06/03/2008 Finance CommitteeJune 3, 2008
The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Gary Haakenson, Mayor
Deanna Dawson, Council President Pro Tem
Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember
Steve Bernheim, Councilmember
D. J. Wilson, Councilmember
Dave Orvis, Councilmember
Ron Wambolt, Councilmember
ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT
Michael Plunkett, Council President
ALSO PRESENT
Hilary Scheibert, Student Representative
STAFF PRESENT
Tom Tomberg, Fire Chief
Al Compaan, Police Chief
Duane Bowman, Development Services Director
Stephen Clifton, Comm. Serv. /Econ. Dev. Director
Dan Clements, Administrative Services Director
Brian McIntosh, Parks & Recreation Director
Noel Miller, Public Works Director
Kathleen. Junglov, Asst. Admin. Services Dir.
Rob Chave, Planning Manager
Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer
Mike Thies, Code Enforcement Officer
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Linda Hynd, Deputy City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Approve
Agenda
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items
approved are as follows:
Roll Call
A. ROLL CALL
Approve
os -2� -os B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF MAY 27, 2008.
Minutes
IApprove C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #104566 THROUGH #104677 FOR MAY 29, 2008 IN
C]airn Checks THE AMOUNT OF $633,670.54.
ord# 3687
Edmonds D. ORDINANCE 3687 - EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS REVISED CONTINGENT
Center for the LOAN AGREEMENT.
Arts
Old woodway E. AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR THE OLD WOODWAY ELEMENTARY
Elementary PARK PROJECT WHICH INCLUDES THE REGIONAL STORMWATER
Park INFILTRATION SYSTEM FOR THE SOUTHWEST EDMONDS BASIN.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 1
Res# 1175 —
Student F. RESOLUTION NO. 1175 OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL COMMENDING
Representative 1 HILARY SCHEIBERT FOR HER SERVICES AS A STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE ON
THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL.
2008 Street
Over lay G. REPORT OF BIDS OPENED ON MAY 20, 2008 FOR THE 2008 STREET OVERLAY
Over
Program PROGRAM AND AWARD OF CONTRACT TO NORTHSHORE PAVING, INC.
($385,218.34).
Alpha
Omicron Pi 3. PRESENTATION BY ALPHA OMICRON PI SORORITY TO HONOR POLICE CHIEF DAVID
Sorority STERN.
Michele Simmons, President, Seattle Alumni Chapter, Alpha Omicron Pi Sorority, a women's
fraternity in Canada and the United States, explained one of their basic tenets was to be of value to others
as well as themselves.
Lori Gannon, Philanthropy Chair, Alpha Omicron Pi Sorority, explained they were honored to
donate the teddy bears, a small portion of the over 150 bears collected with more to come, to the
Edmonds Police Department. On behalf of the Seattle Alumni Chapter of Alpha Omicron Pi and in honor
of the great Chief David Stern, a man who provided great love and care for his community, she thanked
the Council for allowing them to make this presentation to the community and to the children of
Edmonds.
Ann Beardsley, Seattle Alumni Chapter member and friend of Darlene Stern, presented Police Chief
Al Compaan a basket of teddy bears so that all the City's officers would have bears to distribute to
children involved in domestic calls. She also presented Darlene Stern with an Alpha Omicron Pi bear and
a rose, the symbol of their sorority, and thanked her for coordinating this effort with the Police
Department and the City Council. Mrs. Stern expressed her appreciation to the Alpha Omicron Pi
Sorority for the year they spent collecting the bears, commenting her husband had given her bears for 30
years and she would add this bear to her collection. She commented on the love and comfort that teddy
bears would symbolically provide to children involved in domestic situations, providing a continuity of
love during their time of need. She extended her thanks to the Sorority on behalf of her family.
Assistant 4. SWEARING IN OF ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE JIM LAWLESS. NOTE: A 15- MINUTE
Chiefo
Police Ji m RECEPTION WILL FOLLOW THE SWEARING -IN CEREMONY.
4Lawless
Police Chief Al Compaan swore in Assistant Chief Jim Lawless and his wife pinned on his badge. Chief
Compaan described Assistant Chief Lawless' background, beginning with his law enforcement career in
1987 with the Key West, Florida Police Department where he served as patrol officer, street crimes
officer, narcotics detective, as well as sergeant of patrol and detectives and an instructor for Key West
Police Department and Florida State Criminal Academy. Recalling traveling through Edmonds on
vacation, he contacted Edmonds regarding a position and was subsequently hired. Since joining the
Edmonds Police Department, he has served as a patrol officer, corporal and sergeant, been assigned to the
State Training Academy and served as an instructor for crisis intervention, been assigned to the South
Snohomish County narcotics taskforce as a unit supervisor and has been active with the in -house field
training program, new hires and the in- service training program.
Assistant Chief Lawless thanked Chief Compaan and Mayor Haakenson for their confidence in him. He
also expressed his appreciation to his wife Lisa for her support over the years.
Mayor Haakenson recessed the Council to a 15- minute reception in Assistant Chief Lawless' honor.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 2
Student 5. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION COMMENDING HILARY SCHEIBERT FOR HER
Representative
Hilary SERVICE AS STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE ON THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL
Hilary
Scheibert
Council President Pro Tem Dawson commented on the exceptional service by Student Representative
Scheibert, explaining typically Student Representatives serve for one semester; Ms. Scheibert served for
the entire school year including several lengthy meetings. She read a resolution commending Hilary
Scheibert for her service as Student Representative September 4, 2007 through June 10, 2008.
Ms. Scheibert thanked the Council for the opportunity to serve as Student Representative, commenting
she had enjoyed her time on the Council and had learned a lot. She thanked the Council for the
experience and thanked her parents.
Mayor Haakenson commented on what a remarkable young lady Ms. Scheibert was and that it had been a
pleasure to have her work with the Council.
Edmonds 6. PRESENTATION OF CERTIFICATE TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR FROM THE
Backyard EDMONDS BACKYARD WILDLIFE HABITAT PROJECT.
Wildlife
Habitat Project
Laura Spehar, Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Habitat Project, explained they began meeting in
December 2007 and currently have 15 team leaders who divide their time on various wildlife habitat
projects such as schoolyard habitat, grants for public and wildlife gardens and spaces, church and
congregation habitat and community outreach. The goal of the project was to foster a community that
lives in harmony with nature. Their mission was to increase community awareness of local wildlife and
allow themselves and neighbors to preserve, restore and create low maintenance wildlife habitat at home,
at work, in parks and in other public spaces. She provided a packet of information for each
Councilmember.
Ms. Spehar advised their group hosts monthly meetings at the Frances Anderson Center and offers
information via various speakers. The Edmonds Backyard Wildlife Habitat Project also hosts workshops
about gardening and wildlife and holds community events. They currently have a partnership with the
National Wildlife Federation and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife to certify the entire City
of Edmonds as a community wildlife habitat. Through individual backyards, schools and public areas
such as parks, residents of Edmonds can make it a priority to provide habitat for wildlife by providing
four basic elements, food, water, cove and a place to raise young. The community certification process
involves a point system based on the City's population; the City recently reached the number of points to
register as a community wildlife habitat. She provided a framed copy of the registration.
She commented on the May 3 Yost Park trail work party in honor of the registration; at that time the
National Wildlife Federation and Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife registered Yost Park as a
certified backyard wildlife habitat and presented the Parks & Recreation Department a metal certification
sign post. She expressed appreciation for the Councilmembers who have participated in work parties and
invited Mayor Haakenson, the Council and residents to attend their next meeting on June 5 at 7:00 p.m. at
Frances Anderson Center where the guest speaker will be a Seattle Urban Nature Project. She provided
their website: www. EdmondsBackyardWildlifeHabitat .org.
Transportation 7. UPDATE ON THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Element of the
Comprehensive
Plan Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss explained for the last few months, staff had been working with
consultants from ICF Jones & Stokes on the Transportation Plan update. He invited citizens with
transportation issues to attend an open house in the Brackett Room of City Hall on June 19 at 7:00 p.m.
As the Transportation Advisory Committee would be contributing to the Transportation Plan, he
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 3
introduced the Chair, Christina Johnson. He also introduced Mr. Loan, ICF Jones & Stokes, who
participated in the update six years ago.
Mr. Loan commented in addition to ICF Jones & Stokes, the team was joined by Otak and Henderson
Young and Company, the same team that prepared the City's last Transportation Plan update. He noted
there would be several significant elements of the Plan update including a forecasting model. A
transportation model would be developed for the City based on current traffic volumes and land use and
calibrated to current conditions. That model would then be used to apply land use growth over the next
six years and longer periods of time consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to develop traffic models
over that time and analyze traffic volumes at key intersections to determine where failure of level of
service standards and identify projects to address those failures. Once a project list was developed, they
will develop cost estimates used in the budget process and the six year TIP. They will also update the
traffic calming plan and a process for deploying those devices. They will also develop an ADA
compliance plan and have already done an inventory of sidewalk ramps in the City and will be looking at
locations for additional ramps and developing a program and cost estimates.
He explained they will review and update the goals and objectives in the Plan, the walkway plan
including reprioritizing and cost estimating, as well as reviewing the bikeway plan. Throughout the
process there will be a number of citizen involvement programs including the Transportation Advisory
Committee, two additional Citizen Advisory Committees and three open houses.
Councilmember Orvis asked whether this would tie in with the Transportation Benefit District (TBD).
Mr. Loan answered they will be considering a financial plan including expenses and revenue sources;
establishing a TBD or increasing impacts may partly be included in their recommendation.
Councilmember Orvis asked when the plan update would be complete. Mr. Loan answered it was an
approximate ten month process and anticipated it would be completed in January /February 2009.
Councilmember Orvis recalled his concern with the previous transportation element update with regard to
arterials and reiterating his dislike of arterials in neighborhoods.
Councilmember Wambolt inquired about transportation issues that citizens could comment on at the June
19 open house. Mr. Hauss provided examples such as traffic calming, sidewalks, bus routes, bike routes,
speeding, etc., anything related to transportation.
Councilmember Wilson commented the City's previous overlay cycle, one mile every seven years, was
improved via allocating REST funds in excess of $750,000 to road overlays. Recognizing the decline in
REST funds, he asked the consultant team to consider the cost to improve the City's entire infrastructure
to an acceptable level.
Councilmember Orvis asked whether there was a time limit on forming a TBD. Community
Services /Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton answered there was not.
Councilmember Bernheim asked whether the consultant was aware of any legislative proposal to limit the
number of miles driven by cars as part of a statewide greenhouse gas emission plan. Mr. Loan answered
he was not.
sound Transit 8. SOUND TRANSIT UPDATE BY JONI EARL, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. PUBLIC
update COMMENT WILL BE ACCEPTED
Joni Earl, Chief Executive Officer, Sound Transit, commended new Sound Transit Boardmember
Deanna Dawson, who was doing a great job representing Edmonds as well as South Snohomish County
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 4
and Community Transit. Ms. Earl described the basis for Sound Transit's efforts which include
responding to public demand and growth projections, increasing highway congestion, increasing gas
prices, existing service reaching capacity, and concern regarding the environment. She displayed a graph
that illustrated increases in Sound Transit service since 1999 -2007, commenting recent increases were in
ridership without adding much new service. In the first quarter of 2008 compared to first quarter 2007,
Sound Transit experienced an overall increase of 15% including 13% in ST Express service and 28% in
Sounder Commuter Rail. Sound Transit ridership one year ago was approximately 43,800 people per
day; today the average is 53,350. ST Express was carrying 12,600 passengers per day out of Snohomish
County with the two biggest routes to Seattle and Bellevue. Sound Transit has 57 facilities providing
service and half of the parking was over capacity and 28% was 70% full.
She advised of the groundbreaking this Friday for the Everett station that would provide approximately
440 parking spaces and last Saturday's opening of the Mukilteo station. She advised of two capital
projects to be completed, the South Everett Park & Ride near 128th and the Mountlake Terrace Park &
Ride. Design of the Mountlake Terrace Park & Ride was 100% complete; staff will be presenting funding
options to the Sound Transit Board for that project in July. With regard to light rail, she advised the line
downtown to SeaTac airport was approximately 90% complete and will open in July 2009. The
groundbreaking for the extension from downtown to the University of Washington will occur later this
year.
Shortly after the defeat of the roads and transit measure Prop 1 last year, at the Sound Transit Board
request, staff conducted a qualitative and quantitative research of voters. They found the biggest issue for
the voters who voted no was the measure was too big and too costly although they agreed transportation
and congestion were the top issues in the region and that light rail was the right investment. The goal
now was to develop a transit -only package. She displayed the ST 2 plan that was on the ballot last year,
explaining that plan with updated cost estimates and the additional year added to the schedule, remained
the adopted plan of the Sound Transit Board until amended. She noted that plan brought light rail to Ash
Way as well as provided planning dollars for light rail to Everett in a future phase.
Sound Transit staff also talked with the public in focus groups about 1) time - schedule for developing
projects, 2) scope /reach of the projects, and 3) cost. They found faster delivery was the highest priority
followed closely by reach and surprisingly the sales tax rate was the least sensitive issue. The Sound
Transit Board has been discussing amending the plan to 12 years. She commented one of the public's
misconceptions with the 20 year plan was that nothing would happen during the 20 years when in fact
construction would occur throughout that 20 years but the Ash Way station would not open for 20 years.
She explained the Board was seeking feedback on two pricing options and investment levels for a 12 year
plan, a four - tenths of one percent (0.4 %) and five - tenths of one percent (0.5 %). She noted current tax
level for Sound Transit was 0.4% under Sound Move and 0.3% MVET that goes away in 2028. She
explained the 12 -year plan would not bring light rail into Snohomish County; therefore, they considered
other investments while not losing the vision of bringing light rail into Snohomish County and eventually
to Everett. The result was an incremental approach, the long range plan /vision is the same; however, the
public does not appear ready to approve a 20 year plan at this time. The 12 -year plan would include
improvements at Mukilteo and Edmonds, new ST Express facilities at Everett, Park & Rides in Everett,
Ash Way and Lynnwood, funds for environmental, alternative and alignment analysis, preliminary
engineering and right -of -way acquisition for light rail. She clarified Sound Transit only had the .05%
sales tax authority remaining; the vote after the upcoming vote would be authority to extend the tax to
continue building the regional system, not a tax increase. The 12 -year plan would also include arterial
transit lane improvements in Snohomish County to support Community Transit's Bus Rapid Transit in the
Hwy. 99 corridor.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 5
She explained there was much the same in the 0.4% and 0.4% options, including light rail from
University of Washington to Northgate, right -of -way acquisition, light rail extensions; the major
difference was the distance light rail could be extended. She pointed out there was not sufficient taxes
collected in the 12 -year plan in the Snohomish County subarea to extend light rail to Ash Way. She
provided a cost summary comparing the updated November 2007 plan ($20.5 billion), the 0.4% plan ($10
billion) and 0.5% plan ($11.4 billion). She explained the cost of the 0.5% plan equated to approximately
$69 /year per adult. She encouraged the public to provide comment and described the upcoming schedule
including decisions by the Board in July with regard to timing (20 year or 12 year), tax rate, scope and
ballot timing.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson expressed her appreciation for the hard work by Ms. Earl and Sound
Transit staff. She asked Ms. Earl to explain that not all of Snohomish County was in the Sound Transit
district. Ms. Earl explained the Sound Transit District in Snohomish County was comprised of Everett
south and east to Mill Creek along 35tH
Council President Pro Tem Dawson relayed a frequent question regarding expanding Sounder service in
other areas. Ms. Earl explained in the north corridor, Sounder operated on a mainline freight track for
BNSF and the four round trips required extensive negotiations; the forth roundtrip would be operational
in September. In order to expand beyond four round trips would require the addition of a third track
which would require filling approximately 25 -30 acres of Puget Sound. She concluded it was not
environmentally possible to provide the additional track capacity without impacting freight. She noted
that was not the case in the south corridor. Another difference in the south corridor was the commuter
train runs through the heart of several cities; the north corridor is located west of most cities. She noted
although ridership in the north corridor continued to increase, there was still a great deal of capacity with
the existing service. In the north corridor Sound Transit also has a partnership with Amtrak, Rail Plus
Partnership, which allows riders to use Amtrak.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson relayed the public's interest in bringing light rail to Snohomish
County, pointing out there was little difference in the annual cost between the 12 -year and 20 -year plans.
With regard to the estimated per adult annual cost of $69, she relayed spending $70 today to fill her car
with gas, concluding it was not a huge per person investment to bring light rail to the region.
Councilmember Wilson asked the primary reason voters did not support Prop 1 last November. Ms. Earl
answered most said it cost too much although 67% could not say how much it cost, just that it was too
much and too big. She noted with a combined ballot measure with road and transit, some would have
voted yes for roads or yes for transit but when combined, it was too much. She recalled there were groups
such as the Sierra Club who were opposed to the roads piece and other road proponents who were
opposed to the transit piece; hence, there were a lot of mixed messages during the fall campaign that
confused the public. They also heard via the surveys that the public wanted to vote on separate packages,
which was different than what the public said the year before that they wanted a combined plan. The
surveys also indicated the public wanted smaller increments.
Councilmember Wilson asked whether sensitivity to the sales tax increase was an issue. Ms. Earl
responded it was not. Although there often was an aversion to sales tax, when it was the only funding
source available to Sound Transit, there was not a great of opposition to 0.4% or 0.5 %.
Councilmember Wilson asked for a further explanation of the inability of the Snohomish County subarea
to fund light rail to Snohomish County. Ms. Earl described subarea funding, North King County subarea
is comprised of Seattle north to the Snohomish County line, Snohomish County subarea is from the
Snohomish County line to Everett, south King County area is south of Seattle to Pierce County line and
the Lake Washington subarea is everything east of Lake Washington. She explained the core light rail
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 6
system was being constructed in Seattle. In the 12 -year plan, the North King County subarea could only
afford light rail to Northgate which leaves a gap from Northgate to Snohomish County. In the 20 -year ST
2 plan Snohomish County would pay for light rail from 185th north. If may be feasible to extend north of
the County line if all the Snohomish County funds were spent in North King County.
Council President Pro Tern Dawson advised it was theoretically possible to extend light rail to Mountlake
Terrace using all the funds collected in the Snohomish County subarea in the 12 -year plan which would
not leave any funds for the Everett or Mukilteo station and would substantially delay the ability to reach
Lynnwood or Everett. She summarized that did not appear to be in the best interest of Snohomish
County.
Councilmember Wilson inquired about a Tacoma model light rail from Everett to South Snohomish.
County and not connecting it to Seattle. Ms. Earl advised that was on the project list two years ago and
Everett has not expressed interest in starting light rail in that manner as it would take a great deal of
Snohomish County subarea funds and they wanted the right investment for the region.
Councilmember Wilson asked when light rail would reach Lynnwood. Ms. Earl anticipated if a 12 -year
plan were funded, the next phase would extend light rail into the Lynnwood area. She noted the bigger
stretch was reaching Everett due to the distance between Lynnwood and Everett. Council. President Pro
Tern Dawson commented under a 20 -year plan, light rail would reach Ash Way.
Ms. Earl encouraged the public to provide input regarding the 12 -year versus the 20 -year plan. The
Board was also discussing the timing of a third vote if they decide to pursue a 12 -year plan this time. She
relayed the Board's assurance that they were not abandoning the commitment to light rail, it was a
question of how much voters would accept.
Councilmember Wilson expressed support for a 12 -year plan with a vote in 2008, noting it was an
incremental approach that reflected what the voters wanted.
Councilmember Orvis inquired about light rail to the airport. Ms. Earl explained light rail to Tukwila
would open in July 2009 with shuttle service to the airport, the airport station would open in December
2009, and a fourth commuter rail trip from Edmonds to downtown would begin in September 2008. She
explained Sounder riders from Edmonds would transfer across the street from King Street station to light
rail to the airport. Light rail would operate every 6 -7 minutes during peak hours and every 10 minutes
during non -peak with travel time from the Westlake station in Seattle to the airport of 31 minutes.
Councilmember Wambolt asked if the financial projections /growth projections were from PSRC. Ms.
Earl answered the population and employment growth projections were from PSRC. Councilmember
Wambolt questioned the accuracy of those projections as they were developed when the economy was
much stronger than it was today. Ms. Earl answered PSRC did little independent forecasting; their
projections were a compilation of each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plans.
Mayor Haakenson invited the audience to comment; there were no members of the public who wished to
provide comment.
Non-
Conforming 9. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ECDC CHAPTER 17.40 REGARDING
Regulations NON- CONFORMING REGULATIONS.
Development Services Director Duane Bowman recalled this was presented to the Council at a work
session on February 26. He reviewed key amendments:
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 7
• Change the damage percentage from 50% to 75% - under the current regulations, if a building is
damaged more than 50 %, it must be brought into compliance. He explained the intent was to
allow reuse of existing structures.
• Exceptions to the 75% rule - if a building or structure is damaged or destroyed due to the
unlawful act of the owner or owner's agent or the building is damaged or destroyed due to the
ongoing neglect or gross negligence of the owner or the owner's agent.
• Historic buildings /structures - addition of clarifying language and reference to the Edmonds
Register of Historic Places.
• New section regarding residential buildings in commercial zones - existing non - conforming
buildings in commercial zones in use solely for residential purposes or structures attendant to
such residential use may be remodeled or reconstructed without regard to the limitations of
ECDC 17.40.2020(B), (E) and (F) but only if several conditions listed in the ordinance are met.
Mr. Bowman reviewed additional items for consideration by the Council and input from the public that
had not been reviewed by the Planning Board:
• Modify the Non- conforming Lot Table - ECDC 17.40.030 to include the RS -10 zone, 75%
needed for minimum lot size and a minimum of 7,500 square feet for a legal lot. He explained
the RS -10 zone was not currently contained in the chart identifying the minimum lot area for a
nonconforming lot.
• Modify ECDC 17.40.020 - Maintenance and Alternations
D. Maintenance and Alternations
2. Alterations which otherwise conform to the provisions of the zoning ordinance, its site
development and bulk standards, and which do not expand any nonconforming aspect of the
building shall be permitted. Minor architectural improvements which, in an effort to allow
for more creative design and a better overall appearance such as bay windows, eaves, and
chimneys may encroach into a nonconforming setback not more than 30 inches. He cited the
building at the corner of 3rd & Edmonds as an example of what this language would allow.
• Establish a date for detached Accessory building for enforcement purposes
17.40.020 Nonconforming Buildings
A. Definition. A nonconforming building is one which once met bulk zoning standards and
the site development standards applicable to its construction, but which no longer conforms
to such standards due to the enactment or amendment of the zoning ordinance of the City of
Edmonds or the application of such ordinance in the case of a structure annexed to the City.
Subiect to the other provisions of this section, an accessory building that is not an accessory
dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if' photographic or other substantial
evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessoty building existed on or before January
1, 1981. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing evidence.
G. Subiect to the other provisions of this section, an accessoty building that is not an
accessory dwelling unit shall be presumptively nonconforming if photophic or other
substantial evidence conclusively demonstrates that the accessory building existed on or
before January 1, 1981. Such presumption may be overcome only by clear and convincing
evidence. He commented this arose frequently and because the City's records were not very
complete before the 1970s, it was often difficult to prove the status of older accessory
buildings. Staff's intent was to establish a grace period for structures that existed prior to
January 1, 1981, the effective date of the ECDC, and staff would not pursue those buildings
as nonconfonning. The exception would be an accessory dwelling unit. He commented this
would reduce the burden on staff and homeowners to demonstrate compliance with a building
permit for accessory structures in existence for 30+ years.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 8
Councilmember Bernheim advised the last issue was not included in the materials provided to the
Council. Mr. Bowman acknowledged it had inadvertently been omitted from the materials.
Councilmember Bernheim asked whether the Council was expected to take action tonight. Mr. Bowman
recommended the Council take public testimony and determine whether to adopt the additional
amendments or refer them to the Planning Board.
Councilmember Orvis referred to the setback encroachment ECDC 17.40.020, inquiring whether it would
apply to a new building. Mr. Bowman answered a new building could encroach into the required setback
up to 30 inches. Mayor Haakenson commented property owners rehabilitating a building frequently
complained that they should have the same ability to encroach into the setback that a new structure had.
Councilmember Orvis referred to the increase in the damage percentage from 50% to 75 %, suggesting the
percentage for a historic building be 100 %. City Attorney Scott Snyder responded the Council could set
that standard and require the building be reconstructed on the exterior as close to the former building as
possible. Mr. Bowman answered that was currently allowed and read from the code, nothing in this
section shall prevent the full restoration by reconstruction of a building or structure which is either listed
on the National Register of Historic Places, the Washington State Register of Historic Places, the
Washington State Cultural Resource Inventory, the Edmonds Registry of Historic Places or is listed in a
City approved survey meeting the standards of the State Deparrtment of Archeology and Historic
Preservation. Planning Manager Chave pointed out one of the most significant changes in that section
was that it applied to buildings not on a formal register but on a survey.
Councilmember Wambolt asked the reason for the change from 50% to 75 %. Mr. Bowman answered the
intent was to liberalize the current standard. The conservative approach was a nonconforming building
must be brought into code compliance if damage exceeded 50 %; the City Council and the Planning Board
were interested in liberalizing the approach to allow the reuse of existing buildings that were damaged.
Councilmember Wambolt asked for a further explanation of the exception to 75 %. Mr. Bowman
answered gross neglect was someone who allowed their property to fall into disrepair, did not paint,
repair, etc. Mr. Snyder clarified the 75% exception would only apply to someone whose property was
damaged through no fault of their own. Council President Pro Tem Dawson commented a building that
was damaged beyond the established percentage due to the owner's neglect would be required to be
brought into compliance with the code.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson agreed with the addition of the RS -10 zone, percentage and minimum
legal lot size to the Non - conforming Lot Table. She referred to the minor architectural improvements
(amendment to ECDC 17.40.020 maintenance and alteration), questioning how a more creative design or
better overall appearance would be determined. She suggested referring that proposed language to the
Planning Board. Mr. Snyder commented for anything subject to the ADB review, there was already a
process. He referred to the proposal to allow a 30 -inch protrusion into the setback, noting this may be
problematic if a structure was only 36 inches from the property line. Council President Pro Tem Dawson
agreed, pointing out a nonconforming setback meant a structure could already be closer to the adjacent
building and if the adjacent property also had a nonconforming setback, that could be further problematic.
Mr. Bowman pointed out fire code separation issues would also be considered.
Mayor Haakenson recalled when this was discussed previously it was to be in the multi family zone and
not the single family zone to match up the BC zone with multi family neighborhoods that were
immediately surrounding the BC zone. Mr. Bowman agreed it could be restricted to the BC zone.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson advised the single family zone was her primary concern. She
envisioned there were numerous lots with nonconforming setbacks where a 30 -inch intrusion into the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 9
setback would be problematic. She suggested this was a significant enough change that it should be
referred to the Planning Board.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson expressed concern that the proposed amendment to establish a date
for detached accessory buildings for enforcement purposes was not included in the packet for the public
hearing. She suggested also referring that amendment to the Planning Board for further vetting.
Councilmember Wilson referred to the proposed amendment to ECDC 17.40.010(D)(2), specifically
"minor architectural improvements" and suggested further examples be provided in the code. With
regard to the historic buildings /structures, he recalled the survey included any building over 40 years old.
Mr. Chave answered the original discussion was 40 years but the conclusion was an arbitrary year was not
appropriate and a building would need recognition via national historic standards. Councilmember
Wilson suggested the language "City approved historic survey" be changed to "Council approved
historical survey."
Mayor Haakenson opened the public participation portion of the public hearing.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, agreed with Council President Pro Tem Dawson's suggestion to refer the
amendment to ECDC 17.40.020 maintenance and alteration to the Planning Board for further
consideration and clarification. He recalled the flexibility was being added to the code to assist property
owners in older parts of the City who were restricted by the code due to nonconformance. He recalled a
building on the waterfront north of the Senior Center where only one wall was retained and the
nonconforming setbacks were used to reconstruct the building, resulting in a bigger building than they
would have otherwise been allowed. He recommended any time 50% or 75% for damage was allowed,
there be requirements in the historic areas to reconstruct the building in the same style /look and not utilize
the "one wall method" to construct a new building. If the intent was to construct a new building, the
property owner should comply with the current code. He referred to his garage that was constructed
under the old codes and due to changes in the code was now nonconforming. He was not allowed to
extend the roof to provide better weather protection as it would extend the nonconforming building into
the setback.
Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the
public hearing.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson asked staff to address Mr. Hertrich's comments regarding rebuilding
a building in a different style but utilizing the footprint of the nonconforming building in the case of
damage. Mr. Snyder referred to the proposed amendment in paragraph 4 on page 6 of the ordinance that
was included at the Planning Board's suggestion that applied to reconstruction of residential structures in
commercial areas. Council President Pro Tem Dawson noted the proposed amendment appeared to give
greater flexibility to rebuild a nonconforming single family residential building. Mr. Hertrich's concern
was the opposite. Mr. Snyder advised the concept was discussed by the Planning Board in this limited
context. Council President Pro Tem Dawson asked if there was any language that disallowed what Mr.
Hertrich referred to. Mr. Bowman answered it was implied throughout the code, recalling the Council
was particularly concerned with the ability for property owners in the commercial area to rebuild to retain
the unique character of downtown.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson asked if a building that was damaged beyond 75 %, leaving only one
wall intact, would the property owner be allowed to rebuild it on the footprint. Mr. Bowman answered a
residential building could be. Mr. Snyder explained typically buildings were nonconforming due to bulk
standards - height and setback - and this was not an architectural design ordinance. He commented there
were buildings in the City that no one would want reconstructed in the same configuration. He cautioned
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 10
against forcing a property owner to rebuild the same building when they may be able to provide a better
look with a new building. He summarized if the intent was to require buildings be reconstructed with the
same look, there was no opportunity to improve the look. Council President Pro Tern Dawson
commented there was the ability to improve the look within the existing code.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson asked whether it would be appropriate to ask staff to return with an
ordinance to adopt the provisions that the Planning Board had considered and amend the ordinance at a
later date to include the other proposed amendments or was it preferable to adopt them all at the same
time. Mr. Bowman answered it was preferable to do the amendments via one ordinance for codification
purposes. Council President Pro Tern Dawson asked whether an additional public hearing before the
Council be required if these issues are returned to the Planning Board. Mr. Bowman answered the
Council typically held a public hearing on the Planning Board's recommendations. Mr. Snyder advised a
public hearing at the Council was discretionary. He advised the proposed amendment regarding
establishing a date for detached accessory building for enforcement purposes that was not contained in the
Council packet would require a public hearing. Mr. Bowman advised it could be done at the Planning
Board level.
Councilmember Bernheim recalled when this issue first arose, the impetuous was to facilitate
redevelopment/remodeling of buildings in the downtown area and avoid the expense of developing to the
current code. Mr. Bowman recalled the goal was to expand the ability to reuse buildings and was not
targeted at only downtown. He acknowledged downtown raised a number of issues, specifically single
family residences in a commercial zone. He noted the Council's policy has been strict with regard to
variances; one of the tools was the nonconforming regulations.
Councilmember Bernheim asked how the proposed amendments would facilitate the redevelopment /reuse
of existing structures. Mr. Bowman answered the 50% damage percentage was a very low threshold for
damage; the intent was to increase that threshold to provide more flexibility when a building was
damaged. If a building was destroyed entirely, it would be required to meet the current code; however,
historic structures and residential structures in commercial zones that were destroyed in excess of 75%
could be reconstructed. Councilmember Bernheim asked whether any of the amendments applied to
owners who elected to renovate an existing building. Mr. Snyder answered adaptive reuse was discussed
at the Planning Board but was set aside because it was a bigger topic and may be more suitable for
discussion along with LEED.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WAMBOLT, TO REFER THE TWO ITEMS NOT PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED BY THE
PLANNING BOARD TO THE PLANNING BOARD, THE STAFF RECOMMENDED CHANGES
REGARDING 1) MINOR ARCHITECTURAL IMPROVEMENTS ENCROACHING INTO
NONCONFORMING SETBACKS AND 2) ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND BROUGHT BACK
TO COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
ECC Title 6, 10. PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO ECC TITLE 6 REGARDING
Property
Nuisances PROPERTY NUISANCES.
Development Services Director Duane Bowman explained the Planning Board initially began work on the
performance standards in the zoning code when the City Attorney pointed out they were not zoning issues
but part of the City's police powers related to nuisance. Staff reviewed EMC Chapter 6 which included
nuisance regulations and discovered a number of outdated code sections, including regulations dating
back to the early 1900s. He reviewed the rationale for the proposed revisions:
• Consolidate nuisance regulations into one location, the Edmonds Municipal Code (EMC).
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 11
Clean up antiquated code in the EMC.
Nuisance regulations are part of the city's broad police powers and should rightfully be in the
EMC and not within the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC).
The proposed regulations cover the types of frequent complaints received by the City's Code
Enforcement Officer.
Mr. Bowman provided photographic examples of situations encountered by Code Enforcement Officer
Mike Thies that included piles of construction debris, a house that has fallen into disrepair, blackberry
bushes, numerous vehicles in a yard, a carport full of materials, and debris covered by a tarp. He
provided a photograph of the carport brought into compliance by enclosing the materials with chain link
fencing and other materials.
Mr. Bowman advised the proposed ordinance cleans up outdated sections of the code and adds new
nuisance regulations as well as expands the list of nuisances found in EMC 6.20.040. He noted the list of
nuisances were issues the Code Enforcement Officer encountered or were culled from other cities'
regulations. He read from the expanded list of nuisances:
• Any junk, trash, litter, boxes, salvage materials or lumber not neatly stacked in any front yard,
side yard, rear yard or vacant lot.
• Any attractive nuisances dangerous to children, including but not limited to the following items
when located outside of a fully enclosed building:
1. Abandoned, broken or neglected equipment;
2. Rusted, jagged, sharp or otherwise potentially dangerous machinery;
3. Household or commercial appliances, including but not limited to refrigerators, freezers,
washers, dryers, dishwashers, ovens, hot water tanks or toilets;
4. Unpermitted excavations; and /or
5. Unprotected or open wells or shafts.
• Any graffiti on the exterior of any building, fence or other structure in any frontyard, side yard,
rear yard or on any object in a vacant lot.
• Any vehicle parts or other articles of personal property which are stored, discarded or left in a
state of partial construction or repair in any front yard, side yard, rear yard or vacant lot.
• Hazardous trees,
• Any accumulation, stack or pile of building, landscaping or construction materials which are
exposed to the elements or are in disarray and which are not directly associated with a project on
the premises for which a current building permit has been obtained; or, with respect to a project
which does not require a permit, that is in progress or which is scheduled to begin within ten (10)
business days. Construction materials include but are not limited to metal, wood, wire, drywall,
electrical components, and any supplies, equipment or other items utilized for painting,
landscaping, logging, roofing, masonry or plumbing.
He noted the ordinance had a separate procedure for abatement and removal of junk vehicles which
followed the State code. He referred to Section 6.20.045 regarding protective covering that states "Except
as otherwise expressly provided by applicable City ordinance or a valid regulatory permit, any condition
enumerated in ECC 6.20.040 shall constitute a public nuisance irrespective of whether such condition is
covered in whole or in part by a tarpaulin, vapor barrier, canvas or plastic sheeting, or other temporary
covering."
Mr. Bowman recommended the Council take public testimony tonight and continue the matter to July 15
to allow the public additional time to review the proposed ordinance. He advised the ordinance would be
posted on the City's website. He suggested a way to test the list of nuisances was whether a
Councilmember would want any of them on a property next door to their home. He noted the revised
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 12
ordinance would provide the Code Enforcement Officer the tools to effectively deal with these issues as
the current ordinance was quite general and difficult to enforce.
Council President Pro Tern Dawson highlighted the Council was not taking any action tonight. She
supported the request to continue the public hearing to allow residents to submit comments regarding the
proposed revisions. She inquired about the most effective way for residents to provide input regarding
the proposed revisions. Mr. Bowman answered the most effective way was to speak to the Council at the
public hearing on July 15 or they could submit written comments/email to the Code Enforcement Officer
Mike Thies or to him.
Councilmember Wilson recognized this was a particularly challenging topic. He asked how many
complaints staff received each year. Mr. Thies answered approximately 400 -500 nuisance complaints and
with building violation complaints, the number increased to 700 -800. Councilmember Wilson asked Mr.
Thies whether the ordinance would be of assistance to him. Mr. Thies agreed it would be. Mr. Bowman
pointed out clarity was important for the residents who violate the code. Mr. Snyder explained the intent
was to update the code to delete issues common in the early 1990s and to add regulations to address
current risks such as standing water in junk tires that attract mosquitoes and the possibility of West Nile
Virus.
For Councilmember Wilson, Mr. Bowman explained references to the Health Officer were being removed
as the Health Officer addressed health issues and property nuisances were addressed by the Code
Enforcement Officer. References to the Police Chief in the ordinance were also being removed.
Councilmember Wilson referred to Section 20.40(B) types of nuisances that identified any attractive
nuisances dangerous to children, including but not limited to the following items when located outside of
a fully enclosed building and asked whether this applied to those items in a fully enclosed yard. Mr.
Snyder answered a fully enclosed building was a structure. Mr. Bowman explained a dangerous situation
that was attractive to children could exist in a fenced backyard. Councilmember Wilson questioned
whether the Council wanted to regulate things that were covered by tarp that were attractive to children in
a fenced yard. Mr. Bowman agreed that was a fundamental policy issue.
Councilmember Wilson referred to Section 20.40(F) regarding hazardous trees, questioning how the City
determined what was hazardous. He envisioned someone could complain that a tree was hazardous when
it was actually blocking their view. Mr. Bowman advised staff would inspect the tree for obvious signs
and if there were any questions, an arborist would inspect the tree. Mr. Snyder advised a violation was a
civil infraction and the City had the burden of proof before the Hearing Examiner. For that reason, the
City would likely hire an arborist to inspect the tree, providing the City could gain access to the property.
Councilmember Wilson expressed concern with the City mediating between neighbors arguing over a
view rather than the health of a tree. Mr. Thies pointed out two neighbors with an issue over a tree were
usually allowed to work it out themselves. Mr. Bowman suggested adding language in the hazardous tree
section that it applied to trees that overhang the public right -of -way.
Councilmember Bernheim pointed out the existing code sections regarding nuisances focused on health
issues while many of the nuisances described in Section 6.20 were not health related. He urged the public
to comment on the proposed revisions to determine whether residents wanted more regulation of their
aesthetic conduct. He was concerned with the private property rights aspect of several of the nuisances
identified in the ordinance. He recalled while campaigning he encountered many yards where a great deal
was stored that their neighbors may not have appreciated. He was uncertain the City wanted to tell
residents what they could store in their yard. Even with regard to junk cars /car parts, his approach was
from a property right viewpoint rather than social conduct enforcement. Mr. Bowman responded staff
heard both sides, the property owner that stores the items and the neighbor who was concerned with the
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 13
appearance. He recalled a case several years ago where an entire cul -de -sac was impacted by one home,
and three of the homes could not be sold due to the appearance of one home. He agreed the Council must
find the balance.
Councilmember Bembeim noted the test cited by Mr. Bowman, whether the Council wanted that next
door to their home, that was only one of the tests. Another test may be whether a Councilmember wanted
to store such items on their property. Mr. Snyder explained the list of nuisances was staff's attempt to
identify everything that cities receive complaints about and the Council could make a policy decision
about where to draw the line. Mr. Bowman agreed the Council had the ability to strike any items they did
not want regulated.
Councilmember Orvis relayed a comment he received via his blog regarding whether garbage cans could
be stored on the side of a residence or must be stored in back. Mr. Bowman assured garbage cans could
be stored on the side of a residence.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson agreed there was a line between health items that affected the public
and aesthetic items and what was a resident's private business versus what was the public's business. She
asked whether a law enforcement officer that encountered a violation had the authority to issue a citation.
Mr. Bowman answered the officer would typically report the violation to Mr. Thies who would conduct a
follow up investigation to determine whether a violation exists, contact the property owner and begin the
code enforcement process if necessary. Mr. Snyder commented these were civil enforcement issues
where residents were provided a notice and an opportunity to correct, and could request a hearing before
the Hearing Examiner. He referred to code section 6.20.130 that provided a summary of abatement. Mr.
Bowman explained the first step in the process was to send a letter to the property owner to inform them
of the violation and provide them an opportunity to respond within a prescribed timeframe. If they do not
respond, the formal process begins with an Order to Correct that identifies the violation and the timeframe
for correction. If they do not comply, they received a Notice of Violation that includes fines. He
acknowledged usually residents worked with Mr. Thies to establish a compliance schedule.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson observed the benefit of having all nuisances in one section was there
was consistency in the way they were handled. Mr. Bowman noted the process also provided a chain of
investigation in the event of an appeal. Mr. Snyder advised under the current ordinance, failure to abate a
nuisance was a misdemeanor but it did not describe how the notice to abate was given.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
ORVIS, TO EXTEND THIS ITEM FOR 10 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson referred to paragraph K regarding accumulation of perishables attract
mold, insects and/or vermin, commenting one of the problems with perishables was the number of crows
it attracted. She suggested the ordinance also refer to attracting crows as a type of nuisance.
Councilmember Wilson commented wherever there were crows there were also rats.
Councilmember Wilson referred to comments in the December 12 Planning Board regarding nuisance
vines, hazardous trees in parks or public property and asked whether the City would be required to expend
funds to remove vegetation in response to a complaint regarding a noxious vine in a park. Mr. Bowman
answered the Parks Department would investigate any complaint. Mayor Haakenson commented if there
were a damaged tree on City property, the arborist would investigate and the tree would be removed if
appropriate.
Councilmember Wilson referred to a comment in the Planning Board minutes regarding parking
recreational vehicles in a side yard. Mr. Bowman advised that was not a nuisance and was covered in a
different section that the Planning Board would be addressing in the future.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 14
Mayor Haakenson opened the public comment portion of the public hearing.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, pointed out RVs, boats, trailers, etc. were vehicles and according to the
definition of vehicle in the code were not allowed in a yard. With regard to crows, he favored any
regulation that would prevent the crows that were attracted to the deli across the street from his home that
spread debris into his yard. He pointed out he planted tomatoes in tires in his yard. He envisioned Mr.
Thies would need a gun and a badge to enforce the proposed ordinance. With regard to tarps, he
questioned how the City could detennine material covered by a tarp was a violation. He did not favor the
City prohibiting tarps, noting they were used in this area to protect against rain. He pointed out the code
did not address screening; if something could not be seen, it would not be a bother to someone. He
explained he had two old cars and his yard was screened by foliage and fencing, yet Mr. Thies has
attempted to peer through the bushes to see whether they were licensed. He recommended the City not
pursue enforcement of plastic buildings unless they were in disarray /disrepair. He recalled the Planning
Board discussed items in the setback and in Chapter 17. He urged the Council to review the Planning
Board minutes, recalling many of their concerns were based on safety. He provided each Councilmember
a copy of the old code and suggested they identify the references to safety and what constituted a nuisance
in the early 1900s.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WAMBOLT, TO EXTEND THIS ITEM FOR 5 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Finis Tupper, Edmonds, acknowledged some updating was required but the proposed ordinance was
overkill. He questioned whether the City wanted to get involved in neighborhood disputes, finding that a
poor use of the City's resources particularly in the current economy. He emphasized the City would only
enforce the ordinance upon complaint which resulted in selective enforcement and the opportunity for
abuse of police powers. He pointed out some of the City's statutes ignored the Washington State
Constitution Article 7.
Hearing no further public comment, Mayor Haakenson closed the public participation portion of the
public hearing.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM DAWSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
WAMBOLT, TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO JULY 15, 2008. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Councilmember Wilson acknowledged RVs were defined as a motor vehicle and motor vehicles was
listed as a type of nuisance as were articles of personal property stored in the side yard. Mr. Bowman
advised RVs and similar items would be addressed as part of the performance standards. Councilmember
Wilson suggested clarifying in 6.20.040(E) that operational motor vehicles were excluded.
Mayor Haakenson asked whether Mr. Thies was investigating a complaint regarding Mr. Hertrich's yard.
Mr. Bowman advised a valid complaint had been filed against Mr. Hertrich. The case remains open as
Mr. Hertrich has denied staff permission to perform a site inspection.
11. AUDIENCE COMMENTS
4th ofruly Jim Hills, Edmonds, President, Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, announced the 101st annual 4th of July
celabrat;ov celebration that is paid for, organized and sponsored by the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce. He invited
residents to provide donations and businesses to provide sponsorships by mailing checks to the Greater
Edmonds Chamber of Commerce, online at edmondswa.com, dropped off at the Edmonds Log Cabin. He
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 15
displayed a pie chart illustrating how the funds were expended; total cost of the event was approximately
$40,000. He provided a schedule of events:
10:00 a.m. 5K Run
11:30 a.m. Children's parade
12:00 p.m. Main parade
2:00 p.m. City Park activities
7:30 p.m. Entertainment by the Penguins at Civic playfields
10:00 P.M. Fireworks at the civic playfields
ACE Funding Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, encouraged the public to contribute to a fundraising campaign established by
for Waterfro nt ACE to replace the prize money for the waterfront design contest. ACE has collected $2,000. Next, he
Design Contest expressed concern that the Police Department's seatbelt patrol at Dayton & 5th that also targeted people
leaving drinking establishments, scared away customers in downtown Edmonds. He preferred
enforcement focus on Hwy. 99.
Environmental 12. AUTHORIZATION TO CONTRACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES WITH LANDAU &
Review at Old
Milltown ASSOCIATES.
City Attorney Scott Snyder advised this item was to request an appropriation for environmental review at
the Old Milltown site as well as to provide information to the public. He explained staff and Council had
discussed purchase of the courtyard area in Executive Session, an effort that has gotten hung up in
negotiations. As the former site of the Yost garage, it was used for the storage of petroleum products and
there are significant environmental issues regarding the reuse of the property, particularly environmental
liability for clean up now and in the future. As part of the City's due diligence, staff was seeking funds
for Landau & Associates to conduct additional soil testing and underground imaging to determine if there
were any tanks in the portion the City was seeking to purchase to assist the City in their risk assessment
and in negotiating liability with the property owner.
COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM,
TO AUTHORIZE STAFF TO CONTRACT WITH LANDAU & ASSOCIATES TO CONDUCT
ENVIRONMENTAL WORK FOR $6,500.
Councilmember Bernheim commented many people had expressed support for this purchase; however,
because it was the site of a former auto mechanic yard, it was important to conduct further investigation
to ensure there were no hazardous materials that would pose a threat to the City in the future.
Awc 13. SELECTION OF VOTING DELEGATES FOR THE ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON CITIES
conference CONFERENCE.
Council President Pro Tem Dawson advised AWC was holding their annual conference in Yakima. One
of the items that occurred at the business meeting on the last day of the conference was a vote on
representatives to the AWC Board as well as representatives to AWC from Snohomish County and at-
large representatives. She explained every member city was allowed three delegates who were the city's
voting representatives; no proxies and not more than three delegates were allowed. As she was the only
elected official planning to attend the conference and Senior Executive Assistant Linda Carl planned to
attend, she asked that they be authorized as the City's voting representatives.
COUNCILMEMBER ORVIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO
AUTHORIZE COUNCILMEMBER DEANNA DAWSON AND SENIOR EXECUTIVE
ASSISTANT LINDA CARL AS THE CITY'S VOTING REPRESENTATIVES AT THE AWC
CONFERENCE. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 16
14. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Haakenson relayed answers to questions he was frequently asked:
L Why is the grass so tall south of 5th Avenue on SR 104 near the Welcome to Edmonds sign? That
is WSDOT property and they have said they are not planning to mow it. Staff is having further
dialogue with them.
2. When will the Olympic View Drive widening project start? The project has started and Mayor
Haakenson urged everyone to avoid the area.
3. Are the Antique Mall and Skippers properties for sale? The Antique Mall property owner offered
to sell the property for not less than $16 million. The owner of the Skipper's property, Bob
Gregg, has stated the property is not for sale.
4. Is the City going to buy the Old Milltown plaza? Environmental studies are the next step in the
negotiation process.
5. Is it illegal to text /talk on a cell phone while driving? It has been illegal to text while driving
since January 1, 2008 and it will become illegal to drive while holding a cell phone to your ear on
July 1, 2008.
6. When will the Mayor hold another neighborhood meeting? The next meeting is scheduled on
June I 1 at 7:00 p.m. at Steven's Hospital.
7. Does the TV camera add ten pounds to a person's figure? Mayor Haakenson relayed people had
mentioned to him that he looked thinner in person so the adage that the camera added ten pounds
may be true.
8. Can't you do something about the rain? Mayor Haakenson responded he could not.
15. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council President Pro Tem Dawson asked whether any alternatives to purchase /sale had been discussed
ana sk pp ads with the Antique Mall or Skipper's property owners such as land swap, transfer development rights or a
Properties public /private partnership. Mayor Haakenson did not recall there had been much discussion about a
public /private partnership and the subject of land swap or TDR was broached and although it was not
ruled out, there was not much discussion. Council President Pro Tem Dawson commented it would be
helpful to know what the property owners had ruled out and what they were interested in discussing.
Mayor Haakenson commented it was his feeling they were not particularly enthused about doing anything
other than building a project on their property and both intended to move forward with that effort as the
year progressed. Council President Pro Tem Dawson clarified it would be helpful to get a definitive
statement from the property owners regarding what they would /would not consider. Mayor Haakenson
commented the property owners were confused; if the Council made them an offer, they could provide an
answer.
Councilmember Orvis announced handcrafted, ancient artifact replicas from Mesopotamia, Egypt, Rome
D.A.R.E. and Greece would be on display June 10 -12 at Westgate Elementary. He thanked Mayor Haakenson for
Graduations attending his son's D.A.R.E. graduation, Mayor Haakenson's 99th D.A.R.E. graduation. Mayor
Haakenson advised he was presented a D.A.R.E. graduation certificate when he attended his 100th
Health District D.A.R.E. graduation on June 2. Councilmember Orvis also reported on a Public Health Committee
meeting whether they discussed serious funding issues affecting the Health District.
Councilmember Wambolt suggested moving Audience Comments up on the agenda. Council President
Comments ce ents Pro Tem Dawson explained typically Public Hearings were held prior to Audience Comments; items on
omm
tonight's agenda before the public hearings tonight were scheduled at the request of the presenter due to
participants who had traveled from out of town to attend. Mayor Haakenson noted the Council could
change this practice at any time. Council President Pro Tem Dawson commented many public bodies
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 17
only allowed public comment on items scheduled on the agenda and took public comment at the
beginning of the meeting. The Edmonds Council allowed public comment on virtually any subject.
Councilmember Wambolt suggested the Council reconsider the timing of Public Comment on the agenda,
acknowledging the Council was not required to take public comment at all.
Councilmember Olson thanked Council President Pro Tem Dawson for attending the AWC Conference,
commenting it was a very important event and she was sorry she was unable to attend as she would be out
of town.
waterfront Councilmember Wilson commented if the Council wanted to make an offer to the waterfront property
Pr °pert' owners, the Council needed to develop a package or provide clear direction to staff to develop a package.
Owners
He acknowledged part of the frustration was the property owner's reluctance to commit until the Council
presented an offer. Next, recognizing that the City and community derived a great deal from the 4th of
July events, he recommended the Council provide a $1,000 contribution toward the 4th of July celebration
this year only. Council. President Pro Tem Dawson suggested scheduling it as an agenda item in
accordance with the Council's past practice on donations.
Councilmember Bernheim explained he was invited to the meeting with the waterfront property owners
waterfront last week but was later told it was not a public meeting and that there would not be a discussion regarding
Property P g g g
owners the sale of the property. Mayor Haakenson clarified he told Councilmember Bernheim that it was not a
public meeting and he was not invited. Councilmember Bernheim commented part of the problem with
the Council's inability to get information or formulate follow -up questions was the Council's questions
were not raised at meetings with the property owners. Mayor Haakenson suggested the Council form a
committee of three Councilmembers and invite Mr. Gregg and Mr. Dykes to meet with them.
Councilmember Bernheim commented that was what he thought would happen when he was invited to
attend the meeting with the property owners last week. Mayor Haakenson reiterated a Port Commissioner
explained to him after the Council meeting that it was not a public meeting and Councilmember Bernheim
was not invited.
Councilmember Bernheim commented hopefully as this effort proceeded, with the cooperation and
communication between the owners and Council, that some progress could be made. If the channels of
communication did not remain open to facilitate questions and answers, he feared the City's goal would
not be achieved as easily. Mayor Haakenson commented the City had not yet defined what they wanted
to do. He reiterated his suggestion that Councilmember Bernheim and two other Councilmembers meet
with Mr. Dykes and Mr. Gregg. Council President Pro Tem Dawson suggested any Councilmembers
interested in participating inform her and she would coordinate a meeting with Mr. Dykes and Mr. Gregg.
Councilmember Bernheim answered Council President Plunkett and he had already expressed interest and
he thought he would be meeting with the property owners last week.
Councilmember Wambolt explained the meeting that Mayor Haakenson, Mr. Clifton and he attended was
Property a property owners' meeting. They were invited to participate in that group and signed a non - disclosure
Owners agreement. The recent meeting was another property owners' meeting and was the reason it was a closed
meeting. Councilmember Bernheim disagreed there was a non - disclosure agreement that applied to that
group and said no private information was exchanged at those meetings.
Councilmember Wambolt pointed out the question
owners was whether they would sell their property.
TDR or a public /private partnership.
the Council directed them to ask of the property
They were not directed to ask about a land swap or
Councilmember Wilson recalled Mr. Gregg attended the entire Council meeting last week and no
questions were directed to him. He noted this discussion had been ongoing for the past five months as
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 18
well as last year and the previous year and during that time he had met with Mr. Gregg and Mr. Dykes.
He commented it was not incumbent on the Mayor or a Councilmember to schedule a meeting;
Councilmembers were welcome to contact Mr. Gregg and Mr. Dykes. Councilmember Bernheim
commented he would like to know what went on in those meetings. He acknowledged anyone could call
Mr. Gregg, noting it was his understanding at the conclusion of last week's meeting that he had been
invited to attend a meeting and later learned he had not.
Student Representative Scheibert reminded Edmonds - Woodway High School seniors to be safe at prom
so they could walk in graduation.
Council President Pro Tern Dawson expressed her thanks to Student Representative Scheibert for her
service on the Council. Student Representative Scheibert expressed her gratitude to the Council for the
experience.
16. ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m.
Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes
June 3, 2008
Page 19