Loading...
04/14/1987 City CouncilTHESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO APRIL 21, 1987 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 14, 1987 (WORK. MEETING) The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mayor Larry Naughten in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag sa- 1ute. PRESENT Larry Naughten, Mayor Jack Wilson, Council Pres. Steve Dwyer Laura Hall Jo -Anne Jaech Bill Kasper John Nordquist Lloyd Ostrom Tony Russell, Stud. Rep. STAFF PRESENT Art Housler, Admin. Svc. Director Jim Barnes, Parks & Rec. Div. Mgr. Bob Alberts, City Engineer Bobby Mills, Public Works Supt. Peter Hahn, Community Svs. Director Scott Snyder, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder CONSENT AGENDA Items (0) and (E) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL (B) APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 7, 1987 (C) APPROVAL OF EDMONDS YOUTH. -SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM PARAMETERS ION OF PLANN PTION OF PLAN14ING RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW MOBILE T ITY DE CLARIFYING RECON- TATIO�S C TY OF Co.uncilmember Dwyer said he did not think either item was appropriate for the Consent Agenda and that the public should have an opportunity to voice their opinion with respect to any amendment to the Community Development Code. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL14EMBER HALL, TO REMOVE ITEM (D) AND (E) FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND SCHEDULE EACH ITE14 FOR FIVE MINUTE PUBLIC HEARINGS ON MAY 5, 1987. MOTION CARRIED. EXECUTIVE SESSION - LEGAL MATTER The Council recessed to an Executive Session at 7:05 p.m. to discuss a legal matter and recon- vened at 7:22 p.m. REVIEW OF METRO'S SEWAGE SWAP PROPOSAL Community Services Director Peter Hahn reported that in January 1987, a Metro Connnittee directed its staff to prepare a preliminary cost feasibility analysis of the alternative of swapping Rich- mond Beach sewage flows with Edmonds flows. The benefits to Metro would be the elimination of the Richmond Beach plan as well as potential cost savings. The sewage "swap" would be neutral from Edmonds perspective except for potential elimination of the Ballinger parallel main project. In mid March, Metro staff presented its preliminary findings. While the findings did not indi- cate any benefits to Metro, staff was directed to officially contact the City of Edmonds. On March 20, 1987, the City Council and Mayor received a letter from Metro requesting the City's official position on the concept of a sewage trade. On March 24, the Community Services Committee reviewed the concept of the swap. Concerns were expressed about two issues: the long-term validity of any agreement with Metro, .and the prelimi- nary study showed no benefits to Edmonds. Connie King, Community Assistant to King County Councilmember Lois North, read a letter into the record from Ms. North addressed to the Edmonds City Council which stated, in essence, an interest in contracting with Edmonds to accommodate Richmond Beach flows at the new Edmonds secon- dary sewer treatment plant and coordinate Edmonds residential sludge with Metro's sludge manage- ment program. Mayor Naughten recognized in the audience Mayor Lois Anderson of Mountlake Terrace; Sydel' Pollin from Ronald Sewer District; Carl Rautenberg, Public Works Director of Mountlake Ter- race; and Pat Meeker, Olympic Water District. John Spencer, Director of Water Pollution Control for Metropolitan :Seattle, reported that Metro was ordered to implement secondary treatment by 1991 by the Department of Ecology (DOE) and the Environmental Protection Agency. Metro Council subsequently adopted a secondary treatment and combined sewer overflow control plan. One of the policies of the plan was not to increase the service areas outside of the Metro jurisdiction boundaries in an attempt to control or at least maintain the current flows going to the West Point plant. In addition, also adopted was construc- tion of facilities to divert flows from the northeast Lake Washington and northeast Lake Sammamish drainage areas to the Renton treatment plant to further reduce the flows going to the West Point plant. Mr. Spencer said Lois North requested the Metro Water Quality Committee to ask the Metro Staff to investigate the possibility of closing the Richmond Beach plant and routing those wastewater flows to the Edmonds sewage treatment plant in trade to route a similar volume of wastewater from the eastern part of the Edmonds service area to Metro's West Point treatment plant. Mr. Spencer reiterated that Ms. North indicated that sludge management could be a key arrange- ment between Edmonds and Metro. He noted that Metro has extended cooperative sludge management arrangements to other entities in the past. He said Metro would continue to be open to coopera- tive sludge management with Edmonds regardless of the outcome of joint treatment alternatives. Mr. Spencer said predesign of the Richmond Beach plant has been initiated, and defined cost estimates and proposals are expected within the month. Metro's time schedule is to try to reach the completion of predesign before the end of May and reach a decision in June whether or not to enter into formal discussions with Edmonds. Mr. Spencer said Metro would be willing to share with Edmonds the results of the predesign study and cost estimates as soon as the information is available. Gunnars Sreibers reviewed the alternatives for routing flows from the Richmond Beach treatment plant as follows: EDMONDS EAST 2.8 MGD TRANSFER TO WEST POINT, RICHMOND BEACH 2.8 MGD TRANSFER TO EDMONDS. Under this option, Metrowould contract with Edmonds to accommodate Richmond Beach flows at the new Edmonds secondary treatment plant. A pumping station would be constructed at the existing Richmond Beach plant site under this option. Conveyance facilities necessary for this transfer would travel northward along Richmond Beach Drive and the Burlington Northern right-of-way to Point Wells. The pipeline would then head northwestward under the railroad track and be laid into the subtidal area of Puget Sound. The offshore pipeline would continue north- ward to the City of Edmonds and then be directed back to shore along a northeasterly route to the Edmonds treatment plant. The overall length would be 15,000 linear feet of 18 inch diameter force main. To offset the additional 2.8 mgd of flow to the new Edmonds secondary plant, 2.8 mgd of flow from the Edmonds east basin would be transferred to West Point via the McAleer trunk. This transfer would be completed by constructing a new pumping station at Lake Ballinger. 5,400 feet of 18 inch force main and pressure sewer would be constructed between the Lake Ballinger pumping station and 15th Avenue N.E. From that point, 6,100 feet of gravity sewer would be constructed to convey these flows to the existing McAleer trunk. RICHMOND BEACH 2.8 MGD TRANSFER TO EDMONDS. Under this option, Metro would contract with Edmonds to expand its secondary treatment plant to accommodate Richmond Beach flows. The size of the Edmonds plant would increase from 10.9 mgd to 13.7 mgd as a result of the transfer. The conveyance facilities necessary for this transfer are identical to those presented in the first option for transferring Richmond Beach flows to Edmonds. Mr. Sreibers said the transfer alternative appears to be approximately $1.6 million more expen- sive than upgrading the Richmond Beach plant. The alternative of routing all of the flows to the Edmonds plant appears to be $1 million cheaper to Metro than upgrading the Richmond Beach plant. Mayor Naughten inquired if Edmonds would benefit from that savings. Mr. Sreibers said that issue would be open to discussion. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 APRIL 14, 1987 Community Services Director Peter Hahn,advised Mr. Spencer to express his perception of Metro's. position with respect to the swap. Mr. Spencer said Metro is currently applying for a shore- line permit from the City of Seattle to build a facility at West Point, but the outcome of that decision is yet to be known. He said it has been estimated that there will be a cost difference of approximately $325,000 between the adopted plan. and building in the Duwamish. Mr. Spencer pointed out that there was a .strong opinion expressed by councilmembers to not increase the flows at West Point. 'Mr. Spencer said it was his opinion that Metro would' not approve funding if the flows were increased at West Point and if the cost of the swap was more than the cost to upgrade Richmond Beach. However, if the costs were comparable, Metro would probably view the plan favorably. Mr. Hahn said DOE asked Mountlake Terrace to construct a parallel force main from the lift sta- tion to the crest of the hill. The cost of the project would be approximately $1 million. He forcee main out wascons tructed lEdmonds structed towards Metro. He .clarified service the aBallinger liftwould not be stationwould still be necessary, though. Mr. Hahn noted that previous studies revealed that a lift station was not necessary for flows from Edmonds to Metro but that present proposals include a lift station. lie said he would like to examine that discrepancy. The lift station would cost $3.5 million to construct. If it was determined that the lift station was not necessary, the deficit of $1.6 million to Metro would be transformed into a $2:8 million gain. Mr. Hahn recommended that the issues be presented to the Council in June for further review. He noted that the swap issue would not impede progress of secondary sewer treatment for Edmonds. Councilmember Kasper inquired what area the Ballinger lift station would serve. Mr. Hahn ex- plained that a maximum of 2.8 mgd would be diverted to Metro under the swap option. However, a residual 1.2 mgd would be routed to Edmonds. The lift station would route flows from the High- way 99 area, Mountlake Terrace, and Ronald Sewer District to the Edmonds plant. Councilmember Kasper inquired why more than 2.8 mgd would not be routed to Metro. Mr. Hahn said that was a Political issue that related to the capacity at West Point. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the swap option would not be a possibility if Metro built a plant in the Duwamish. Mr. Spencer said the possibility would still exist but the cost would be higher. Councilmember Ostrom assumed the scenario that the swap plan was consummated and in effect. He inquired how the plan would be affected if the population increased in Richmond Beach. Mr. Spencer said that area has almost reached full development. Councilmember Wilson said one of the documents indicated that Metro would not be desirous of processing wastewater flows from Snohomish County after the year 2010. Mr. Spencer said the design of the facility at West Point must be reconfigured to accommodate the increased flows after 2026, which has a present day.cost of approximately $90,000,000. Metro Water Quality Com- mittee adopted a policy that the agencies that contract with Metro outside of its jurisdiction must agree to pay the full cost of treatment after 2016. Councilmember Kasper said he understood that Carkeek Park would be converted to a stormwater system. Mr. Spencer concurred. He said the average wet weather sewage flows would be routed to West Point, and the Carkeek plant would treat the flows and would operate only during storm conditions. Councilmember Kasper inquired when the Carkeek facility was constructed. Mr. Spencer replied 1962. Mayor Naughten inquired if the present Edmonds site precludes the 13.7 plant. Mr. Hahn said he understood that that proposal would entail utilizing the entire site (the Public Works building, storage, and the street) and a comprehensive amendment to the approved engineering report. Mr. Hahn said it was his opinion that that proposal was, by far, the riskiest alternative. Councilmember Hall inquired if Mr. Spencer anticipated that DOE would grant an extension in order to allow other entities to become involved with combined wastewater treatment. Mr. Spencer said in most instances, entities build their own plant. He said there did not appear to be any possibility that DOE would grant an extension. Mayor Naughten inquired if Metro staff intends to appear before the Edmonds City Council in June with additional information. Mr. Spencer replied affirmatively. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 APRIL 14, 1987 Councilmember Jaech inquired how long the negotiation process would take if Edmonds chose to incorporate its sludge into the Metro sludge management program. Mr. Spencer said approximate- ly six months. Councilmember Jaech inquired about the length of time it would take for the City to receive cost estimates for Metro to handle its sludge. Mr. Spencer said a cost estimate - could be available immediately if Edmonds provided Metro with digested sludge. Councilmember Jaech said it appeared that the most feasible alternative for Metro would be the scenario.where Edmonds processed the Richmond Beach wastewater flows and Metro processed the flows from Mount- lake Terrace. Mr. Spencer disagreed. Councilmember Jaech said it appeared that the only benefit to the City of Edmonds, assuming the scenario where Metro would contract with Edmonds to expand its secondary treatment plant to accom- modate Richmond Beach flows, would be a cost savings of the Ballinger parallel main project. Mr. Hahn said that savings would not be realized because the City would still take tine present Edmonds east option. Councilmember Jaech inquired about the participation of Metro if Edmonds entered into that arrangement. Mr. Spencer said Metro would enter into a cost -savings agree- ment with the City and would, more than likely, make a cash payment. In addition, Metro would pay the City an annual operating fee. Councilmember Dwyer inquired when it is projected that the Edmonds plant would require upgrading to 10 mgd. Mr. Hahn replied 2010. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the plant would be capable of servicing the 2.8 mgd plus the flow that would remain with the presently proposed 10.8 mgd plant if the Edmonds east flow was routed to a different plant in 1999. Mr. Hahn said there are uncertainties about the rate of growth. Councilmember Dwyer said he assumed the western portion of the Edmonds flow was fairly well developed at the present time. Mr. Hahn concurred. DISCUSSION REGARDING SEWER TREATMENT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Community Services Director Peter Hahn reported that Staff and representatives from CWC-HD, Inc. will make a presentation on the methodology used in the planning process and the anticipated methodology to be used in the design of a plant built to be operational, cost effective, and sized to meet the basic needs of the City. Documents were provided in the Council packet which reflect the "basic needs" philosophy used to date. In addition, a review of the possible Harbor Square site, an outline of the planning history of the project, and project chronology were in- cluded in the packets as well as costs associated with different sites. City Engineer Bob Alberts introduced Gordon Culp, Brian Hemphill, Bud Benjes, and Bruce Wiley, representatives from CWC-HDR. Councilmember Jaech said she had previously requested that additional information be provided to the Council in order to aid the Council in making a determination prior to contract approval. She inquired what the bare minimum requirements were for the secondary sewer treatment plant. Mr. Benjes reviewed a slide presentation. He explained the process components of the plant, which illustrated the estimated construction costs as well as a summary of the capital costs. The costs, he said, were developed in the facility plan and provide a contingency of $5 million. The planning costs will total $39 million in 1990, which include engineering and administrative costs. Mr. Benjes said it is estimated that the annual operating costs will be slightly over $1 million per year. Mr. Benjes then reviewed a slide of the cost factors, i.e., alternative process technologies, sizing of the facility, reliability/redundancy; alternative liquid treatment technologies and solid treatment technologies. Mr. Benjes said generic cost procedures were factored into the facility planning costs to com- pare alternative regional concepts and alternative treatment processes. He noted that predesign addressed processes in more detail and more refined concepts, which allows a more precise level of cost estimating. Mr. Benjes pointed out that one of the issues was: Has the facility heen over designed? He said if DOE's criteria were literally followed, a percentage of the facility would need upgrad- ing, but DOE was convinced of several cost -saving ideas: peak flow rates, per capita flow rates, as well as a number of other concepts so that the facility plan that DOE has agreed to allows smaller facilities than those included in their "Orange Book" criteria. Mr. Benjes said mitigation measures include mitigation for noise, odor, additional costs for architectural treatment, landscaping, and lidding. All are issues which will be defined in the predesign stage. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 APRIL 14, 1987 fie said issues which affect costs include dewatering on the site, stabilization, structural. sup port requirements and alternatives, and scheduling. Mr. Benjes also showed slides of laboratory facilities of other plants throughout tire country that CWC-HDR has been involved with. Councilmember Kasper inquired if the operation is significantly different between incineration and digestion. Mr. Benjes said there were several ways to combine efforts with Metro. Raw sludge could be routed to them, and Metro could digest and dispose of it or it could be digested at the Edmonds site and then the stabilized sludge routed to Metro. lie noted that a digestion facility in Edmonds would emit. unpleasant odors throughout the entire City. If sludge was routed to Metro, the amount of truck traffic would dramatically increase in the City. Councilmember Hall said she understood that incineration was one of the more expensive alterna- tives to secondary sewer treatment. Mr. Benjes concurred. Councilmember Hall said she also understood that a ban will be placed on incineration in 10 years, and an incineration plant would not be allowed to operate without mitigation measures. Mr. Culp said he was a consultant to EPA on sludge disposal on a national basis. He said there was no written rule that incinera- tion will be banned in 10 years, as far as he knew. He said one could expect,, though, that air pollution regulations will be enacted in the future that will require possible additions to a facility. He noted that the proposed project is designed to exceed all existing air pollution standards. * Councilmember Hall inquired if blueprints from other facilities that CWC-I4DR has been involved with were available for application to the Edmonds site. Mr. Culp said a blueprint from one facility could not be utilized for a facility at another location because there are varying fac- tors. Councilmember Jaech inquired if a figure of $40 million to construct the plant was originally estimated rather than $34 million. Mr. Culp pointed out that the $34 million figure did not include engineering and administrative costs. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the $34 million was the absolute bare minimum estimate. Mr. Benjes replied negatively. Ile said that figure was an estimated cost and included $5 million in contingencies, as well as liberal costing esti- mates to insure that costs do not exceed that estimate. Mr. Culp said the bids may be less than the cost estimates. He said the facility is designed to have the bare minimum units to provide reliable, economic, long-term treatment. Mr. Hahn pointed out to the Council that the facility is an urban plant. He said a percentage of the costs include a backup system, which is necessary in the event of failure. Councilmember Hall said she understood that the outfall may need to be extended, noting that there was no lidding in the costs. Mr. Culp said there is some lidding in the cost esti- mate. Councilmember Hall inquired about the outfall. Mr. Culp said outfall was not included in the plan because it was not anticipated to be built for 7 to 10 years. Councilmember Jaech inquired if some other cost would be incurred if incineration was discount- ed. Mr. Culp replied affirmatively. lie said capital costs would be lowered if wastewater flows were digested and routed to a remote site for disposal but operating costs would increase. Mr. Hahn said the incineration method is viewed favorably because it provides the most predictable, independent, and reliable method of solids treatment. Mr. Culp noted that all of the sludge options were analyzed in predesign, and the data will be presented to the Council in the future. Councilmember Kasper noted that Metro intends to convert the Carkeek plant to a stormwater facility. Ile inquired if the City was taking a risk by relocating the Edmonds site rather than upgrading the present facility and disposing of it in the future, if necessary. Mr. Culp replied negatively. He said the Metro plant is different from the Edmonds facility in that it is a com- bined sewer area for stormwater and sanitary sewage. Mr. Alberts said the cost figures are based on a basic plant, i.e., construction materials will be standard reinforced concrete, and the pipe materials and pumps will be designed for corrosive material. He said a consultant was hired to guarantee that permit requirements are met. The meeting recessed at 9:10 p.m. and reconvened at 9:20 p.m. (Councilmember Ostrom left the meeting during the recess.) *See Council Minutes of Arai 1 21, 1987 EpMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 APRIL 14, 1987 REVIEW CONTRACT WITH CWC-HDR, INC. FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT SERVICES RELATED TO SECONDARY TREATMENT F CIL TIES , ,8 City Engineer Bob Alberts reported that on March 3, 1987, staff distributed to Council the draft engineering agreement with CWC-HDR, Inc. for the predesign, design and construction engineering and start-up services for the City's secondary wastewater treatment facility. Exhibit B of the agreement summarizes the phases, tasks, and levels of effort to be provided by the consultant. In addition to providing actual design, construction engineering, and start-up services, there is a strong emphasis on coordination and cooperation with City Staff, Council, and the public. There is also a very strong emphasis in assuring that tile. City is protected and, to the greatest extent possible, that the project will be done properly and to the needs of the City. The Council will receive status reports by the consultant as frequently as once a month, if desired by the Council. The actual daily communications with the consultant will be through the City Engineer's office. In general, the agreement requires the consultant to become thoroughly familiar with the plant site; gather input from the City, DOE, Value Engineering team (VE), and the community; prepare a detailed design to be approved by the City and DOE; prepare cost estimates and schedules; over- see the project during construction; redesign any design errors found during construction at the consultant's cost, and provide start-up services and guarantee. that the plant will meet the NPDES permit requirements. Gordon Culp stated that overheads are established by Federal government audit. The contract with the City establishes overhead at $156.8% and is competitive with other consulting firms. Profit levels have been established at 15%, which are also competitive. Mr. Culp noted that profits are not derived from any expenses or subcontracted services. Mr. Culp noted that common to all three phases (predesign, detail desinn, and engineering servic- es) are tasks that fall into the communication and coordination category. lie said he felt that the contract is a first class communication/coordination effort. Mr. Culp reviewed the different categories of the three phases. Councilmember Jaech inquired to what extent the steps in the contract would be executed if the contract was approved and unknown factors, i.e., participation of other jurisdictions, were con- sidered. Mr. Culp said if, at the onset of the Vl_ stage in the predesign stage, the City re- quested a downgrade of the plant, the cost differential would not exceed $10,000 and three addi- tional weeks would be necessary to revise the proposal. However, if the plant was upgraded, the costs would exceed $10,000. Councilmember inquired when the VE stage would be approved. Mr. Culp replied between 6 to 8 weeks. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the 10% design phase would be affected by the predesign phase if the capacity of the plant was altered. Mr. Culp replied affirmatively. He said, however, that the project would proceed through the 10% layout for the 10.8 mgd plant. Councilmember Jaech expressed concern that additional costs would be incurred if a specific agreement is not reached with the other agencies involved in secondary sewer treatment with Edmonds. She inquired about the time frame involved to determine the plant capacity after the contract is approved. She expressed a concern regarding cost overruns. Mr. Culp replied between 6 to 8 weeks. Mr. Alberts noted that notice to proceed would be dependent upon DOE approval so the City would have 2 weeks in addition to the 6 to 8 weeks to finalize its decision. Mr. Culp reviewed the project costs as follows: predesign - $320,000; design - $2 million; con- struction and start-up - $1.8 million. REVIEW OF AGREEMENT WITH DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY FOR DESIGN GRANT ON SECONDARY WASTEWATER TREAT- MENT FACILITY Councilmember Jaech inquired if the .grant could be approved by the Council prior to executing the contract with CWC-HDR. Mr. Hahn replied affirmatively. Councilmember Jaech said she did not want to jeopardize the position of the City in receiving grant monies. Councilmember Jaech inquired if it would be appropriate at that time to make a motion to approve the execution of the agreement with the Department of Ecology. Councilmember Nordquist recommend- ed that a full Council be present when the motion is made. The motion was deferred until April 21, 1987. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 APRIL 14, 1987 REVIEW OF REQUEST TO ADVERTISE FOR PROPOSALS FOR VALUE ENGINEERING ON SECONDARY TREATMENT PLANT DESIGN 15U,000 Because a full Council was not present, authorization was deferred until April 21, 1987. MAYOR Mayor Naughten noted that he will be out of town on April 21. He. inquired what type of review the Council was seeking with regard to the item on the April 21 agenda entitled "Review City -owned Property at Perrinville". Councilmember Dwyer said the Council was awaiting a progress report with regard to the letter sent to the legislators in Washington D.C. Councilmem- ber Wilson inquired if the legislators were contacted by telephone. Mayor Naughten said he called one legislator but the other two were unavailable. Mayor Naughten said he would provide an updated report to the Council. Councilmember Kasper said if the status does not change, he would be in favor of selling the City -owned property. He inq"aired if it must first be declared as surplus property. City Attorney Scott Snyder said it could either be declared as surplus property or sold through negotiations. Mayor Naughten noted that the Plaza meeting room will not be available for the June 16 Council meeting. Councilmember Dwyer recommended that the June 16th Council meeting and the June 30th Council work dinner meeting be interchanged. Mayor Naughten reminded the Council to file the PDC forms by April 15. COUNCIL Council President Wilson read a letter into the record from the Edmonds Main Streets Projects, William McLaughlin, President, regarding secondary sewer treatment which requested the Council to schedule a public hearing wherein current costs, public opinions, future business considera- tions, and alternate sites (Union Oil, Harbor Square, Port of Edmonds property) be considered, as well as capping, if expanded, at the present site. Council President Wilson asked the Council to accommodate that request. Councilmember Jaech recalled that the public had ample opportunity to express their views because numerous public hearings were scheduled in past years. She said she was not in favor of reopening the issue to the public because she did not want to delay the con- tracts or jeopardize grant money. Councilmember Kasper said the Harbor Square site has not been considered as an alternate site. lie felt the site would be an ideal location for a secondary sewer treatment plant. Mayor Naughten adjourned the meeting at 10 p.m. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEM- BER DWYER, TO REOPEN THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Dwyer said he did not see anything fruitful about reopening the entire issue. He said he felt it was wrong to characterize it as an issue that has never been open. * Councilmember Hall was in favor of reopening the issue for public input. Councilmember Nordquist reiterated that numerous public hearings were held in past years, and the public had an opportunity to speak at that time. He noted that very little public input was offered. * Councilmember Kasper noted that the Harbor Square site was not available in the past and has only been available for a short period of time. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED TO AUTHORIZE CWC-HDR TO CONDUCT A FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE HARBOR SQUARE SITE AND PRESENT THE RESULTS TO THE COUNCIL. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Jaech recommended that discussions commence in the near future regarding the partic- ipation of the other jurisdictions with respect to cost sharing. She said the outcome of those discussions will determine the design of the secondary sewer treatment plant. Mr. Hahn suggested that the City send an.official letter to the other jurisdictions regarding the City's position. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCiLMEMBER_WILSON, TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON APRIL 28, 1987 AT 8 P.M FOLLOWING THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO INCLUDE THAT A FEASIBILITY STUDY BE CONDUCTED BY CWC-HDR FOR THE HARBOR SQUARE SITE. MOTION TO AMEND FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. *See Council Minutes of April 21, 1987 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 APRIL 14, 1987 A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MAIN MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMEMBER HALL, COUNCIL - MEMBER KASPER, COUN.CILMEMBER NORDQUIST, AND COUNCILMEMBER WILSON IN FAVOR AND COUNCILIIE14BER DWYER AND CO.UNCILMEMBER JAECH OPPOSED. Councilmember Kasper noted that busses are encountering difficulty' in leaving bus turnouts in Edmonds. He inquired if the Council would have any objection if he put -sued the issue. No objec- tion was noted from the Council. * Co.uncilmember Hall said she and Councilmember Nordquist attended the Health Board meeting that day. A movie presentation was made regarding AIDS. She said the education process must prevail because there are 2,000,000 people afflicted with the disease throughout the country. Councilmember Hall said a hearing on wood stoves was recently held, and legislation is pending. The meeting adjourned at 10:33 p.m. These minutes.are subject to April 21, 1987 approval. AC LINE G. PARRETT, City Clerk 4LAIRRS. I AUGHTE,.d, ayor 1 *See Council Minutes of April 21, 1987 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 1 APRIL 14, 1987