Loading...
19720801 City Council Minutes294 Following some discussion, a motion was made by Councilman Gellert, seconded by Councilwoman Shippen to postpone this preliminary plat -to the next council meeting to allow people to be present and able to speak on the matter. A roll call -vote was taken, with Councilmen Gellert, Shippen and Nordquist voting in favor; Nelson-, Tuson, Winters and Haines against, and the motion failed to' carry. It was then moved by Councilman Haines, seconded by Councilman Winters to approve the preliminary plat of Woodvale North,'subject.to engineering re- quirements. This motion carried, with Councilmen Nelson, Tuson, Winters and Haines in favor; Gellert, Shippen and Nordquist against. CONSIDERATION OF THREE APPLICATIONS FOR SOLICITORS LICENSE Mayor Harrison reported that three Mountlake Terrace school teachers had sub- mitted -applications for solicitors' licenses for a'Neighborhood Security Patrol. Acting Police'Chief Neuert had approved the applications because none had been found to have police records. However, Chief Neuert explained that although present customers of this service seemed satisfied, it was his feel- ing that uniformed people soliciting from door to door in Edmonds could create problems. Mayor Harrison said he felt that people soliciting for this sort of thing could alarm the residents of Edmonds. There followed much discussion, and it was moved by Councilman Haines, seconded by Councilman Winters that this matter be tabled until such time as we can have adequate standards and regulations which can be applied to -this type of -operation. Motion carried. PROPOSED "LITTER ORDINANCE" First reading was, held on a proposed "Litter Ordinance" for the City of Edmonds, • adopting the state uniform litter control code ordinance as recommended by the state department of ecology. COUNCIL SUGGESTION Councilman Gellert suggested that the Mayor prepare a letter of appreciation to send to Mr. Bob Nixon, of the Mercer Island Design Commission, thanking him for taking his own time to appear before the Edmonds City Council to explain the functions of his city's Commission. Mayor Harrison answered that he would see that this is done. AUTHORIZE BID OPENING DATE•FOR FIVE CORNERS DRAINAGE SYSTEM; In answer to a request from City Engineer Leif Larson, a motion was made by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Nelson that August 24 be set as the 'date for opening of bids on the Five Corners drainage system, subject to re- view and approval .of the Park Board as to•the portion going through Pine Ridge Park: Motion carried. AUTOMATIC'SPRINKLER REQUEST City Engineer Larson reported that the Park and Recreation Director had asked him to advise council that on the contract awarded to Sprague Nursery for .the mini -park, no automatic sprinkler heads were put in as required. There is a watering system installed, but it is not automatic. Therefore, he wondered if the city would authorize an expenditure of from $1800 to $2000 for an automatic sprinkler system to be installed. There was discussion by council, but no action was taken on the matter. COUNCILMAN REQUEST Councilman Nelson asked that the minutes reflect that he -would be out of town and not able to attend the council meetings during the month of August. There was no further business, and the meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M. Irene Varney Mora , City Clerk August 11 1972 ROLL CALL r Harve H: Harrison, Mayor Meeting of the Edmonds City Council was -called Harve Harrison with all counc-il•members present for .the record that he would be -out of town and during August. APPROVAL OF MINUTES to order at 8:00 P.M. by Mayor except Nelson, who had stated .not able to attend the meetings Minutes of the meeting of July 25 had been posted and mailed, and with no omissions nor corrections, they were declared approved as written. 1 • 1 0 � I COUNCIL PARTICIPATION Councilman Gellert was concerned about the procedure of business as taken up by council under the new meeting ordinance.' He felt this should be defined as to allowed procedure for the first and third Tuesdays, and what matters could be' handled on the alternate Tuesdays. Attorney John'Wallace stated that this was specifically set forth in the recently passed meeting ordinance; that the only matters that council cannot handle on the alternate Tuesdays are the passage of ordinances, resolutions, and holding of public hearings for which a date must be set prior to the hearing. Councilman'Gellert mentioned the review'of a preliminary plat, feeling that it could be reviewed one week and action then taken the following week. He said people should be aware of the method of operation by the council in regard to procedure. Discussion followed, and Councilman Gellert then moved, seconded by Councilwoman Shippen that this matter be an agenda item for the next council meeting; the policy'of council procedure in regard to method of operation at the meetings of the first and third Tuesday and all alternate Tuesdays. Motion carried. HEARING: VACATION OF TRACTION R/W, NORTH OF 244th Hearing on the vacation'of the traction R/W, north'of 244th had been continued from the council meeting of July 5, in order to allow time for the petitioners and their attorney to contact the PUD and in turn, contact the City.' Attorney John Wallace advised that he had not heard from the property owners and therefore recommended that the matter be dropped. He stated that the attorney for the property owners had been advised of'this fact and had' agreed • that if he did not notify the city prior to the hearing tonight, the matter could be dropped. It was moved by'Councilman Haines, seconded by Councilman Nordquist that council deny the request for the vacation of the traction R/W, north of 244th, and'the motion carried. HEARING: ON LETTER OF INTENT FOR ANNEXATION - NORTH OF 220th BETWEEN 76th AND ' 96th W. Hearing was held on the letter of intent for annexation for the area north of 220th between 76th and 96th W., south of the city limits. The petition accompany- ing the letter had included the necessary signatures of property owners repre- senting 10% of the assessed valuation of the area seeking to be annexed. Assistant City Engineer Richard Allen commented on this -,proposed annexation. In regard to the sanitary sewers, he stated the most logical way to serve this area would be through the Edmorids-'system. Connections would be made under an LID to the Edmonds trunk or the Olympic View Water District trunk. The storm drainage�,�problem, especially in the vicinity of the Chase Lake Elementary ' school,,,,would be alleviated by the installation of the sewers, and the city's comprehensive storm sewer plan also covers this area. Engineer Allen noted that the proposed annexation area is under the Alderwood Water District, with 4 and 6 inch steel water lines, which could be converted to the Edmonds Water District. He also stated that the streets are generally two lane asphalt with ditches on each side. Hearing was then opened. A man in the audienc"e'asked what advantages Edmonds could offer the people in this area that they don't already have. He was told mainly the sewers., street lights, and police protection.- One gentleman stated he had lived in the area • for 19 years and the police protection was not satisfactory from the County;: Another said he had no problem, with the Sheriff's Patrol and State Patrolmen in the area quite often. There seemed to be a great deal of disagreement in the audience as to the present police protection in the area. One woman asked what else besides sewers and police protection the City could offer. She said she felt her taxes would be higher if.arinexed. A gentleman asked what intent meant of the area had petitioned, showing an indication of interest for annexa- tion, and the petitioners were asking the City if it felt favorably toward annexing this area before trying to obtain a petition with 75% signatures. In answer to queries,' the City Attorney explained the complete procedure from letter of intent to actual annexation, using for examples both the petition and election methods. Mr. Brown, in the audience, felt the people in the area did not fully under- stand the history of the matter, and he went on to explain the health problem at the Chase Lake School due to the effluent coming up out of the ground be- cause of being saturated with septic tank runoff mixed with storm water. One woman asked for the City Engineer to explain what had happened since the school construction had been approved. Engineer Allen answered that since this was not in the'City, it had not been approved by the City Engineering Department. However, he explained, as time went by, septic tank effluent from the surround- ing area, mixed with the storm water, was causing ground seepage. Mr. Blake agreed the Chase Lake school was a big problem, and asked if there was any way sewers could be brought into the area without annexation to the city. Mayor Harrison answered that perhaps the area could form its. own sewer district, but this would be a very expensive proposition. • Mr. Hoggins, who had attended the meeting held recently between the School District, City, and County in regard to the health problem at the Chase Lake school* stated that if something isn't done to alleviate the problem, the school will have to be closed, according to information from the Health Dis- trict. He said Alderwood Water District would not attempt to sewer the area and the Olympic View Water District had no control, as they would have to contract with the City of Edmonds for use of the facilities. A woman in.the audience stated she has children who.go to that school and she felt it was the city's responsibility to pay to have the problem solved, since the ground is the same as it was eight years ago when she moved to the area. The Mayor corrected her, stating that the school and grounds were owned by the School District, not' -,the City.. He added that the area creating the problem is also not in the city. A woman asked if the area.might be annexed and then not get enough signatures on a petition for sewers? She was assured that sewers could be installed by resolution of intention with a health factor involved. Mr.Schaller had a question on the 10% valuation of the property, and said he also thought the school district should pay for the sewering. Another woman asked why the school was built at that location instead of somewhere else. She was told that all school sites must be approved by the County Planning Agency and the School District then builds them; that in this particular in- stance, the school had been sewered by the City of Edmonds. He added also that the trouble with the septic tanks was that after a few years,'the ground becomes saturated and cannot handle more drainage from more homes with the additional septic tanks. Another gentleman mentioned that the Chase Lake school was not the problem'as some people seemed to thank, because --the school is sewered; but the area is full of seepage. A woman asked why the school was built in a swamp in the first place. Mr. Goggins answered that the School • Board has a plan for schools according to child population, along with certain other factors in an area. There followed much discussion and audience comment. Mayor Harrison mentioned that sewers could be in the area within a year after annexation. A woman asked for an explanation of the city indebtedness and taxes. Mayor Harrison asked Councilman Haines to answer this. Councilman Haines noted that this year Edmonds had a 48.4 mill levy and the County had 47.5 mills, making the present difference in millage approximately 1 mill higher in Edmonds than in the County. Differences would also occur within the City of Edmonds de- pending upon whether or not you lived within the Port District, for instance. Another woman again asked if Edmonds would sewer the area without annexation. When answered no, she asked why not. The Mayor answered that it was possible for the area to form a sewer district, but they would have to contract with the City for use of the lines and disposal, and the City would not be inclined to serve -them as cheaply as people within city limits. There was a question regarding installation of the side sewer.on one's own property. Engineer Allen explained that this was possible as long as it was inspected and the connection done by a licensed contractor. A man who had lived on 95th, north of 220th for 16 years,'said only two homes in the immediate area had full basements, and the existing trunk.line on 95th is above the base- ment line, so if they were annexed, what would be done about the basement plumbing. Engineer Richard Allen answered that if*the basement plumbing were below the present trunk, it would mean running an additional sewer line in the area or pumping to the upstairs line and using the gravity flow. Councilman Haines suggested a revenue bond issue rather than the LID method of • financing if the people wished to pay monthly rather than annually. Tom Belt brought up the question°".of connecting to the existing sewer line by gravity flow and then wondered if he could leave his lower basement on septic tank and just connect the main part of the house to the sewer. CAO Ron Whaley answered that there were cases where a sump pump would be used to pump the sewage from the lower part of the house to the upstairs and then handle the flow by gravity. He then explained the $25.00 trunk charge and $10.00 permit necessary for sewer installation following the LID. The property owners were also advised•that the length and depth of'.the property would be a factor in the cost of the side sewer. A contractor in the audience quoted a $2.75 to $3.00 per lineal foot for side sewer installation. Another gentleman in the audience brought out the fact that a,property owner can -connect his own side sewer on his own property with inspection. Another man inquired about the costs involving a corner lot. He was told the address side of his property would most likely be the side used for figuring the mone front foot cost. A question from the audience on events preceding actual annexation again brought an explanation from the City Attorney on the petition, including the assumption of indebtedness and zoning particulars if required by council; on up through the presentation of the area in question to the Bondary Review Board for consideration; and then to actual annexation. He also explained the election method of annexation. Engineer.Allen explained .the zone and termini method of assessment. Count,Tuson told the audience if they were inter- ested in annexation, they couta request that the city use the revenue bond method of financing, which could give them sewers much faster than the LID method. .The concern was the petitions and the time it would take to get an LID in this manner. A man asked if he installed his.own side sewer, whose responsibility would it be if something needed repair. He was told it was his responsibility if this was on his own property. Another man asked the Attorney if council entertained a petition for annexation, what would the city indebted- • ness involve. The Attorney answered that the city can require or not the LA Following__s6me discussion --a mot n,-Wias made by uncilman on se nded by Couri.lman Haines that ouncilo with fayn he pe ion an etter of intent for annexatioh., inclu( g ex i tine, lty inde ness an do tion o the cor�rehens�ve zonin to be i uded in the pet i ' ono 5o e = ditional " s�ssion fir ed,' and nci an Ge Yert mo y amend t motion 7 s�ed va- ation t't�n.be co ted with' a riod to stat the a s lu p of 60 days. � was seconde by Counciln�a�ordqui . The amend ent the carried, and the motion as mended also carried. A five minute recess was declared. BASKETBALL BACKBOARD AT END OF CULDESAC IN PUBLIC R/W CAO Whaley reported on the question of allowing basketball backboards to be installed in city right-of-way. He noted that this had been discussed at the Staff meeting this morning and a majority of the Staff members were opposed to the backboard being in the public right-of-way and recommended that,this one and any others in the city be removed to private property, since.the city would be liable if these were allowed to remain with city permission. It was noted that each elementary and junior high school has backboards on the school grounds that are available for use at any time. A gentleman in the audience stated that his culdesac has six houses with 20- children living there; that there is no traffic except the cars of the property owners in this culdesac; and that the backboard in question is 9'ft. in the R/W, but that the children would be in the street even if the backboard were moved back 9 feet. The question before council was whether or not the backboard should be allowed to remain 9 feet into the public R/W. Mayor Harrison suggested that they move it back ©rito private property and solve the problem of R/W use. Council dis- cussion followed, with the gentleman in the audience feeling that the city should allow the backboard to remain; .where it°z isa ':Cound lman,-Haines<:Ivx-pla ned' l`,-;�.: that it was a question of liability as far as the city was concerned, and they cannot assume this, even for an attractive nuisance in the public R/W, Councilman Haines therefore moved, seconded by Councilman Tuson that permission for use of the public R/W for playground use be denied. Some discussion followed, wherein Councilwoman.Shippen suggested that the word "equipment"'be inserted after "playground", and it was moved by Councilman Gellert, seconded by Councilman Tuson to amend the motion to state that permission for use of public R/W for playground equipment be denied. The amendment carried, and the motion as amended, with a roll call vote, also carried unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF.LID FOR STREET AND UNDERGROUNDING ON ELM The request for consideration of an LID for street improvements and under - grounding on Elm had been continued from the meeting of June 20. Assistant City Engineer Richard Allen explained the events leading up to this point, where Tom Belt had petitioned for.the forming of an LID for street... improvements and undergrounding to serve his plat on Elm. A recent letter received from Mr. Belt now requested that the petition be withdrawn, since he considered it to be too expensive. Mr Belt was present and stated that he would install 28 feet of paving, and asked if the city would participate with additional asphalt work on the side with no curbs at a cost to be approximate- ly $19000. He would put in .the necessary work for future undergrounding, but leave the poles. There was discussion regarding city participation with curbs instead of a thickened edge, with the city installing 8 feet of paving and standard curbs in front of the city property on Elm. It was noted that the petition method would be.acceptable for installing the paving and curbs, and Councilman Haines suggested that Mr. Belt petition the city to install the" asphalt and curbing by participation in a proposed LID. It was stated that for paving, curbs, and sidewalk improvement, the city would pay approximately $5,000 instead of the $1,000 for thickened curb. Mr. Belt said that he would prefer at this time to ask city participation in a thickened edge and he would withdraw his request for LID. CAO Whaley stated that the city property there is the original site of the Yost water system and has'been used in past years as a fill sited A motion was then made by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Winters that the LID be dropped for undergrounding and street improvements on Elm as requested by Mr. Tom Belt. The motion carried. It was then moved by Councilman Haines, seconded' by Councilman Gellert that the city participate in a 2 foot rolled edge for this improvement by Mr. Belt on Elm, providing there are sufficient funds in the proper department'to cover the work. Motion carried. assumption of indebtedness and zoning'regulati5ons, and.the:indebtednes's at this time amounted to approximately h mill. Another man asked if they.could have only one' petition, : -for -ianriexation,' .arid hot have 'toobtain signatures on another_.: for - -sewers., - Attorney--Wa-1-l-ace answered that; an LID -,could -be .formed _'by Resolution: of, Intention, by the" ,-City. 'At this> point,- Mayor.-' Harrison closed ,.'the hearing.,. . "Following some discussion, a motion was made,by Councilman • Tuson,'.seconded by 'Councilman Haines that council look with favor on the pe.tition:and_letter .of..... intent.for annexationg'and that all property within the territory hereby sought to be..annexed shall be assessed._and taxed at the same rate and on the same basis as property within the City of Edmonds for any:now outstanding indebtedness of said City, including assessments or taxes in payment of. any bonds issued .or, debts contracted, prior to or existing at the date of annexation, and that simultaneous ..adoption of proposed zoning regulations be required in the 75% petition, Some additional discussion followed, and Councilman,Gellert moved to amend.the motion :to state that the 75�.assessed valuation petition be'completed within.a period of 60 days. This was seconded by Councilman Nordquist. The amendment then carried' and the motion as amended also carried.'.' school grounds that --are available for use at any. time. A gentleman in the audience stated that his culdesac has six houses with 20 children living there; that there is no traffic except the cars of the property owners in this culdesac; and that the backboard in question is 9 ft. in the R/W, but that the children would be in the street even if the backboard were moved back 9-feet. The question before council was whether or-notthe backboard should be allowed to remain 9 feet into the public R/W. Mayor Harrison suggested that they move it back onto private property and solve the problem. of R/W use. Council dis- cussion followed,with the gentleman in'the audience feeling that the city should allow the backboard to remain,„,;0 ere i:t. i'sa •"::Couric mah� Ha nes`;.�xpla ned'_i ::: that it was a question of liability as far as the city was concerned, and they cannot assume this, even for an attractive nuisance in the public R/W. Councilman Haines therefore moved, seconded by Councilman Tuson that permission for use of the public'R/W for playground use be'denied.. Some discussion followed, wherein Councilwoman,Shippen suggested that the word "equipment"''be inserted 'afte"r'"playground", -and it was moved by Councilman Gellert, seconded by Councilman Tuson to 'amend: 'the- motion to 'state that permiss:ibn 'for use' of public R/W for-playground'equipment be denied. The amendment carried, •and' - the motion as'amended9,with-a roll 'call vote, also -carried unanimously, CONSIDERATION OF..LID FOR STREET AND UNDERGROUNDING ON ELM The request for consideration of an LID for street improvements and under - grounding. on Elm had been continued from the meeting of June 20. Assistant City Engineer Richard Allen explained the events leading up to this point, where'Tom Belt'had petitioned for -the forming of -an LID for streett- improvements and undergro.unding'to serve his plat on'Elm. A recent -letter' received from Mr'; Belt now,requested,that the -petition be withdrawn*, -'since he considered' -it to be'too expensive; Mr Belt,was pies.ent'and stated that he would install' 28 feet -of paving', and asked= if the city' would participate with' additional asphalt work bri the'side with'no curbs at a cost'to'be approximate- ly $1,000. H6,woUld put in the necessary work for future undergrounding, but leave the poles.. There --was discussion regarding'city participation with'cunbs instead'of a thickened-edg.e, with;the city installing 8 feet of paving and standard curbs in front of the city property on Elm. It was noted that'the petition method would be -acceptable for installing the paving and curbs, and Councilman Haines."suggested -that Mr. Belt petition the city to'installthe asphalt and curbing.;.by-participation 1n'a,proposed LID, It 'was'statedthat for paving, curbs, and sidewalk -improvement' the city would'pay approximately $5,000 instead of'the'.$I,�Q.00 for thickened curb. Mr. Belt said that he would prefer at this time to ask city participation in a thickened''edge and -he would withdraw his request for LID. CAO Whaley stated that the city property there is the "original` site of the Yost water system ,and h'a's' been used in past years as a' fill' site'' A motion was then made by Councilman Tuson, seconded by Councilman Winters that the LID be dropped for undergrounding and street improvements on Elm as r-equested by Mr. Tom Belt' 'The'motion carried.: It was then moved by Councilman Haines, seconded -by Councilman Gellert that the city'participa:te in 'a 2 foot rolled edge for this 'improvement by Mr' Belt on Elm, providing there are,,sufficient"funds in'the proper-department.to cover the work. Motion carried. CITY EMPLOYEES PRESENT AT COUNCIL MEETING At this point, Mayor Harrison asked that several Public,Works'employees in the audience -be recognized9 and he had -Public Works Director Herb-Gilbo introduce them. Toe. six men- were: Chriscaden,' Hively, Ogle', McNamar, Walvatne9 and Meide. PROPOSED,ORDINANCE TO COMPREHENSIVE OVE SATER LANE MINUS'DEDICATED-PORTION9 FROM ,. Action had been taken at the meeting of -July 18 to remove Sater Lane, minus the dedicated portion, from the comprehensive street plan, and the Attorney presented the proposed ordinance.: City Plannf4 rl��ppan reviewed the particulars for council clarification', and it was found that a slight change had been made in the map originally adopted by council from which the ordiance was to"be'prepared;.-However,' with a change in legal description to conform to the council's original,intent and motion, it was moved by Councilman Haines, seconded;by Councilman-Nordquist that proposed Ordinance #1608 be passed, vacating the undedicated portion of Sater Lane.from-the comprehensive street plan, and the motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #385 At`tlie 1A.9t - meeting of the city council, the City Attorney had.. been directed to prepare an ordinance -in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution 3859 fair setting two regular.Planning Commission meetings per month in .place of one regular and one work session. A motion was made by Councilman Nordquist, seconded by Councilwoman Shippen that proposed Ordinance #1609 be passed,.and the motion carried. SET DATE FOR HEARING ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #383 Planning Commission Resolution #383 was presented, recommending an amendment to the comprehensive land use plan, removing and revising the areas designated for multi -family use, as set forth in Planning Commission File CP-1-72. Councilman Nordquist made the motion9.seconded by Councilman Haines that September 19 be set as the date for hearing on Planning Commission Resolution #383, and the motion carried.. PLANNING.COMMISSION RESOLUTION.#384 Planning Commission Resolution #384 was presented, recommending denial ofa proposed -east -west public street extending westerly of 76th Avenue West for about 400 feet and aligned with 192nd-Place'S'.W. as set forth in Planning Commission File_ST-3-72, No,appeal had been received from this Planning Commission denial. City Planner Logan;explained.that it had been a staff request, but,that.unforseen problems had arisen, and it was therefore moved by Councilman•Nordquist9-.seconded by Councilman-Tuson to .uphold the denial of the Planning Commission in their Resolution #384. Motion carried.' CONSIDERATION OF PARTICIPATION FOR SEA -KING SERVICES Consideration of participation for Sea -King services had been continued from the meeting of July 25. There was some discussion, wherein Councilwoman Shippen stated that she was -curious as to just what -was considered 11�revelant" information.going through this service, and what would not be considered relevant-., Acting Chief Neuert'answered that intelligence files were not- for general publication; that an intelligence officer would contact the office directly for-this!information, which would include victims of sex crimes-and- burglary-9 and misdemeanors not of a criminal nature. Councilman Haines said that he would like to,see non -victim misdemeanors eliminated from the service and was concerned with the interpretation involved. Acting Chief-Neuert . noted that drug:use and prostitution were non-victim.crimes. CAO Whaley stated that -the city would have control over the specifications'as to what information will be released. There was council discussion, and it was then moved by Councilman*Winters, seconded by -Councilman Nordquist to postpone this matter for one week in order to give the City Attorney time to'study the,agreeinent and to make any notes that council -might have on,policy regarding what)information is put,on the - wire. Motion carried. Following further discussion,:it was moved by Councilman Haines, seconded by Councilman Nordquist to reconsider the former motion and state.that this matter be postponed for a period of two weeks instead of one. This motion carried. PROPOSED ORDINANCE IN ACCORDANCE.WITH.WATER SYSTEM STUDY FOR CITY First reading was heard on a proposed ordinance in accordance with the water system study for the City of :Edmonds, which.council had directed the City Attorney to prepare at the meeting of July 25, Second reading will be heard on August 15. i • SECOND READING PROPOSED LITTER ORDINANCE 99 Much discussion was held on the proposed litter ordinance, and it was noted that if the city should pass this, it could go into effect following the November elections when a state litter proposal will be on the ballot. It was therefore moved by Councilman Nordquist, seconded by Councilwoman Shippen that proposed Ordinance #1610 be passed, with effective date to be November 219 1972. Motion carried. CAO REPORT CAO Ron Whaley reported that it was a.pleasure once again to see another city department receive an award; that the Fire Department had received a placque for placing third in the state for 1971 on fire prevention programs. The award had been made last week in Walla Walla and was based upon the entire program of fire prevention for part -paid departments throughout the state, of which there are approximately 30. There was no further business, and the meeting adjourned at 11:05 P.M. v Irene Varney Mor , City Clerk August 81 1972 Harve H. Harrison, Mayor • ROLL CALL Meeting of'the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:45 P.M. by the Mayor Protem John Nordquist with all council members present except Nelson, who is on leave to Illinois and Mayor Harrison, who is in Alaska. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the meeting of August 1 had been mailed and posted, and with the substitution of -the last paragraph on page 3, were approved as modified. Mayor Protem Nordquist at this point introduced the Deputy City Clerk, Eleanor Quealey, and asked that anyone wishing to speak step up to the rostrum and give name and address to her for the records. He also introduced the City Attorney, John Wallace and the CAO, Ron Whaley. COUNCIL PARTICIPATION Councilman Tuson stated that there had been a -bad automobile accident this evening at 2nd and Bell, with apparently two injured persons. Mr. Tuson noted that there are two blind corners at this intersection, one with a large hedge and one with a hotel. Mr. Whaley suggested checking the frequency of accidents at this location. A motion was made by Councilman Tuson and seconded by Councilman Winters to replace the Yield Sign presently in existence at 2nd and Bell with a Stop Sign. Motion carried. Councilwoman Shippen asked Assistant City Engineer Dick Allen if he knew what size light standards the State Highway Department is going to use for the remainder of the freeway. He replied that right now from Dayton to Fifth Avenue they are going • to use the standard 40' mast with the. -arm mount. Mrs. Shippen said she would prefer the-30' standards and does not think it is appropriate to have the 40' standards going through a residential area. She stated that she -hoped the City would negotiate to reduce the size of the standards for the rest of the freeway. Mrs. Shippen noted that the area she was referring to is from Dayton Street to the south city limits. Mr. Allen explained that there would have to be more 30' light poles in order to aomply with the State Highway lighting standards. He said he would investigate this and see what powers we have to make changes in the size of the light standards. Ron Whaley stated that there has been a standard proposed nationally by some associations which highway departments are following and obviously, when you go into the City of Seattle they are meeting this criteria with regard to intensity of:.,lights on streets, both residential and arterial. The CAO stated further that we in the City of Edmonds are not used to these standards or this intensity_of light. The intensity is for two purposes as the Highway Department sees it (1) for traffic safety and (2) for protection of the neighborhood against vandalism, burglaries, etc. Mr. Whaley suggested that rather than going through this time and time again it would be advisable to come up with a standard that is acceptable to what we want for the City of Edmonds. Mr. Shippen stated that she thought we should have more choice in the height and style of lighting and would like the staff to review the entire matter. Councilwoman Shippen asked the City Attorney what was the difference between a franchise and a business permit that we now have with Cable T.V. or do we have franchises with a utility. The City Attorney answered that he did not believe we had franchises with any utility. He said basically with a franchise the difference would be that you are relegating a specific area to the franchisee and no one can compete with it, however there is some question as to'the validity of a franchise in any situation. Mr. Wallace stated that generally a franchise does import exclusivity. Mrs. Shippen said that when the City charges a B & 0 or utility tax, that the tax is passed on by the company or by the utility to the r� U