19790724 City Council Minutes400
•
July 17, 1979 (continued)
Councilman Nordquist asked for information as to the height of the trees on the 7th and Elm property
MOTION: in light of the upcoming hearing. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, THAT
THE CITY'ENGINEER SHOOT A TRANSIT FROM ONE CORNER TO THE OTHER TO GET A TREE LINE. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Harrison asked that the height be provided from the base as well as from Elm..
Councilman Nordquist announced his candidacy for City Council.
Councilman Herb said he would like to attend an American Management seminar, Basic Project Management,
to be held in Seattle in August. No objection from the Council was voiced.
A letter had
been received appealing a.July 5, 1979 ADB
decision regarding Bayside Used Furniture
MOTION: (ADB-32-79).
COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED,SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO SCHEDULE THE APPEAL OF
THE ADB DECISION REGARDING ADB-32-79 FOR JULY 24, 1979.
MOTION CARRIED.
There was no
further business to come before the Council
and the meeting was adjourned.at 9:05 p.m.
IRENE VARNEY
MORAN, My. Clerk
HARVE H. HARRISON, Mayor
July 24, 1979
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. All present joined in the flag salute.
PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor Bill Kasper Charles Dibble, M.A.A.
Mike Herb Leif Larson, Public Works Director
Katherine Allen John LaTourelle, Community Develop. Dir.
Ray Gould Dan Prinz, Acting Police Chief
John Nordquist Jack Weinz, Acting Fire Chief
Tom Carns Fred Herzberg, City Engineer
Larry Naughten Mary Lou Block, Asst. City Planner
Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
Mayor Harrison welcomed Mayor Alice Tawresey from the City of Winslow.
CONSENT AGENDA
Councilman Carns asked.that Items (D) and (G) be removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMAN CARNS
MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, 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 July.17, 1979.
(C) Report on bids opened July 19, 1979.for sale of City-owned.vehicles and awarding bids as
follows: Unit 7 to Charles Day for $780; Unit 50 to Peterman Roofing for $800; Unit 39 to
Currie Construction for $7,253; Unit 19 to McCubbins for $5,779.98; Unit 42 to Ostman
Enterprises for $1,595; and Unit 368 to Mrs. G. Brogger for $502. The above bids did not
include sales tax. Units 15, 36, and 464 will be readvertised.
(E) Setting date of August 21, 1979.for hearing on preliminary approval of Pine Ridge Estates,
17-lot subdivision south of 202nd S.W. and west of 84th Ave. W. (File P-6-79)
(F) Setting date of August 21, 1979 for hearing on preliminary approval of 8-lot plat at 17729
72nd Ave. W.. (Donald Pulver - File P-5-79)
(H) Adoption of Ordinance 2079 vacating portion of property north of 199th and west of 76th
(File ST-8-79)
(I) Adoption of Ordinance 2080.vacating port.ion of the right-of-way along 76th Ave. W. between
224th S:W. and intersection of 76th Ave. W. and Pacific..Highway 99 (File ST-4-79)
(J) Adoption of Ordinance 2081 amending Official Street Map by reducing the designated right-
of-way on 76th Ave. W. between 224th S.W. and the intersection of 76th Ave. W. and Pacific
Highway 99 from 70' to 60' (File ST-4-79)
1
•
1
1
0
•
July 24, 1979 - continued
FINAL PLAN APPROVAL: PARKSIDE.WEST .-..PP,D LOCATED AT N. MEADOWDALE RD., 68TH AVE. Ins.,
AND 64TH S.-W:; AND ADOPTION.OF ORDINANCE CHANGING ZONING FROM..RS-20.'TO PRD PRD-4-77) [Item (D) on
Consent Agenda
Councilman-Carns removed this .item from the Consent Agenda because tie wished to vote against it
MOTION:
because it was devoid of single-family homes. COUNCILWOMAN.ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
NAUGHTEN, TO APPROVE ITEM (D) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, ADOPTING.ORDINANCE 2082. MOTION CARRIED, WITH
COUNCILMAN CARNS VOTING NO.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION STATING INTENTION TO ANNEX PORTION OF.74TH AVE. lnl.., AND SETTING HEAPING DATE
Item G on Consent Agenda
Councilman Carns removed this item from the Consent Agenda at the request of the City Attorney.
City Attorney Wayne Tanaka stated that it was necessary.that.the Council authorize the Mayor to sign
the petition onbehalf of the City as property owner, then approve the annexation and set a hearing
date to hear any objections. This property is owned by the City of Edmonds and lies within the
MOTION:
boundaries of Snohomish County. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED .BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO AUTHORIZE
Amended
THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE PETITION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY AS PROPERTY OWNER, TO APPROVE OF THE PROPOSED
ANNEXATIONl, AND TO SET A HEARING. DATE OF SEPTEMBER 25, 1979. Councilman Nordquist noted that thereis
one more lot next to this that has never been annexed and he.felt it would be a.courtesy to
invite the property owner to join.in the annexation :;,.000NC�ILMAN.CARNS.:MO.VED TO AMEND HIS MOTION,
Amendment
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT THIS ANNEXATION BEHELD IN ABEYANCE FOR TWO WEEKS•AND THAT
GORDON LINDSTROM BE ASKED WHETHER HE WOULD LIKE TO PARTICIPATE AND, IF SO, THAT HE -BE ALLOWED TO BE
INCLUDED; OTHERWISE, THE ANNEXATION. PROCEEDINGS WILL COMMENCE WITHOUT HIM. THE MOTION TO AMEND
CARRIED. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, THEN CARRIED.
•
AUDIENCE
Al Bailey of 825 Sprague requested that the Council consider the preservation and rehabilitation of
Shell Creek. He said that through the years the people living north of Caspers had pooled the creek
in their yards and he would like to know whether the City had received reports -from the State Natural
Resource Commission. He felt there -had to be some interest in a creek of this nature and he wanted
MOTION:
to start some action in that direction. COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO
SET AUGUST 14, 1979 TO CONSIDER THE REQUEST FOR ACTION TOWARDS THE PRESERVATION AND REHABILITATION
OF SHELL CREEK... MOTION CARRIED.
George Boden, representing a Meadowdale area committee, said.they wished to continue to object to
the approval of the Parkside West PRD. -He felt there had been violations of the State Environmental
Protection Act for failure to complete an EIS, that there was a violation of the Appearance of
Fairness Doctrine because the architect for the project is on the ADB, there were violations of the
PRD ordinance, and there was a violation of the spirit of the Meadowdale area moratorium. He added
that to their knowledge the builder and applicant for the PRD did not own the land.
Bill Crow.of 338 3rd St. S. complained about the parking problem on 3rd Ave., saying some cars are
parked there continually, day and night. He was advised that this problem was scheduled for discussion
later this evening.
Several persons from the 209=210 block of 81st P1. W. complained about problems in water pressure,
foreign matter in the water, and unhardened tar in the street which clings to shoes and is carried
into the homes. Parties speaking were Tom Sharp, Carol Meyers, Monte Ritter, Mike Carr,.and Bill
Newell. They also objected to the $3 charge on their water bills for improvement to the water
system when their service in fact had greatly deteriorated. Public Works Director. Leif Larson
responded that when the new water tank at Five Corners goes into service, probably at the end of
August, the water pressure problem will be resolved. Councilman Gould suggested 'that a deadhead
pressure, reading be taken and then be taken again after the Five Corners tank is in service.
MOTION: COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, THAT THE COUNCIL BE GIVEN A REPORT ON THE
STATED PROBLEMS AND THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY AUGUST 7, 1979 AND THAT A COPY OF THE REPORT BE SENT TO ONE
OF THE 81ST PL. W. SPOKESMEN. Bill Newell said he was experienced at laying pipe and he had never
seen as shabby a contracting ,job as was done on the water line project on their street. He also
noted that 13 of the homes have been assessed for it and 3 have not. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED.
HEARING ON P,.C...RESOLUTION 627 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN.APPLICATION FOR A SHORELINES
MANAGEMENT SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT:PERMIT TO SUBDIVIDE INTO TWO LOTS A PARCEL OF
PROPERTY WITHIN 200' OF LAKE BALLINGER File SM-2-79
Assistant City Planner Mary Lou Block stated that the Planning Commission had approved this on June 13,.
1979. The lots involved are.two.lots of a four -lot subdivision and all RS-12 zoning requirements
were met. The Community Development Department recommended approval because it was consistent with
the designation .of the Edmonds Shorelines Management Master. Program and the Edmonds Policy Plan.
Details of the proposal were provided in the Planning Commission minutes. The public portion of the
hearing was opened, no one wished to speak, and the public portion was closed. Councilman Nordquist
said he had received some telephone calls from neighbors in this area which appeared to support the
MOTION: recommendation of the Planning Commission. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
CARNS, TO APPROVE THE SHORELINES.MANAGEMENT SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR SM-2-79, PURSUANT TO
P.C. RESOLUTION 627. MOTION CARRIED.
APPEAL OF:.ADB..DECISION ON.APPROVAL OF.FURNITURE STORE AT SOUTHWEST CORNER OF 5TH-AND WALNUT
(Bayside Used'Furniture - ADB-32-79
Councilman Carns advised that he had discussed with the City Attorney his position on this matter
and the City Attorney had suggested.that he not participate..because of a possible Appearance of
Fairness Doctrine violation. Councilman Carns disagreed with the.City Attorney's opinion and explained
that the applicant and he had done business over the years and,the applicant is a close friend of
Councilman Carns' brother. On the other hand an employee of Councilman Carns had spoken in opposition
402
July 24, 1979 - continued
to the development at the ADB meeting. Councilman Carns said he would step down if anyone on
the Council felt he should. Councilman Herb said he was sure Councilman Carns would be fair
and objective but the whole point of the Doctrine is that if there is even a remote possibility
of not being objective then a cloud is created. He felt Councilman Carns should step down. Council-
men Naughten and Nordquist also stated they felt he should step down. Councilman Carns then left
the Council Chambers. Community Development Director John LaTourelle said this matter had been
heard by the ADB twice, receiving approval at the second hearing. Minutes of those meetings had
been provided to the Council. Mr. LaTourelle read a letter from Warren LaFon, a member of the ADB,
in which he stated that'_he felt the design of this building to be of high quality and one of the
best to come before the ADB in some time. Mr. LaFon stated further that this building is the only
building in the area except for the Shoreline Savings Bank which has architectural merit and that
the ADB made the only decision that could be made on this, on its own mer.it and not on past decisions.
It was noted that Jack McClellan, the designer of the building being discussed, was present to
represent the applicant. Assistant City Planner Mary Lou Block displayed drawings of the proposal.
It had been, redes:i,gned..at;:the,�request .'of'. the, ADB 'after the*:first hearing in order to lower it, and
the height from the mean elevation was 31'6" or, measured from the sidewalk on 5th Ave., 29'6". For
comparison, Ms. Block gave the heights of several buildings in the general area. The bank across
the street and also on the west side of 5th Ave. measures 33' at the sidewalk, the Finnegan Apartments
building at 4th and Walnut is 35', and the Raymond Apartments building is 33'. These are within
viewing distance of the proposal, and there are also numerous buildings which are lower. Ms. Block
approximated Milltown to be 30' high on the 5th Ave. side, possibly more.. Mr. LaTourelle commented
that the owners of the VonMax Restaurant had approached the City to discuss adding a second story to
their building. He also noted that the property on the west side of 5th Ave. is somewhat lower than
that on the east side. The public portion of the hearing was then opened. A number of people spoke
in opposition to the proposal, feeling it was too high and stating it would take away their views
and reduce their -property values. In general they felt the maximum height should be 25'. Some
stated that to allow this would create a precedent and open the way for more tall buildings and
•
Edmonds would then lose the quaintness and charm which the citizens valued. Speaking in opposition
were Joe Calman, 524 Walnut; Louise Dwyer, 529 Holly; Jean Yost, 536 Walnut, William Mathias,
543 Holly; Steve Dwyer, 529 Holly; Joanne Childers, 546 Walnut; Jane Morck, 525 Holly; John
McCoy, Pine St.; Joseph Dwyer,.529 Holly; and Cynthia Baker, 529 Walnut. Jack McClellan,
designer of the.building, said they had met all the criteria set by the Building Department,
,Planning.Commission,.and ADB, and they had no desire to create a hardship for anyone, but they
wished to build on their property within the rights set forth in this City. Ken Mattson of 725
Daley, a member of the ADB, said if they were to go along with the immediate neighborhood's desires
then the City would end up with a whole row of 25', flat roofed buildings, and that is not quaint or
desirable. He said the ADB had worked.with the.designer and owner at several meetings and they were
extremely cooperative. He said this was one of the few buildings where the builders had gone out of
their way and spared no expense and they had done a very good job, and to change their product at
this point would be.like sawing a classic painting in half to make it smaller and not block view.
He said the City needs variety, the highs and the lows, and there are parameters within which a
person can develop his property. He felt that if the Council were to find that 25' was better than
the allowed height then that might be a spot rezone. Further, he advised the Council that if they
had any reservations about this project he strongly recommended a Council/ADB work session so they
could see what would happen if they cut the height arbitrarily, and they essentially would be telling
the owner that other people have the 35' privilege but he does not. Carol McCrary, one of the
owners of the subject property, said they were not providing a daylight basement as some of the
speakers had suggested because of drainage --they had been told by Mr. Winters that they would cause
him flooding problems if they used a daylight basement. She said the furniture they handle is
unique and needs the height proposed for the upper floor. The public portion of the hearing was then
closed. Councilman Naughten commented that, design -wise, this was a beautiful piece of work and the
ADB had done a good job in reviewing it from all aspects. His position, however, was that this is a
small community and the Council has to be sensitive to the impact such buildings have on the neighborhood.
He felt people values were more important than building design, especially when views were involved.
He felt the profile of 5th Ave. was low and the roof of the proposed building provided no function
except aesthetic design. Councilman Gould said the ADB had done a very fine job and he liked what
they had done. He had attended the last ADB hearing on this issue and he noted that they had gone
by their guidelines. He felt the issue now was one of policy and that there was something unique
about the building height in this situation, that being the location of the building relative to
the other residences in the nearby area. He noted that this building.could be put in some areas of
Edmonds that would not impact the area. He agreed that the Council should work with the ADB as
suggested by•Mr. Mattson, and he felt a..change may be needed in the policies under which the ADB can
operate. Councilwoman Allen said.she had been in the applicants' present store and they do have
large pieces of furniture. She noted that this site is.a part of the commercial zone and the City
has goals and policies regarding commercial land use. She agreed that the Council should meet with
MOTION:
the ADB and that it should be done prior to making a decision on this matter. MRS. ALLEN THEN MOVED
THAT ADB-32-79 BE REMANDED TO THE ADB AND THAT THE COUNCIL INVITE THEMSELVES TO ATTEND THAT ADB
Withdrawn
MEETING. City Attorney Wayne Tanaka advised the Council of what actions they could take in this
matter, after which COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN WITHDREW HER MOTION. Councilman Nordquist felt the Council
possibly should have addressed view sensitive areas previously, and he felt 25'- 26' height should
be the maximum for this piece of property.. Councilman Herb stated that the issue is that the City
wants taste and taste means expense, and to justify that there has to be size. He thought it was
important that.this was the first time the ADB had actually.communicated to the Council to urge them
MOTION:
to approve something. It bothered him that if this building were reduced to 25' a tasteful building
would be lost. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
NORDQUIST, THAT THE APPLICANT
BE ASKED TO MODIFY THE DESIGN TO A HEIGHT NO MORE THAN 25' FROM THE 5TH AVE. SIDEWALK AND TO RETURN
THE PLAN TO THE COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION, THIS MOTION BEING MADE FOR THE REASONS HE STATED EARLIER.
Councilman Gould noted that the Policy Plan refers to "other related problems" and he felt they were
developing'a new policy for the City. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS
NAUGHTEN, NORDQUIST, AND GOULD VOTING YES, AND WITH
MOTION:
COUNCIL MEMBERS HERB AND ALLEN VOTING NO.
MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN THEN.MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB, THAT A JOINT MEETING
WITH THE ADB BE SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 11, 1979 TO REVIEW POLICY PLANNING. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman
Carns then returned to the rostrum.
E
403-
• July 24, 1979 - continued
HEARING ON PETITION REQUESTING.:ONE=WAY.TRAFFIC, NO PARKING.AFTER.10:00 P.M., ETC., ON
SUNSET AVE". FROM MAIN TO CASPERS.', ALSO DISCUSSION OF 3RD..AVE....PARKING FROM MAIN TO
City Engineer Fred Herzberg discussed three possible plans which had evolved after the study.of this
situation. He displayed drawings .to explain them,and then recommended Plan C which he felt was the
most feasible. This would make Caspers one way, eastbound,,.between.2nd and 3rd, no parking on the
east side of Sunset, 4-hour parking on the west side of Sunset.until 10:00 p.m., no parking on the
west side of Sunset after 10:00 p.m., and no left turn from the ferry. The public portion of the
hearing was opened. A large number of residents of Sunset Ave. spoke, describing the problems.they
have experienced, especially since the closing of the beaches at night. They described drinking,
rowdiness, littering, obscene behavior, and destruction to their property, all on the part of young
people cruising and parking on,Sunset. Among those speaking were Shirley Pauls, 310 Sunset; Cecelia
Light, 342 Sunset; Herb Wright, 400 Sunset; Edith Wicker, 386 Sunset; Marion Pierce, 340 Sunset;.
Betty Gay, 206 Sunset; Rosemary Wells, 120 Edmonds; and Bob Morrison, 250 Beach P1. Rosemary Wells
felt if the parking were eliminated from.Sunset it would cause the offenders to move to 2nd. She
felt there should be some place for the young people to go and said they are going to get to the.
beach somehow.. Acting Police Chief Dan Prinz said he did not think the problem would progress to
2nd Ave. if Sunset were closed because 2nd is not that attractive. It was requested that consideration
be given to issuing some kind of permit to residents of Sunset.to let them or their guests park.
The plan proposed by Mr. Herzberg.was generally acceptable to the residents. The public portion of
MOTION: the hearing was closed. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY -COUNCILMAN HERB, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY
BE INSTRUCTED TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE INCORPORATING -PLAN C PRESENTED THIS EVENING, WHICH INCLUDES ONE-
WAY TRAFFIC EASTBOUND FROM 2ND TO 3RD AVE.; EXTENDING THE FOUR-HOUR PARKING NORTH ON SUNSET TO
CASPERS, ON THE WEST SIDE OF -THE STREET, UNTIL 10:00 P.M., AND NO PARKING ON THE WEST SIDE OF SUNSET
BETWEEN 10:00 P.M. AND 8:00 A.M.; NO PARKING ON THE EAST SIDE OF SUNSET; NO LEFT TURN FROM MAIN ST.
• TO SUNSET.; AND NO U-TURNS AT THE CORNER OF SUNSET AND CASPERS. MOTION CARRIED. 'Councilman Herb
felt the police officers would have to do more, even if it went -to patrolling in teams. He did not
think approaching it from an engineering viewpoint would solve the problem. Councilman Carns pointed
out that the City has only 28 police officers, the same number as it had in 1972, and the police can
make only so many calls. He did not think.they could do more until the Police"Department was expanded.
MOTION: COUNCILMAN HERB MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, THAT THE COUNCIL BE GIVEN AN UPDATED REPORT
ON AUGUST 21, 1979 REGARDING THE BOISTEROUS WATERFRONT PROBLEM, AND THAT A REPORT COME FROM THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT TO SEE IF BETTER CONTROL CAN BE GAINED. MOTION CARRIED.
Regarding the 3rd Ave. parking question, Bill Crow added to his earlier remarks, saying some of'the
cars remain parked there for weeks, and the street sweeper -cannot get down the street because of the
parked cars. Muryl Medina said -she has property at 318 3rd Ave. and parking is a problem. She felt
a four-hour parking restriction would be appropriate. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
MOTION: CARNS, THAT.THE CITY ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE RESTRICTING PARKING ON 3RD AVE. TO
FOUR HOURS., FROM MAIN ST. TO PINE ST.., ON BOTH SIDES. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Allen asked
that when the Police Department submits its review the budget implications involved be included,
such as patrolmen being downtown when they might be elsewhere,.and any other ramifications.
HEARING ON.P.C...RESOLUTION 626 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO OFFICIAL
STREET MAP TO EXTEND THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM HILLCREST PL., VIEST AND SOUTH TO
SHELL VALLEY RD. File ST-10-79
Assistant City Planner Mary Lou. Block distributed copies of a memorandum from the Fire Chief supporting
the extension of the public right-of-way from Hillcrest Pl.,.west and south to Shell Valley Rd.,
because the additional access would greatly improve response by all emergency vehicles. Details of
the proposal had been provided in the Planning Commission minutes on the matter. The action had
been Staff -initiated to provide potential additional access in -and out of Shell Valley. Ms. Block
indicated the grade to be approximately 10%. This currently was a private road and by putting it on
the Official Street Map it would be.assured that it would be developed to City standards. The
public portion of the hearing was opened. Charles LeWayne of 20829 Hillcrest P1. submitted and read
a letter signed by Hillcrest P1. residents requesting disapproval of the proposal. Mr. LeWayne said
they would not.object to extending the road and making it a deadend--their objection was to extending
it all the way.and making it a thoroughfare. Maybelle Chapman of 20915 Hillcrest 01. noted that
this proposal would not, in fact, be an extension of Hillcrest P1. as Hillcrest P1. is to the east.
The question was asked as to the status of Pioneer Way as access to Shell Valley. Community Development
Director John LaTourelle responded that from a traffic design and safety standpoint Hillcrest is
preferable as it has longer sight distances than Pioneer Way..�Andy Jaeger of 21322 Shell Valley
Way, President of the Shell Valley Homeowners' Association, said that association had made inquiries
about this proposal but had taken no action. He stated that after dark there is traffic on the
lower part of the proposed road, traffic that is contrary to the welfare of the neighborhood, as it
is suspected unlawful activities such as sales of drugs are taking place. He recommended.that the
proposal be approved and that the residents barricade the road -until it is developed. Another
gentleman stated that it had been barricaded but the cars.managed to go around the barricade. Mr.
Jaeger noted that one thing that came out of the Planning Commission meeting was the suggestion that
the whole Shell Valley situation be examined. Ms. Block added that the Planning Commission on the
next evening would be looking at the overall development of the valley. The public port ion of this
MOTION: hearing was closed. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY.000NCILMAN HERB,•THAT THE EXTENSION OF
HILLCREST PL. BE SENT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO BE CONSIDERED WITH THEIR OVERALL RECONSIDERATION
OF THE SHELL VALLEY PLAN, AND THAT THE COUNCIL'S INTENT BE STATED THAT THEY DO NOT WANT THIS ROAD TO
GO THROUGH --THAT THERE BE A TERMINUS WITHIN IT. MOTION CARRIED.
REVIEW AND:ADOPTION OF COMMUNITY-PEVELOPMENT:CODE (INCLUDING PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO RMO ZONE
Community Development Director John LaTourelle said the proposed amendment would allow small businI. esses
in the RMD zone by Conditional Use Permit. It would allow small businesses as the primary use in
existing single family homes and as secondary uses in mul.tiple dwellings; it would allow in -lieu
parking fees to be considered for RMD uses; it would establish additional criteria to be considered
in review of a proposed Conditional Use Permit for a small business use in -the RMD zone; and it`;
404
July 24, 1979 - continued
would establish additional criteria to be used by the-ADB in reviewing conversions of single family
homes in the RMD zone to small business uses. Mr. LaTourelle believed the ordinance would establish
strict standards that would preserve the low density residential character of those downtown areas
that may be rezoned to RMD, while allowing some flexibility of uses. The public portion of the
hearing was opened. Natalie Shippen of 1022 Euclid addressed questions to the Mayor and Council,
stating that they were questions of interpretation and opinion and asking that the questions not be
referred to the Staff. She felt the proposed ordinance was ambiguous and would allow the reintro-
duction of apartments and condominiums in the RMD zone. She questioned the Council about the
effects of the proposed amendment. Councilman Carns said the Council had already passed an ordinance
which prohibits multiple -family use in the BC zone, and another which would reduce density by 50% in
the RMD zone. He said he doubted that anyone on this Council would vote to increase density. Mrs.
Shippen made recommendations as to changing the amendment, but said she thought the original document
was preferable to this one. The public portion of the hearing was then closed. Councilman Carns
was opposed to the proposed amendment because it would increase business uses. COUNCILMAN CARNS
MOTION:
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO DENY THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE RMD ZONE. A ROLL
CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CARNS, NORDQUIST, GOULD, AND NAUGHTEN VOTING
YES, AND COUNCIL MEMBERS HERB AND ALLEN VOTING NO. MOTION CARRIED:
CONSIDERATION OF SIGNS INDICATING NORTH END OF CITY BEACH
It had been proposed by acitizen that a sign be placed at the northern boundary of the City beach
��
property that would read City property ends here. Public Works Director Leif Larson stated that
he felt informative signs should be kept to a minimum, whether on private or public property.
Further, he felt if the owners of tidelands want .the public off their beaches it should be their
responsibility to post applicable signs and replace them when vandalized. He said adding more signs
to public property means a higher maintenance cost for the City, and he recommended reducing the
number of signs in the parks, beaches, and other facilities, keeping them aesthetically pleasing.
•
Also, he said he did not feel a sign could be posted at the north end of the beach without it being
under water most of the time and covered with barnacles when it wasn't under water. Fremont Case,
the citizen requesting this sin said q g that since the tides had been low 9 he had twice had to call
the police to get drunks off the beach and stop them from taking more than the limit of clams. He
suggested the sign be put on Caspers saying "End of Public Beach" and on Water St. one or two signs
saying "West of here is private property." -Councilman Carns suggested that the private homeowners
post their property with "Private Property --No Trespassing." He felt that would be more effective.
He noted that too much of the City owned beach is mingled with private beach and the City cannot put
signs all over town. Mr. Case responded that he felt the Council was pushing the teenage problems
MOTION:
north. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION FROM
THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMAN GOULD.VOTING NO.
CONSIDE _
RATION OF FERRY OPERATIONS- LONG..RANGE PLANNING
Public Works Director Leif Larson reported on information furnished by the Department of Trans-
portati.on regarding current and future planned projects that would affect the operation of the ferry
system from Edmonds, and planning through 1990. They included safety devices at the railroad crossing,
floating dolphins south of the ferry dock, covered passenger walkway, tower replacement for transfer
span, termination of. the Port Townsend ferry, and construction of a ferry terminal building, addi-
tional slip, and expansion of dock. There are no plans to relocate the ferry dock. Councilman
Carns said he would not want to see a lot of.expansion without additional parking. COUNCILMAN CARNS
MOTION:
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT A LETTER BE SENT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
THAT ANY PLANS FOR EXPANSION OF THE FERRY DOCK SHOULD BE REFERRED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION
CARRIED.
COUNCIL
Councilman Carns noted that the City of Lynnwood has reached its capacity for its sewage treatment,
MOTION:
and because interlocal cooperation is encouraged, COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED.THAT THE ENGINEERING DIVI-
SION PREPARE A STUDY TO DETERMINE THE ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY OF DIVERTING SOME OF THE FLOW FROM THE
Failed
LYNNWOOD SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT THROUGH MOUNTLAKE TERRACE LINES TO THE EDMONDS TREATMENT PLANT.
THIS STUDY SHOULD-i�P,.OTsTHE:?.GROWTH<.�
OF, -THE.. AREA THROUGH 1990 DETERMINE THE' PEAK FLOWS EXPECTED AT
THAT TIME, DETERMINE THE CAPACITIES OF THE SYSTEM AND VARIOUS ELEMENTS OF THE EDMONDS PLANT TO HANDLE
THOSE FLOWS, AND DETERMINE THE IMPROVEMENT NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE INCREASED FLOW FROM LYNNWOOD IN
1990. FURTHER, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY PREPARE AN AGREEMENT WITH LYNNWOOD TO PAY FOR THE COSTS OF
THIS STUDY. There.was some discussion, but no second to the motion, as the feeling was that this was
premature inasmuch as the City of Lynnwood had not officially asked the City of Edmonds for this kind
of cooperation. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Councilwoman Allen noted a:'request from.the Community Development.Director that the report from the
Park Board regarding Seaview Park be
MOTION:
scheduled.for July 30, 1979. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED
BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO PLACE ON'THE JULY 30, 1979 AGENDA A REPORT FROM THE PARK BOARD REGARDING
SEAVIEW PARK. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Herb -advised he would be absent August 7, 1979, and Councilman Gould advised he may be
absent July 30, 1979.
MAYOR
'MOTION:
Mayor Harrison asked for confirmation of his appointment of Ken Rose to the Shoreline Management
Advisory Committee, COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, TO CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S
APPOINTMENT OF KEN ROSE TO POSITION 7 ON.THE SHORELINE MANAGEMEN.T,ADVISORY COMMITTEE, TERM TO EXPIRE
JUNE 2, 1983. MOTION CARRIED.
There was no further business to come.befo.re.the Council, and the.meeting was adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
IRE L AKNtY_MRAV7, 1erKHARVE
•
y H N H RRIS ayor