10 ` EACH SIDE.WITH 15' FRONT AND 20' REAR,. OR WITH 20'`FRONT AND.15' REAR, OR A VARIABLE PROVIDED THE SUM OF ALL SETBACKS IS 55' WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE ADB; LOT COVERAGE 40%; AND NO LIMIT ON NUMBER OF UNITS PER BUILDING. FURTHER, THE RM-D ZONING WILL APPLY ONLY TO THE DOWNTOWN AREA FOR THOSE AREAS CURRENTLY ZONED RM. Councilman Clement commented that if a new zone is created and then the process of rezoning is accomplished, that would be difficult and time consuming. He suggested it would be better to go back to changing -the bulk and dimensional requirements of buildings. Mr. LaTourelle responded that, in effect, that would create a downzone and an environmental impact statement would be required. He said the proposed ordinance would only create a classification and would not rezone MOTION: any property. THE MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMAN HERB VOTING NO. A MOTION WAS THEN MADE BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE CHANGING THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS IN SECTION 12.13.130 FOR THE RML AND RMH ZONES TO 35' HEIGHT -FOR A PITCHED ROOF AND 30' FOR A FLAT ROOF AND TO REDUCE THE MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE TO 45%. MOTION: MOTION CARRIED, -WITH COUNCILMAN.HERB VOTING NO. COUNCILMAN•GOULD THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN Amended CARNS, THAT THE STAFF FORWARD TO THE COUNCIL DESIGN STANDARDS.ESTABLISHED FOR MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS,.ADDRESSING SUCH ISSUES AS VIEW OBSTRUCTION, HEIGHT: -IN RELATION TO EXISTING•TOPOGRAPHY AND Amendment VEGETATION, AND COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT BUILDINGS. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO HAVE THE INPUT FROM THE STAFF SUBMITTED FOR THE WORK MEETING OF DECEMBER 12, 1978. THE MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED. THE MAIN.MOTION, AS AMENDED, CARRIED. ' The discussionthen went to the.moratorium on building permits for construction of projects having more. than ten units. It was felt it should be continued until the ordinances asked for this evening go before -the Council. City Attorney John Wallace noted that environmental checklists will -have to MOTION: be accomplished. COUNCILMAN.CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT, THAT THE CURRENT MORATORIUM ON ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR PROJECTS OF MORE THAN TEN UNITS BE CONTINUED UNTIL.NOVEMBER 21, 1978 AND THAT REVIEW OF THE MORATORIUM BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA FOR THAT EVENING. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON EDMONDS GOAL - PARKING PLAN_AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION Community Development Director John LaTourelle had prepared a report on the Parking Commission review of the problems. No one in the audience had input,to.offer. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, MOTION: SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB, TO ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORT. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting was then adjourned at 11:20 p.m. IRENE VARNEY MOR N, C y Clerk October 24, 1978 HARVE H. HARRISON, Mayor The regular.meeting of the Edmonds.City Council was called.to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Harve- Harrison in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT STAFF PRESENT Harve Harrison, Mayor Charles Dibble, M.A.A. Mike Herb Leif Larson, Public Works -Director Phil Clement John LaTourelle, Community Development Director Katherine Allen Noelle Charleson, Assistant City Planner John Nordquist Fred Herzberg, City Engineer Ray Gould Lila Crosby, Administrative Services Director Tom Carns Jim Murphy, City Attorney Larry Naughten Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk CONSENT AGENDA MOTION: Councilman Carns asked that Item (E) beremoved from the.Consent Agenda. COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE.OF THE CONSENT AGENDA., MOTION CARRIED. The balance of the Consent Agenda contained the following: (A). Roll call. (B) Approval of Minutes of October 17, 1978.. (C) Acceptance of Quit Claim Deed in conjunction with short subdivision. (File.S-20-78 - Box) (D) Acceptance of Quit,Claim Deed in conjunction with short subdivision. (File S-45-78 - Lindberg) . REPORT ON BIDS'OPENED OCTOBER 18..FOR.REHABILITATION OF EDMONDS MUSEUM [Item (E) on Consent Agenda] Councilman Carns inquired as to, how the,bid received compared to the Engineer's estimate on the project. Public`Works Director Leif Larson responded that it was higher, but in view of the fact 8 • October 24, 1978.- continued that no bids were received at the first invitation and only one was received at this second invitation, he recommended that this one be accepted. His memorandum indicated that a State grant and City matching funds totaled'$19,000 which left a deficit of $4,517.74, and he suggested a -transfer of $5,000 from the Council Contingency Fund to cover the deficit and minimal. contingencies which may MOTION: arise. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO ACCEPT THE BID OF PIONEER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ON THE REHABILITATION OF THE EDMONDS MUSEUM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $23,514.74 INCLUDING SALES MOTION: TAX, APPROVING ITEM (E) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN FURTHER MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE A RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING $5,000 FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND TO THE GENERAL FUND TO COVER THE DIFFERENCE IN THE BID AND THE AMOUNT AVAILABLE AND ANY MINIMAL CONTINGENCIES WHICH MAY ARISE. COUNCILMAN GOULD SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL Councilman Nordquist said he would like, on advice of the City Attorney, to ask for a brief Executive Session following this meeting for discussion of the possible purchase of a piece ofproperty. MOTION: COUNCILMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB, TO CALL AN EXECUTIVE SESSION FOLLOWING THIS EVENING'S MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Naughten reported that City Engineer Fred Herzberg and he had attended the mini -convention of the Association of Washington Cities on October 21. He commented that some cities are involved in downzonings and it is not as difficult as it seems on the surface. Also, he noted that Tukwila has an ordinance requiring smoke alarms in homes which has resulted in a decrease in insurance costs, and he had requested a copy of the ordinance for review. Councilman Gould noted that Councilman Clement had called him this evening, advising that he would arrive at this evening's meeting between 8:00 - 8:30 p.m. Councilman Carns inquired about the personnel. manual and -job ratings on which Tom Purton had been working for an extended period. M.A.A. Charles Dibble responded that the job descriptions have been completed and they are in the process of being reviewed. He said Mr. Purton is away for one month but it was anticipated that the project will be completed by the end of this year. Councilman Carns noted that a letter had been received from Clari.s Hyatt, Health Officer with the Snohomish Health District, indicating that the per capita assessment would be increased for 1979 from $1.10 to $1.20. Councilman Carns asked what the City was getting for its money. Councilman Nordquist responded that the South Snohomish County Health Office, located in Lynnwood, is available to all residents and is highly used. He noted a few of the services that are available and that it would be far more expensive for the City'to have its own health department. Councilman Carns suggested that perhaps the funding should be based on usage rather than population: He felt the City of Edmonds may be helping to'subsidize the County. Mayor Harrison commented that the more dense areas benefit more than the rural areas. Councilman Nordquist said he was sure Dr. Hyatt would be happy to come before the Council to elaborate if the Council desired. It was agreed that Councilman Nordquist would invite Dr. Hyatt to come to the City Council meeting of November 28. Councilman Herb was concerned that one of the motions made at last week's meeting may be a case of MOTION: exclusionary zoning. COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE ASKED FOR A LEGAL OPINION ON Failed WHETHER THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE CITY IS GETTING INTO EXCLUSIONARY ZONING IN THE THIRD MOTION ON PAGE 6 OF LAST WEEK'S MINUTES WHERE THE RESTRICTIONS ARE INCREASED FOR THE RML AND RMH ZONES. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN SECONDED THE MOTION. Some discussion followed, and Councilman Gould felt the request was unnecessary because the City Attorney indicated he would advise the Council if they asked for an ordinance that was illegal. THE MOTION FAILED, WITH COUNCILMAN HERB HAVING THE ONLY YES VOTE. `` Councilwoman Allen commented on a memorandum from M.A.A.Dibble suggesting early morning budget work meetings, rather than having them in the evening. She said she did not especially care for early • morning meetings, but she felt his suggestion had some merit. Mr. Dibble said that at next week's meeting the Staff would be asking the Council to set the dates for the work meetings and the public hearing. AUDIENCE Rachel Bell of 264 Beach P1. announced that Lillian Carter would be.at.the Edmonds Yacht Club at 9:00 a.m., October 30, for a political fund raising breakfast, instead of October 31 as previously announced. HEARING ON P.C. RESOLUTION 600 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT.TO ZONING CODE, COMPREHENSIVE POLICY; PLAN, AND SHORELINES MANAGEMENT:MASTER PROGRAM.TO CHANGE'THE PERMITTED USES AND DEVELOPMENT'REGULATIONS`IN:THE CW ZONE AND.SHORELINES MANAGEMENT MASTER PROGRAM AND TO ADD WATERFRONT AND WALKWAY DESIGNS POLICIES TO SECTION 208:OF THE'COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN (Files ZO-9-77 and CP-2-78 This item was continued from the September.5 meeting. Councilman Carns noted that a motion in the October 10 minutes referred to this hearing and stated the items.in the,amendment would be considered one at a time. Mayor Harrison opened the hearing to comments from the audience. Inasmuch as a number of items were being considered, the audience comments were solicited during the entire hearing rather than opening and closing the discussion for each item. Bill Wilson, an attorney representing interested parties, said their main objection was to the limitations on uses in the CW zone. He felt the restriction against construction over the water could be fought in court. He said his client owns the tidelands and other agencies have bought tidelands rights and if the City thought it would take those rights it could expect a fight. June Friesendahl of 181 W. Dayton requested that residential:uses continue to be allowed in the CW zone as her property and that adjoining had been residential for years. She said she could then remove the old buildings and provide open spaces for view, enhance the area with new buildings, and increase.the tax base. She also voiced objection to the requirement that lower floors of commercial buildings be used for retail only. And r1 U • 2 October 24, 1978 - continued I 1 MOTION: Failed 1 MOTION: Failed MOTION: MOTION: MOTION: MOTION: Withdrawn r-I MOTION: MOTION: MOTION: MOTION: MOTION: Failed she felt the lower level should not be required to be enclosed if it is used for parking. She further asked that a limit not.be'.placed on the area used for parking, feeling the other restrictions would limit- the parking. Marie.King`.of'713 Laurel ,'a-membe'r.of the Shorelines Advisory Committee, reminded the Council of some mod.ifications.that Committee had suggested: She said the Committee had asked that "(either land'or water moorage)" be eliminated.from.the.permitted use of boat storage in the.CW zone, and that the permitted..use ofaquariums be included.in Item 5 They felt over -water constru"ction was.tota1ly unn'ecessary.and would be a detriment to -the waterfront. They .felt there should not be new residential. construction.in this area, with.the understanding that those now having residences there would be.grandfathered in to retain their residential zoning. She said their concern was regarding new residential uses in areas not presently used for such. She then read a list of waterfront design concepts which the Committee had formulated and had sent to the Council. At this point Mayor Harrison -said the proposed amendment would be discussed item by item. Jerry Hann of Reid, Middleton & Associates, representing. the Port of Edmonds, suggested that in Item 7 of the permitted uses the proviso that.offices not be located at street grade or -on the first floor be stricken. He said they were concerned that in areas of this nature.where you are trying to develop'a highly specialized retail center the economics of such..a venture were shaky and to restrict the ground floor use may create some problems on a temporary basis. He said in some cases businesses cannot make it and in the interim the.ability-to lease these spaces for some kind of use, office or other, is desirable. He.noted that a vacant structure attracts no one and he suggested such allowance on a temporary basis. Community Development Director John LaTourelle said he would have no objection to removing that requirement as he felt that as the area develops that`situation'will be'dictated. Councilman Nordquist said he would like .to see retention of residential uses., He said he would not like to see two residential units there with a commercial development between them and he would like to see that particular area retained as a residential zone. He did not think those residential uses would damage the waterfront but would be an asset. He felt there was enough shoreline for the citizens to use. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST THEN MOVED THAT RESIDENTIAL USES BE RETAINED IN THE CW ZONE. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN SECONDED THE MOTION. Councilman Naughten.then asked for clarification, that Councilman Nordquist meant.to restrict the residential use to where it now is located•, which.Councilman Nordquist affirmed. Mr.'.LaTourel.le stated that there is the problem that if"new residential construction is permitted in'the CW zone it has to_apply throughout the zone. He said his Staff had.tried to figure out a way to preserve the residential use for the Friesendahl property but could not do so. He noted that present regulations will allow existing residential development to stay and be substantially improved. He was asked if the option had been considered of allowing.residential and commercial uses together.. He responded that it had been considered but they had not proposed such because residential uses mixed in -with the highly active public uses there are innately incompatible.' -He said they have had innumerable complaints about people using the public beach and bothering the people who.live there: Mrs: Friese"ndahl suggested that'the policing'provided by having year around residences there would be beneficial. Councilman Gould-said..he did not want to see the Edmonds waterfront'look Pike Mukilteo and he felt it would be.a prime candidate for condominiums if residential uses were allowed, so he would vote against the motion. Councilman Clement noted that one of the purposes'was to reduce the'bulk along the waterfront so the view would not be a series of walls; and people could see through.the glass,of retail areas, walkways, -etc. _He asked if that purpose could be accomplished,.by reducing.setbacks and heights of buildings and eliminating residential uses on the first floors. Mr. LaTourelle said i't would be economically disastrous to squeeze the buildings any more and reduce height.more. He said he favored allowing office uses on the first floor but did not think a series of offices on.the first floor and then two floors of apartments on top of that would.accomplish the.public access goals of the City. Councilman Clement noted that the Staff had opposed the Density Review Committee's recommendation to eliminate residential use from the BC zone, and Mr. LaTourelle responded that in this case you are essentially abutting a recreation area. A, ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE.MOTION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS NORDQUIST AND NAUGHTEN VOTING YES, AND WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS HERB, CLEMENT, ALLEN, GOULD, AND CARNS VOTING NO. MOTION FAILED. COUNCILMAN HERB THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, THAT ITEM 7 UNDER PERMITTED USES BE AMENDED TO ELIMINATE "PROVIDED THEY ARE NOT LOCATED AT STREET GRADE OR ON THE FIRST FLOOR." AND THAT ITEMS 1-7 THEN BE APPROVED. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION, COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN WITHDREW HIS SECOND. THE MOTION THEN FAILED FOR LACK. OF A:SECOND. COUNCILMAN GOULD THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, THAT -ITEM 7 UNDER PERMITTED USES BE INCLUDED, BUT READING ONLY: "OFFICES." MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT, TO STRIKE ITEM 2 UNDER PERMITTED USES, ENTIRELY. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO ADOPT ITEM 1 UNDER PERMITTED USES. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY,COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO STRIKE "WATER MOORAGE" FROM ITEM 3. Jerry Hann stated that by striking that, the entire Port area would be made nonconforming and other'ordinances are very restrictive when it came to nonconforming uses. He was concerned with the resulting restrictions which may be placed on the Port. THE MOTION AND THE SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN. Mr. Hann added that water moorage is one of the most water dependent uses. Don Martin of Anchor Boats said to strike the "land and water moorage" from Item 3 would be doing the boating community and the City an. injustice. Mr. LaTourelle said the Staff felt a few guest mooring buoys would be a good idea, and that was the kind of water moorage they contemplated when evolving the uses. .He said the new fishing pier might also have a dinghy moorage for sailboats. Discussion revealed the feeling that "limited building" of boats was vague and Mr. LaTourelle said a definition would be included. It was suggested that "custom building" would more nearly delineate the intent. 'COUNCILMAN HERB THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, THAT ITEM 3 UNDER PERMITTED USES BE ACCEPTED. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, THAT ITEM 4 UNDER PERMITTED USES BE ACCEPTED. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB, THAT "AQUARIUM" USE BE.ADDED TO ITEM 5 UNDER PERMITTED USES. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST,.TO ADOPT ITEM 6 UNDER PERMITTED USES. MOTION CARRIED. Discussion then went to limitations on uses in the CW zone, the next section of the proposed amendment. The first item restricted parking within 60' of bulkheads. Mr. LaTourelle said the intent was that new parking would not be permitted within 60' of the bulkhead, but existing parking would remain, so this would not affect the Port except that he felt eventually even the Port should plan not to have parking near the bulkhead. Gordon.Maxwell, Port Commissioner, said the Port has had a waiting list of several hundred citizens residing.in the Port District who are waiting for moorage, and with the addition of more moorage.he felt the.60'.restr.iction on parking would be detrimental because parking will be limited anyway. He asked that.the 60' restriction be reduced, and he suggested 20'. Jerry Hann suggested that the 60' could apply except for.that property serving water -moorage. COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED THAT SECTION A UNDER LIMITATIONS OF USES IN THE CW ZONE BE ADOPTED, WITH THE RESTRICTION IN ITEM 1 BEING AMENDED TO READ "WITHIN 20' OF BULKHEADS." 9 2,9 0 October 24, 1978 - continued 0 MOTION: MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT ITEM 1 UNDER SECTION A OF LIMITATIONS ON USES BE ADOPTED AS WRITTEN. ..MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMAN HERB VOTING NO. Regarding Item 2 under Section a, Mr. LaTourelle said this recommendation had come from the Shorelines Management Committee, but he did not believe.construction over the water should MOTION: be absolutely precluded. COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO ELIMINATE ITEM 2 UNDER SECTION A OF THE LIMITATIONS OF USES. MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMAN GOULD VOTING NO. Regarding Section b of use limitations„ which listed uses excepted from bei.ng.conducted in an entirely enclosed building, Jerry Hann said the Port was.uneasy that all the.uses were stated as some may be omitted. For instance, he was sure that parking of boat trailers was not intended to be in an enclosed place. Mr. LaTourelle said parking is considered an accessory use unless it is a commer- cial parking lot. The question was asked as to whether the sale of products over the counter to people standing outside a building would be precluded, but that dial not appear to pose a problem. MOTION: COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY.000NCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO.APPROVE SECTION B OF THE LIMITATIONS OF USES. COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INSERT IN.SECTION B THE WORD "STORAGE" SO IT Amendment WOULD READ: "ALL STORAGE USES SHALL BE CONDUCTED WHOLLY WITHIN AN ENTIRELY ENCLOSED BUILDING EXCEPT:" Failed THE MOTION TO AMEND FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. THE MAIN MOTION THEN CARRIED. Discussion then went to the bulk and dimensional regulations in the CW zone, the,next,section of the proposed amendment.. There -had been some discussion suggesting reduction of the stated 35' maximum building height.to 30'. Mr..LaTourelle said he did not -recommend that reduction. He.felt that there would be no increase in view impairment with 35', as opposed to 30', because of the distance at which other properties would overlook the waterfront. Jerry Hann added.to this the thought that 35' would allow some architectural manipulation of roof lines, creating a more pleasing view, whereas by reducing the height to 30' the result would be only flat roofs, and this could create more bulk and mass. Further, he noted that it was anticipated that the waterfront would be developed for commercial and office space but the market had not been tested, and he encouraged as much economic flexibility as possible. Regarding the 15' minimum setback, he said that would.make the Port office and the State restaurant/concession building nonconforming and could.lead.to.restrictions on.remodeling in the future. He noted that construction over the water was being permitted, but this requirement • called for a minimum 15' setback on the landward side of the existing bulkhead. Bob Pantley, a member of the Shorelines -Advisory Committee., said that requirement was included in order to provide for a future walkway. Regarding the height limitation, he said the Planning Staff was putting a lot p 9 of faith in the Architectural Review Board which he hoped always would p y w ul have the outstanding membership it now does. He said e h would rather see a taller, narrower building on o the waterfront than a lower, wider building. Bill Wilson said 15' was a lot of area to take from a person. COUNCILMAN MOTION: HERB MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO ADOPT SECTIONS A, B, C, AND D OF THE PROPOSED BULK AND DIMENSIONAL REGULATIONS IN THE CW ZONE- INCLUDING THE 15' SETBACK AND THE 35' BUILDING HEIGHT. MOTION CARRIED. The next section to be reviewed was on building design policies. Mr. LaTourelle MOTION: recommended that the word "totally" be removed from Item 3.. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY Amended COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, THAT ITEMS 1, 2, AND 3 OF BUILDING DESIGN POLICIES BE APPROVED, WITH THE DELETION OF THE WORD "TOTALLY" FROM ITEM 3. COUNCILMAN CLEMENT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO ,Amendment AMEND THE MOTION TO CHANGE ITEM 2 SO THAT'INSTEAD OF SAYING "FIRST FLOOR, PEDESTRIAN LEVEL SPACE SHOULD BE RESERVED FOR RETAIL USES. . ." IT WILL SAY "FIRST -FLOOR, PEDESTRIAN LEVEL SPACE SHOULD ENCOURAGE RETAIL USES. . ." THE MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED. THE.MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, THEN CARRIED. The next section to be reviewed was regarding site design policies. It was suggested by a member of the audience that the word "and" be changed to "or" in Item 1 where it .states "The site layout should be coordinated with existing buildings and proposed improvements. . .." The response was that there are already proposed improvements, namely those of the Port, the walkway, and other City plans. COUNCILWOMAN MOTION: ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO -APPROVE THE SITE.DESIGN POLICIES AS AMENDED IN THE PROPOSAL. MOTION CARRIED. The next section to be reviewed was regarding landscaping policies. Mr. LaTourelle said he already had made a note to have the Park Superintendent look into sig'nage at the MOTION: beach areas. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO ADOPT'THE LANDSCAPING POLICIES. MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMAN HERB ABSTAINING BECAUSE HE.WAS NOT PRESENT DURING THE DISCUSSION. COUNCILMEN CARNS AND NAUGHTEN.HAD DEPARTED. The wal.kway design policies were the next MOTION: to be reviewed. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED., SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT THE WALKWAY DESIGN 'Amended POLICIES SECTION BE ADOPTED. COUNCILMAN CLEMENT MOVED TO AMEND,THE MOTION. TO INCLUDE ITEM 6 OF THE SHORELINES ADVISORY'COMMITTEE'S WATERFRONT DESIGN CONCEPTS MEMORANDUM WHICH HAD BEEN READ EARLIER BY Amendment MARIE KING (AN EDUCATIONAL DISPLAY TYPE OF SIGN EXPLAINING THE ECOLOGY OF THE BEACH MARINE LIFE ORGANISMS). COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN SECONDED THE MOTION TO AMEND. THE MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, THEN CARRIED. MOTION: COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT THE CITY.ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO DRAFT THE APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE TO INCORPORATE THE ABOVE, FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE OCTOBER 30, 1978 MEETING, AND THAT THE BUILDING MORATORIUM IN THE CW ZONE.BE EXTENDED TO NOVEMBER 7,1978,, AT WHICH TIME IT WILL BE RECONSIDERED. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON P.C. RESOLUTION 704, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF PETITION FOR VACATION AND AMENDMENT TO'THE OFFICIAL STREET MAP, ON 84TH AVE. W., SOUTH OF 202ND ST. S.W. . File ST-5-78 Community Development Director John LaTourelle stated that the subject right-of-way is the only legal access to two building lots. Further, it is on an officially designated recreational walkway of the City and provides access -to one of the City's major parks. Denial was recommended by the Planning Department, Parks & Recreation Department, Public Works Department, and the Planning Commission. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Gaylord Riach, an attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. P 9 Moore,.the.owners of Parcel B indicated on Exhibit A to the Planning Commission Resolution, said they did not want the right-of-way to be -vacated. The public portion of the hearing was then closed. MOTION: COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO UPHOLD PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 604, DENYING THE PETITION.FOR VACATION OF THE SUBJECT RIGHT-OF-WAY. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON EDMONDS.GOAL.- CONTROL OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS Mayor Harrison opened the public hearing on this item, no one wished to speak, and the public hearing MOTION: was closed. After some discussion, mostly in relation to PRDs, COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT, TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO NOVEMBER 7, 1978 TO BE HEARD TOGETHER WITH THE REVIEW OF THE PRD ORDINANCE. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Gould noted that in Goal 1 of Mr. LaTourelle's 9 October 24, 1978 - continued 1 October 19, 1978 memorandum, a- statement -should be added,regarding density. Councilman Clement suggested that the Staff provi.de.some information on.acqusition candidates for environmentally sensitive areas, and Mr. LaTourelle.asked.that they be given more time to..accomplish that. COUNCILMAN CLEMENT MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED.BY COUNCILMAN HERB, THAT.THE STAFF BE REQUESTED TO PROVIDE.INFORMATION ON ACQUISITION CANDIDATES FOR ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS FOR THE NOVEMBER 14, 1978 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. There was. no.further business to -come before the Council, and the meeting adjourned to Executive Session at.10:10 p.m. IREN .VARNEY MORAN,, Ci Clerk October,30, 1978 - Work Meeting HARVE H. HARRISON, Mayor The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Harve Harrison in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT Harve Harrison, Mayor • Phil Clement Katherine Allen John Nordquist Ray Gould Tom Carns CONSENT AGENDA ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Mike Herb Charles Dibble, M.A.A. Larry Naughten Leif Larson, Public Works Director Mary Lou Block, Assistant City Planner Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk Art Housler,.Finance Director Jim Murphy, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk MOTION: COUNCILMAN.CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA EXCEPT FOR ITEM (D) WHICH.THE STAFF HAD REQUESTED TO BE DELETED FROM THIS EVENING'S AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The Consent Agenda contained the following: (A) Roll call. (B) Approval of Minutes of October 24, 1978. (C) Setting.date of November 7, 1978 for hearing of P.C. Resolution 608 recommending denial to change number of members on the Board of Adjustment. (File ZO-11-78) (E). Passage of Resolution 415, authorizing interfund loan for the purpose of providing funds for legal and consulting services in the acquisition and development of the Edmonds Elementary School. (F) Adoption of Ordinance 2029, amending Tax Levy Ordinance 2026'. (G). Adoption of Ordinance 2030, amending Ordinance 1964 (1978 Budget), • authorizing an increase in revenues and appropriations of the.Street Arterial Fund 112 and to establish Edmonds Elementary School. Acquisition/Development Fund 336. COUNCIL Councilwoman Allen noted that.the City Attorney had distributed a proposed resolution in connection with Coun.cil.action taken last week relating to rehabilitation of the Edmonds Museum. 'COUNCILWOMAN' MOTION: ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, TO PASS RESOLUTION 416, AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF THE SUM OF $5,000 FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND 119 TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 325 FOR THE PURPOSE OF REHABILITATI.ON�OF THE EDMONDS MUSEUM. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Carns referred to a letter to the Mayor from Ken Rose, Manager of the new Shoreline Savings. Bank in Edmonds, in which Mr. Rose asked if there would be objection to displaying a 2' x 3' flag with the.City of Edmonds logo alongside the State of Washington and the American flags. The MOTION: Council found no objection to this. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT THE MAYOR'S.OFFICE.RESPOND TO THE LETTER FROM SHORELINE SAVINGS INDICATING FAVOR OF THEIR PROPOSAL TO FLY A FLAG WITH THE EDMONDS LOGO. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Clement inquired about the procedure being used to obtain compliance with the new Sign Code. He had. been contacted -by a a merchant regarding a sign.he..has had in place for over seven. years, predating the Sign Code,. and this merchant was now being.asked to go through ARB review and to pay a sign.permit fee of $1.00 per sq. eft. of signage. Assistant City Planner Mary Lou Block responded that in an attempt to enforce the Sign Code, letters had been sent because a number of signs never had -permits and some were nonconforming'. The letters advised of the sign permit fee. After the letters were sent it became obvious that problems.were going to develop, so it was decided that anyone. -who received the letter and whose sign conformed to the Sign Code could call the Planning Department and they would be advised that they would not have to pay the sign permit fee.