<br />• June 19, 1979 - continued
<br />Council, in which he stated his.objections to the rezone action taken last week. He said the major
<br />problem which appeared to influence the Council was the water.runoff which he stated was not caused
<br />by these lots but by the lots above, and the open pasture and temporary road on these lots were
<br />obvious places for the water to show. He felt this --was spot.zoning and he and Etta Morehouse were
<br />being penalized while other lots.around them were being,developed.as RS -6 lots. He said no drainage
<br />plan would be required if the lots..were developed as RS -12., but as RS -6 --they would be short platted
<br />and a drainage plan would be required— Further, that the minimum sized lot that could be developed
<br />would be 7,200 sq. ft. because of.Shellabarger Creek. Dean Shepherd, attorney.for Etta Morehouse,
<br />also had submitted a letter requesting.the Council to give this matter further consideration. After
<br />discussion with the Staff regarding:the various issues,.the Council agreed to reconsider the matter.
<br />MOTION: COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED.BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, TO REHEAR THE SUBJECT REZONE MATTER ON JULY
<br />10, 1979. MOTION CARRIED. City,Attorney Doug Albright who arrived during this discussion suggested
<br />it might be proper to send this back to the Planning Commission and he advised that City Attorney
<br />John Wallace should be present.la.ter.in the evening to advise on that. Mr. Wallace did not arrive
<br />and during the meeting Mr. Albright.had.an opportunity to review the file, after which he advised
<br />that he felt a rehearing before the Council would be proper.
<br />Mayor Harrison advised that he had..received a memorandum from.the Community Development Director
<br />indicating that the Proposed Amendment to the RMD Zone, scheduled for hearing on July 17, 1979, will
<br />be incorporated into the first -phase of the Code revision, scheduled to be considered on July 24,
<br />1979. It was -therefore requested that the Council review the RMD amendment as part of the Code
<br />MOTION: revision on July 24. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED.BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, THAT THE PROPOSED
<br />AMENDMENT TO THE RMD ZONE BE REVIEWED JULY 24, 1979 WITH THE FIRST PHASE -OF THE CODE REVISION.
<br />MOTION CARRIED.
<br />• Mayor Harrison asked for the Council's confirmation of his.appointment of John Hodgin to the Planning
<br />Commission. Mr. Hodgin was interviewed by the Council prior,to this evening's meeting. COUNCILMAN
<br />MOTION: CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO CONFIRM THE,MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF JOHN.HODGIN TO
<br />POSITION 1 ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION., TERM TO EXPIRE OCTOBER 9, 1979. MOTION CARRIED. -
<br />Mayor Harrison announced that the quarterly meeting of the Association of Snohomish County Cities
<br />and Towns will be held June 28, 1979. at Lake Stevens. Councilwoman Allen indicated she would attend.
<br />James McAnally of 730 Elm St. said it.had been his understanding that the alder trees on the City
<br />property at 7th and Elm were to be topped but it appeared that action was stopped. He said his
<br />property had been assessed as view property but in another year he would not have a view because of
<br />those trees. Sharon Blossey of 1210.8th Ave. S. said in 1976 the neighbors had contributed $600 to
<br />plant trees and have these topped—Councilman Carns corrected her, saying those funds were to plant
<br />trees, not for topping. He said the -trees were cut three years ago and the runoff caused erosion to
<br />the property below. He advised Mr...McAnally that the Council had discussed this -on May 22;. 1979 and
<br />reaffirmed their November 2 4 1978 decision that no trees.would be removed except1for three specific
<br />reasons. He stated further that the Council had stated in May that there would-be no cutting of
<br />trees on that property. He explained.that at one time all.the.neighbors in favor of cutting the
<br />trees come in,.and the next time all thoseopposed come in,: and the Council cannot change its position
<br />with each change in the audience. Councilwoman Allen added that there are tall firs growing all
<br />over the City which are diminishing views, but the City cannot start trimming all those trees. She
<br />said a view has never been able to.be guaranteed and she was.not ready to start guaranteeing people
<br />views. Councilman Naughten commented that with private property a person has to try to work -with
<br />the property owner, and that was what these people were trying to do. He felt the City could come
<br />up with some kind of policy to cut a specified portion of a tree if the party were willing to -pay
<br />for it. Don Forgey of 724 Elm St..said his property had been assessed for view property and most of
<br />his view was of alders. Councilman.Carns said the only way he would consider discussing this topic MOTION: again was if everyone involved were present. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN,
<br />THAT ON AUGUST 7, 1979 THE COUNCIL HEAR THE TREE CUTTING/TRIMMING ISSUE, AND THAT THE AGENDA BE
<br />CLOSED TO OTHER MATTERS.. Councilman Carns.said he would like.everybody invited to that hearing who
<br />had spoken regarding the 7th and Elm property during the past four years. Councilman Naughten said
<br />that included in the discussion should -be whether the property should be sold or kept. THE MOTION
<br />HEARING.ON_FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL,, LID 205, BELL ST. PAVING
<br />City Engineer Fred Herzberg described the.LID. The preliminary estimate had been $8.14 per zone
<br />front foot, but the final cost was $8.71 per zone front.foot because of the required removal of
<br />several trees not included in the.original estimate. There were no people in the audience for this
<br />item, so Mr. Herzberg assumed the people involved were satisfied. The public portion of the hearing
<br />MOTION: was opened, no one wished to speak,: -and the public portion was closed. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED,
<br />SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST.,.:TO-ADOPT.ORDINANCE 2074, APPROVING AND CONFIRMING THE FINAL ASSESSMENT
<br />ROLL FOR LID 205. MOTION CARRIED.
<br />HEARING ON PETITION FOR VACATION<OF:.PORTION OF DAYTON ST..,'EAST:OF 9TH AVE. S.
<br />Assistant City Planner Mary Lou Block.said,this petition.had been heard by the Planning Commission
<br />on April 11, 1979 at which time they, recommended denial. The,Community Development Department and
<br />the Public Works Department also had.,recommended denial because.vacating of the right-of-way would
<br />force one or two lots to access from an unimproved alley and would block their street access. Ms.
<br />Block demonstrated on a map which properties would be affected.... The public portion.of the hearing
<br />was opened. An unidentified gentleman thanked the Staff for..recommending denial of this proposal.
<br />MOTION: The public portion of the hearing was.closed. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST,
<br />TO UPHOLD P.C. RESOLUTION 622,.DENYING THE. PETITION TO VACATE A PORTION OF DAYTON ST., EAST OF 9TH
<br />AVE. S. MOTION CARRIED.