Loading...
19680102 City Council Minutes401 . questionnaires if the council. would take action at the next meeting before receiving the answers. She was assured that no action would be taken on formation of the proposed LID until the members of the council had taken time to evaluate the answers on the questionnaires, and had time to decide what the feeling of the majority of the people was. Frank Johnson, 196:h and 88th, asked where the sewer line would run in his immediate area. The Engineer gave him'a tentative answer, and explained that final engineering could change these preliminary locations. A gentleman asked how a determination is made on whether or not a large piece of property _ would be subdivided in the future, and he thought that large parcels of property that were not to be subdivided and only had one home on them should not be penalized with such large assess- ments, because this factor might cause the property owners to have to sell off a piece of the land to help pay the assessment, and that would tend to change the entire complexion of the neighborhood. At this point, zoning requirements were explained for this area. A man on Hillcrest Place noted that his road had never been improved except for oiling by the residents, and he wanted to know if the road would be surfaced by the contractor with the restoration following the installation of the sewer. He was told that the contractor was required to restore streets only to their original condition, and if it was just a dust coat before, it would not be surfaced. A woman wanted to know about the health hazard and who requested the proposed LID. This was explained. Bill McNamara, 20031 - 82nd W.,questioned why the storm sewers couldn't be installed at the same time as the sewer LID and save digging up the area twice. A man from 205th and 851h P1. W. inquired about a hook-up fee; also about the amount of money held out for payment of easements. It was -stated that any money to be used for payment of easements was listed in the indirect costs of the estimate, and if more was needed , then all property owners on the assessment roll would have to share in the extra costs. Mayor Harrison advised the audience that tyre City staff would stay after the hearing to answer any questions property owners might have on their own assessments or property. • There were no further general information questions that had not already been covered, and the hearing was declared closed. January 2, 1968 ROLL CALL Regular meeting was called to order by Mayor Harrison with all councilmen present except Nordquist. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of December 19 had been mailed and posted, and with no omissions nor corrections, they stood approved as presented. HEARING: APPEAL FROM PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #248 - (DOCES) Hearing was held on an appeal from the recommendation of the Planning Commission in their Resolution #248, wherein they recommended denial of a proposal to amend the official zoning map by designating as multiple residential high density (RMH) that property described in Planning Commission File No. R-12-67, known as the Doce property. City Planner Logan projected on the screen a land use map of the vicinity; a map showing the existing zoning; and the zoning before and just after the dddoption of the comprehensive plan in 1964. He explained that the request was to rezone the area from RD to RMH. Mr. Logan then read the minutes of the Planning Commission pertaining to this hearing. He added that the comprehensive plan designates this area as single family, and the present RD zoning is better in his estimateion than RMH. Hearing was then opened. • Mr. John Ehrlichman, attorney representing Mr. Doce, stated that the owners of this property had been before the council for zoning at least three times since and during the progressive ex- pansion of this particular area. He noted that dramatic changes had taken place over this period of time in South Snohomish County, and that everyone realized this and would not fight building changes to keep pace with the growth. He added that this was the reason that the highest and best use of this property had changed periodically, and that where once a single store could not survive without'a shopping center, it now was able to. He noted the need for multiple housing because of the present situation. Mr. Ehrlichman then showed slides of the subject property, pointing out the topography of the land and the surrounding vicinity, as well as the surrounding zoning. Mr. Jones, architect for Mr. Doce, presented a plot plan drawing of an apartment devel- opment for the area if rezoned RMH, and when Councilman, Kincaid questioned whether the plan as presented here tonight would remain the same. if the rezone were granted, Mr. Ehrlichman stated that Mr. Doce would be happy to enter into contract with the city to insure that the plans would be essentially the same as presented, and that they would further guarantee participation in an LID to pave the streets bordering. Mr. Ehrlichman then traced the pattern that Edmonds had seemed to follow in zoning from CG to RM to single, and he wondered why in this one par- ticular case the city would choose to omit a buffer of multiple between CG and single family dwellings. He added that he felt the proposal solves how the area can be successfully developed in view of the terrain. No one.in the audience wished to speak in connection with the rezone. City Attorney I,,iurphy noted that the Supreme Court had approved a contract between a developer and a city when the developer".had been the one to suggest the public improvements, and that this could legally be done by the council in this case, since the developer's attorney had suggested it. Hearing was then closed. Following discussion, a motion was made by Councilman Bennett, seconded by Councilman Tuson that the appeal be granted subject to the appellant submitting a proposal to the City Attorney in regard to the setbacks, participation in LID for street paving, the use of the discussed pro- posed recreation area, and that the design as submitted be essentially the same. More dis- cussion followed, and it was moved by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Kincaid to amend • the motion and have this matter resubmitted to the Planning Commission for consideration of the terms of the contract. Motion carried on the amendment, and a vote on the original motion as. 402 amended also carried. HEARING: PLANNING C014MISSION RESOLUTION #254 � Hearing was held on Planning Commission Resolution #254, File z0-4-67, to amend Section 12.13.130 iJ to.establish minimum side yard setbacks in multiple residential zones at 10' instead of 5' as pres- r-7) ently required. City Planner Logan read the minutes of the Planning Commission for this, and Mayor Harrison then opened the hearing. No one in the audience wished to comment, and the hearing was therefore closed. It was moved by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Slye that Ordinance #1341 be passed, amending section 12.13.130 as recommended by the Planning Commission. Motion carried. HEARING: ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #255 Hearing was held on Planning Commission Resolution #255, File CP-10-67, to amend the official street plan to establish access street from 761� Ave. W. to the rear of the RMH zoned properties at the SW corner of 761� W. and 196k S.W. 1,11r. Logan explained the reasons for this request, and outlined the area for council. Hearing was then opened. Mr. Robinson, 1941�, stated that he thought the property owners should be able to work out this problem of access by themselves. Capt. Shields asked what the attitude of the people was who were living there, and had they objected to no access. Mr. Logan answered that one property owner felt a double access would be an improvement and he has held off building in hopes that this would be done. No one else wished to comment, and the hearing was closed. It was suggested that perhaps it would be well to try to get the five property owners together to discuss this. It was moved by Councilman Bennett, seconded by Councilman Tuson that this matter be tabled to the first meeting in February - (February 6) and the Planning Commission in the meantime take another look at the situation. Motion carried. HEARING: ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 71256 O Bearing was held on Planning Commission Resolution #256, File CP-11-67, to amend the official street plan to deny the proposal to extend 194th S.W. eastward to Lot 19, Maplewood Gardens, unrecorded. City Planner Logan projected a map of the area on the screen, and gave an ex- planation of the situation. Hearing was opened. John D. Baker, an elder in the Maplewood Presbyterian Church, was spokesman for a group representing the church. Mr. Baker stated that the church had purchased property when it was still just a mission church with a small congre- gation, and that now it had grown to over 400 members, and the church did not want the city to buy a 50 ft. strip of property from them. They felt that the city should not condemn property to take it away from a church congregation for access for the benefit of one contractor. Mr. Baker added that the church had preliminary sketches drawn on the expansion of the building northward and their plan would use the area for building and parking for parishioners. Capt. Shields inquired if the City had bought any property for the benefit of one property owner before, and did they expect to set a precedent and have to do this for others in the future. It was answered that the city had not purchased property for this type of thing before. No one else in the audience wished to comment, and the hearing was closed. A motion was made by Councilman Tuson, seanded by Councilman Slye that the recommendation in Planning Commission Resolution #256 for denial to extend 1941� S.W. e4stward to Lot 19, Maple- wood ua;rdens, unrecorded, be upheld. Motion carried unanimously. CORRESPONDENCE Council acknowledged receipt of a letter from Fred K. Ross, Editor of the Enterprise, requesting a change'in council policy in regard to releasing names of apprehended juveniles. CONSIDERATION OF UNITS 2 AND 3 • Consideration of Units 2 and 3 sewer project had been tabled to this date from the council meeting of December 19. However, it was explained that the questionnaires which had been sent to each owner of record were still coming in, and in order to allow time for these to be re- ceived and tabulated, a motion was made by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Bennett that further consideration of Units 2 and 3 be tabled to January 16. Motion carried. APPOINTMENT OF COUNCIL AUDITING COMMITTEE FOR 1968 Mayor Harrison made the appointments of Councilman Slye, Chairman,; and Councilmen Bennett and Nelson to serve as members of the Council Auditing Committee until January 1969. It was moved by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Kincaid that Resolution #168 be passed, confirming these appointments. Motion carried. PROPOSED RESOLUTION GRANTING STREET FRANCHISE FOR OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT In regard to the proposed street franchise for the Olympic View Water District, a motion was made by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Nelson that Resolution ##169 be passd4, authorizing the Mayor to enter into contract with the District. Motion carried. APPOINTMENT TO PLANNING COMMISSION Mayor Harrison nE de the appointment of Glenn Gustayson, 7931 Talbot Park Road, to Position #2 on the Planning Commission, expiring October 9, 1968. A motion was made by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Haines.that the Mayor's appointment of Mr. Gustayson be confirmed. Motion carried. APPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT The Mayor made the appointment of Oam Felton, 8415 Talbot Road, to Position #7 on the hoard of 403 • Adjustment, term to expire December 31, 1971. It was moved by Councilman Kincaid, seconded by Councilman Slye that the Mayor's appointment of Mr. Felton be confirmed. Motion carried. EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS OF PLANNING COMMISSION Mayor Harrison appointed Councilmen Nordquist and Nelson to serve as ex-officio members of the Planning Commission, and it was moved by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Slye that the Mayor's appointments of these councilmen be confirmed. Motion carried. COUNCIL STATEMENT ON MEADO DALE COUNTRY CLUB PROPERTY . Councilman Haines made a :notion, seconded by Councilman Benr7ett, that the Edmonds City Council go on record with the Snohomish County CommiSSioners as endorsing their purchase of the Meadowdale Country Club property for a salt water park site. Motion carried. There was no further business, and the meeting was adjourned. City Clerk Mayor January 16, 1968 ROLL CALL Regular meeting was called to order by Mayor Harrison with all councilmen present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES isMinutes of the council meeting of January 2 had been posted and mailed, and with no omissions nor corrections, they stood approved as presented. BOY SCOUTS IN ATTENDANCE Mayor Harrison gave recognition to a group of Boy Scouts in the audience, who introl"ed themselves as Boy Scout Troop 333, working presently on their citizneship badges. HEARING: FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL LID #159 Hearing was held on the final assessment roll for LID #159, sewers for 16!h S. Engineer Wayne Jones gave the comparison of the preliminary and final costs for the project, which were $8.03 per zone front foot for the final, as compared to $9.11 per z.f.f. for the preliminary estimate. Hearing was then opened. There was no one in the audience who wished to comment on this, and the hearing was therefore closed. It was moved by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Tuson that proposed Ordinance #1342 be passed, confirming the final assessment roll for LID #159. Motion carried. HEARING: ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #251 Hearing was held on Planning Commission Resolution #251, recommending amendment to the zoning map by designating as 12,000 single-family residence, low density waterfront zone (RSW-12) property described in Planning Commission File No. R-15-67. City Planner Logan projected a map of the area on the screen for explanation.to the council, and also read the minutes of the Planning Commission hearing on this. Hearing was then opened. Robert Boye, lot 21, Lake Ballinger, who was spokesman for the Lake Ballinger Action Group which had requested this rezone, also projected a colored map showing the properties in favor of the rezone, those opposing, and those properties whose owners had not been contacted. The majority were in favor. Mr. Healey,, 23615- 74th W., felt the rezone would preserve • the neighborhood as is and prevent subdivisions in the area, which the people living there did not want. Jack Jones, 205th, was opposed to the rezone. Of those present in the audience who were interested in this hearing, a show of hands resulted in a majority in favor, with one person opposed. Councilman Bennett asked Mr. Jones why he opposed this.proposed rezone, and would it create a hard- ship. No one else wished to be heard , and the hearing was closed. A motion was made by Councilman Nelson, seconded by Councilman Nordquist that proposed Ordinance #1343 be passed, amending the zoning map by rezoning this Ballinger area in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution #251. Motion carried. HEARING: ON APPEAL FROM RECOMMENDATION IN PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS #252 AND #253 Hearing was held on the appeal of the Sierra Village Committee from the recommendations in Planning Commission"Resolutions #252 and #253, to deny an amendment to the comprehensive plan and a rezone from multi -family to single properties lying along both sides of 196th S. W. between the east city limits and 86th Ave. W. as extended. Mr. Logan projected a map of the area and explained the zoning request. He also read the minutes of the Planning Commission hearing on this. Mr. Logan re-emphasized his idea that although some areas are good for apartment buildings from an urban design standpoint, he cannot agree with strip zoning, and with 11 blocks involved here, he recommended retaining single dwellings between 80th and 84th and using the cluster zoning at ,the ends. Hearing was then opened. Jim Krider, 19708 - 82nd Pl. W., was spokesman representing the Sierra Village Committee, being both an attorney and a resident of the area. He stated that the major concern was to preserve the character of single family neighborhood and suburban atmosphere from 80th to 84th, and suggested deleting this from current zoning and revert back to single family as the Planner recommends. Mrs. Audrey McGinness, 7819 - 192nd P1. W., stated that she was a teacher and -a mother, aid had moved here from an apartment area in the University district. She was definitely in favor of single family dwellings in her area, and did not want it to become an,"asphalt jungle". She added that 600 apartment units would result in too many cars and transient people who would have children to add to • our school system, but who would not be in favor of paying their way as far as school bonds were considered 8315 Bob Robinson, - 194th S. W., projected a picture on the screen of Mr. Helson's view, and added