Loading...
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.