19680618 City Council MinutesCouncilman Tuson had a question to ask Mr. Logan in regard to the site limit,
and he answered that this was a 2 acre minimum.
e
A gentleman in the audience stated that he was definitely against any Planned Unit
Developments in Edmonds. Phil Odell, who said he lived near the Edmonds High School,
had several questions on the units in the PUD which were on the illustrations which
Mr. Logan had shown the audience. A man who said he had a copy of the proposed
ordinance and was against Planned Unit Developments, seemed to have a misconception
in his interpretation of the ordinance wording, and this was clarified by the City.
Attorney and Mayor Harrison. Warren Henderson noted that open space in a Planned
Unit Development is not private space, but that a single family dwelling with a yard
does have its own private open space. Bob Robinson asked if the citizens wish to
mix multiple units in with single family dwellings in this city. He added what is
the illustrated need for Planned Unit Developments at this time, and who is interested
in having this sort of thing come about in Edmonds. John McAdam stated that he didn't
care what was going on in other communities,.that he is interested in what Edmonds is
doing, and he didn't think there was a need for Planned Unit Developments here.
Another gentleman said he preferred Planned Unit Developments, and felt they would
enhance the surrounding properties. Mr. Kelly.asked how many variances to the
Building Code had been issued in 1967. He was against apartments. Jim Krider stated
that he was against apartment houses in single family areas and was also not in favor
of doing away with a 5 acre minimum for PUD. Paul Weaver stated that he was concerned
with the single family houses in a Planned Unit Development being allowed to be built
in a 6000 square foot area, when the zoning of the area for other single dwellings not
a part of a PUD was 12,000 square feet. No one else had anything new to add to the
hearing, and it was therefore closed.
Mayor Harrison then asked for a show of hands in the audience in answer to several
questions:
(1)' How many prefer a PUD without a minimum land requirement? (2 people) O
(2) How many prefer a PUD with a minimum acreage of 5 acres? (25 people)
(3) How many prefer a PUD with a 20 acre minimum? (70 people)
(4) How many prefer no PUD ordinance at all? (3 people)
(5) How many prefer prohibiting multi -units in PUD? (16 people)
June 18, 1968
ROLL CALL
With the Edmonds Arts Festival being held at the Civic Center, the regular meeting of the
Edmonds City Council was held at the Seaview Elementary School. The meeting was called
to order by Mayor Harve Harrison'with all councilmen present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of June 4th had been posted and mailed and since there were no
corrections or ommissions they stood approved as presented.
PUD POWER LINE FROM WALNUT TO MAIN
Marvin Smith, who lives on the SW corner of llth and Alder, pointed out the fact to the
council that the PUD in putting their high power line from Walnut to Main through the
park area were proposing to remove more trees than Mr. Smith felt the council had approv-
ed of when permission was given to go through the park with this line. Council had
approved taking down only a minimum number of trees necessary for this line and the top-
ping of some. Bill Shaw of the PUD was present, and also David James from the PUD en-
gineering department. They stated that there would be two poles erected in the park area
and that a single yellow band had been put around the trees to be taken out and a double
yellow band around those marked for topping. Mr. Smith noted that there were quite a
number of trees with the single yellow band showing that there would be many more trees
removed than had previously been approved by council action. The Mayor asked that the
councilmen take a look at these banded trees and this matter would be considered at their
next work meeting to come to some conclusion as to how many trees it was necessary to re-
move for this PUD power line. In the meantime they asked the PUD to please hold off on any
tree topping or removal.
APPROVAL OF FIREWORKS STAND PERMITS
A recommendation was received from Fire Chief Cooper that the council grant fireworks
stands permits to the following organizations and at the following locations. American
Legion Post #66, 620 Edmonds Way and 6th and Dayton. Amaranth #56, 141 Dayton Avenue,
and 138 Edmonds Way. Edmonds Jaycees, Parker Plaza, and 9th Avenue and Edmonds Way.
Boy's Club, 2005 - 92 Ave. South. Job's Daughters Bethel 50, 1677 Main Street, and Holy
Rosary Church, 657 Daley Street. Chief Cooper noted that all applications were accompanied
with proper fees, state license and insurance certificates as per city code and that each
location had been inspected and found to meet all requirements. It was therefore moved by
Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Slye that the six organizations and nine locations
be granted permits as requested to operate fireworks stands in the City of Edmonds during
the 4th of July celebration. Motion carried unanimously.
8
j
AUDITING OF BILLS
A motion was made by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Haines that Vouchers #6960
O
• through #7138 in the total amount of $76,437.13 be approved and the City Clerk be author-
ized to issue warrants in payment of these regular monthly bills. Motion carried.
It was moved by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Tuson that Vouchers #26, 27, and
28 against 1967 Water Sewer Revenue Bond issue be approved as follows: Olympic View
Plumbing Company for final estimate #3 - $1,259.00. Reid Middleton & Associates Inc.
for engineering services - $2,233.97 and Hersey Sparline Meter Co. Final Estimate #2-
$2,464.50 for a total amount of $5,957.47, and that warrants be issued in payment of these
bills. Motion carried.
A motion was made by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Kincaid that the following
LID bills be approved for payment. LID #151, Unit #4'Sewers - $368.73 to Norm's Print
Shop for printing of bonds. LID #160, Paving of Pine, 9th to loth - $689.85 to Ech's Burner
Oils for Contractor's Estimate #5 semi-final, and $1,870.00 to Reid Middleton & Associates,
Inc. for engineering interim billing #1, and the City Clerk be authorized to issue an in-
terest bearing warrant to the City of Edmonds in the amount of $2,559.85 in payment of
these two bills. On LID #161, Sewers Units 2, and 3 - $2,275.23,to Gray & Osborne for
engineering services on sewer extension, and $12,534.00 to Reid Middleton & Associates, Inc.
for engineering services interim billing #1 and the City Clerk be authorized to issue an
interest bearing warrant to the City of Edmonds in the amount of $14,809.23 to cover these
two bills. LID #162, Fifth Avenue South Sidewalks - $1,118.69 to Almer Construction Com-
pany for Contractor's Estimate #2 and the City Clerk be authorized to issue an interest
bearing -warrant to the City of Edmonds in the same amount to cover this bill. LID #164,
Units 5, 6, and 7 Sewers - $55.85 to the Edmonds 3�ribune Review for legal publications and
the City Clerk be authorized to issue an interest bearing warrant to the City of Edmonds
for the same amount to cover this bill. Motion carried.
A motion was made by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Tuson authorizing the payment
of $17.15 to the Edmonds Tribune Review for legal publication of Resolution #182 under the
. Sidewalk Construction Fund 68-1. Motion carried.
OPEN BIDS BONDS & WARRANTS LID #161
Bids were opened on bonds and warrants for LID #161, Units 2 and 3 sewers. One bid'was
received from Grande & Co., Inc. with a net effective interest rate based on a five year
average of '5.949%. They would pay par for the warrants bearing the same interest rate
as the bonds and pay us 100.02% of 'the par value thereof for bonds bearing the interest
coupon rate of 5.95916 per annum.
In place of a bid a letter was received from Colin A. Campbell of Southwick, Campbell,
Waterman Company and representing Hughbanks Inc. and William P. Harper & Son & Company.
They listed reasons why they had concluded to not submit a bid which would be of a condition-
al nature and not in accordance.with our notice of sale. They noted that a representative
would be present who was prepared to negotiate with the city in good faith for the pur-
chase of these warrants and bonds in the event that we did not receive a bid within the
requirements of the notice of sale. However, with the.high interest rates on today's
market, it was recommended that the bid of Grande & Co. be accepted and the motion was
made by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Nordquist that the bid of Grande & Company,
Inc. for warrants and bonds on LID #161 be accepted with an interest coupon rate of 5.95%
and a net effective interest rate based on a five year average of 5.9/9%• Motion carried
unanimously. '94/9
HEARING: ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #276
Hearing was held on Planning Commission Resolution #276 recommending an amendment to the
zoning ordinance to permit selective light industrial uses in community business districts
under conditional use permits and with other desireable safeguards as set forth in file
z0-4-68. City Planner Logan read the minutes of the Planning Commission on this hearing,
• which pointed out that there was not much interest shown by the people at the hearing before
the Planning Commission. Mayor Harrison then opened the hearing.
Charles Shepherd, Attorney, stated that if the city wished any light industry they would
have to change the code to allow it. He went on to note that light industry does not
create smoke etc., and you could have an installation of this sort in a basically nice
area. He thought that there was a need for this type of industry to help with taxes and
create extra wages in the city of Edmonds. Mr. Talbot Wegg, a Planner, was then con-
sulted and he proposed the use of light industry with control in closed areas etc. He
suggested the allowance by a slight amendment to the code to provide for light industry
in the City of Edmonds as it would be an asset to the area with no noise, vibration, smoke
or outside storage. Mr. Wegg then spoke about light industry such as plastic products
manufacturing and noted that attractive industries such as this would improve the city's
economic base and tax base. He urged that an amendment to the city code be adopted. There
was no one else who wished to speak for or against this and the hearing was closed. Follow-
ing council discussion, a motion was made by Councilman Bennett, seconded by Councilman
Slye that Proposed Ordinance #1371 be passed to amend the official zoning ordinance pur-
suant to Planning Commission Resolution #276. A roll call vote was taken with Councilmen
Bennett, Nelson, Slye and Haines voting in favor; Nordquist, Kincaid and Tuson against
and the motion carried four to three.
HEARING: ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #277
Hearing.was held on Planning Commission Resolution #277 recommending an amendment to the
zoning ordinance to permit advisory recommendations of the Planning Commission to the
Board of Adjustment on appeals and conditional use permit applications to be discretionary
rather than mandatory as set forth in File z0-5-68. City Planner Logan summarized this
amendment for the council and also read the minutes of the Planning Commission hearing on
this. Mayor Harrison then opened the hearing. Mr. Don Torrey had a question relating to
the proposed amendment and other than that there was no one else in the audience who wished
0
to comment. Hearing was therefore closed. Following some discussion, it was moved by
Councilman Haines, seconded by Councilman Slye that Proposed Ordinance #1372 be passed
amending the official zoning ordinance pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution #277.
Motion carried unanimously.
O
At this•poiht Councilman Kincaid noted that he wished to proceed for deferment on the amend-
ment to the zoning code in Resolution #276 from the Planning Commission and he moved
that deferment on Resolution #276 be passed, but he was advised by the City Attorney
not to do so at this time since the applicants had left the council meeting. Council-
man Bennett then noted that he felt that a lot of good thought had been given during
the Planning Commission Hearings on these recommendations and he felt the council
found themselves holding hearings on hearings, and since there are competent men on
the commission who give their time and much thought and study before making these de-
cisions, the council should abide by them unless they have definite. ideas to the con-
trary.
HEARING: ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #278
Hearing was held on Planning Commission Resolution #278 recommending an amendment to
the official street map to establish a 50 f t. right-of-way proceeding northerly from
176th street S. W. on the approximate alignment of 69Lh Ave. W. as set forth in file
ST-1-68. City Planner Logan gave an explanation of the recommendation of the Plann-
ing Commission with a map to illustrate. He also read the minutes of the Planning
Commission meeting for this hearing. The hearing was then opened. One gentleman
in the audience asked why sidewalks should not be required on this amendment to the
street map and other than that there was no one else in the audience who wished to
comment. Hearing was therefore closed. Following council discussion and questions
asked of the City Planner, a motion was made by Councilman Slye, seconded by Council-
man Bennett that Proposed Ordinance #1373 be passed amending the official street map
pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution #278. Motion carried unanimously.
HEARING: ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #279
Hearing was held on Planning Commission Resolution #279 recommending an amendment of
the official street map to establish a public right-of-way of about 30 feet in width
in the form of a loop street extending easterly from Third Avenue North as set forth
in file ST-2-68. City Planner Merlin Logan explained that the proposed street is
needed to serve a number of deep narrow lots east of Third Avenue North and that it
would provide a better quality of access to the reapportions of these lots than private
dead end easements which would be required if no street were established. Hearing
was then opened. Leon Loomis, a resident of the area to be affected, stated that he
lived -on the north side of the property which they are trying to open up. He wished
to know where the north and south loop would go in relation to his house. Mr. Getner
asked who wanted this road. He stated that the people living there were not in favor
of it. Mr. Logan explained that the city staff had iniated the proposal due to the
subdivision of property there. After some discussion and after it was determined that
no one else in the audience wished to comment, the hearing was closed. A motion was
made by Councilman Bennett, seconded by Councilman Nelson that Proposed Ordinance #1374
be passed amending the official street map pursuant to Planning Commission Resolution
#279. Motion carried. It was then moved by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman
Kincaid that Ordinance #1374 be reconsidered. Mr. Tuson noted that he had not voted
in favor of the ordinance and wished to study it further. However, after more council
discussion, Councilman Tuson withdrew his motion with Kincaid withdrawing his second.
COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED OPEN HOUSING ORDINANCE
Mayor Harrison summarized the informal hearing on the open housing ordinance held on
June llLh at the Junior High School auditorium. He noted that the city council had been
petitioned not by non -whites outside the city but rather from,.whites living inside 'the
city. He also mentioned the passage of the Fair Housing Law by the Federal Government.
He added that he was in favor of open housing in the City of Edmonds if only to allow
the creation of a three member commission to receive and investigate complaints and
thus keep minor offenses out of the courts. He concluded with the statement that if the
councilmen had respect for the freedom of individuals and equal rights, this was their
chance to prove it by voting for the ordinance. Councilman Bennett moved, seconded
by Councilman Nelson that Proposed Ordinance #1375 be passed, relating to open housing
in the City of Edmonds. City Attorney Murphy then read parts of the proposed ordinance
for the benefit of the audience. Councilman Slye stated that he had not received a
copy of the proposed ordinance and therefore did not wish to vote on something with
which he was not familiar. A gentleman named Pete Bilder, in the audience, asked if
he could find out which councilmen had not read the proposed ordinance. There were
two, Tuson and Slye. However, Councilman Tuson felt that he was sufficiently familiar
with the proposed ordinance to make a decision. Councilman Tuson then made a motion
to amend Proposed Ordinance #1375 by stating that the sale of a house be excluded
from the open housing ordinance as long as the sale was not put into the hands of a
real estate broker. This motion died for lack of a:second. A roll call vote was
then taken on the original motion to pass Proposed Ordinance #1375 and the motion
carried with all councilmen voting in favor except Slye who stated that he was voting
against the passage of the ordinance for two reasons: (1) that he had not readit, and
(2) that he felt that the City of Edmonds had no problem along these lines at the moment.
Motion carried.
COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS
In regard to the Planned Unit Development Ordinance Mayor Harrison stated that it was
his recommendation to .the council to send the proposed ordinance back to::the Planning
Commission for more study and another hearing. Mr. Robinson, in the audience, stated
that a poll taken at the end of the informal hearing held on June llth in the Junior
High School auditorium showed what the people who were present that evening wished in
1
1
O
I-
I
U-
M I
•
the way of a planned unit development. Jim Krider was against sending the ordinance
back to the Planning Commission and felt that the council should make a decision this
evening. Following more discussion a motion was made by Councilman Tuson, seconded by
Councilman Kincaid that the council do away with the Planned Unit Development entirely.
A roll call vote was taken on this motion with Councilmen Tuson and Kincaid voting in
.,.
favor, all others against, and the motion failed. Councilman Bennett stated that he
felt it was necessary to make a determination on the minimum size, the zones, the
multiple units etc., and that .the council would be remiss to forget the matter and not
take another look at the proposed ordinance. He therefore moved, seconded by Council-
man Nelson that the matter relating to Planned Unit Developments be taken to council
work meetings for further study and recommendations and then be referred back to the
Planning Commission. Don Torrey, in the audience, felt the council should advertise
more in regard to the hearings to get more people out to express their views. Mr.
Salisbury, 91h Avenue, said that he was surprised that this would be referred back to
the Planning Commission. Councilman Nelson stated he felt the people should understand
this Planned Unit Development more fully and he for one intended to give it thorough
study. Councilman Haines agreed and added that since, there was a Planned Unit Develop-
ment Ordinance already on the books it needed now some kind of improvement, and there-
fore the council felt they should take another look. Ken Killien, in the audience,
asked if this is being referred back to the Planning Commission will the work be done
by the present staff and he wished the city could bring in outside help for work on
this proposed ordinance. Jim Krider asked why the council didn't make a recommendation
for minimum size before sending the proposed ordinance back to the Planning Commission.
This was to be done at work meetings before sending the ordinance back, according to
the motion made by Councilman Bennett. A roll call vote was then taken on the motion
to give the proposed ordinance further study and recommend to the Planning Commission,
and resulted in Councilmen Bennett, Nelson, Kincaid and Haines voting in favor; Tuson,
Slye and Nordquist against, and the motion carried four to three.
•
AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
A gentleman living on Andover Road who had petitioned for paving and sidewalks under
LID 168 was anxious to know what could be'done to expedite the LID because of the dust
problem in the summer months.
Mr. Fred Bryant, developer, stated that he had been billed for sewer on property which
he owned in Halo Hollow and cannot build on the property because of storm drainage. He
was assured that this was being studied and at this point was on the City of Edmonds #1
priority list.
CORRESPONDENCE
A letter was read from the Pollution Control Commission stating that the City of Edmonds
application for Federal Aid to extend sewer facilities had been turned down at the present
time and would be re-examined at a later date. City Engineer Larson stated that he would
send a follow-up letter to the Pollution Control Commission.
COUNCIL PARTICIPATION
Councilman Slye, Chairman of the Park Board, reported that the board at their June 5+h
meeting voted to purchase eight lots on Main Street west of Olympic Avenue for $2500.00
per lot on contract terms and wished that the council would give consideration to this.
The Park Board also recommended that the platform and buildings at Sunset Beach be removed
because of a report that they were in unsafe condition. Supervisor Lawson suggested that
the buildings be used during this summer as he felt there was no immediate danger. A
motion was made by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Bennett that the buildings at
Sunset Beach be eliminated at the convenience of the Park Department. After some dis-
cussion, a motion was made by Councilman Nelson, seconded by Councilman Tuson to amend the
above motion and have the Building Inspector inspect the building at Sunset Beach and re-
port back to the council his opinion on the condition of the structures. Vote was taken
on this amendment and the motion carried. Vote was then taken on the original motion as
amended and that motion also carried.
Councilman Nordquist requested that any information pertaining to hearings, proposed
ordinances, etc., which the council would be considering at their regular meeting should
be made available to each councilman to give them ample time for study of the matters
prior to the council meeting. Councilman Nelson asked if the council could get further
information on a discussion held at one of the March meetings in regard to the use of
Yost park for a bridle trail.
REPORT FROM ENGINEER ON PETITION FOR FOURTH AVENUE LID
A petition had been received for the paving of Fourth Avenue from Pine to approximately
900 feet South to the proposed state highway Route 104 right -of• -way. City Engineer Larson
reported that the signers of the petition comprised approximately 35016 of the frontage
and he at this time recommended that the city not pursue the Resolution of Intention.
It was therefore moved by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Nordquist that no
action be taken on the petition for Fourth Avenue LID at this time. Motion carried.
REPORT ON SUNSET BEACH COMFORT STATION
A letter from Park Director Ron Taylor stated that there had been a change in specifica-
tions for the comfort station for Sunset Beach and that the building would be cement
block rather than steel. Jack Bevan, in the audience, stated that he was against a cement
block building and that the design does not fit the surround community, however, speci-
fications will be drawn on a new comfort station for Sunset Beach and action on authori-
zation of calling for bids will be taken at a later date.
U
44
REPORT ON BIDS FOR 2,300 LINEAL FEET OF CAST IRON PIPE AND APPURTENANCES e
Bids had been opened on June 17th at 2:00 P.M. in the office of the Mayor for 2,300 lineal
feet of cast iron pipe and appurtenances for the Water Department. Present at bid
opening were the Mayor, City Clerk, City Supervisor, and Director of Public Works.
Bids were from:
Pacific Water Works - No bid on the pipe C`?
Bid on appurtenances- $1,481.22 including tax f.o.b.
Job site bid: - $1,525.21
Western Utilities Co- f.o.b. pipe & appurtenances
$8,847.90 including tax
No bid for Job site
U. S. Pipe & Foundry- f.o.b. bid on pipe only
$6,729.8o
Job site - $6,946.12
H. D. Fowler - No bid on pipe
f.o.b. appurtenances- $1,257.05
Job site - $1,303.84
Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe -Several of the appurtenances
had no bid but on pipe and the appurtenances on which they
did bid f.o.b. - $7,618.73
Job site - $8,130.31
U. S. Pipe & Foundry had the low bid on the pipe and H. D. Fowler the low bidder on
all material less pipe and acceptance of these bids was therefore recommended. It
was moved by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Nordquist that the bid of U. S. O
Pipe & Foundry for the pipe be accepted in the amount of $6,946.12 job site and the
bid of H. D. Fowler Co. in the amount of $1,257.05 f.o.b. becaccepted for the appur-
tenances. Motion carried unanimously.
AUTHORIZATION OF CALL FOR BIDS FOR FUEL OIL REQUIREMENTS FOR 1968-1969
Motion was made by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Slye to authorize a call
for bids for fuel oil requirements for the City of Edmonds for 1968-1969, bids to be
opened on July 1. Motion carried.
FINAL PLAT SEAVIEW LANE
City Planner Merlin Logan presented to council the final plat of Seaview Lane and a
motion was made by Councilman Slye, seconded by Councilman Tuson that the final plat
of Seaview Lane be approved. Motion carried unanimously.
There was no further business to come before the meeting and it was.adjourned at
11:55 P.M.
Irene Varney Mora City Clerk Harve Harrison, Mayor
July 2, 1968 U
P O T.T. P A T.T.
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order by Mayor
Harrison with all councilmen present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of June 18k had been posted and amiled, and since
there were no corrections nor omissions, they stood approved as presented.
HEARING: ON APPEAL FROM RECOMMENDATION IN PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #280
This was the evening set for the hearing on the appeal from the recommendation
of the Planning Commission in their Resolution #280, to deny a rezone request
for Holly Drive.
An appeal had been received from William A. Wilson, Attorney for Ralph K. Birum,
notifying the City of an appeal from the decision of the Edmonds Planning Com-
mission. Therefore, the hearing had been set for the July 2 meeting. However,
a letter was received by the Mayor requesting a continuance of this matter to
August 6, 1968. The reason for the continuance being that William A. Wilson,
attorney representing the applicants on the appeal, stated that he had a conflict
of scheduling on July 2.and would be unable to attend the hearing before the
City Council. Councilman Haines moved, seconded by Councilman Nelson that the
continuance of this appeal to August 6 be granted. There were several people in
the audience who were opposed to the continuance, however, and they felt it unfair
that they should have to come to another hearing on this to satisfy the convenience
of the attorney for the appeal. Some of the people in the audience who wished to
be present when the hearing again took place said that they, too, would be on