Loading...
19760413 City Council Minutes412 than single detached houses. Councilman Gellert again voiced his concern on common areas and proper maintenance of these. Councilman Carns said one major .concern was that i:t would allow undevelopable lots of be built upon and a cluster of theree, for example, would then leave un- buildable areas such as a ravine for the open space, and he suggested that council not allow any PRO of less than one acre. Councilman Gould said he would favor larger than one acre minimum size; maybe four acres to start, and then consider a lesser area. Councilman Clement .commented on how differently some plats might have been developed under the PRO concept, and stated that the price mechanism by itself is going to force certain areas; that developers are not going to give away the land. MOTION: COUNCILMAN HERB THEN MADE A MOTION THAT THE PRD ORDINANCE AS DRAFTED BE ADOPTED, WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT THE AMENITIES DESIGN BOARD PROCEDURE BE DELETED. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. MOTION: Following this, IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT, SECONED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS THAT THE ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO REDRAFT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES: THAT UNDER THE GENERAL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS, A MINIMUM PROVISION MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF A SUBDIVISION IN THE ZONE BE APPLIED: THAT A PRD CANNOT BE APPLIED IN A SHORT SUBDIVISION SITUATION: THAT IN SECTION .1.2.1.4.063 (4), THAT IT BE SPECIFIED THAT 20% OF THE NET DEVELOPABLE LAND BE OPEN SPACE AND IN THE SAME SUBSECTION, 7 (a) BE DELETED: AND THAT THE ATTORNEY FIND AN APPROPRIATE DICTION TO ENUNCIATE THE CITY'S POWER TO EITHER REVIEW OR REQUIRE SUFFICIENT MAINTENANCE OF COMMON SPACE. COUNCILMAN GOULD THEN MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION, TO STATE THAT THE PROPOSED CHANGES BE MODIFIED TO STRIKE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, AND THE PRD ONLY APPLY TO LOT SIZES OF 3 ACRES OR LARGER. THERE WAS NO SECOND TO THIS AMENDMENT, AND THE ORIGINAL MOTION THEN CARRIED. PROPOSED LEASEHOLD ORDINANCE 1 The proposed leasehold ordinance, which the attorney had presented at the March 23 council meeting, would impose a leasehold excise tax from and after January 1, 1976, pursuant to Chapter 61, Laws of • 1975-76 Second Extraordinary session, Laws of the State of Washington. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCIL- MAN HERB THAT PROPOSED ORDINANCE #1833 BE PASSED, AND AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR PRO TEM TO SIGN THE AGREE- MENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE. MOTION CARRIED. PREPAYMENT ORDINANCE - LID 193 MOTION:. The prepayment ordinance for LID 193 was presented by the Attorney, and IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS THAT PROPOSED ORDINANCE #1834 BE PASSED, CASH PREPAYMENT PERIOD EXPIRATION FOR LID 193, AND THE MOTION CARRIED. There was no further business on the council agenda, and the.meeting was adjourned at 11:25 P.M. IR E VARNEY MORAN4 City Clerk H. H. HARRISON, Mayor April 13, 1976 ROLL CALL The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Mayor Harve Harrison in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds. Civic Center, with all councilmen present except Anderson, who was attending a seminar in Oregon. APPROVAL -OF MINUTES Minutes of teh regular meeting of April 6 had been posted, mailed and distributed, and Councilman Gellert commented that at the bottom of page 1, Councilman Nordquist's motion should have the word • "attempt' inserted before 'to resolve the problem in 2 weeks'. Minutes were then approved as amended. COUNCIL PARTICIPATION Councilman Gellert inquired as to what legally do tree cutting restrictions on a plat mean? It was noted that there was no "legal" meaning as such; that the city has had a policy to retrict cutting of trees by the developer, and try to reach an agreement as to which trees can be saved, which will be topped or limbed, etc. This is designed to prevent scalping of lots by the builder, which makes building the homes easier. However, this tree cutting restriction is only until such time as the property is sold. Councilman Clement asked M.A.A. Whaley about the present status of the CETA employees. Mr. Whaley reported that tomorrow, April 14, at 10:30 A.M. the outcome will be known. Councilman Gould advised council that at the March 30 work meeting, Councilman Carns had been selected to serve on the committee of elected officials of the ciW es involved under Public Law 92-500, the plan for secondary sewer treatment, and that since that time he and Councilman Carns had discussed this, and were in agreement that since Councilman Gould had a great deal of interest in this, he would like to volunteer to serve. Councilman Carns therefore will be replaced by Council- man Gould. Mayor Harrison reported that the Civil Service Commission had brought to his attention that they would like to appoint their own secretary. The work load has become too heavy for a full time city employee to -devote this much time to Civil Service duties. The Mayor stated that he felt it was to the city's advantage to let the Commission appoint its own secretary, and it would mean appropriationg about $1500 for the balance -of the year to fund this -and cover other expenses. A secretary would be paid $4.50 per hour, with no fringe benefits. A MOTION WAS THEN MADE BY COUNCIL- MAN GOULD THAT AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1500 BE TRANSFERRED FROM THE CONTINGENCY FUND TO THE CIVIL n U �13 • SERVICE FOR THE BALANCE OF THE YEAR, TO INCLUDE FUNDING OF -A SECRETARY. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Harrision mentioned the quarterly meeting of Snohomish County Cities and Towns to be held April 22 in Marysville, and he read the agenda -for that meeting. Councilmen Clement, Carns, and Gould said they would plan to attend. JOINT MEETING WITH AMENITIES DESIGN BOARD - The City Planner reminded council that the ADB had been established by ordinance in 1973. He stated that their meetings are on an informal basis, with no posting, publishing, or hearings involved. They have,often advised applicants much to the applicant's benefit. Following some further mention of the background of this body, Mayor Harrison invited the ADB members present to join council at the work table. There were four members present: Chairman John Latourell, Don Westlin, Mrs. Margaret Bernhoft, and Chauncey Wight. Chairman Latourell expressed the Board's, appreciation to meet with the council. He said that they were not as well defined as they could be; that they very much set their own rules and polices. He discussed attitudes, how. the -'individual members of the Board function, general policies, and the ordinances under'which they operate. Each of the four members spoke to council on views and ideas. Don Westlin discussed archi;tecture, and this was.followed by discussion on staggering of terms on the Board acting as a neutralizing force against dullness or sameness of -design in the City. Margaret Bernhoft.mentioned the initial hostil.ity felt because they were "another regulating body". She added that they often now hear ocmpliments from some of the applicants for their help in'finding a better.concept. The Board wants.structures to be an asset to our community. Chauncey Wight said he had practical experience on the limitations as well as potentials of what plants and plantings Can or cannot do. There was a great deal of discussion on the goals and functions of the Amenities Design Board. Mayor Harrison expressed his appreciation to the people serving,on the Board, and said that he • looked at their prime function as being to protect neighboring properties,from something that might be damaging next door. Councilman Carns said he thought their special noon meetings held„ in order to accomodate an applicant were outstanding, and he felt they were doing a whale of a job. Councilman Clement noted..that a good indication of the quality showed in only 2% appeals out of 210 Board actions. Councilman Herb stated that he was not critical of the individuals, but of the Board itself. He felt there was a danger in trying to regulate aesthetics, since there are no standards. He said the Planning Commission and City Council -can impose those requirements that can be regulated without the necessity of an Amenities Design Board. Each council member comment- ed on his views, and there was a great deal of discussion between council and Board.. Councilman Nordquist said that he had voted against the ADB initially. He noted that the Board acts in good faith, but they need to solve the enforcement problem. He commended the members on a good job and the long hours they spend doing the job. Chai,rman'Latourell told council the Board would like to see one or two people work.on suggestions on criteria for regulating designs. With the aid of the blackboard, he illustrated the possibilities of discriminating geographically, which would imply districts in regard to signs. Councilman Carns said he felt if certain signs are allowable under the sign ordinance, perhaps they should then amend the sign ordinance. Councilman Gellert felt the ordinance could say that all signs allowed must be approved by the Amenities Design Board. Number one on the list for the ADB seemed.to reworking the sign ordinance. Councilman Clement felt the design concept might be completed within 12 months, and Councilman Carns siad he would like to see a different regulation on signs. Attorney James Murphy advised that council suggest the ADB work with the Planning Commission on a sign ordinance, because this must go through the Planning Commission before coming to council. MOTION: Following this discussion, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS TO INSTRUCT THE AMENITIES DESIGN BOARD, IN CONNECTION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION, TO REVIEW THE SIGN ORDINANCE IN ALL ZONING AREAS. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMAN HERB VOTING AGAINST. ADB Chairman Latourell then suggested that the ADB would like 2 more members on the Board; one • other design professional and one more lay persona Following discussion of this suggestion, MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST TO INSTRUCT THE ATTORNEY TO AMEND THE ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE AMENITIES DESIGN BOARD FROM 5 TO 7'MEMBERS, AND THE MOTION CARRIED. Members of the Board again expressed theirappreciation for having had this meeting with Council. DISCUSSION ON OLYMPIC VIEW (ESPERANCE) ANNEXATION POLICY CONSIDERATIONS Mayor Harrison stated that he had received a petition signed by 6 parties interested in pursuing annexation, with notification that they'would circulate a petition for signatures to qualify placing{the annexation of this area on the November ballot. M,A.A. Whaley commented on the data contained in the annexation report, which Staff hoped would cover all questions that might come from residents in that area. Joan Brown, who had written a letter to the Mayor, was in the audience. She said she would like to meet personally with a city representative.to discuss the the report. She made the comment that there were several points that concerned her.- Mayor Harrison invited her to discuss these points tonight if she wished. However, she said she would prefer to write her questions for each council member and bring them in. She was advised that if she would bring one copy to the City Clerk's office, each council member would receive a copy for inclusion in the Friday packets that are regularly mailed from that office, providing that the material is brought in by Friday noon. W. J. "Butch" Barden, for the Action Committee for Esparance,,; presented petition signatures from approximately 1100 residents of the Esperance area who are opposed to annexation to the City of Edmonds. He noted that due to the short notice, this was only a partial list of the signatures the group had obtained, and indications are that they should have another 800 to 900 signatures which they can present at a later date. His letter accompanying the petitions noted that from the report prepared by the city, he understood that -it would cost $5,000 just to place this matter before the voters. He said this figure does not include the time or money spent already on the subject. Mr.. Barden added that several -residents and concerned taxpayers of Edmonds have made the suggestion that this money and the time could be better spent on matters that are more 414 MOTION: practical and have at least a measure of community support. There followed discussion -by -council and COUNCILMAN CARNS MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT TO ACCEPT PETITIONS FOR ANNEX- ATION OF THE ENTIRE ESPERANCE AREA ONLY IF THE CITY RECEIVES 2000 OR MORE VALID SIGNATURES -OF REGISTERED VOTERS IN THE AREA. M.A.A.Whaley then explained the value of facts that could be -pro- vided the residents there on what the city council would or would not do if annexation were to take place. If council would decide on these issues, the information could be distributed and people would then have.facts before them before signing any petition for or against. Councilman Anderson had prepared an outline of his feelings regarding the annexation, and provided each `• council member with a.copy. He and stated answers to each question submitted by Mr. McRae and his group. Council then decided to take up each of'Councilman Anderson's points, and COUNCILMEN' CARNS AND GELLERT THEN WITHDREW THE MOTION AND SECOND. The items were then taken up as follows: (1) Police Services: Councilman Anderson stated that it appears the Police services can be ex- panded to current Edmonds standards in two steps. Jan. 1, 1977 and Jan. 1, 1978, as revenues increase in two increments. Police Chief Marlo Foster told council it would take 5 extra patrolmen and approximately one year to train them in order to put them into the area. In the meantime, using the trained patrolmen would lower the level throughout the entire city. Council felt they should answer. the question as to.whether or not the city would expand the police services to current Edmonds standards; yes, MOTION:....or no. Following some discussion, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT, SECONDED BY COUNCIL- MAN CARNS THAT POLICE SERVICES WOULD BE BROUGHT UP TO CURRENT EDMONDS LEVEL OF -STANDARDS BY 1.97.8. MOTION CARRIED WITH COUNCILMAN HERB VOTING AGAINST. (2) Fire and Aid Car Service: Councilman Anderson stated in his.memo that Fire and Aid Car service would be maintained from the 231st and 83rd Ave-.-.W. station, full time. Continued cover- age from a relocated station, if ever changed, would still be from within the area. Jack has recommended 9 full-time personnel' rather than 8. It would seem this change would have to take • place in 1978 at the earliest. Fire suppression, possible locations of stations, and aid car service were discussed by council, MOTION: and A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS TO APPROVE THE STATEMENT MADE BY COUNCILMAN ANDERSON UNDER (2) OF HIS MEMO, WITH THE PROVISO THAT THE EXCESS LEVY PASSES IN NOVEMBER 1976. MOTION CARRIED. (3) Assumption of indebtedness: Councilman Anderson stated that he favored not requiring Olympic View to assume any Edmonds' indebtness. There followed discussion on present indebtedness, future indebtedness if a park bond issue was submitted and passed, and the present indebtness of the area MOTION: in question. A MOTION WAS THEN MADE BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT THAT OLYMPIC VIEW (ESPERANCE) WOULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO ASSUME ANY EDMONDS INDEBTEDNESS INCURRED PRIOR TO 1976, BUT IF THE PARK BOND ISSUE IS PASSED IN 1976, IT WOULD BE AN OBLIGATION OT THE OLYMPIC VIEW RESIDENTS AS WELL AS THE ENTIRE CITY OF EDMONDS; AND THAT THE PRESENT EDMONDS RESIDENTS WILL NOT ASSUME ANY.OBLIGATIONS FOR PRIOR OLYMPIC VIEW (ESPERANCE) INDEBTEDNESS. MOTION CARRIED. (4) Street maintenance: Councilman Anderson's memo stated that since -Edmonds does not levy a road tax as such, we could made no quarantee to keep all streets repaved to the present quality. discussion on present street maintenance priorities in Edmonds, the present condition of the MOTION: county county streets and the system of repaving, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB THAT THE CITY MAKES NO GUARANTEE TO KEEP THE STREETS_REPAVED TO THE PRESENT QUALITY. MOTION CARRIED. (5) Representation in government: Councilman Anderson stated that he favored election of a 5 person Community Council at the time fo the annexation election, until the next.ensuing Council election (1978). (CITY CLERK'S NOTE: 1977) Council discussed the possiblilities of community councils, and the pros -and cons of such a system. • Mayor Harrision suggested expanding all Boards and Commissions with a couple more positions and have these positions filled with residents of the area, if annexed. MOTION: A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN HERB, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN.CLEMENT TO ADD 2 POSITIONS TO THE PARK AND LIBRARY BOARDS, BOARD OF APPEALS, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND PLANNING COMMISSION: AND THAT THESE APPOINTMENTS ALL BE FROM THE ANNEXED AREA; AND THAT THIS BE UNTIL THE 1.978 COUNCIL ELECTION. MOTION CARRIED., (CITY CLERK'S NOTE: 1977) (6) Community Parks: Councilman Anderson's memo stated that he favored placing some high priority on lease of the Holly school site as a communtiy park. There was discussion on locations of parks; that one of the hopes of the people in this area was to have neighborhood parks; monies used if a park bond issue is submitted and passed; and prior- ities. MOTION: IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS TO GO ON RECORD THAT IF THE ANNEXATION IS VOTED UPON, THE CITY PLACE A HIGH PRIORITY ON THE ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT OF A COMMUNITY PARK IN THE ESPERANCE AREA. A ROLL CALL VOTE SHOWED.ALL COUNCILMEN IN FAVOR EXCEPT GOULD AND HERB, AND THE MOTION CARRIED. (7) Zoning: Councilman Anderson said he favored accepting the basic plan of County zoning plus formation of a 10,000 square foot R-S zone to be more comparable to the 9,600 county zone. MOTION: There followed discussion on city zoning vs. county zoning. On this subject, IT WAS MOVED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT THAT THE CITY OF EDMONDS WOULD NOT ANTICIPATE ANY ZONING CHANGES IN THE ANNEXED AREA. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN, WITH COUNCILMEN CLEMENT, CARNS AND HERB IN FAVOR: GOULD AND.GELLERT AGAINST; NORDQUIST NOT PRESENT TO VOTE; AND THE MOTION CARRIED. 0 U 1 1 E 1 (8) Olympic View Water District: Councilman Anderson noted that since Olympic View Water District employees,are required by law to be absorded, I favor separate management for 2 to.3 yesars to afford absorption -of these employees. Edmonds would assume continuation of Olympic View service quality and improvements. MOTION: Following discussion on this subject, COUNCILMAN CLEMENT MADE A MOTION, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD TO DROP OUT THE PHRASE AFTER "I FAVOR" IN COUNCILMAN ANDERSON'S STATEMENT, AND ADD IN WITH EMPLOYEES THAT SINCE OLYMPIC VIEW WATER DISTRICT EMPLOYEES ARE REQUIRED BY TO BE ABSORBED, EDMONDS-WOULD ASSUME CONTINUATION OF OLYMPIC VIEW SERVICE QUALITY AND IMPORVEMENTS. THE MOTION CARRIED. (9) Fire District #1: Councilman Anderson's memo stated to maintai.n�what is legally permissible, and I favor special consideration for the absorption of Fire District #1 employees into the Edmonds system. MOTION: There was discussion on the'ETr-e District, and resulted in A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB TO MAINTAIN WHAT IS LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE FOR FIRE DISTRICT #1 EMPLOYEES. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION: At this point, COUNCILMAN CARNS MADE A MOTION OT ACCEPT THE PETITION FOR ANNEXATION ONLY IF THEY HAVE A COMPARABLE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES OF THOSE WHO HAVE SIGNED THE ANTI -ANNEXATION PETITION, AND BY MAY 4, 1.976. THIS MOTION WAS LATER WITHDRAWN. MOTION:: IT WAS THEN MOVED BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS THAT THE CITY EXPRESS THAT IT NEITHER ENDORSES NOR TAKES A STAND AGAINST ANNEXATION OF THE ESPERANCE AREA.EXCEPT UPON PRESENTATION OF 1000 VALID SIGNATURES BY JUNE 15, 1976; AND THAT THE PRESENT LEADERS OF BOTH MOVEMENTS (PRO AND ANTI) BE PRESENTED WITHIN A WEEK OF -THIS MEETING, THE ITEMS.AS VOTED UPON TONIGHT IN REGARD TO THE CITY'S VIEWS ON THE ANNEXATION. MOTION CARRIED. It was decided that the city staff would prepare petition forms for the people to circulate in the area. REPORT FROM ATTORNEY ON IMPACT OF SUB. H.B. 90 ON CITY OF EDMONDS The City Attorney had sent a memo to each council member explaining that the only change made by Substitute House Bill 90 that is relevant to the Edmonds Gambling Ordinance allows the city to tax sports pools. Subsequent amendments to -::the city gambling law have removed fishing derbies from the definiation of gambling add accordingly, they should be removed from the Edmonds MOTION: Ordinance as a taxable form of gambling. COUNCILMAN GOULD THEREFORE MOVED, SECONDED..BY COUNCIL. -- MAN HERB TO INSTRUCT THE ATTORNEY TO DELETE FISHING DERBIES FROM THE TAXABLE GAMBLING FORMS OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, AND THE MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION ON DATE FOR JOINT DINNER MEETING WITH MOUNTLAKE TERRACE COUNCIL Councilman Gellert noted that Councilman Nordquist had been the one to bring this item before MOTION: council., and since Councilman Nordquist was not present at this time, COUNCILMAN GELLERT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB TO SET THIS MATTER OVER FOR ONE WEEK. VOTE ON THE MOTION SHOWED TWO COUNCILMEN IN FAVOR; TWO AGAINST; AND THE MAYOR BROKE THE TIE FOR THE MOTION TO CARRY. DISCUSSION OF POSSIBILITY OF SENDING REPRESENTATIVE TO SEMINAR IN OLYMPIA MOTION: In regard to the seminar being held June 9-11 in Olympia, A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT THAT COUNCILMAN HERB BE ALLOWED TO ATTEND, AND M.A.A. WHALEY IF HE WISHED TO ATTEND ALSO. MOTION CARRIED. There was no further business to come before council, and the meeting was therefore adjourned at 11:15 P.M. April 20, 1976 ROLL CALL Regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order by Mayor Harve Harrison at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center, with all council members present. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Minutes of the regular meeting of April 13 had been posted, mailed and distributed, and with no omissions nor corrections, they were approved as written. COUNCIL PARTICIPATION Councilman Gellert stated that he and Councilman Nordquist had attended a meeting on the Senior Center and since funding via grants can be applied for when the approval has been given for the architect, etc., and only the first phase hasbeen.approved, he asked that an item be, placed on next week's agenda approving the architect for future phases so that applications can be pro- MOT;ION: cessed for funding. IT,WAS THEREFORE MOVED BY COUNCILMAN ANDERSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD THAT THIS ITEM BE PLACED ON THE APRIL 27 COUNCIL AGENDA, AND THE MOTION CARRIED. This item is for Senior Center remodeling. Councilman Gellert noted that on the Board of Adjustment agenda -for tomorrow night there was an item regarding Liberty Cable TV antenna at the water tank site along with other equipment, and MOTION: A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN GELLERT, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL GO ON RECORD AS FAVORING THE VARIANCE WHICH WOULD PERMIT LIBERTY CABLE TV TO PLACE THE RECEIVING ANTENNAS ATOP THE CITY WATER TANK AND "HEAD END" EQUIPMENT ON THE TANK SITE NEAR FIVE CORNERS BECAUSE THIS SITE IS ONE -OF THE HIGHEST WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS;,.THE•RESULTING IMPROVED RECEPTION WOULD BENEFIT A LARGE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF EDMONDS: THIS SITE WOULD FACILITATE OBTAINING IMPORVED RECEPTION FORM CANADIAN TV VIA MICROWAVE REPEATERS; THE