Loading...
19780321 City Council MinutesI] March 14, 1978 - continued 1 9 9 Mayor Harrison had invited Bill Nims to make a presentation about the International Cultural and 1 1 Personal Exchange with the Nagoya College of Foreign Languages in Nagoya, Japan. Mr. Nims re - MOTION: viewed the previous exchanges and said they are now soliciting cooperation for this year's ex- change. This year's exchange will be July 21-29 and he reviewed the plans for that. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, TO ADOPT THE INTERNATIONAL CULTURAL EXCHANGE PROGRAM. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION: MOTION: (AMENDED.) 6NDMENT 1 • i 1 REPORT FROM COMMITTEE ON RECOMMENDATIONS RE DIVING OFF EDMONDS SHORELINES A report had been submitted containing the Committee recommendations. A film of the Underwater Park was shown by Gary Smith, after which Park Planning & Recreation Director Rod Garretson in- troduced the members of the Committee who were present. He reviewed the changes in the proposed Underwater Park expansion. He said the Scuba Committee is very interested in maintaining the park and has been working on raising funds.for the improvements to the park. Two unresolved questions were whether fines would be necessary for violations of Underwater Park regulations, and whether there should be some kind of boat access to the safety floats on a 24-hour basis in case some diver is in trouble there and cannot swim to shore. The report of the.Committee was discussed.at length. COUNCILMAN CARNS THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SCUBA SAFETY COMMITTEE BE GIVEN TO THE CITY ATTORNEY TO INCORPORATE INTO CHANGES TO CITY ORD- INANCES AND THAT THE COUNCIL GO ON RECORD AS THANKING THE SCUBA SAFETY COMMITTEE FOR THEIR WORK AND THEIR EFFORTS TO ENHANCE THE UNDERWATER PARK AND TO MAKE IT SAFER FOR DIVERS. Regarding fines, City Attorney Jim Murphy noted that there is always a maximum.fine of $500 for violations of the City Code. He said the Committee was suggesting fines of something like $50 where you might be damaging someone else and $5 if you were only damaging yourself. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED. COUNCIL- MAN GOULD THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST THAT THE CITY AUTHORIZE CONSTRUCTION OF THE KIOSK AS PROPOSED ON PAGE 7 OF THE SCUBA SAFETY COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POSTING OF REG- ULATIONS AND OTHER RELATED INFORMATION AND THAT $3,000 BE DRAWN FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND AND TO BE PLACED IN THE PROPER FUND FOR SUCH CONSTRUCTION. Councilwoman Allen was not sure the estimate of costs was reasonable and Community Director. John LaTourelle agreed.that it'was a "ball park" estimate. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO READ THAT THE STAFF BE INSTRUCTED TO PREPARE A DRAWING OF THE KIOSK, TOGETHER WITH COST ESTIMATES, SUCH ESTIMATES TO BE REVIEWED BY PUBLIC.WORKS DIRECTOR LEIF LARSON. THE MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, THEN CARRIED. A member of the audience commented that there has been a problem of boats leaving Andy's Boathouse and cutting across the Underwater Park and there should be some signage to deter such boats. It was agreed that such signs could be included in the kiosk construction. There was no further business to come before the Council, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. IRENE VARNEY MORAN, CITY CLERK HARV H. HA SON, MAYOR March 21, 1978 The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Harrison in the Council.Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT STAFF PRESENT Harve Harrison, Mayor Mike Herb Phil Clement Katherine Allen John Nordquist. Ray Gould Tom Carns Larry Naughten CONSENT AGENDA Charles Dibble, M.A.A. Leif Larson, Public Works Director John LaTourelle, Community Development Director Marlo Foster, Police Chief Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk Lila Crosby, Administrative Services Director - Art Housler, Finance.Director Noelle Charleson, Assistant City Planner Dick Allen, Assistant City. Engineer Jack Weinz, Acting Fire Chief Jim Murphy, City Attorney Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk Councilwoman Allen asked that Item (C) be removed from the Consent Agenda and Councilman Herb asked that Items (D) and (0 be removed. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The balance of the Consent Agenda included the following: (A) Roll Call. (B) Approval of Minutes of March 14, 1978. (E) Setting date of April 4, 1978 for hearing on approval of preliminary plat "Irish Acres." (File P-3-78) (F) Setting date of April 4, 1978 for hearing on approval of preliminary plat "Lauri Ann Park." (P-4-78) APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT OF JESSE'S PONDEROSA..- V.I.CINITY OF 218TH AND 82ND [Iiem (C) on Consent Agenda] Councilwoman Allen was concerned that one of the lots in this plat did not have the required 8,000 2 Q V- March 21, 1978 - continued sq..:.ft. Publ:it'.Works Director,Leif Larson assured her that all of the lots in the plat had at, • MOTION: least the required 8,000 sq. ft. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN THEREFORE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, TO APPROVE ITEM (C) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING FUNDS TO PAY FOR MEMBERSHIP IN THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL AND FUNDING ARCHITECTURAL STUDIES OF THE EDMONDS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL [Item (D) on Consent Agenda] Councilman Herb said it had been his understanding that the architectural study of the Edmonds Elementary School was to evaluate the space needs of the City, and the study presented a proposal MOTION: for a new building. Councilman Gould responded that each of those things would be considered at the March 28 meeting. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY, COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO APPROVE ITEM (D) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA AND PASSING RESOLUTION 395. MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED ORDINANCE, CASH PREPAYMENT - LID 198 [Item (G) on Consent Agenda] MOTION: Councilman Herb advised that he would discuss his question with the Staff, and COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, TO APPROVE ITEM (G) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, ADOPTING ORDINANCE 1982. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL Councilman Carns stated that the fund raising activities for the Medic 1 project were about to begin. He asked for authorization to insert an envelope or card in.a complete cycle of the utility billing in order to solicit funds. He said he realized this was an unusual request but he felt there was a great need for the Medic 1 program. He noted that the other South County MOTION: cities also would be doing this. COUNCILMAN CARNS THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB, THAT THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE INSERTION OF A MEDIC 1, FUND RAISING ENVELOPE (OR CARD) IN A COMPLETE UTILITY BILLING CYCLE. In answer to a question, Councilman Carns said there should be no costs to the City involved. He said if an envelope could bot be inserted a card would be provided instead. MOTION CARRIED. • MOTION: COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, THAT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION BY SCHEDULED FOLLOWING THE MARCH 28, 1978 COUNCIL MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PROBABLE PURCHASE OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN -RAILROAD PROPERTY FOR THE FISHING PIER PARKING LOT. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman.Gould noted that correspondence had been received from Dr. Woodroof regarding a pres- entation by the Performing Arts Center Task Force to be given on March 23 at 7:30 p.m. in the Edmonds School District Board Room. He said they have a site plan and two elevations so they can present a good idea of what the center will look like, and he urged attendance at the presentation. AUDIENCE Mrs. Eugenia Link of 1029 Bell St. complained about a large dog which has been roaming her neigh- borhood and which she said had been cited 10 times. She said the owner had paid only a small portion of the assessed fines, and she felt there should be a way to enforce the City's leash law. She felt that as a taxpayer she had a right to be protected against the intrusions of this dog who continually was damaging her yard. She said the owner of the dog had informed the judge ,who he would not put his dog on a leash and was too poor to raise the height of his fence to keep his dog in his yard. Mrs. Link said she had talked to'the judge but he had indicated his interests were in violations of people, not of dogs. She felt that payments of fines should be mandatory. Mayor Harrison .said he had also heard from a Wayne Baker whose dog had been picked up twice. The second time he was given a citation with bail of $47 and fees totaling $27.50. Mayor Harrison read the citation aloud and suggested that the Council may want to re- view the ordinance to see if it is satisfied with the penalty schedule. He noted that cita- tions generally are not given for a first offense. Councilman Carns said he felt that after a person has been duly warned he should.pay when there is another offense, and Councilman Clement added that, assuming the person has been found guilty of the charges on several occasions, the ordinance may as well not be in existence if it is not going to be enforced. Councilman Herb felt very strongly that it is important to have an independent judge. He said you have to have • confidence in the judge; and the Council should not intrude on.his discretion. Councilman Carns noted that the Council had completely reviewed the Animal Control Ordinance about six months ago and he did not see any reason to bring it up again unless either of the two new Council members wished it. However; he said he would like to see some relief for Mrs. Link. It was agreed that unless either of the new Council members requested it, the Animal -Control Ordinance would not be reviewed. Wayne Baker of 416 6th Ave. N. asked if the ordinance could be amended so the owner of a dog would be liable for damage the dog has done. City Attorney Jim Murphy responded that sometimes the courts will provide for private restitution by reducing the fine if the restitution is made. The dog owner about whom Mrs. Link was complain- ing has an April court date for the most recent citation. No action was taken by the Council. Doug Margeson, reporter for the Enterprise, introduced Janice Crosette, who will be replacing him beginning next week. HEARING ON APPEAL FROM P.C. RESOLUTION 583, RECOMMENDING DENIAL TO REZONE PROPERTY LOCATED ON NORTH SIDE OF 174TH S.W. AND EAST OF 72ND AVE. W. (File R-1-78) Assistant City Planner Noelle Charleson showed the location of this property on the Zoning Map. The proposal was to rezone one lot from RS-20 to RS-8. Zoning directly to the south of this site is RS-8 and all the other surrounding zoning is RS-12 and RS-20. The zoning had been established in 1964 and Ms. Charleson felt the intent of the RS-20 zoning probably was to pre- serve open space and a ravine in the area. The area is very steep in places. She said -the applicant, Edwi,n-Orner, could have subdivided in 1964 and created long .lots that would have level building envelopes on parts of the lots. He did -not subdivide that way, however, but sold off property all around the one remaining lot, leaving this a lot of approximately 8,000 sq. ft. A further complication is that 174th St. was not constructed within the right-of-way but south of it. There is a proposal to vacate that right-of-way but south of it. There is a proposal -to vacate that right-of-way, and such vacation would add to this lot to bring -it to March 21,.1978 - continued • the 8,00.0.s.q. ft. area and the lot adjacent to it would be approximately 13,000 sq. ft. Ms. Charleson showed slides of the area, noting that there is an existing garage on the property. She did not feel the illegal subdivisions in the area -had met the intent of the Zoning Code and she felt the pro- posed, rezone should be denied because it did not meet the intent of the Zoning Code --to preserve open space, because she felt it would 'represent a'spot "zone, and because the applicant had created the situation himself. When asked what future she saw for this Lot 7, she responded that she saw it being sold to the owner of the adjacent Lot 9 in order to make that a legal 20,000 sq. ft. lot. Community Development Director John LaTourelle added that there was another complication and he referred to the Planning Commission Minutes of this hearing in which Harlan .Bell, the owner of Lot 9, said he had a contractual agreement that his lot would-be 20,000 sq. ft. Mr. LaTourelle said if 'be 'requirement Lot 7 is sold, Mr. Bell's lot will nonconforming and his contractual could not be satisfied and he would then have to ask for a rezone also. Ms. Charleson then reviewed the guide- lines -for rezoning recently provided by the City Attorney's Office. With regard to conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, she said the proposal would not conform. Regarding the relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding property, Ms. Charleson said the lots to the north and east were zoned the same because of the topography and this lot should also be so zoned. Ahe pointed out that the lots to the south which are zoned RS-8 are flat and do not have the steep topography which the others have. She did not believe there had been any changes in the character or conditions of the surrounding neighborhood that would warrant a rezone on this site. With regard to the relative gain to the public as compared with the hard- ship imposed upon the individual owner, Ms. Charleson noted that the property owner to the east thought he had bought in an RS-20 zone and -he will not be happy to see another house so close to him: She said this proposed rezone would not promote any health, safety, or public welfare. Regarding the suitability of the property for the purpose for which it had been zoned, she said it was zoned RS-20 and she felt that was the purpose for which it was best suited. The last crite- rion in regard to a "down zone" did not apply to this proposal. The public portion of the .hearing was opened. Herman Michelson, attorney representing Joe Orner, son of the applicant, said he believed the original zoning did not have to.do with ravines or open space but it was to take care of the out - fall and effluent because there were no sewers there at that time. Mr. Michelson.reviewed the incident of the.road not being built in the right-of-way, leading:up to the'current vacation pro- posal. He said that when Harlan Bell spoke at the Planning Commission hearing he did not object to Mr. Orner's application, he only wanted it noted where the vacated property would go. Mr. Michelson felt a new house on the property would improve the value of the neighborhood. He said what Mr. Orner had done had not been illegal --;.he had only sold his existing house and left a sub- standard lot. He said Reid, Middleton & Associates had advised that the lot is between 8,000 and 10,000 sq. ft. and will be more when the street is vacated. Mr. Michelson felt.the best use of the property would be to build a house on it; otherwise there would be a vacant lot that would accomplish nothing. While Mr. Michelson was speaking, Councilman Nordquist arrived (8:30 p.m.). Joe Orner of 22715 95th P1. W. said his father had bought a lot of property from Joe Orner's grandfather and now he, Joe,.was trying to buy one piece from his father but was being prevented from doing so because'of so much "red tape." He said he could not afford to build a house and that was all he had for a future. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Councilman Herb said he was inclined to move for approval, not because the proposal met the criteria, but because he did not see any harm if it were approved. He did not think it .would seriously affect anyone. Councilman Clement said he was sympathetic with Joe Orner's.intents, but that piece of property should not exist. He said it was created by a substandard subdivision. Also, by approving this lot the original lot.that was divided into three lots could result in four lots if Lot 6 were subdivided. That would result in increased density, and he felt no rezone should be MOTION: approved which would increase density. Councilman Carns agree. COUNCILMAN CARNS THEN MOVED,, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO UPHOLD P.C. RESOLUTION.583, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE APPLI- CATION TO REZONE CERTAIN PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE,OF1l74TH S.W. AND EAST OF 72ND AVE. W. Councilman Gould advised at this time that he had been represented .by Michelson &.Gallagher on some personal legal matters, but he had consulted the City Attorney who advised him that in no. • way would that be a conflict of interest but that he should disclose it. He said he did not think it would influence him on this issue. He said that in reviewing the guidelines for rezoning he saw that the preponderance of the issues indicated this property should not be rezoned. Council- man Naugh.ten said he was sympathetic with Joe Orner but he felt opposed to anything that created more density. He did.not think the arguments justified rezoning the property. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMAN HERB VOTING NO' AND WITH COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST ABSTAINING BECAUSE HE HAD COME IN LATE AND HAD NOT HEARD ALL THE TESTIMONY. HEARING ON P.C. RESOLUTION 581, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE TO EXTEND PERIOD IN WHICH REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS MUST BE INSTALLED OR BONDS SUBMITTED FOR PRD'S (File ZO-3-78) Assistant, City Planner Noelle Charleson stated that in recently approved PRD's there had been re- quests by the developers for extension from three months to one year on the period permitted to install required.improvements.- She said it usually takes at least six or seven months to get all the engineering work done and when weather conditions are added to that a full year really is necessary. She said she did not believe there'wou•ld be any significant adverse effects from the proposal, and she recommended approval. The public portion of the hearing was opened, no one MOTION: wished to speak, and the public portion was closed. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 1983 PURSUANT TO P.C. RESOLUTION 581. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON P.C. RESOLUTION 582, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONING CODE AMENDMENT CHANGING THE PROCEDURE FOR APPEAL OF ADB DECISIONS. (File ZO-2-78) Assistant City Planner Noelle Charleson stated that the Council had requested a revision to the appeal procedure .on ADB decisions so that appeals would be filed only with the.City Clerk. When this matter went .before the Planning Commission they felt all appeals should go to the Council posthaste so they recommended that the 45-day period 'in which the .City Council must take action be shortened to 15 days. Ms. Charleson felt.15 days may be too short a period if one of the Council meetings in that.period is a work meeting, so she recommended a 30-day period. She said she understood the Mayor had recommended 20 days and she said that would be adequate. She said an • environmental analysis had been done and the procedural change should not have any significant 202 March 21, 1978 - continued adverse impacts. She recommended approval. The public portion of the hearing was opened, no one • wished to speak, and the public portion was closed. Councilman Carns noted that the ADB meets on the first Wednesday of the month and the Council has a work meeting in the second week and an appeal would not be appropriate for a work meeting. He was in favor of the 30-day period as it would give both the Staff and the applicant enough time. ,He said it should not be a burden to either the applicant or the Staff. Councilman Herb was in favor of the Mayor's proposal of 20 days. Councilman Gould favored the 30-day period as it would give the Staff more flixibility in case there were some untoward situation. He noted that it did provide for a measure of speeding up the process, and he felt it was important to do a good job of preparation. He felt if they could have it ready in less time that would be fine but he MOTION: favored allowing 30 days. COUNCILMAN GOULD THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 1984 PURSUANT TO P.C. RESOLUTION 582, WITH THE PROVISION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WILL HEAR ALL ADB APPEALS WITHIN 30 DAYS. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON P.C. RESOLUTION 584, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE TO ALLOW JOINT RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS USE OF BUILDING IN BN, BC, AND CW ZONES (File ZO-8-77_�__ Assistant City Planner Noelle Charleson said it had come to the Planning Division's attention that residential uses over shops in the BC zone -are not permitted by the code. The code pro- vides that residential uses in the BC zone are permitted "as regulated therein" in "R" section of the code, but the "R" section does not permit such. She said a number of business license applications had come in from people who wanted to have offices in apartment buildings, and there are quite a number of nonconforming uses such as this throughout the City. She said the CG zone is not included in this because no residential structures are permitted in the CG zone on High- way 99. She reviewed the various sections of the proposed amendment and recommended approval. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Roger Hertrich of 10.20. Puget Dr. asked if there were any projects pending on this proposal. Comm- munity Development Director John LaTourelle responded that_there is a proposed development on 196th. Councilman Carns stated that this proposal had been "in the mill" for a long time and it was not because of any one development. Mr. Hertrich felt that proposal would be a good example to use to demonstrate how the proposed change will affect the area. Mr. LaTourelle responded that the di- mensional requirements for the mixed use will be more restrictive. Jane Cunningham of 1030 Grandview described the development to which Mr. Hertrich-referred as having three businesses on the ground floor and an apartment on the upper floor. Her.,property is adjacent and she said the development would create a large wall '10' from her property. She said the present design will be disastrous to her property. She said the area is unique in that there is RS-12 completely sur- rounding the BN zoning at that'location. She did not believe there was sufficient parking pro- vided by the development. Don VanDriel said the proposed development at 1300 Olympic View Dr. was his. He said he had removed an unsightly gas station from the neighborhood and the BN zoning there would permit the use of 5,500 sq. ft., whereas he only proposed to use 3,996 sq. ft. for his building. He went on to describe the proposed building, illustrating that it would be far less imposing than what would be permitted in the BN zone. The public portion of the hearing was then MOTION: closed. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 1985 PURSUANT TO P.C. RESOLUTION 584. Councilman Gould commented that in taking this action he felt the direction was helpful in that the requirements were more restrictive in every aspect: THE MOTION THEN CARRIED. HEARING TO AUTHORIZE A NEEDED MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT (WATER TANK) TO EXCEED ZONING CODE REQUIREMENTS. Assistant City Planner Noelle Charleson stated that the City Council may allow certain municipal improvements to exceed zoning code restrictions, provided.the Council makes certain findings. She reviewed those requirements. The variances -the Council was being asked to permit were: (1) That the the water tank be a maximum of 50' in height (46' high structure plus any roof appurtenances); (.2) That it be a minimum of 18' from Summit Lane to the west, 30' from the north property line, and no setback from the unopened right-of-way east of the site; and (3) That itcover 60% of the lot. Ms. Charleson said the code states that all municipal improvements must meet a 25' set- back or the height of the structure, in this case 46'. The Council was being asked to waive this • requirement. Ms. Charleson showed the location of the proposed water tank, noting that there is a public right-of-way east of the property that never has been opened. The proposed color of the tank was metallic pale green or blue. The capacity would be 3,000,000 gallons. The existing zoning of this property is.RML. An environmental review had been made, with.the finding that the proposed water tank will not have a significant adverse environmental impact on the area. Reasons were stated in a memorandum from the Community Development Director to the Mayor, dated March 16, 1978. Some of those reasons were: The tank will not be taller than the existing tank, but it will be taller than other buildings in the area. There will be substantial landscaping, including 14' high. plantings with. branches low to the ground. There is a large laurel hedge on the north side which will remain. With the planned landscaping the tank should not be very visible except when looking directly up. The.tank will generate no noise once construction is completed. The City will try every means to minimize or mitiagate any adverse effects on the neighborhood. Ms. Charleson showed slides of the site of the proposed water tank. Councilman Nordquist questioned the need for a larger tank. Public Works Director Leif Larson responded that the major reason is for fire protection. In addition, it will reduce the peak demands during heavy usage periods. Assistant City Engineer Dick Allen showed slides of renderings of how the proposed tank would look. John Olson of Reid, Middleton & Associates said it was not feasible to put the tank under- ground at this site and he said they did not see anything in the area that would be comparable to th.is site because of its elevation. He said there are structural problems when you even put such a tank part way into the ground because of the expansion of the tank when it is filled. Council- man Carns noted that the ADB review of this proposal had been very brief, and he was disappointed in that. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Dr. Robert Suchert of 8430 Main St. said his property had been condemned for this and now the City was proposing to build all the way to the right-of-way. He was strongly against the proposal and said when he so-ld the property he had stipulated that the large cedar trees on the periphery of the property would not be removed if at all possible, but this proposal would cause their March 21, 1978 - continued " .203 • 1 1 1 removal. He suggested the Fire Department's parking lot be used instead of going all the way to the right-of-way. MRs. Robert Bell of 8523 Bowdoin submitted photographs of the present water tank which demonstrated the lack of landscaping.' She said the City was impacting a stable neighbor- hood with water tanks and.a fire station. She felt the tank should be underground. Regarding the lack of landscaping at the present tank, Public -Works Director Leif Larson said that at the time that tank was.constructed aesthetics were not considered so much as they are now. He said the underground tanks at Yost Park and in the Seaview area are only half the size of this pro- posed tank so undergrounding was more feasible for them. The public portion of the hearing was then closed. In answer to a question, John Olson said.the costs to underground this tank wouldbe about four times the costs to build it as proposed, and more land would be required. He said various sites had been considered for this, and.this was the best site.in the City. He suggested that the right-of-way could be relocated. City Attorney Jim Murphy suggested that the Council could consider purchasing the homes of the neighbors who felt their homes were offenced by the tank, then build the tank and resell the homes at the depreciated values. He said that would be less costly than taking another site. Councilman Clement noted that if a builder were requesting all the stated variances,based on less cost, the variances would not be granted. Mr. Larson responded that the City needs this, that the .proposal was being asked for the benefit of all of the City: Community Development Director John LaTourel l e noted that when the unopened ri ght=of-way-,, i:s :,paved�i i,tr could"be�ipaved )on the easterly side of the right-of-way instead of in the center. A MOTION WAS THEN MADE BY COUNCILMAN HERB, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, TO AUTHORIZE THE WATER TANK AT FIVE CORNERS, EXCEEDING ZONING CODE RESTRICTIONS: AND'THAT THE COUNCIL FINDS: (A) THAT) -THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT IS NECESSARY FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE;'(B) THAT THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT IS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE SERVICES OR FACILITIES NOW OR IN THE FUTURE FOR THE RES- IDENTS OF THE CITY; (C) THAT THE MEASURE, QUANTITY OR AMOUNT BY WHICH.THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT WILL EXCEED RESTRICTIONS IS THE MINIMUM EXCESS NEEDED IN ORDER TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY SERVICE OR FACILITIES; and (D) THAT REASONABLE EFFORTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO MINIMIZE OR MITIGATE THE EFFECT OF THE MUNICIPAL IMPROVEMENT WHEN IT IS PERMITTED TO EXCEED THE RESTRICTIONS —Councilman Gould felt he would like to see other alternatives_ to this proposal. Councilman Carns was in favor of the motion because he felt the -proposal was necessary for the health, safety, and general welfare of the City. He said that if the Engineering Department or the consulting engineering firm had held out any hope that there would be other alternatives at reasonable cost, then -he would vote against the.motion. He felt that by postponing this decision -the Council would be holding out some hope for the neighbors, and he did not think there was any hope. Councilman Clement said he would -not support the motion as he felt the City should obey restrictions as well as anyone else: Councilman Nordquist alsowas against the motion, saying he did not see any written materialrfrom Reid, Middleton & Associates.to substantiate their findings, 'and he wanted to see something more substantial supporting one method or the other. Mr. Larson responded that he felt the report that was the basis.for floating the bond issue for the water tank reflected the findings. Mr. Olson then read from that report the part that addressed underground storage. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS.HERB, CARNS, AND NAUGHTEN VOTING YES, AND COUNCIL.MEMBERS. CLEMENT, ALLEN, NORDQUIST, AND GOULD VOTING NO. THE MOTION FAILED. COUNCILMAN CARNS THEN SAID HE WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE HIS VOTE TO NO AND, BEING ON THE PREVAILING SIDE, HE MOVED THAT THE FIVE CORNERS PROPOSED WATER TANK MATTER BE SCHEDULED AGAIN FOR APRIL 18, 1978, WITH MORE INPUT FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND REID, MIDDLETON & ASSOCIATES. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN SECONDED..THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED. There was no further business to come before the Council, and the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. IRENE VARNEY MORAN, 91TY CLERK March 28, 1978 1 HARVE H. HARRISON, MAYOR The regular meeting of the Edmonds.City Council was called to order .at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor. Harve Harrison in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. PRESENT STAFF PRESENT Harve Harrison, Mayor Charles Dibble, M.A.A. Mike Herb Leif Larson, Public Works Director Phil Clement John LaTourelle, Community Development Director Katherine Allen Rod Garretson, Park Planning & Recreation Director - -John Nordquist Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk Ray Gould Art Housler, Finance Director Tom Carns John Wallace, City Attorney Larry Naughten Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Harrison advised that the Staff had requested that Item.(C), Approval of Equipment Rental Rates for 1978, be removed from.this evening's agenda. A MOTION WAS MADE BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, SECONDED BY._000NCILMAN GOULD, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The balance of the Consent Agenda contained the following: (A) Roll call. (B) Approval of Minutes of March 21, 1978. (D) Acknowledgeme t-of receipt of Claim for Damages from Robert L. Brubaker, Jr., in the amount of $68.07. 0