19800115 City Council Minutes" "
P
i 4'
January 15, 1980 •
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:40 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 Ray Gould Charles Dibble, M.A.A.
Jo -Anne Childers Fred Herzberg, Public Works Director
Bill Kasper Jim Adams, City Engineer
Katherine Allen Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
John Nordquist Marlo Foster, Police Chief
Tom Carns Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Larry Naughten John LaTourelle, Planning Consultant
Mary Lou Block, Act. Plan Div. Mgr.
Art Housler, Finance Director
John Wallace, City Attorney
Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy .City Clerk
Mayor Harrison advised. -the audience of i:he.hearings on this evening's agenda and invited those who
wished'to speak to sign the respective sign-up sheets for each hearing.
CONSENT'AGENDA
MOTION:
Councilman Carns removed Items (B) and (F) from the Consent Agenda,.and COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED.
The approved items on the Consent Agenda included the following:
(A) Roll call.
(C) Setting date of January 22, 1980 for hearing on P.C.-Resolution 639, Amendment to Official
Street Map to remove a 40' turnaround on 80th Ave. W., south of 200th St. S.W. (File ST-
15-79)
(D) Passage..of Resolution 458, setting the date of February 19, 1.980 for hearing on final
assessment roll for SID-1-79,.Fifth.Ave. Sidewalks.
(E) Adoption of Ordinance 2110, establishing 8:00 p.m. meeting time for City Council.
APPROVAL.OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, •1980 [Item (B) on Consent Agenda]
.The City Clerk's Office had advised of an omission from last week's minutes. COUNCILMAN CARNS
MOTION:
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, THAT THE CORRECTION TO THE JANUARY 8, 1980 MINUTES PROVIDED
BY THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE BE INCORPORATED INTO THOSE MINUTES, AND THAT THE MINUTES BE APPROVED AS
CORRECTED. MOTION CARRIED. The change was to insert the following on page 2, immediately after the
approval of Item (H)on the Consent Agenda:
"APPROVAL OF EQUIPMENT RENTAL RATES FOR 1980 [Item (I) on Consent Agenda]
."Councilwoman-Allen'had some brief questions regarding the rates, following which COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN
MOTION:
MOVED, SECONDED BY.000NCILMAN CARNS, TO APPROVE ITEM (I) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED."
PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADOPTING STATE STATUTE REGARDING DRUNK DRIVING .[Item (F) on Consent Agenda]
Councilman Carns said he had discussed this proposed ordinance with Judge Thorpe who had convinced
him that the proposal.before the Council last week was preferable to the one before them this
eveningat their direction. Councilman Carns asked that
hat Judge Thorpe be heard on i g p this matter.
Richard J. Thorpe, City of Edmonds Municipal Court Judge, spoke against the ordinance which would
adopt the State ordinance requiring a mandatory one -day jail sentence for.the first offense of drunk
driving. He felt.such a sentence sometimes. would be inappropriate, and he supported his position
with a number of examples:of recent instances when.it would have been.inappropriate to sentence the
offender to jail.. He.stated that if the jail sentence were not made mandatory his intent would be
generally to follow the mandatory Jail sentence policy, and most offenderswould spend the day in
jail, but if it was entirely inappropriate then he would not make that sentence. As a declaration
of public policy,.he would be following the mandatory jail sentence requirement. COUNCILMAN CARNS
(MOTION:
MOVED, -SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN.NAUGHTEN, TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO REDRAFT THE SUBJECT ORDINANCE,
REQUIRING THE PENALTY OF MANDATORY 24-HOURS IN JAIL FOR DRIVING.WHILE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OR AFFECTED
BY.INTOXICATING.LIQUOR AND/OR DRUGS UNLESS WAIVED BY THE MUNICPAL COURT'JUDGE WITH FINDINGS.
Councilman Carns suggested that one of the recitals could indicate that -it would be the policy,
however, generally to follow the State statute in this regard. Councilwoman Allen felt the man-
datory jail time should be required except under extraordinary circumstances. THE MOTION CARRIED.
MAYOR
Mayor Harrison announced the quarterly meeting of the Association of Snohomish County Cities & Towns
to be held Thursday, January 31, 1980, in, -Snohomish at the Silver King Cafe, at 6:30 p.m.
Mayor. Harrison asked for confirmation of two appointments to the Edmonds Arts Commission.. COUN-
MOTION:
CILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENTS OF HARRY
HISE AND LYNN MADDOX TO POSITIONS 1 AND 7, RESPECTIVELY, ON THE EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION, TERMS TO
EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 1983. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Harrison stated that a liquor license application had been filed by the Depot Springs establish-
ment, located at 180 Sunset Dr., for a Class H license instead of a BCEF license. After investigation,
�J
475
• January 15, 1980 - continued
the Police Chief had.recommended approval, subject to the owner-'s meeting other requirements.of the State
and of the Health Department. Councilman.Nordquist felt the public should be
given the opportunity to be
aware of .the..app1.ication,.and he suggested that a public heari.ng.be posted and
held, and that it become
MOTION:
the_po1i.cy�to,.have public hearings on liquor license applications. COUNCILMAN
NORDQUIST MOVED,,
SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN,.TO SET FOR HEARING JANUARY .22,.1980 THE LIQUOR
LICENSE:APPLICATION
OF DEPOT SPRINGS. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Harrison reported that he.had conferred with City Attorney.John Wallace
regarding a settlement
with Walcker..Homes, contingent upon an approved landscaping.plan.. Mr. Wallace
stated that since
this matter.currently is in litigation,it should be discussed in Executive Session.
-An Executive
Session was scheduled following this evening's regular meeting for this and to
discuss labor negotiations.
COUNCIL
MOTION:
Councilman,.Carns advised he would not be present January 22.
COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, THAT.IT BE AFFIRMED IN
THE MINUTES THAT THE
TERM OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT IS ONE YEAR AND THE REMUNERATION IS $5 PER DIEM WITH
A MAXIMUM OF $100 PER
MONTH. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Naughton asked about the parameters for a new downtown zone and whether that subject was
scheduled on an agenda. Acting Planning Division Manager. Mary -Lou Block responded that it was her
understanding that it would be included in the new Zoning Code going to the Council in March, and
any rezones .to.take place throughout the community should be pursued at that time.
Council,President Nordquist had some items to discuss regarding the Council organization,.so COUNCIL
• MOTION: PRESIDENT NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, TO ADD AN ITEM 13 TO THIS EVENING'S AGENDA
DESIGNATED "COUNCIL ORGANIZATION." MOTION CARRIED.
1
MOTION:
(Failed)
MOTION:
HEARING.ON..SALE OF.PARAPHERNALIA..ASSOCIATED WITH CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES
Councilman Carns prefaced this hearing.with remarks about a Lakewood, California, ordinance which
was discussed at.a recent National.League of Cities convention. The ordinance prohibited the sale
of controlled substance paraphernalia to minors and required that such materials be kept in a separate
room from which minors were restricted unless accompanied by a parent or guardian. Councilman Carns
stated this ordinance had been adopted by a number of other cities and had been indorsed by the
National League of Cities and the California League of Cities and,,further, that President.Carter
had asked the Justice Department for a model ordinance to_prohibit-such sales. After these opening
remarks, the public portion of the hearing was opened. Leon Couchee of 22705 74th Pl._.W. stated
that he had discovered the Lakewood ordinance had been overturned and that there was a. -permanent
injunction against interference with such sales and the shop owner. -is suing the City of Lakewood for
damages and loss of income. He said he was in favor of controlling the sales with.regard to age,
but as far as the items being labeled as "drug paraphernalia," he thought it was hard to so label
them as.people can use the pipes and pipe screens for tobacco. He stated he is the owner of Gray
Matter.Records .(the only shop in Edmonds selling such items). Bill.Younger of 663 152nd N.E.,
Bellevue., was concerned about the interpretation of the ordinance and how it will be decided what is
drug related. He was concerned that record stores would be singled out and also concer.ned.about the
costs involved to enforce the ordinance. He named several states in which he said such ordinances
were overturned. He said he hadn't seen -the ordinance, and Councilman Carns gave him a copy...
Councilwoman Allen said the Council was not at the point of passing an ordinance but they were only
discussing it, and she felt his concerns regarding interpretation were well taken. Joe McIntyre of
7030 210th S.W said there was a good idea behind this ordinance but it would be impossible to enforce
and a waste.of.time. The public portion of the hearing was closed. Councilman Carns stated that
the Lakewood ordinance is a model ordinance. He felt there was no reason to allow the sale of
paraphernalia to be used for illegal use. He felt it was time that law-abiding citizens in the
community say they have had enough, and he was sure the City Attorneys could draft an ordinance that
would make .it illegal to sell such things to minors or to allow minors to viewsuch things without
their parents or guardians. Councilwoman Allen felt.an ordinance ] ike the Lakewood ordinance was
not enforceable, but she was not sure about the Marysville ordinance which _takes a different approach
to the problem.. She said she would like to explore that further, but she felt it would be very
difficult.to say for sure exactly what would be used for narcotics.and what would -not. She did not
think an ordinance could be drafted to cover that. Councilman Nordquist said he had talked to the
Mayor of Marysville about their ordinance which requires the.shop owner to write a complete inventory
each month.of everything in the store. He liked the Lakewood.ordinance in that it requires a special
room to display the paraphernalia and restricts the sale to minors. City Attorney John Wallace was
asked if his office could write an enforceable ordinance. He responded that they would -inquire to
see whether the Lakewood ordinance had been overturned and.why, if it had. They could then detern�ine
whether it coul'd.be drafted. He said the subject matter was clearly within the police power of the
City to regulate. COUNCILMAN CARNS THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, THAT THE CITY
ATTORNEY BE .INSTRUCTED TO INVESTIGATE THE POSSIBILITY OF WRITING A PROPOSED MODEL ORDINANCE GENERALLY
IN LINE WITH THE LAKEWOOD ORDINANCE,.AFTER CHECKING WITH LAKEWOOD, CALIFORNIA, AND THAT IT BE SCHEDULED
FOR HEARING._FEBRUARY 5,.1980. Councilman Naughton said he was opposed to the sale of these devices
and*even though such.sale could not,be.prohibited, he would.:like to see such sale controlled.
Counc.i.l_woman.Childers said it would.not take long for the City.Attorney to write to see what has
happened in Lakewood. She felt it would be cost saving to -get more information before instructing
that an ordi.nance.be drafted. If'it had not been overturned in Lakewood, she was interested in how
successful it has been. She said the information she had did not list the costs, who'enforced it,
or what the.penalties were; and she felt more information was needed before making a decision. A
ROLL CALL MTE.WAS.TAKEN.ON THE MOTION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CARNS AND NAUGHTEN VOTING YES, AND WITH
COUNCIL MEMBERS CHILDERS, KASPER, ALLEN, AND NORDQUIST VOTING NO. MOTION FAILED. COUNCILWOMAN
ALLEN THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, TO HEAR A -REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY ON FEBRUARY
5, 1980 REGARDING THE LAKEWOOD ORDINANCE, AS WELL AS ON OTHER POTENTIAL ROUTES TO CONTROL THE SALE
476
January 15, 1980 - continued
•
OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Carns then said he would like to change his vote
on his motion to vote "NO" on the prevailing side so he can bring the matter up again. He was
advised by Mr. Wallace that he could not do'that since another motion.had been acted on after his
motion.
HEARING ON PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT.'ROLL, RESOLUTION OF.INTENTION:2535 PROPOSED WATER
AND SEWER LID; VICINITY OF'208TH & 76TH.
City Engineer Jim Adams reviewed the LID'and City Attorney John Wallace explained the financing.
The water line.on 210th St. S.W. and 70th Ave. W. is a 4" steel line which is inadequate and in need.
of improvement. It was the -intent to replace this line with an.8" line .and install sanitary sewers
to serve the area. A number of people in the audience asked questions and. .then the public hearing
was opened. Donald.Dr.iscoll of 7115 210th S.W. said he did not understand the assumption that
because sewers were.going-in the water line should be improved just because the street was torn up,
and he felt a lot of people were being asked to pay for something that will benefit only a few. He
had experienced.no..problems with his septic tank or with water service. He asked about the right of
protest. Mr. Wallace advised that this was an LID by resolution and that there was a right of
protest except for certain items. He stated that -to exercise the:night-of protest it is required
that owners of property who will pay 60% of the assessments must -file a protest with the City within
30 days, and he cautioned that that was not 60% of the residents, so the owner of one huge piece of
property could_..stop the protest. He advised that a protest should be filed with the City Clerk.
Sandy.Dern of 7805 173rd S.W., owner of,property at 7122 210th S.W.., said their property was purchased
last March, but they had not been notified of this.evening's meeting and they had not received an
LID notice,.but she had received a telephone call from the-Engineerin,g Division, so they were aware
that she was a property owner. She was advised. that the Engineer would talk to her individually
after the meeting.. Douglas Willard of 7330'208th S.W. said he had experienced no problems with
water or with his septic tank. He asked why.he hadn't been able to vote on being annexed to the
City and whether the petition had been in terms of populace or otherwise. The annexation process
was explained to him and he was told there is an election method, but in this case it was not
done by election.but by petition. Edward Reich of 7316 210th S.W.'asked about deferring the payment
of the assessment if.the property owners were over 65. Mr. Wallace explained that there is a provision
that assessments could be deferred until the end of the payment period. Mr. Reich asked that the
payment period.be extended to help people on fixed incomes and of low income. Joe McIntyre of 7030
210th S.W. said he .was one of the three.people who.collected signatures on this and when he was
gathering signatures the people were aware.'of the costs and they thought they also would have to
assume the City's indebtedness, but the Council did not require that. He .added that 75% signed and
if anyone was missed that still couldn't be changed. Martin Bahr of 20904 74th W. asked that payments
be spread out as far as po"ssible, and he asked for an explanation of the.rest of ,the procedure,
MOTION: whi Eli Rr: ' Wa1l'ace gave." The' public` portion of the, heari ng then was : closed. COUNCILMAN CARNS' MOVED,
SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2111 TO ESTABLISH LID-206, WITH THE FOLLOWING
CHANGES ON PAGE 4: IN THE FOURTH LINE, "10" EQUAL ANNUAL INSTALLMENTS SHOULD BE CHANGED TO 1125,"
AND IN THE SEVENTH LINE, "12" YEARS SHOULD'BE CHANGED TO'"27" YEARS. Councilman Carns added that
sanitary sewers are..necessary, but.by allowing the payments to come in over 25 years it will be less
difficult to pay. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED.
HEARING ON P.C. RESOLUTION 640, AMENDING OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO DESIGNATE AS CG THE
Acting'Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block said this property was recently annexed to the City
and must be given a zoning designation. It had been GC in the County and she recommended the most
similar City designation be given it, which is CG. She said that is consistent with some of the
existing land uses of the area; it*is consistent with the existing land use and zoning of property
to the south and east; zoning to the north and west is multiple.residential and will act as a transi-
tion zone between this site and single family zoning; the value of .the property will not be diminished
in any way; the proposed zoning does not preclude the reasonable use of the property; the.property
must be given an.Edmonds City zoning designation for proper administration; no hardship will. be
imposed on.the.individual property owners; and there will be no substantial adverse environmental
impacts as a result of this action. The public portion of the hearing was opened. Sandy Dern of
7805 173rd S.W., owner of property at 7122 210th S.W., said they had purchased the property.in March
as GC and they would .like to see it stay with that zoning. Edward Reich of 7316 210th S.W. concurred
with Mrs.-Dern'-s comment. The public portion of the hearing was then closed. COUNCILMAN CARNS
MOTION: MOVED, -SECONDED BY.000NCILMAN KASPER, TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 2112, PURSUANT TO P.C. RESOLUTION 640.
MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, THAT AGENDA ITEMS BAND 9.(R-10-79 AND R-9-
79) BE HEARD TOGETHER. MOTION CARRIED.
HEARING ON P.C: RESOLUTION 641, AMENDING OFFICIAL'ZONING MAP TO DESIGNATE AS RS-8 THE
AREA KNOWN AS NORTHWEST'TRACTION'CO: RIGHT-OF-WAY. R-10-79
HEARING ON P..C. RESOLUTION 642, AMENDING OFFICIAL ZONING`MAP TO DESIGNATE AS RSW-12
THE AREA BOUNDED ON THE EAST BY LAKE BALLINGER, THE WEST BY 74TH AVE. W., THE NORTH
BY BALLINGER PARK GOLF COURSE, AND ACROSS FROM 23510 74TH AVE W.. R-9-79
These properties also recently were annexed to the City and had no zoning classifications prior to
annexation. The property in R-10-79 currently is being used as a street, known as 74th Ave. W., and
City.pol.i.cy is to zone streets to match the adjacent property. Ms. Block recommended approval -of
zoning this property as RS-8 because it was consistent with the Edmonds Policy Plan, it was -con-
sistent with the existing land use of the site; it was consistent with the existing land use and
zoning of adjacent properties; the value of the property would not.be diminished; the proposed
zoning did not preclude reasonable use of the property; there would be no substantial adverse
environmental impacts from the rezone action; and the property currently was under no zoning
1
is
1
1
1
4.771.
January 15, 1980 - continued
1
1
E
classifi-cation and could not be administered by the City. The public hearing for both items was
MOTION: opened,, no one wished to speak, and.the public hearing was closed. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED
BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO ADOPT. ORDINANCE 2113 PURSUANT TO P.C. RESOLUTIONS 641 AND 642. MOTION
CARRIED.
HEARING...ON.4-LOT SUBDIVISION AT NORTHEAST CORNER OF 76TH AVE.. W. AND 176TH ST. S.W. (P-8-79 -- PETE TROKA)
This type.of subdivision normally..would not come to the City.Council, but because the property was.
subdivided within the last five-years,..State law requires..that any further subdivision be accomplished
through thi.s.procedure. The site, 3.35 acres, is wooded and environmentally sensitive.` There is a
stream and..large pond on theproperty.which are an integral. -part of the City's storm system. Lots 2
and 4 will be left essentially as.they are, and Lots 1 and.3.were to be sold for single family
development. There is an existing.house on Lot 4 whi-ch would be made nonconforming by this.action,
and a modification on its setback -was requested. Environmental -A mpacts were not significant, and a
declaration..of.'nonsignificance had been issued.. Ms. Block recommended approval, with.the following
conditions: (1) That a covenant -..be placed on Lots 2 and 4, restricting further subdivisionon these
lots because of the environmental sensitivity of the site and-involvement'in the drainage system of
the City (the applicant was agreeable); (2) That a soils test. -be required before issuance of any
building permit; (3) that the.40'-wide pipestem between Lots.l.and 3 be reduced to 20'; and (4) That the
large evergreens shown on the face of the drawing be retained to the extent possible. She also recom-
mended -a modification on the setback of Lot 4. She said the proposal was consistent with the Edmonds
Policy Plan.and.conformed to existing zoning and subdivision regulations. Mayor Harrison asked what
would be. accomplished by requiring a soils test, and she responded that it would assure that the
foundation will be on solid ground.. Mayor Harrison was not.sure that should be part of the planning
procedure as it was a part of the building permit process. Ms. Block said it had been the recommendation
of.the Engineering Division. Mayor Harrison thought the builder could establish a firm area and not
require a soils engineer. The public.portion of the hearing was opened. Pete Troka said his existing
house is 17' from the road. He had nothing additional to.add.. No one else wished -to speak, and the
MOTION: public portion.of the hearing was closed. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST,
TO APPROVE.P-8-79, INCLUDING THE SETBACK MODIFICATION, AND WITH THE CONDITIONS STATED BY MS. BLOCK
EXCEPT FOR.THE.REQUIREMENT OF A SOILS TEST. It was noted that.existing conditions will necessitate
a soils test,, but that a test by a soils engineer will.not be a requirement of this approval. THE
MOTION CARRIED. (Councilman Carns..was not present for the vote.)
DISCUSSION AND DECISION ON SR 524
City Engineer Jim Adams displayed drawings of cross sections of the driveways affected, as well as
drawings reflecting the two".proposals. Proposal. A would take 10'.from the south side only ,`.and
Proposal B.would take 5'.from each'side. The decision to be made was whether.-to-i-nsi.st...that the
* State go along with Proposal A,*as previously stated to be the City's desire, or to accept the
State's.plan as described in Proposal A. Mr. Adams described both proposals and compared the require-
ments of each, finally recommending acceptance of Proposal A. He noted the substantial monetary
savings, stating that Edmonds would have tocome up with $62,000.for right-of-way acquisition under
Proposal:B and construction costs would be $50,000 higher for Proposal B than for Proposal A.
Further, Proposal A would damage abutting buffer plantings on one side only, while Proposal B would
damage both,sides; Proposal A would avoid -conflict with existing commercial, condominium, and apart-
ment development on the north side;.Proposal A would not affect improvements on the south except for
plantings andhedges; and Proposal A would improve connections with driveways and City streets on
the north side and do no harm to approaches on the south side. Public Works Director Fred -Herzberg
said the only money available.for the additional right-of-wayacquisition under Proposal B would be
from 1/2¢ gas.tax funds, and other projects.would have to be eliminated if the money were taken from
that. Roger Hertrich of 1020 Puget Dr.. said there was concern from people regarding the lower end
between 3rd..and 7th on Caspers St...as to where the roadway will.go and how wide it will be there, as
the improvement.could end up very.close to some houses. He also noted that the impact statement
indicates very little impact on the area, but anytime hedges, plantings, fences, etc. are removed
• there is an.impact. He suggested the,sidewalk be narrowed or,the shoulder reduced where there are
critical areas. He also said they should try to bend and mold a little bit so the roadway.could.go
forward without.a lot of fighting with the State. Councilman Carns responded that public hearings
had been held regarding .the configuration of the street and changes could not be made without further
hearings for the public. He said everything -had been decided except for the question of 10' of
right-of-way..from one side or 5' from either side, and that was the subject of this discussion. Mr.
Herzberg added that he did not think there was any latitude on this, as for a.36' roadway with full
improvements the State would like 60' and the City had already got that down to 50' and that is
about as faras they can go. Ann Spivey of 300 Caspers.asked for an explanation of the reasons the
State.planned to take 10' from the south side, and Councilman Carns gave that explanation. Annette
Jones of 341 Caspers said there are some very old homes there and she preferred that the improvement
not go.in.. She asked if the Council. wanted to keep the Edmonds atmosphere or to look like Lynnwood.
Steve Cal.lendar.of 820 Hindley Lane reminded the Council of the configuration the State first wanted
and notedthatthe City got the State to back down from their standards and do what the City asked.
He felt a 50' right-of-way was.the least that there could be for a safe roadway. He said a lot of
people adjacent to the improvementwill benefit -by the improved safety. Councilman Kasper felt this
street could be. redesigned, and he noted that 9th Ave. N. had not been built as designed, but was
reduced in.width.. He felt they should take the position of 10' on the south side with.a taper,* with
no more.than.5' being taken on.the south side through the residential area. He felt the road could
be built in 45'. Councilman Carns.again.said the public. -hearings already had been held -.on the
MOTION: configuration of the road. COUNCILMAN..CARNS THEN MOVED, SECONDED_BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN,THAT THE
(Failed) CITY COUNCIL -ACCEPT PROPOSAL A FOR.SR 524. Councilman Naughten said this was not his first choice,
as he would rather have 5' taken fromeach side, but he said SR 524 is needed for the -benefits and
safety it will provide. He said the reduction to 50' was a tradeoff in certain respects, and he
felt the improvement was needed for safety. Councilman Carns felt it was necessary to go forward
with this street .as soon as possible as it has a lot of traffic and small children crossing. He
felt the Council had done all it could.to lessen the impact, and he could not see taking $62,000 out
of the meager street funds to pay for acquisition in that small area. Councilman Nordquist said it
was sad.that the State would do this after all the years spent on this project. He was not convinced
that the people on the south side should get the brunt of this, but he realized something had to be
• *See 1-22-80 Minutes for correction to "Proposal B"
47S
January 15, 1980 - continued •
MOTION:
MOTION:
done: A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION', WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS.CARNS AND NAUGHTEN-.VOTING YES,
AND WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CHILDERS, KASPER, ALLEN, AND NORDQUIST VOTING NO. MOTION FAILED. Councilman
Carns:then.said_he woul-d'-like:to'change his vote from "YES" to "NO," voting on the prevailing side,
so he can bring the subject up again in.the future.
CONSIDERATION OF LYNNWOOD SEWAGE DIVERSION
This matter -was continued from the January 8 meeting. Public Works Director'Fred Herzberg reported
that he.had met with Lynnwood personnel and it had been agreed that Edmonds is using less than 85%
of its purchased capacity of the Lynnwood Treatment Plant. He said that is still being discussed
and the final figure probably will be close to 70%. It'appears likely that Lynnwood can get a grant
in the next year.or two to increase the capacity of their primary treatment plant. Based on this
information, Mr. Herzberg recommended that Edmonds offer to assist Lynnwood, but that the final
contract for the diversion include milestones so that flow could be increased if those milestones in
progress were met, or flow terminated if they were not met. This would be in addition to the other
recommendations.he made at'last week's meeting. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
NORDQUIST, THAT -THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR BE ACCEPTED AND THAT EDMONDS OFFER
TO ASSIST LYNNWOOD IN THE MATTER OF SEWAGE'DIVERSION. MOTION CARRIED.
COUN.C'TL. ORGANIZATION =
Councilman Nordquist adjusted some of the -committee assignments.as well .as the weeks they will meet.
He suggested a di.nner meeting on the last Tuesday of the month, inviting some of the public such as
the new Chamber of Commerce president: Regarding secretarial services for the Council; he said
Mayor Harrison..had offered the services of Judie Gilbo, and she is.willing to rearrange her schedule
to start work later on Tuesdays and stay to take minutes of the committee meetings, leaving at 8:00
p.m. There will be no committee meeting next Tuesday, but the.Council meeting will start at its new
time, 8:00 p:m. •
John LaTourelle reported that the the Boundary Review Board had declined to accept jurisdiction of
the Union'Oil property, so that annexation will proceed on schedule.
There was no further business to come before the Council, and the meeting adjourned at 11:20 p.m.
IRENE VARNEY MORAN, ity Clerk HARVE H. HARRISON, Mayor b
January 22; 1980
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order.at 8:05 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
Ray Gould Charles Dibble, M.A.A.
Jo -Anne Childers
Tom Carns Fred Herzberg, Public Works Director
Bill Kasper
John LaTourelle, Planning Consultant
Katherine Allen
Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
•
John Nordquist
Marlo Foster, Police Chief
Larry Naughten
Jack Weinz,-Fire Chief
Art Housler, Finance Director
Jim Jessel, Parks & Recreation Manager
John Wallace, City Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
Mayor Harrison presented a plaque
to Shirley Betham in recognition.of her service on the Library
Board.
CONSENT AGENDA
Items (B) and.(C) were removed
from the Consent Agenda. The City Clerk's. Office had advised that
there was a correction to the
Minutes.of .last week's meeting [Item (B) on the Consent Agenda]. �On
page 6, in the.fourth line of
the SR 524 discussion, the reference should have been to "Proposal B"
rather than to ' roposal A."
Item (C) on the. Consent Agenda was a proposed ordinance, which the
City Attorney's Office advised
was not,ready, and it will be.on the January 29 Consent Agenda.
COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED
BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA, WITH THE
CORRECTION TO THE MINUTES OF JANUARY.15
AND WITH THE ELIMINATION OF ITEM (C), "PROPOSED ORDINANCE
ADOPTING STATE STATUTE REGARDING
DRUNK DRIVING." MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent
Agenda included the following:
(A) Roll call.
(B) Approval of Minutes of January 15, 1980, as corrected.
(D) Final approval of PRD-1-78, Wispy Willows, 21101 80th W.