Loading...
19760120 City Council Minutes�74 .. MOTION: IT•WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMAN ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN C ARNS TO ACCEPT THE WORK OF JOINT VENTURE, INC., AS COMPLETE AND THEREBY ESTABLISH THE 30-DAY LIEN PERIOD. MOTION CARRIED. SET DATES FOR HEARINGS ON PLANNIN;COMMISSION RESOLUTIONS Four Planning Commission resolutions were presented to set dates for hearings before council. They were #485, recommending excluding real estate office from RM zones with conditional use; #486, regu- lating churches in RM zones the same as other structures in RM zones; #487, amending zoning oudinance., to allow acute care general hospitals to have alcoholic and mental facilities; and #489, an amend- ment to zoning ordinance to provide for crisis centers in CG zones and exclude in BC zones (correc- tion of code error). A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT TO SET FEBRUARY 17 AS THE DATE FOR HEARING ON RESOLUTIONS #485 AND #486, AND FEBRUARY 24 AS THE DATE FOR HEARING ON #487 AND #489. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT There was no further business to come before the council, and the meeting was adjourned at followed by a brief executive session in the Mayor's office. WE W M _,_ - d - - M, 0. M d — N ��� f��ty Clerk January 20, 1976 ROLL CALL 4H.. HARRISON, Mayor 11:05 P.M. The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order by Mayor Harve Harrison at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers at the Edmonds Civic Center. All council members were present, except Clement who had notified the City Clerk that he would be absent. u APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of January 13, 1976 had been posted, mailed and distributed. Councilman Gellert noted that on Page 2 in the 3rd from the last paragraph, 2nd from the last line, the gentleman's name should be spelled "Newerf", not Mueller. The minutes were then approved as corrected. COUNCIL PARTICIPATION Councilman Carns stated that the council members had received a letter from Councilman Nordquist dated January 15th which dealt with job descriptions far exempt employees. He felt that a committee should be formed to discuss some of the job descriptions with the assistance of Ron Whaley, the Mayor's Administrative Assistant. It was thought that this might give some opportunity to draft a form to use in reviewing those positions in relation to salaries next year, and that the Prior MOTION: Report could be used to help accomplish this task. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER AND APPOINT A COMMITTEE AT THE COUNCIL MEETING NEXT WEEK. COUNCILMAN HERB SECONDED AND THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Anderson gave notice that he would be absent on the 3rd of February. Councilman Anderson noted that the Council had met in December to discuss salaries for the exempt personnel. He called for an executive session to be scheduled for further discussion and feedback to department heads if they desire. He also said that the two former council members, Natalie Shippen and Norma Bruns, should be invited to attend. COUNCILMAN ANDERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY • COUNCILMAN GELLERT TO SCHEDULE AN EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 28TH AT 7:30 P.M. TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER. MOTION CARRIED. The Deputy City Attorney, John Wallace, said that this would be anappropriate matter for executive session if it is about appointment, employment or termination. In response to a request from the Council, Mr. Wallace said that he would be available that evening to advise the Council. Mr. Whaley was asked to schedule department heads for meeting with the Council through his office. Councilman Gellert said that he was reminded by one of the State Highway Commissioners that when the new ferry route was completed we were going to have that designated as a truck route. City Engineer, Leif Larson, stated that they have been taking counts on truck traffic. He said that last week in a one hour period 58 trucks went down 196th west of Highway 99 and only four of them went through. He said that it appeared that the truck traffic in that period of time was basically local. He questioned whether we should initially pass an ordinance and maybe we should solicit the cooperation of the Washington Trucker's Association and the companies that have tankers going through. Mr. Larson said that the State Highway Department has scheduled re-signing of the FAI-5 for the southbound traffic, so they will remove the signs from 196th. He said that they would like to have more than one count. Councilman Gellert asked that Mr. Larson report back to the Council in 60 days and that this be put on the extended agenda. Councilman Gellert said that he would like to have a brief report on the significance -of the State Department of Ecology ruling on the Union Oil Swamp. Mr. Wallace, said that if it stands; if it'is not challenged in Superior Court; it would mean that the Master Program would be eligible to be approved by the State. He said that it has been found to be within the jurisdiction of the Shore- lines Management Act. Mr. Wallace said that the normal appeal period is 30 days from the date of the ruling. 11 3 75 • Mayor Harrison said that he would like to schedule the preliminary plat for Burlington Northern to be heard. He said that it was heard by the Planning Commission on the 14th of January and approved. Joe Wallis, the City Planner, said that he had received a request from one of the parties involved MOTION: asking that this be handled in the most expedient manner possible. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD TO SET THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR THE FEBRUARY 17TH AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. C)uncilman Gellert announced that he would not be present at the meeting of February 17th. Mayor Harrison then brought up the matter of the official right-of-way on 174th Street between 72nd Avenue West and Olympic View Drive. He said that the Planning Commission held hearings and passed Resolution #363 recommending the change to the Official Street Map to allow the right-of-way to coincide with the actual location of the pavement. This came before the Council in December of 1971 when the Council directed the City Engineer to proceed to establish a 30' right-of-way over the existing pavement. The City Council at that time did not complete the legal action to change the Official Street Map by ordinance. For this reason he recommended that the Council set a public hearing for adoption of an ordinance establishing a proposed 30' right-of-way. The Deputy City Attorney suggested that the matter be posted and published,`which would require a minimum of 10 MOTI(K days in advance of the hearing. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN ANDERSON TO SET FEBRUARY 17TH AS THE DATE FOR HEARING ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #363. MOTION CARRIED. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION A lady in the audience asked if the public would be permitted to speak on Item #11 when that report is made. The Mayor said that they would be invited to participate. SELECTION OF MAYOR PRO-TEM MOTI(N COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED TO PLACE THE NAME OF ROBERT ANDERSON IN NOMINATION FOR MAYOR PRO-TEM. COUNCIL- MAN GOULD SECONDED THE MOTION. COUNCILMAN GELLERT THEN MOVED THAT NOMINATIONS BE CLOSED, WITH A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN CARNS. THAT MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMAN ANDERSON WAS THEN NAMED MAYOR PRO-TEM BY UNANIMOUS VOTE. COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS Mayor Harrison noted that there is a vacancy on the Snohomish County Solid Waste Steering Committee. Councilman Gould volunteered to serve on this committee. The Mayor then said that someone was needed for Park Board liason. Councilman Carns will serve in this capacity. Councilman Herb said that he would serve as representative to the Puget Sound Council of Governments. At this point the City Planner, Joe Wallis, said that the Puget Sound Council of Governments would MOTION: like to appear before the Edmonds City Council. COUNCILMAN GELLERT MADE A MOTION THAT A PRESENTATION BY THE PUGET SOUND COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS BE HEARD ON THE 9TH OF MARCH COUNCIL WORK MEETING. COUNCILMAN CARNS SECONDED AND THE MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Harrison remarked that according to our ordinances there should be two ex-officio, members to the Planning Commission and one to the Amenities Design Board. He said that Councilman Clement is presently serving as ex-officio to the Planning Commission and he felt that one person is enough, and perhaps the MOTION: ordinance should be amended to this effect. COUNCILMAN ANDERSON MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT AN APPROPRIATE ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE TOPIC OF REDUCING THE EX-OFFICIO MEMBERSHIP ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ONE COUNCIL MEMBER INSTEAD OF TWO. COUNCILMAN CARNS SECONDED THE MOTION AND IT WAS PASSED. There was some discussion about someone to serve on.the Amenities Design Board as ex-officio and it was suggested that the appointment could be from one board to another, and did not necessarily require Council action. • HEARING: ON, APPEAL OF PORT OF EDMONDS FROM DECISION OF AMENITIES DESIGN BOARD The City Planner noted that the Planning staff member that has been meeting with the Amenities Design Board is Mary Lou Block and he asked that she be recognized to give a summary of the action taken on this item up to this time. Mrs. Block said that this was brought before the Board by Mr. Aos, repre- senting the Port of Edmonds, who initiated the application in September, 1975, including drawings of the proposed gates. He had indicated that there had been problems with cars racing through the parking lot at night and that these gates were needed to relieve the problem. There was not a Port representa- tive at the October meeting, so the matter was not heard until December 3, 1975. At that meeting the drawings were presented by Jim Reid, with Reid, Middleton and Associates. At that time, Mr. Reid indicated that the gates would be locked at night by the Port and that this would be primarily for security purposes for the boats and.property. The Amenities Design Board expressed admiration for the landscaping and some concern was expressed that the gates would lead to construction of fences around the facility. The Board stated that there concern was for the appearance of the property. They sugg- ested that the Port could install pilings with a chain across or perhaps a simple ornamental iron gate. Mrs. Block then read the motion from the Design Board Minutes of the 3rd of December which was "To reject the wire gates in ADB-75-75 subject to further review". She said that subsequent to the ADB action an appeal was received from the Port representative. The public hearing was then opened. Gordon Maxwell, Port Commissioner, informed the Council that for some time the Port has been concerned about security, and that in time to come they may have to go for this proposal. He said that he feels the time will come when the facility will have to be fenced. He said that the Port has watchmen at night, but that this is a costly proposition. Mr. Maxwell said that they have considered closing these proposed gates at night during the off-season. Mr. Maxwell reminded the Council of the concern of the Port for their own tenants in connection with the parking and the fishing pier. He said parking on the Port property is primarily for the tenants. He said that it has been their understanding that the parking in their north lot be protected so that there would be no conflict between the tenants and the people using the fishing pier. The only way • to do this is by fencing and by gates. Mr. Maxwell said that he is sure that the Port would withdraw 376 • support of the fishing pier if they are not allowed to do that in some fashion. He said that the ADB suggestion of pilings and chainwould keep out the cars, but would not take care of the security problem. Dick Cole, representing the Port of Edmonds, commented that the suggestion of a chain being put across the entrance to the Port parking lot would not solve the problem and the cost of ornamental iron gates would exceed the total cost of all the gates requested in the application. The prices quoted for ornamental iron gates, is $3-5,000 for one gate alone. Mr. Cole pointed out that there are numerous wire mesh gates and fences in the area already. He also noted that the proposed fishing pier plans include wire mesh on the pier itself. Mr. Cole also felt that the Amenities Design Board should not be denying an application because a fence may be requested later on; and that they should consider only the application before them. He asked Council to overturn the ADB action. Councilman Gellert wondered if the Amenities Design Board had heard all the reasons stated by the Port as to their need for the gates. It was pointed out that this is a de novo hearing. Deputy City Attorney, John Wallace, said that the Council reverse the decision, uphold or remand it back to the Board for further review. Keith Goldsmith, a member of the Amenities Design Board, said that the Board inferred exactly what has been said this evening. He felt that the Board would not ever pass on a chain link fence or gate and he thought that was why Mr. Reid asked for suggestions on what might be approved. He said that the motion meant that they were open to further considerations. Mr. Goldsmith said that comments were made that there were other chain link fences in the vicinity, but that the only one he recalls passing on was the one for the protection of the ferry patrons. Mr. Wallis noted that the application indicated that the Port wanted to control auto traffic and that the Council should determine the intent of the Port. Mr. Maxwell said that they did not know, but that it was his personal belief that it will be necessary to fence eventually. Mayor Harrison commented that Mr. Maxwell had made it clear that they want to close it off to fishermen. Port Commissioner Harold Bucklin said that the gates would be open 99% of the time and just closed at nights for security.. The Mayor felt there was a very legitimate reason for pacing those gates there.,. and would support the'Port's position. Councilman Anderson - asked Mr. Goldsmith if his statement meant that,the Board would never approve wire gates.. Mr:, Goldsmith said that they are ugly, but not necessarily inappropriate.. Stan Kauffmann, Laebugten Wharf.,, said that the Port is running into the same problem that he has had - you need fencing,for security reasons.. as there are many robberies. The City Planner said gates are down on the piers now to which tenants have pass keys: Mr. Bucklin pointed out that only three of the piers are locked. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Councilman Gellert felt that the Amenities Design Board did not get as.much information as tYe Council received this evening and, therefore, should hear it again* Councilman Herb stated that the Council is supposed to be hearing this de novo. Councilman Carns said that Mr. Goldsmith felt that the ADB had gotten the whole picture. Councilman Gould was of the same opinion. Councilman Anderson said that if this proposal is for the purpose of securing the piers then perhaps.the unfinished piers could be completed to take care of the security question and the chain across the entrances would :•take care of automobiles. Deputy City Attorney Wallace said that if this matter is remanded back to the Amenities Design Board, it should be with further directions. Councilman Gellert felt that MOTION• sufficient alternatives have not been considered. COUNCILMAN HERB MADE A MOTION THAT THE DECISION OF THE AMENITIES DESIGN BOARD BE REVERSED AND THAT THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION BE GRANTED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: AN ORNAMENTAL IRON GATE WOULD BE FAR MORE COSTLY AND SOME OF THIS WOULD BE BORNE BY TAXPAYERS; THERE ARE OTHER CHAIN LINK FENCES IN THE AREA; AND THAT IT WOULD NOT INTERRUPT THE ENVIRONMENTAL HARMONY; THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER WOULD NOT BE SUBSTANTIALLY INTERRUPTED; THE COLORS IN THE FENCE ARE COMPATIBLE SINCE THERE IS SIMILAR FENCING. COUNCILMAN GOULD SECONDED THE MOTION FOR THE SAME REASONS AND THAT IT WOULD BE PROMOTING THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE IN THE AREA AS A FENCE WOULD GIVE PROTECTION FOR TH;CARS PARKING OVERNIGHT. Councilman Carns said that he would speak in favor of the motion as he believes the Port has a right to protect its property. Councilman Gellert said that he would speak against the motion as he felt all the alternatives had not been explored. He also felt that the ADB has the prerogative to upgrade the appearance of non- residential developments in the City of Edmonds. Councilman Anderson said that he would apeak against the motion as he felt that if it were remanded back to the Amenitites Design Board some • compromise might result. A ROLL CALL VOTE RESULTED IN "NO" VOTES FROM GELLERT AND ANDERSON AND "YES" VOTES FROM GOULD, CARNS AND HERB. THE MOTION PASSED AND THE APPEAL WAS UPHELD. HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #488, RECOMMENDING ALLOWANCE OF TENNIS'COURTS WITH FENCES IN RS ZONES WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. The City Planner said that this was a staff generated application, and the type of application is an amendment to the Zoning Code. He felt that when an inordinate number of variances occur, it is appropriat4 to look at the Code to see whether an amendment is necessary. He indicated that the Board of Ad- justment has heard two applications for variance to allow tennis courts with fences in RS zones and one application that was later withdrawn. Mr. Wallis asked for amendment to Sec. 12.13.030 to add paragraph (g) which deals with the allowance of tennis courts with fences in RS zones with consid- erations as to views, hazards to the health and safety of the neighborhood and impairment of the general character of the neighborhood. Councilman Gellert asked what the Board of Adjustment could do if views were impaired. Mr. Wallis said they could refuse the conditional use permit, or make adjustments such as altering the configuration of the fence so that views would not be impaired. The public portion of the hearing was opened, however no one wished to speak and the hearing was closed. Councilman Gellert thought perhaps we should be more..specific for instance with territorial views. There was some discussion on this with Mr. Wallis suggested that the Council may want to add that a MOTION: conditional use permit would be required only if the fence is within the setback areas. COUNCILMAN GELLERT MADE MOTION TO INSTRUCT THE ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE THAT IN RS ZONES TENNIS COURT FENCES WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE OUTSIDE OF THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING ENVELOPE, BE PERMITTED SUBJECT TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, SUCH PERMIT BEING GRANTED ONLY IF THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FINDS, UPON RE- VIEW, BUT NOT LIMITED ONLY TO THESE ITEMS, THAT TERRITORIAL VIEWS WOULD NOT BE IMPAIRED BY CONSTRUCTING SAID FENCE IN THE YARD SETBACK AT THE HEIGHT SPECIFIED BY THE APPLICANT; AND THAT THE PROPOSED FENCE NOT CREATE A HAZARD TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE; AND THAT THE PROPOSED FENCE DOES NOT IMPAIR THE GENERAL CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN WHICH IT IS LOCATED. COUNCILMAN ANDERSON SE- CONDED THE MOTION. Councilman Herb said that he was opposed to the motion as he felt the word "views" contained in the draft before the Council, gives the Board more discretion. THE MOTION CARRIED. 0 377 HEARING: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION #490, RE/MEASUREMENT OF WHARF & BUILDING HEIGHTS IN CW ZONES The City Planner introduced Noelle Charleson, stating that she has worked with the Shorelines Management regulations as well as the city regulations in regard to CW zones. Miss Charleson, the Assistant Planner, then reported on this item and with the help of a chart projected on the screen, showed the Council how to measure a building when it is on a wharf or pier. She said that what they have proposed is to allow the height of buildings over,docks or piers in the CW zones to be measured from the pier 35' rather than the street grade. The other change that was proposed was that the code now states that the deck of any pier shall be no more than 8' above high water level, and this should be changed to mean higher high water. She,:�said that this is a definable term on the Army Corps of Engineers Map that you can measure from. Miss Charleson said that the second part of the proposal was to make the Zoning Ordinance com- patible with the Edmonds Shorelines Management Plan, which technically is still in a draft stage, be- cause the State has not officially adopted our plan. She said that the reason the State has not officiall: adopted our plan is because of the confusion about whether or not the Union Oil Marsh is considered to be an associated wetland. The Deputy City Attorney had just informed the Council that the Department of Ecology that the marsh is an associated wetland, and therefore does fall under the Shorelines Management Act. She said that the Draft Master Plan drawn up by the citizens of Edmonds recommended that multiple - family residential uses in the shoreline area should be located only to the south of the ferry terminal and should not be any more than two stories or 25' in height, whichever is less. This is to minimize visual obstruction on the waterfront. The Assistant Planner then pointed out that the Zoning Ordinance currently allows for all structures in the CW zones, residential or commercial, to be 35', so the two are in conflict. She said that the Attorney has advised that when the Department of Ecology officially approves our plan, the Zoning Ordinance will have to comply with the Shorelines Master Plan. Councilman Gellert questioned the advisability of setting the pier height at 81. There was a discussion with Jim Reid, who commented that it is desirable to get the superstructure up out of the water consid- erably. Floyd Smith, 814 Dayton, retired Puget Sound pilot, said that the average height of the docks in Seattle run from 19' to 221, Tacoma is the same and Bellinham runs about 23' above the mean higher • high water. He said that in extreme high water it gets up to less than 8' of the under pining. He said that the underpinnings should always be well out of the water. Miss Charleson said that the State Act limits heights on the shoreline to 35'. Attorney Wallace said that this is tied to whether or not there is an obstruction of a substantial amount of view. The local jurisdiction has the power to restrict further if they desire. The hearing was opened. -Margaret Johnson said that she was speaking as a member of the Shorelines Advisory Committee involved with the Edmonds Shoreline Master Program. She said they wished to commend the Council for moving ahead in providing ways for the.public to enjoy the beach in the form of a walkway at the Senior Center. Mrs. Johnson said that the Advisory Committee would support the 25' limit being maintained as it is in the Shorelines Master Program, and they asked the Council to recognize the optimum possible use of the downtown shoreline and not to change the standard to one that would promote uses that would exclude the general public. Gerry Geschke, 8222-186th, said that he would like to reaffirm what Mrs. Johnson said. He said that the committee spent over a year studying the shorelines and getting input from the residents of the City of Edmonds. During that time they received over 600 questionnaires. The citizens responded overwhelmingly that they would not like to see substantial development that would destroy their participation in the shorelines of Edmonds. He did remind the Council that they have approved the Edmonds Shorelines Master Program. Capt. Shields said that when you reduce the height of buildings, you reduce the value of the property and you also reduce the tax base. Marie King, 713 Laurel Street, said the residents living on the hillsides also are affected by what goes on downon-the waterfront. She said that 25' is acceptable, but 35' is quite high. Floyd Smith, 814 Dayton did not feel that he would lose much view at 35' and also felt that the height • should be the same for everything. The hearing was then closed. MOTION: COUNCILMAN GELLERT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE WHICH WILL CHANGE THE EXISTING ZONING ORDINANCE TO THE FOLLOWING: THAT THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT DEFINED AS THE LESSER OF (1) THE HEIGHT ABOVE THE UPPER PLATFORM SURFACE OF ANY PIER, DOCK OR ANY STRUCTURE OVER THE WATER, (2) THE HEIGHT PLUS 8' ABOVE THE MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER OR (3) THE HEIGHT ABOVE THE LOWEST ELEVATION OF THE NEAREST ADJACENT STREET SHALL BE LESS THAN 35' FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS AND 25' FOR MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS. FOLLOWING DISCUSSION, THE MOTION CARRIED. ACTION ON HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT QUESTIONNAIRE Noelle Charleson introduced this subject and the Council proceeded with review of the questionnaire. MOTION: COUNCILMAN GELLERT MOVED TO CHANGE THE SANITARY SEWERS TO A HIGH PRIORITY NEED FOR BOTH COUNTY AND LOCAL. COUNCILMAN ANERSON SECONDED AND THE MOTION PASSED. MOTION: COUNCILMAN ANDERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, TO MOVE THE PARKS AND RECREATION TO THE HIGH PRIORITY COLUMN. MOTION CARRIED. It was pointed out that the reason for this is because of the Junior High School project, including building and playfield. MOTION:, COUNCILMAN GELLERT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS TO MARK "IMPROVED WATER SYSTEMS" TO THE MODERATE COLUMN AND THAT IT IS A LOCAL NEED. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION: COUNCILMAN GELLERT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMANCARNS THAT "IMPROVED SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES" BE CHANGED TO A MODERATE NEED. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION: COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB TO INDICATE "IMPROVED FIRE PROTECTION FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT" AS A MODERATE NEED. MOTION CARRIED. Under the Job Training and employment programs, Councilman Carns suggested that it should read, "for • Senior Citizens and .youth". 378 These was some further discussion on Road Improvements and it was decided to expand the comments to MOTION: include more than walks for school children. COUNCILMAN GELLERT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN ANDERSON TO CHANGE THAT COLUMN TO READ "WALKS FOR SCHOOL CHILDREN, ELDERLY AND OTHER NEEDY PERSONS". CARRIED. REPORT ON STEINMAN PROBLEM LEIF Larson, City Engineer, said that Mr. Steinman had submitted an application for a plat and prior to it being processed he had started to do some work in the area. During the course of the plat hearing the question came up on the roadway and also the fact that the right-of-way had been cleared without a permit. Mr. Larson said that they have a grade prepared for consideration which comes in from the east to the west, which is 20%. He said that they had considered in thepast that access could only be from 172nd S.W. because that is the way it was plotted on the map many years ago. Mr. Larson said that he feels it should be referred back to the Planning Commission to consider the alternate, which would be to come'in from the south across 172nd and follow the contours rather than try to get access up 172nd. His recommendation was to study this area, not only this property, but the property to the south, to provide a more reasonable road grade to the properties so that they can be developed, and then put it of the Official Street Map. Mr. Larson said that this would require acquisition of MOTION: right-of-way. COUNCILMAN ANDERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS THAT WE REFER TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION THE MATTER OF THE OFFICIAL STREET PATTERN IN THE AREA OF THE STEINMAN PROPERTY WITH A VIEW TO ESTABLISHING A MORE SUITABLE SET OF GRADES FOR ACCESS TO ALL PROPERTIES IN THE AREA CONSIS- TENT WITH THE INTERESTS OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE. Councilman Gould said that he would like the city staff to develop all the alternatives and come to the Council and the Commission with all those alternatives and include their recommendations. COUNCILMAN GELLERT MADE AMEND: A MOTION TO AMEND THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN THEIR DELIBERATIONS SHOULD NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ANY GRADING OF RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT WAS DONE WITHOUT PERMIT OR WITHOUT PREVIOUS SETTING OF GRADES. THE AMENDMENT CARRIED, AND THE MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED ALSO CARRIED. Mayor Harrison noted that there might be a possibility for trading one right-of-way for another. The City Engineer pointed out that there is a sewer there and if the right-of-way is not used for road purposes it would be used for utilities and that the study should address this also. (The amendment was seconded by Councilman Carns. • REPORT ON THE PINTER PROBLEM The Mayor and Council had received two memorandums from J. Herb Gilbo, Director of the Public Works Department, regarding this matter. There were some brief comments which indicated that the Council felt that everything possible has been done on this matter. REPORT ON BIDS FOR PHASE IV WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT (OPENED JANUARY 15) City Engineer, Leif Larson, reported that bids were opened on the above project on Thursday, January 15, 1976 at 2:00 P.M. Eight bids were received. The low bidder on Schedules A and B was United Utilities, Inc. and the low bidder -on Schedule C was King Construction Company. Mr. Larson recommended to the low bidders on each schedule. The bids were as follows: CONTRACTOR SCHEDULE A SCHEDULE B SCHEDULE C TOTAL OF A, B,•_C 1. United Utilities, Inc. $229,o49.00 $ 88,754.50 $125,678.60 $!+43,482.10 - 2. King Construction Co. 247,009.00 96,190.00 120,964.o0 464,163.00 3. Bert Robinson Const. Co. ,258,951.00 96,506.10 134,216.70 489,673.8o 4. DiOrio Const. Co., Inc. 266,559.00 103,485.00 135,946.00 505,990.00 5. West Coast Const. Co.Inc. 273,oi9.18 97,035.10 14o,612.31 510,666.59 6. Gary Merlino Const. Co. 272,358.00 102,043.00 137,357100 511,758.0o 7. Excavators, Inc. ---- 115,583.76 ----- ----- 8. Taylor Utilities Const. Co. 293,706.70 115,880.05 157,319.75 566,906.70 MOTION: COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN ANDERSON TO ACCEPT THE BID UNITED UTILITIES, INC. • ON SCHEDULES A AND B AND -KING CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ON SCHEDULE C AND THE FIGURES DO NOT INCLUDE SALES TAX. MOTION CARRIED. Harold Gardner with King Construction Company said that there was a completion date of 90 days and King Construction met that requirement and the combination bid on A and B stipulated 120 days. Mr. Larson noted that in the bidding the City has the right to waive any irregularities and that the gentleman was contacted and he indicated that they would do it in the time specified. AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE VEHICLES ON STATE BID J. Herb Gilbo, Director of Public Works, said that is a two -fold request, one being for authorization to purchase and the other being for the sale of the vehicles being replaced. This is for the pur- chase of three, compact 4-door patrol vehicles; one 1976 compact 2-door patrol vehicle and one 1976 31-Y ton pickup. He then indicated the proposed use for the vehicles. He said that consideration has been given to the fact that general fund revenues may not be sufficient early in the year to. offset the expense of the Park Maintenance vehicle when it comes in. If that requirement does exist, they will make short term loans from the "B" fund. He said that the costs are inclusive of Washington State Sales Tax and will come from Renton Dodge, who received the low bid on the Washington State bid. Councilman Gould asked Police Chief, Marlo Foster, if these compact cars would be satisfactory. Chief Foster said they had been watching Seattle, as they have been using these vehicles and they appear MOTION: to be performing well. COUNCILMAN ANDERSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST FOR AUTHORIZA- TION TO PURCHASE THE VEHICLES MENTIONED FROM RENTON DODGE. (3, 4-door compacts at $13,883.01; one 1976 2-door at $3,868.30 and one 3/4 ton pickup at $4,617.72). MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Gilbo then requested permission to sell all vehicles being replaced with a bid date to be set MOTION: when the new vehicles arrive. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN ANDERSON TO•APPROVE THE SALE OF THESE VEHICLES. MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING ANIMAL LICENSES (SECOND READING) MOTION: COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN ANDERSON TO PASS ORDINANCE #1813 AMENDING THE • ANIMAL LICENSE PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF LICENSES FOR DOGS WHO'S OWNERS LIVE OUTSIDE THE EDMONDS CITY LIMITS. MOTION CARRIED. 379 • RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING MONIES FROM LID GUARANTY FUND TO SENIOR CENTER FUND:320. MOTION: COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT TO PASS RESOLUTION #351 TRANSFERRING $30,000 FROM FUND #613 TO FUND #320 UNTIL FEDERAL MATCHING MONIES ARE RECEIVED. MOTION CARRIED. RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING FROM CONTINGENCY FUND TO GENERAL FUND FOR BICENTENNIAL CELEBRATION PURPOSES. MOTION: COUNCILMAN GELLERT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN-NORDQUIST TO PASS RESOLUTION #352. MOTION CARRIED. CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES The City Council acknowledged receipt of a Claim for Damages from Standard Brands Paint. This was referred to the City Clerk for processing. There being no further business to come before Council, the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. IRENE VARNEY MORAN, Cjgy Clerk January 27, 1976 ROLL CALL] H. H.-HARRISON, Mayor The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order by Mayor Harve Harrison at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers at the Edmonds Civic Center. All council members were present. • APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of January 20th had been posted, mailed and distributed. Councilman Carns said that he would like to clarify what he meant to.say with respect to job descriptions during the Council portion of the meeting. He said that he would like to adopt by ordinance the job descriptions for all"City department heads and to draft a performance analysis form to be used annually in rating performance of department heads. All this.is to be reviewed by the Mayor, M.A..A., Council and the affected department head. Councilman Gellert said that on page 7, one-third of the way down the;item with reference to Improved Water Systems should also indicate that this is a.County need in addition to a local need. The minutes were then approved as:.corrected. APPOINTMENT TO LIBRARY BOARD The Mayor said that there is an opening on the Library Board and that he' would like to appoint Ira Minnihan to that position #2. Mr. Minnihan had been a resident of the city for seven years and has been..a resident of the city for seven years and has been active in the last two years in the Home MOTION: Protection Program with the Police Department. COUNCILMAN ANDERSON MOVED FOR CONFIRMATION OF THE APPOINTMENT OF IRA MINNIHAN TO POSITION #2 ON THE LIBRARY BOARD. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST SECONDED AND THE MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL PARTICIPATION Councilman Carns said that he would like to discuss the executive session scheduled for tomorrow evening. He said that last Friday he went to a seminar given by the Bar Association which covered several areas, one of them being open government. There -followed -discussion on the legality, with the City Attorney stating that he would be present to see that the discussion is conducted in accordance with the Open • Meeting Law. Councilman Gellert asked the Parks and Recreation Director for clarification on a letter from the chairman of the Beautification Committee regarding the Seaview Tennis Courts. He said that it was not clear whether she meant the tennis courts which have,already been contracted for at Seaview Park, or the courts that were to be at the Seaview Reservoir. Mr. Garretson said that he felt it was intended to stop the tennis courts on the reservoir. Councilman Gellert asked Mr. Garretson to check into this. Councilman Clement said he would also like to explore the the comment regarding the lack of rest room facilities in neighborhood parks. Councilman Gould said that he had attended an Association of Washington Cities meeting held at Frontier Village. He said that it was a very interesting and informative meeting with a Mrs. Chesney and Mrs. Andrey speaking about the needs of the Snohomish County Juvenile Court. Councilman Nordquist remarked that it would be appropriate to send a resolution of appreciation to both MOTION: Natalie Shippen and Norma Bruns for their service to the people of ;Edmonds as council members. COUNCIL- MAN NORDQUIST THEN MOVED TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE RESOLUTIONS FOR NORMAN BRUNS AND NATALIE SHIPPEN. COUNCILMAN GELLERT SECONDED AND THE MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Nordquist said that he would like to schedule as an agenda item, the Mayor's proposal regarding the Senior Center. He would also like to have some background material for the new council members so MOTION: that they can discuss the situati.on. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT TO SET FEBRUARY IOTH FOR DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM AND THAT THIS PORTION BE OPENED FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. Council- man Gould thought it would be a good idea to see the plans and to ask the architect, Mr. Nelson to -attend. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Nordquist said that he felt it was appropriate at this time for the committee dealing with job descriptions to sit down and review all the job descriptions. There was a consensus that this should be pursued further. is