19800325 City Council Minutes•
March 18, 1980 - continued
HEARING ON LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION.FOR GO N JOY FOODS - HIGHWAY 99.LOCATION
This application was to the Liquor Control Board for a Class "E" and Class "F" license for a con-
venience store, Go N Joy Foods, at-238th and Highway 99. Police Chief Marlo Foster stated that the;
area generally is commercial in nature, and he recommended approval of the applicant and of the
location. The hearing was -opened to the public, no one wished to speak, and the hearing was closed.
MOTION: COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ, TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT AND THE LOCATION
FOR ISSUANCE OF A CLASS "E" AND "F" LIQUOR LICENSE. MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMEN KASPER AND
NORDQUIST VOTING NO. Councilman Nordquist said he did not see how they could approve the applica-
tion when the facility is not even built. Councilman Kasper agreed,.adding that there is no indi-
cation of management.
HEARING ON PROPOSED INCREASE IN UTILITY RATES
Finance Director Art Housler reviewed the utility funding for recent years,.demonstrating the effects
of refunding bond issues and noting that there never had been any consideration for depreciation in
the.City's utility rates. He also discussed ways to improve the City's bond rating, feeling it
essential that it be raised to a "Aaa" rating. Three refunding bond issues between 1972 and 1977
provided more favorable interest rates and money for capital improvements, and also delayed paying
principal on debt service. This enabled the City to keep utility rates artificially low, but now
those things are catching up with the.City, with a principal payment of $140,000 being due at the
end of the year, no money being available for capital improvements, and advance refunding issues not
being permitted by the IRS. Public Works Director Fred Herzberg explained that capital improvements
and major maintenance are required on the water, sewer, and drainage systems, some being long
overdue and others to be programmed in an orderly manner. Utility system needs were identified in
detail and various suggested utility rate structures were provided, illustrating which needs could
be provided with each. Contracts with Mountlake Terrace and Olympic View Water District were also
discussed as to increasing their rates. Mr. Herzberg said there is no federal money available
because the per capita income in Edmonds.is too high. He felt there might be a possibility of funds
for sewer lines but not replacement lines or storm lines. The hearing was opened to the public, no
one wished to speak., and.the hearing.was closed. The number of people in the audience was very
small. Councilman Naughten said he would like to have more time to study the problem, and he
MOTION: recommended setting several dates for discussion. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED TO PLACE THE INCREASE
IN UTILITY RATES ON THE AGENDA FOR DISCUSSION AT'.THE APR'I'L.8 WORK- MEETING, =FOR-P.UBLIC:*HEARING-.ON
APRIL 15, AND WITH A TARGET DATE FOR A DECISION BY MAY 6. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
.After some further discussion, COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED TO SET THE MATTER FOR DISCUSSION APRIL 8,
AND WITH HEARINGS ON APRIL 15 AND MAY 6. COUNCILWOMAN CHILDERS-JAECH SECONDED THE MOTION FOR DIS-
CUSSION. Councilman Kasper questioned whether the City was getting equity, noting that Edmonds is
taking care of Mountlake Terrace and Olympic View by running the sewer plant and acquiring an
additional site. After a brief discussion, THE MOTION CARRIED.
There was no further business to come before the Council, and the meeting adjourned at 10:55 p.m.
Jt_11�
IRENE VARNEY MORAN, City lerk HARVE H. HARRISON, Mayor
March 25, 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
STAFF PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor
Fred Herzberg, Public Works Director
Jo -Anne Childers-Jaech
John LaTourelle, Planning.Consultant
Bill Kasper
Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
Katherine Allen
Marlo Foster, Police Chief
John Nordquist
Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Ray Gould
Mary Lou Block, Acting Planning Division
Manager
Larry Naughten
Jim Murphy, City Attorney
Mary Goetz
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION: Items (C) and (E) were removed
from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED,
SECONDED BY COUN-
CILWOMAN ALLEN, TO APPROVE THE
BALANCE OF.THE CONSENT AGENDA. .MOT.ION,CARRIED.
The approved items
on the Consent Agenda included
the following:
(A) Roll call.
(B) Approval of Minutes of
March 18, 1980.
(D) Passage of Resolution
464, commending.Edmonds Rainbow Assembly No. 38
for their civic
pride and services rendered
to the City and the citizens thereof, for
their street cleanup
after the Irish Spree
Parade.
•
aw
b
March 25, 1980 - continued
1
1
MOTION:
1
1
MOTION:
1
(F)' Acknowledgment of recei.pt.of Claim for Damages from. Raymond D. Wentz in the amount of $249.21.
(G) Setting date of April 22,'1980 for hearing on proposed amendment to Comprehensive Plan to
change the designation of the following described.property from�Industrial to Business: A
14.61 acre parcel -on the east -side of Burlington Northern Railroad, the west side of SR 104,
the north side of Union Oil Marsh, and the south side of Dayton St. (File CP-2-79); and
Setting date of Apri1.22, 1980.for hearing on Contract Rezone from IP to CG on that same
described property.(File R-4-79).
(H) Setting date for hearing of April 22, 1980.for following items and passage of Resolution 465 in
connection with the right-of-way vacation of a_portion of 6th Ave. S. (Frank Taylor):
.(1). Amendment to Official Street Map to delete.a.cul-de-sac shown at the north end of 6th Ave.
S. (ST-1-80)
(2) Proposed,vacation..of,a.portion of the right-of-way of 6th Ave. S. which extends south from
Elm St. (Resolution.465)., and accordingly amend the Official Street Map.
(3) Contract rezone from RS-6.to RMH property at 22200 6th Ave. S. (R-12-79).
(4) A 50-unit Planned Residential Development at 22200.6th Ave. S. and SR 104 (Edmonds Way)
near the south end of 5th.Ave. S. (PRD-4-79).
REPORT ON BIDS OPENED MARCH 19.,.11980 FOR -PURCHASE OF MOWER.[Item (C) on Consent Agenda]
One bid had been received from Brim Tractor Co., Lynden, Washington, in'the amount of $27,993.00,
including.sales tax, and Public Works Director Fred Herzberg.reported.that the bid met all specifica-
tions and was within the budget allocation, so he recommended approval of the bid. Councilman
Nordquist removed this from the Consent Agenda to ask where any warranty work would be done if the
mower is purchased in.Lynden. Mr. Herzberg responded that other cities' experience with this machine
had been very excellent., but he could -not -say where the maintenance work would'be done. He added
that the specifications had included,.thefeatures-wanted but..did not specify brand names. COUNCILMAN
NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN:NAUGHTEN, TO APPROVE ITEM (C) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA, AWARDING
THE BID FOR A MOWER TO BRIM TRACTOR CO. IN THE AMOUNT OF $27,993.00, INCLUDING SALES TAX. MOTION
CARRIED.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION DEALING WITH�..OPEN.SPACE ZONING [Item (E),on Consent Agenda]
Councilman Nordquist removed this item.from the Consent Agenda, noting that the Council had been
waiting to see what State legislative action took place regarding open space zoning. Planning
Consultant. John LaTourelle stated that a bill was introducedthat would have set the assessment
ratio at 50% of the normal assessment, but that did not pass. A piece of legislation that did pass
grants tax relief for local improvement ..district assessments and -Mr. LaTourelle believed it wholly
exempts properties classified as open space. Councilman Nordquist said he was not totally pleased
with the proposed.resolution because he was concerned that .if a piece of property were rezoned.to
open space, ten years later the owner may have trouble getting it back to a zone useful to him.
Councilman Gould -said the proposed resolution requires a concomitant agreement that the property be
rezoned to open space at the same time as the owner asks that it.be taxed as open space. He said if
people are really serious that they want it to be open space and get that tax benefit, then he
thought the trade-off should be that they zone it open space; otherwise, all a property owner had to
do -was -pay up.the back taxes and then he could do whatever.he wanted that the zoning of the property
allowed. He agreed that there was the possibility that a. later rezone would not be granted, but he
said the rezone criteria would have to be followed. Mr. LaTourelle stated that the penalty for
taking the property out of open space classification before the end of the 10-year term is very
small--20% of the difference in the taxes paid between the open space classification and that which
normally would be charged. Councilman Nordquist asked the City Attorney if the City could require a
covenant on the .land that it not be developed for ten years.. City Attorney Jim Murphy said he did
not see why -that could not be done, but he could foresee problems with trying to do that because the
State law says .the property can be taken out of the open space classification if the penalty 'is
paid.' Councilman Kasper felt the City should be very strict in what is allowed to be put in open
space, rather than rezone the property, and he said criteria were needed for determining how property
is allowed to go into open space and some way to measure sincerety when it goes into open space.
Councilman Gould said the main question was what does the community get as its benefit by allowing
the property to have reduced taxes for that period. He suggested that be the first assignment for
the upcoming Planning Advisory Board. He said he would-be satisfied if they could think of some
other determinants to help set that policy. COUNCILMAN KASPER THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN
ALLEN, THAT .THE PROBLEM OF OPEN SPACE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY.BE REFERRED TO THE UPCOMING PLANNING
ADVISORY BOARD AND THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION PRESENTED THIS.EVENING BE ONE OF THE CONSIDERATIONS
AS A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM AS THE COUNCIL SEES IT; AND THAT.CRITERIA SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED FOR
PUTTING PROPERTY INTO OPEN SPACE, AND THAT. IT BE DETERMINED IF THERE ARE ANY. ALTERNATIVES OTHER THAN
REZONE TO TAKE IT BACK OUT AGAIN. MOTION CARRIED.
MAYOR
Mayor Harrison introduced Tim McManus.who,has worked for several years on organizing the annual
Irish Spree Parade. Mayor Harrison then presented a framed.copy.of Resolution 464 which was passed
this evening to Vickie G1anister,..Worthy Advisor of Edmonds Rainbow Assembly No. 38, and thanked her
for the civic contribution made by.the-Rainbow Girls.
March 25, 1980 - continued •
Mayor Harrison advised that a letter had been received from Jack Cooper, President of the School
Board, asking for a representative to serve on a task force to review the school closure criteria
and make recommendations for-revision.of the criteria before finalizing decisions on which secondary
schools will be closed in 1981. Councilwoman Allen will serve on that task force.
Mayor Harrison gave a report on a recent Community Affairs meeting of the South Snohomish County
Chamber of Commerce.
COUNCIL
Councilman Nordquist noted that there.was a request from the Community Development Department that
the hearing on the proposed Community Development Code be scheduled for April 15, 1980. The firm
MOTION: date was needed for advertising of -the hearing. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST.MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
GOULD, THAT A HEARING.BE:SET FOR APRIL..15, 1980.ON THE PROPOSED.COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. MOTION
CARRIED.
Councilman Nordquist advised that he may not.be present next week as he is involved in the Community
Transit's purchase of 30.buses and he.may be out of town on that project.
Councilman Naughten notedthat approximately 20-30 citizens will be retiring from boards and com-
missions very shortly and he felt the plaques presented to outgoing members should be upgraded. He
circulated two samples and said he would like to see something presented that a person would be
proud to display. He estimated that it would cost approximately $200.for an artist to design a
prototype, with the cost of each plaque reproduced being approximately $8 - $10. COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ
MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED BY -COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT THE MAYOR BE AUTHORIZED TO HIRE AN ARTIST TO DEVELOP A
PLAQUE THAT COULD BE PRODUCED FOR $8.- $10, AND WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE INITIAL PROTOTYPE
COULD BE DEVELOPED FOR LESS THAN $300. MOTION CARRIED. •
Councilwoman Allen noted that there had been a request for an appointment to the SNOCOM Board.
MOTION: COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED., SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT...FIRE CHIEF JACK WEINZ BE APPOINTED
TO THE SNOCOM BOARD. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Nordquist noted that AWC was asking for nominations to.AWC committees and he said interested
members should -contact -Peter King at the AWC:office.
AUDIENCE
Jens Brautaset of 1037 6th Ave. S. said he had come to the Council two years ago asking for relief
from fumes and dust.being created by his.neighbor's constructing a sailboat in his back yard. He
said he eventually took the matter to court, at the Council's suggestion, and he now wanted to bring
the Council up-to-date on what had happened since that time. He said the court ruled that no further
construction take place.on the boat in its current location after September 15, 1979, but that
construction could continue if the boat hull were moved to the southeast corner of Mr..Rine's yard.
Mr. Brautaset provided the Council with copies of various exhibits, including the court's findings.
Mr. Brautaset reviewed portions of some of the exhibits and he stated that Fire Marshal Gary McComas
had said in court that he could waive any fire.code requirements buthe also had signed an affidavit
saying there were no_violations. Mr. Brautaset said he had spent approximately $15,000 and many
hours fighting for what he thought was right, and he now asked the City Council to do something
about continuing dust and fume emissions from -Mr. Rine's boat building. He felt that further con-
structi'on on the boat anywhere in Mr. Rine's back yard would continue to be a nuisance to his family
and to his neighbors, and he said he had received no help from the Health Department, Fire Depart-
ment, or -Building -Department but felt it was time the City looked -into -it. For clarification,
Councilman Gould said his understanding was that Mr. Brautaset felt the Council is a legislative
body and they ought to.look at their legislation and see if there is something they can do. COUNCILMAN
GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, THAT MR. BRAUTASET'S REQUEST BE PLACED FOR DISCUSSION
MOTION:
ON THE APRIL.8, 1980 AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. 'That is a work meeting and this will be a discussion
•
matter.
MEETING WITH.PET.ITIONERS FOR ANNEXATION OF.FUTURE ALBERTSON'S SITE
City Clerk Irene Varney Moran advised the Council of the actions required in meeting with the
petitioners. Douglas Mulvanny, architect.for Albertson's, said he was authorized to speak in their
behalf. He .explained that half of the,site on which they were building a new store is located in
.the City of Edmonds and the other half. in the County, and the purpose of the annexation was to have
the new building construction totally in the.C.ity. Acting Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block
added that the applicant will prefer to -.have it rezoned at the same time as it comes into the City
MOTION: so they.. can be sure it will be zoned BN. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN,
THAT BECAUSE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CONTIGUOUS TO CITY OF EDMONDS PROPERTY, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL
ACCEPT THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION; THE CITY COUNCIL WILL REQUIRE THE SIMULTANEOUS ADOPTION OF PROPOSED
ZONING..REGULATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED AREA TO BE ANNEXED; AND THE CITY COUNCIL WILL REQUIRE THE
ASSUMPTION OF EXISTING CITY INDEBTEDNESS BY THE AREA TO BE ANNEXED. MOTION CARRIED. The petitioners
were then directed to proceed in obtaining the necessary signatures of 75% of the assessed valuation
on a Petition for Annexation.
HEARING ON LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION.FOR..GO N JOY. FOODS CORP., AT 7207 212TH S.W.
Councilwoman Goetz said she had heard some concern expressed about approving a liquor license prior
to construction of the place of business, and.she pointed out that if a person were considering
developing a piece of property for the.busi'ness and then the liquor license was not approved, that
person could have invested a large amount of money and then not get the City's approval. She also
noted that it is the Liquor Control Board which makes the decision. Councilman Nordquist responded
that the City is asked for input but .if the person has not been in business in the City, he did not
see how a rational comment could be made. Councilwoman Goetz then suggested that perhaps the Council
1,
• March 25, 1980 - continued
should consider having a business impact"statement as Lynnwood now requires. City Attorney Jim
Murphy said the Liquor Control Board sends out a notice to.a city.which is really a courtesy notice,
and usually*a city will not respond unless there is some objection, and unless the City responds
within 20 days the Liquor Control Board assumes the city has no objection as they are only interested
in negative responses and reasons for the negative responses.. Police Chief Marlo Foster identified
the.location of the proposed store as being in front of the Adix Kennels, to the north of the
commercial building on the LaPierre property. He said more and more applicants are getting their
permits;in advance. fie noted that Go N Joy is a New Jersey corporation and they have no criminal
record, but the Police Department.has no way to know if they have been in business and are reliable.
Councilman Kasper commented that they should be advised that Edmonds is considering an 11:00 p.m.
closure -time for.convenience stores.. The hearing was opened .to.the public.
Don Sheehan, construction engineer for Go N Joy Foods Corp., said they have eight stores scheduled
in the Edmonds area. He said they cannot buy this property -and sign the final commitments until
they have the necessary licenses. They are opening these stores throughout the northwest, their
first to open next week on University Way. Some of the stores will have gas pumps also if the
zoning will allow it. Mr. Sheehan said he was aware that Edmonds was considering closing convenience
stores at 11:00 p.m. No one else wished to speak, and the public portion of the hearing was closed.
MOTION: COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ, TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT AND THE LOCATION
Failed FORA CLASS " AND "F!' LIQUOR LICENSE FOR GO N JOY FOODS CORP. AT 7207 212TH S.W. Councilman Gould
said he was Lconcerned because last weep: they had approved a liquor license for this company at 238th
and Highway,99 and part of his rationale for approval was that it was an acceptable site for this
activity. However, that was as far as he wanted to go befbre approving more liquor licenses for
this company. He said he would like to know the management will operate it as they say, and even
though they have no criminal record, they are new to the area and.he wanted to see them prove them-
selves before getting more licenses. Councilman Kasper agreed that they should be allowed to open
• onestore and,see how it goes. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS
NAUGHTEN AND GOETZ VOTING YES, AND WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CHILDERS-JAECH, KASPER, ALLEN, NORDQUIST,
AND GOULD VOTING NO. MOTION FAILED. Councilman Kasper said Pie agreed that they should be allowed
to open one store and see how.it.goes. Councilman Gould added that he also will observe the one on
MOTION: University Way as he frequents that area. COUNCILMAN GOULD THEN.MOVED, SECONDED -BY COUNCILMAN
KASPER,`THAT THE CITY ADVISE THE LIQUOR CONTROL BOARD THAT IT DOES NOT WISH TO HAVE THIS PERMIT
ISSUED AT THIS TIME, REASONS BEING THAT.ONE LICENSE ALREADY HAS.DEEN APPROVED FOR THIS COMPANY IN A
LOCATION CONSIDERED SUITABLE, PiND THE. CITY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT PROVEN BY PERFORMANCE THAT THE
OPERATOR DOES ABIDE BY ALL THE LAWS -OF THE CITY AND "rHE STATE, AND AS A SECOND ISSUE THIS PARTICULAR
LOCATION DOES HAVE SOME PROBLEMS BECAUSE IT IS NEAR A SCHOOL. MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS
NAUGHTEN AND GOETZ VOTING NO.. If the Liquor Control Board has a. hearing on the matter Council
President Nordquist will appear for the City. The City Clerk..was advised to telephone the Liquor
Control Board to advise of this action inasmuch as the written response will not reach them within
the required 20 days.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE REGULATING.SALE OF PARAPHERNALIA ASSOCIATED.WITH CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES
Police Chief Marlo Foster said it appears that the drug paraphernalia laws that have been upheld are
those which.specifiy that intent.to use be proven, and the proposed ordinance included that language.
The proposed ordinance had five major provisions: (1) Prohibition,of drug paraphernalia with intent
to use; (2) Prohibition of sale of drug'paraphernalia to any person who demonstrates an intent to
use; (3) Requirement of a separate room for sale and display of drug paraphernalia along with
required -posting; (4) Requirement that the owner, manager,'employee, or otherperson in charge,not
allow.minors to enter the room unless accompanied by parent orguardian; and (5) Prohibiting minors
from entering the.room or enclosure where paraphernalia is sold.or displayed unless accompanied by
parent or guardian. Based on the fact that the proposed -ordinance appeared to follow the example of
those that have been upheld, Chief Foster recommended approval. City Attorney Jim Murphy noted some
minor word and punctuation changes which he recommended. One was'that the sign.at entrances to
rooms containing the paraphernalia.refer to "paraphernalia" only, rather than "dru.g paraphernalia."
• He said.this-was only a personal opinion, that omitting the word "drug" made'the sign somewhat less
distasteful.. Councilman Gould responded that he saw no reason.to make the sign more pleasant, and
if these people were going to.sell such objects they should.take the full responsibility and acknowl-
edge what they are doing. Laura Hall of.1140 Edmonds St.. said they did not have to worry.about
putting a sign on it because everybody knows what it is, and .the name of the the business itself,
MOTION: "Grey Matter Records," certainly implies a "head" shop. COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
NORDQUIST, TO ADOPT OR'JINANCE 2127,-REGULATI`1G THE POSSESSION, USE, AND SALE OF,DRUG PARAPHERNALIA,
AND INCORPORATING TWO CHANGES RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY; I.E., IN PARAGRAPH 5.60.100 B, ON
THE SECOND LINE, THE WORD "SHOULD" WILL BE CHANGED TO "MAY" AND IN SUBPARAGRAPH (2) OF THAT PARAGRAPH
A COMMA WILL BE'INSERTED AT THE END OF THE SECOND LINE AFTER.THE WORD "LOCAL." Councilman Gould
felt the City: should do =what it can in this area, and he felt credit should be given to former
Councilman Tom.Carns for all of.his.efforts in getting the City started toward this legislation.
Councilman Kasper voiced.agreement. Councilman Nordquist said that, based on the. recommendation of
the Police Chief, he thought the City should go ahead with this. THE MOTION CARRIED. (Councilwoman
Allen was not present for the vote.) Judy Anderson, Edmonds PTSA Legislative Representative,
complimented the Council on passing this ordinance and she asked that a copy be sent to Marianne
Carnes, Legislative Coordinator for the Washington State PTSA, who had spoken to the Council previously
on this subject.
REPORT ON LANDFILL COMPLAINT.AT SPRAGUE AND 7TH
Acting Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block referred to several items which had been provided to
the Council as.background on this.comPlaint. A sequence of events.was provided by both the Building
Division and the Planning Division regarding their actions.in-the matter. Also provided were
minutes from two Board of Adjustment meetings at which Conditional Use Permit applications were.
heard, asking to.place over 500 cu.. yds:.of fill, -both of which -were denied. Ms. Block.stated that
the position ofthe neighbors was most.completely presented.at.the December 19, 1979 meeting,_and
the position of�the owner of the fill site was most completely presented at the February 20, 1980
meeting. After discussion with the City Attorney, Ms. Block and Acting Building Official Hal Reeves
suggested three options: (1) Set a date by which the owner must submit a complete application for
8
March 25, 1980''= continued •
appropriate City approvals which would bring the site into compliance with City regulations,
(2) Begin court action to force the owner to comply with City regulations and/or institute
criminal action against those responsible for placing the fill.without necessary City approvals,
or (3) Set up a meeting between the affected parties and representati.ves.of the City to attempt
to arrive at a solution acceptable to the City by a specified date. Ms. Block said the owner
of the site had submitted an application for subdivision and if the property were divided into
separate lots a portion of the fill legally could be placed there without the Conditional Use
Permit. Required grading and drainage improvement would be a condition of the subdivision
approval. Tom Rakus, attorney representing the neighbors making the complaint, asked if he
understood that the problem could be alleviated by the successful application for subdivision,
and would that take care of the present problem and excuse the past violations, overlooking '
those violations. City Attorney Jim Murphy responded that it would not say those violations do
not exist, but it would be consistent with usual City practices to try to encourage a resolution
of the matter, and then if it were not resolved criminal action could be filed. Mr. Rakus said
there was a general feeling among the neighbors that this problem will be pushed aside, and
there was the issue that a violation occurred and nothing had been done to solve the problem
and the applicant had been allowed to proceed. Mary Hannum of 747 Edmonds St. said she felt
there was a double standard and if she had done this the City would not tolerate it. She said
the majority of the fill is there illegally and just by allowing the subdivision will not solve
the problem --the problem was the earth and they all were suffering from it. She said she had
felt when they came to the Council last week that their sufferings were being recognized, but
now she apparently did not feel that was so, and she said they had to work very hard on this
and had hired an attorney. Peg Hardisty of 757 Sprague said that until they did some pushing
back last week, and except when they did some pushing in December and in February, no action
was taken. The statements made were in tones accusatory of the Council and Councilman Naughten
responded that the Council meets once a week and they do not get into the day-to-day activity
of the Building Department, but they do encourage everybody to come in if they have a problem
with the City. He advised them that they may be frustrated, but he was not willing to accept
•
their criticism of what the Council was doing. Mr. Murphy commented that there is a good
possibility that in the subdivision process the street improvement may be required which will
do a lot for the neighborhood, and he said if this was taken to court, action would be much
slower and in a criminal action there would be only a fine which would not solve the problem.
Jay McGinness, son of the owner of the property, said it was a matter of opinion as to how nice
the property looks. He said the people were talking about the drainage, but he would invite
the Council to examine the property with him, and he said the water was coming from the road
area. Mrs. Sproule McGinness said they were not trying to cause trouble,'but they don't know
exactly what to do, and they felt they.had improved the property. She said she resented the
fact that because her husband had been Mayor and had served on the Council and Planning Commission
that it was implied that they had some kind of "drag" and would get away with something. Laura
Hall of 1140 Edmonds St. said this matter had been brought to her attention as a member of the
Planning Commission. She said her information was sketchy but she understood this started with
a permit to dump fill and.more fill was.dumped than the permit allowed. She felt an undue
amount of time had elapsed in resolving this, and if the Council had been aware of it they
could have acted. Since the City Attorney had been brought into the matter she felt if the
Council had been advised they could have acted more expeditiously. Mr. Murphy responded that
he was sure the Council did not want to be advised of every stop -work order, because they
happen every day, and they do not want to get involved in everyday matters. Mr. Rakus said
there was the question of with whom these people should get angry, as they were frustrated with
the process, the situation having gone on for.six months since the stop -work order was first
issued. He said they face'the problem everyday and do not want to feel the issue will be
avoided, and they understand the political process but also understand laws should be enforced.
Mrs. McGinness said she could not see how she was hurting them in any way. Ken Loving of 710
Sprague said the landfill had devalued his property --he had it up for sale last summer and two
parties were very interested in it until. they saw the dirt arrive. He said they had asked what
was going on next -door and then lost interest in the property. Ken Hardisty of 757 Sprague
felt this could have been resolved a long time ago. He said Ken Hovde, Jr. had met with
•
neighbors at the Loving house and said he would bring the plan back to them to work out the
problem, but it never came to that and they went forward for another Conditional Use Permit.
He felt something still may be worked out if the neighbors could get together with the McGinnesses.
Councilman Naughten responded that the City has codes and ordinances to protect the citizens,
and he liked the idea of the affected parties getting together to resolve the situation to meet
those codes and ordinances. George Walsh of 739 Sprague said they did have a meeting and they
thought they had a solution. They said there had been numerous violations of City code and
nothing had been done and that was why they now had doubts about what was happening. Since
nothing had been done to this point,.he asked why they should expect anything will be done. He
felt the City departments had had ample opportunity to enforce the codes. He said the City is
not protecting itself or citizens by the lack of enforcement. But he said he did have
faith in the system or he would not be present. He added that the Board of Adjustment was
trying to apprise the Council when they voted against the Conditional Use Permits. Mrs. Block
stated that when the subdivision hearing is held the Staff will require certain grading and
contouring and removal of some of the fill. and street elevations of houses will be based on
prior ground level. Mr. Murphy added that there definitely had been code violations, but he
noted that the owners could have gotten permits to put 500 yards on each lot, individually, and
that would have resulted in terrible looking mounds.
Councilman Gould commented that he felt a meeting between the affected parties.would not be
very effective in view of what had happened this evening, in that a lot of hostility had been
aired. Chuck Cain of 1060 6th Ave S. suggested.that a disinterested engineering firm look at
the site and see if there is a violat.i.on from a.professional standpoint. After some discussion
of this suggestion.it was determined that..the,City's engineering department had already studied
it and there had been an engineeri.ng report and map showing the drainage presented at one of
the hearings. It was not felt there would be much more engineering information that would be
pertinent. Councilman Gould felt existing codes and regulationsshould be upheld and if they
are not good then they should be changed, but they should make sure existing rules are upheld.
After further discussion, Councilman Naughten said it appeared the people were willing to talk
•
t
• March 25 1980 - continued
MOTION: some.more. THEREFORE, COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED.BY.000NCILWOMAN GOETZ, THAT THE STAFF
ORGANIZE A MEETING OF THE AFFECTED PARTIES,.AND THE CITY.HAVE..WHATEVER REPRESENTATION IS NECESSARY
TO MAKE IT AN OFFICIAL MEETING,.AND.THAT THE COUNCIL BE PROVIDED FEEDBACK FROM -THAT MEETING BY
APRIL.15, 1980; THEN. IF THE PROBLEM CANNOT BE WORKED OUT THE COUNCIL WILL GO TO THE NEXT STEP. Ms.
Block commented..that in subdivision certain engineer's requirements will be established, many of
them having to do with the dirt. She felt it would be helpful .to the neighbors to see the engineer's
requirements to see whether their needs will be satisfied,'and she thought this may go a long way
toward resolving the problem: She felt there would be no problem in holding this meeting close to
the date of the subdivision hearing.and by that date the engineering requirements would be available.
A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON.THE MOTION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS NAUGHTEN, GOETZ, AND KASPER VOTING
YES, AND WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS CHILDERS-JAECH, NORDQUIST, AND GOULD VOTING NO, RESULTING IN A TIE.
(Councilwoman'Allen was not present for.the vote, having left the meeting prior to this.discussion.)
MAYOR HARRISON VOTED YES, TO BREAK THE TIE. THE MOTION CARRIED.
.There,was.no .further business:to..come.before the Council.,.and themeeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
FJ
IREN - VARNAY MORAN, CiW Clerk
April 1, 1980
HARVE.H. HARRISON, Mayor
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council.was called to order at 8:00 p.m. by Mayor Harve
Harrison in the Council Chambers of.,the Edmonds Civic Center.. All present joined in the flag salute.
PRESENT STAFF PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor
Jo -Anne Childers-Jaech
Bill Kasper
Katherine Allen
John Nordquist.
Ray Gould
Larry Naughten
Mary Goetz.
CONSENT:.AGENDA
Charles Dibble, M.A.A.
Fred Herzberg, Public Works Director
Irene Varney Moran,,.City Clerk
Jim Adams, City Engineer
Art Housler, Finance Director
Mary Lou Block, Acting.Planning Division Mgr.
Jim Jessell, Parks & Recreation Division Mgr.
Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Dan Prinz, Acting Police Chief
Bob Franklin, Technical Studies Engineer
Jim Murphy, City Attorney
Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
MOTION: City Attorney Jim Murphy removed Item.(D) from the Consent.Agenda. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN 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.
• (B). Approval of Minutes of March.25,.1980.
(C) Acknowledgment of receipt of Claim for Damages.from Ambassador House Travel, Inc. in the
amount of $275.89.
-(E) Setting date of Apri1..8, 1980 for hearing on proposed one-way traffic on alley east of
Beeson -Building for.drive-through banking window, and hearing on a Street Use Permit
application from Old National. Bank, 410 Main St.
AUTHORIZATI.ON.TO SIGN LEASE AGREEMENT,FOR.,POLICE CARS, [Item (D).on,Consent Agenda]
City Attorney Jim Murphy said the lease -had .been redrafted and hisoffice had not reviewed the
redraft. He now found problems wi.th.some of the wording,.so he suggested the Council might approve
execution of the.lease in concept and his office could go through .the technical exceptions. Council-
woman Allen felt it should be.returned.to the Council on next .week's Council agenda.. COUNCILWOMAN
MOTION: ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT ITEM (D) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA NOT BE APPROVED
THIS EVENING, AND THAT THE LEASE AGREEMENT BE PRESENTED.ON NEXT WEEK'S CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION
CARRIED.
COUNCIL
Councilman Gould noted that the. Council had been provided.an update on the Seaview Park situation,
and he said.he.would like to be sure there is City representation and a report back from the April
21 meeting.
Councilwoman. Allen referred to..the last.item on this evening's.agenda, "Discussion re, Purchasing
System for City," and said the Finance Committee will be.reviewing,that next week. THEREFORE,
MOTION: COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST,;THAT THE LAST ITEM ON THIS EVENING'S
AGENDA BE CONTINUED TO APRIL 29, 1980- MOTION CARRIED.
• Councilwoman Childers-Jaech said she had attended the Planning Commission special meeting on March
27 when the proposed Community Development Code was reviewed, and the citizens had expressed
I