19800506 City Council Minutes•
May 6, 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
Charles Dibble, M.A.A.
Jo -Anne Jaech
Fred Herzberg, Public. Works Director
'
Bil-1 Kasper
John LaTourelle, Planning.Consultant
Katherine Allen
Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
John Nordquist
Marlo Foster, Police Chief
Ray Gould
Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Larry Naughten
Jim Adams, City Engineer..
Mary Goetz
Mary Lou Block, Acting Planning Division Manager
Richard Pearson, Code Revision.Project Manager
Jim Jessel, Parks & Recreation Division'Manager
Jim Murphy, City -Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION:
COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN-MOVED, SECONDED.BY
COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ, TO.APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
MOTION CARRIED. The items approved on
the -Consent Agenda included the following:
(A) Roll call.
•
(B) Approval of Minutes of April
29., 1980.
(C) Setting date of June 3, 19.80.for.hearing on P.C. Resolution 650, proposed vacation of
41 _right-of-way and amendment.to Official Street Map to remove a portion of 4th Ave. S.,
north of SR 104. (File ST-2-80).
a
'(D) Adoption of Ordinance 21.34, vacating portion of right-of-way of 6th Ave. S.
(E) Adoption of Ordinance.2135, amending Official Street Map for 6th Ave. S. vacation.
COUNCIL
Councilwoman Goetz inquired as to. -the status of the publication,.of the employees' newsletter,
"Sound Views. She asked.when it would be.printed again. Mayor Harrison referred the question
to.M.A.A. Dibble who said he had not participated in any.di,scussions on it since the retreat.
Councilwoman Jaech stated that the Council decided at the retreat that it was an important
piece of communication and.publication should continue. Mayor Harrison asked for a motion to
MOTION: that effect. COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ.MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN JAECH, THAT PUBLICATION -OF THE
EMPLOYEES' NEWSLETTER BE REINSTITUTED FOR THE BENEFIT OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE CITY EMPLOYEES.
MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Naughten said he been requested by some of the audience to move Item 11 on the
agenda, "City Council Personnel Committee Reports and:Recommndations regarding Management
Compensation and CDD organization," to position 5 on the agenda. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN THEREFORE
MOTION: MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ,. TO PLACE AGENDA ITEM 11 IN POSITION 5 ON.THE AGENDA: A
Failed ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION,.WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS NAUGHTEN, GOETZ, AND NORDQUIST
VOTING YES, AND WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS JAECH, KASPER, ALLEN,..AND GOULD VOTING NO. MOTION FAILED.
Councilwoman Jaech felt that.Item 12 on the agenda, "Report on Newsletter,"*was an item the
• majority of.audi'ence was interested.in hearing, and she felt that having it last on -the agenda
would make the`hour late for those people who did want to hear it. THEREFORE, COUNCILWOMAN
MOTION: JAECH MOVED; SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN KASPER,>THAT ITEM 12 ON THE AGENDA BE PLACED'IN POSITION 5:
A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN, WITH COUNCIL. MEMBERS JAECH, KASPER, ALLEN, NORDQUIST, AND GOETZ
VOTING.YES,� AND WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS GOULD AND NAUGHTEN VOTING NO. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Naughten noted.that a.,letter and.check had been received from Robert Pantley. The
check was in the amount of $1,100 which had been raised at the grand opening of Pantley's on
Edmonds Bay;. and'Mr. Pantley asked that .it be forwarded to.Children's Orthopedic Hospital in
the name of -the City.of Edmonds. Councilman Naughten felt that:,was a considerate gesture, and
MOTION: COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED.BY.000NCILWOMAN GOETZ,.THAT THE MAYOR WRITE A LETTER TO
ROBERT PANTLEY THANKING HIM.FOR.THE..DONATION. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Allen stated that.:no,motion was made at the last.meeting regarding purchasing
procedures. She read aloud a memorandum .from -the Finance Director, setting forth the details
MOTION':. of the procedures. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN THEN MOVED, SECONDED:_BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT THE
PURCHASING CONTROL PROCEDURES BE:APPROVED. Councilman Gould asked what the mechanism will be
for the Finance:Committee to review on .a quarterly basis those purchase orders over $500, and
Councilwoman Allen responded that since it will be a quarterly•,review the purchases already
will have.been.approved by the M.A.A._ so the Finance•Commi.ttee would only ask questions. ` THE
MOTION. CARRIED: The procedures.-wil.l.be incorporated into.the.Purchasing Manual.
Councilwoman Jaech said she had. received.a..telephone call from the Washington Diabetes. Association
i nformi ng he.r that Jim Jessel . had .been .very instrumental '
nstrumental:in helping to put on the recent Bi ke-
a-thou in'the'City of Edmonds for that association, and that .this had been the first time
Edmonds had participated and there was an outstanding turnout.
May 6, 1980 —continued •
Councilman Nordquist advised that this..is "Better Water for People Week," and the Water Department
is holding public,open house on Friday., May 9,.1980, from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Tours will be
conducted and films, models, and displays shown.
Councilman Nordquist suggested that the contract between Mountlake.Terrace and the Nile Country Club
should be reviewed now that the Nile Country Club is being annexed to Mountlake Terrace. COUNCILMAN
MOTION: NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, THAT ON MAY 27, 1980 THE COUNCIL REVIEW THE CONTRACT
BETWEEN MOUNTLAKE TERRACE AND THE NILE COUNTRY CLUB. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Nordquist had received a letter from Hans J. Lutz of 549.N. 68th, Seattle,.saying the
City's insurance had not paid an entire claim which he made, omitting the payment on a checkvalve.
Councilman Nordquist referred the letter to.the City Clerk.
Councilman Nordquist advised that the AWC convention will be June.17-20,.1980 and that Mrs. Gilbo is
concerned about making reservations for the City participants. He asked that those planning to
attend advise Mrs. Gilbo immediately.
Councilman Nordquist asked for an Executive Session following this evening's meeting to discuss a
personnel matter and a property acquisition matter. He asked that the City Council and City Attorney
be in attendance.
AUDIENCE
Loren Wilson, no address given, voiced a complaint against a police officer who allegedly had not
assisted him in a stalled vehicle situation and instead had cited him for failure to yield.. He
described the details of the incident and gave the officer's name,.and Mayor Harrison said he would
investigate it the following day.
Lloyd Ostrom,.711 Puget Lane, asked if..this. evening's hearing on Section 15 of the Community Develop- •
ment Code would.involve citizen input,.and he was told it would.
Peggy Hardisty of 757 Sprague asked.if the water/sewer rate increases would be discussed this -evening,
and she was told that was scheduled for..next week.
REPORT ON NEWSLETTER
Councilwoman Goetz had asked to see what the City of Mountlake Terrace was sending to its citizens
as a newsletter. City Clerk Irene Varney Moran had obtained a copy of..the most recent issue and
provided it to the Council along with a cost breakdown and details of.the publication. The annual
cost for their newsletter is $13,430.88 ($1.,1.19.24.monthly), mailing to 4,800 households, and at a
postage cost of $272.40 per month. Mrs.fMoran.estimated that if..the.City of Edmonds were to follow
the same procedure it would cost approximatley $1,750 per month or $21,000 annually because there
would be approximately twice the number of mailings. The poss.ibil.ity of such a newsletter for the
City of Edmonds was discussed, as well as..other methods of -getting information to the citizens. It
was suggested that the Extended Agendas might be mailed -in the water./sewer billings, b"ut.they change
so,much and the billings are sent every other month, so that did not appear to be a good solution.
It was al
so noted that they would not include the Planning Commission or Board of Adjustment hearings.
Rob Morrison of 250 Beach P1.. felt that those people who are really.interested in the City would be
willing to pay for a subscription service.to receive the information. Councilman Naughten observed
that with what the City is looking at .for revenues he. did not.feel .this.was the time to find more
ways to spend money. He felt if the people were interested they could have themselves put on the
mailing list. Mrs. Moran stated that -people who are interested.in receiving Council agendas furnish
stamped, self addressed envelopes for that purpose. Councilman Gould suggested that key issues be
identified and the City pay the bill for a utility bill mailing for those issues, and if the local
newspapers will publicize what the City is doing that would be helpful. He noted that.this evening's
Western Sun -had an article about this hearing.. Paul Roy of 840-Alder felt an Extended Agenda in the •
water bi 1 would be enough information. Steve..Simpson, a member of the Recreation_Div.ision staff.,
said the Recreation Division has•a'quarterly publication .of their programs and they had discussed
with the newspaper the inclusion of some of these important issues.in that publication. After
MOTION: discussing the question at length and arriving at no conclusion, COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED
BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT THE CITY CLERK REPORT ON JULY 15, 1980 REGARDING THE SUGGESTIONS MADE THIS
EVENING. MOTION CARRIED.. I -
HEARING ON SECTION 15 OF COMMUNITY ..:DEVELOPMENT CODE
Richard Pearson generally reviewed the six areas.in Title 15.which.had.been.discussed in previous
Council meetings. The hearing was then.opened to the public. Patty Price of 515 5th Ave. S. said
the general public is not aware of what is contained in the published agenda items and she asked
that the newsletter idea be pursued.. She mentioned a citizens group.which has been meeting.regarding
the code and she asked that Sections 16 and 20.not be discussed until the very end of the review,
taking the more simple sections first, in order to -give the citizens group an opportunity to digest
the contents. She noted that a questionnaire was sent out regarding shorelines management and the
results were compiled, but she -said the Planning Division could not locate the questionnaires now
and she would like to see them.
Jane Cunningham of 1020 Grandview spoke to a contradiction in't4e code regarding" -noise pollution:
She the
said new code sets the maximum noise decibel at night at 45, whereas the current zoning code
sets a maximum of 40, which -increases noise. Mr. Pearson responded that when the Council reviewed
this section last August Councilman Gould had questioned the 40 decibel for nighttime.hours,- saying
it was unrealistic and inconsistent with State standards. The Staff had checked and found the"State
standards to be 45'and that was why the change was made. .
Bill Mathias of 540 Holly Dr. complimented the Staff on the work done and particularly for the
philosophies expressed in Title 15. He was concerned that the Mayor had asked the audience to limit
•
May 6, 1980 - continued
1
1
thei r remarks 'to five .minutes per person. He fel t there ; sho61 d be'. no 1 imit: Mayor, Narri•so,n ,'adyi sed
him that he had not intended.to_.p,lace'any constrictions 'on the speakers, but.there were four other
hearings scheduled this evening and he.felt people involved.with those also should'be given consideration,
and he thought most people could say what they wanted to say.in..five minutes. Mr. Mathias asked
about housing for the elderly which generally is in apartment.buildings rather than individual
houses, and.yet,the code states such:.housi.ng will be dispersed throughout the City. He was told
that multi -family housing will onl.. be.all.owed in.those areas zoned for multi -family and that this
was a policy statement which would provide that all such..un.ts.woul.d not be located together.
Jean Mathias, 540 Holly Dr., asked what the interpretation.was of the statement in 15.20.010 B that
"Special consideration should.be g'iven'.to._major land use decisions made in relation to downtown
Edmonds. Mr. Pearson said his.interpretation was that when a. major land issue came up extra thought
.would be given to it, and Councilman Gould.added that the Council would consider what would happen
if certain action were taken, and they would look at it.to see if.it would ruin the existing character,
hinder it in some way, etc.
Roger Hertr.ich.of 1020 Puget.Dr...submitted..a list of questions which concerned him and, he discussed
them. .He noted that no goal was..stated.regarding running storm ..water through a.storm water system
and it bothered him that Edmonds.'would always want to use.its streams for storm water runoff.
Councilman Gould responded that page 16 stated that streams should not be filled if there is any
other. way.. Mr. Hertrich then stated that traffic and noise were not mentioned in 15.15.03. He
questioned.whether the citizens wanted apartments in RS.zones or PRDs in RS areas of flat land. He
was concerned that RM zones should be near arterials, feeling that would open up too many places for
RM areas; and with regard to the comprehensive street plan -.he asked what to expect in the way of
changes. 'Counci,lman Gould explained that the comprehensive street plan indicates there will be a
street map --a drawing on file that will always be kept up-to-date, and not that existing streets
were going to''be widened, further improved, etc.
Roberta Kasmar of 725 Driftwood Lane also submitted a list of..questions. She felt PRDs should be
encouraged in RM neighborhoods:instead.of RS-neighborhoods. ....She asked for a specific definition of
"low scale" in 15.15.030 B 4a regarding.neighborhood shopping,concept and she felt there should be
some specific goals there for traffic, noise pollution, and ai:r pollution.. She felt the majority of
people do'not want PRDs in residential.areas, and Counci.lwoman.Allen responded that there are a lot
of people living in them who are glad they are there. But Mrs. Kasmar felt that through the use of
PRDs the result may be apartments in single family zones....Regarding her question as to goals for
traffic, noise pollution, and air pollution, she was told -.that those items are covered in the
specific sections.
Louise Dwyer of 529 Holly' submitted-a.l.ist.of.questions.having to do with officials of the -City and
an organization chart. City Attorney Jim. Murphy explained .that those things are in other chapters
of the code and page.10 to which she was referring was intended as a way for the public to inquire
for information -and to see which officials functioned.where in -relation to -Titles 15-21 of the code.
In answer to one of -her questions, he said.a.11.officials.and employees are appointed by the Mayor,
serve at-the''pleasure ofthe %yor,.and may..be confirmed by the Council. The Permit Coordi-nator is a
new function,,the Community`rDevelopment Director .is John LaTourelle. Further, the -duties of the
officials will change from time to time so should not beiin this part of the ordinance.
Lloyd Ostrom, 711 Puget Lane, said.there are many groups of people i.n many parts -of the town who are
concerned about the code. He sa;id.,.if.there..was concern.about getting public notice out regarding
the subsequent -hearings on"th-e-remaini.ng portions of the code..he would guarantee that people are
informed if,he-is-given the dates.
Rob Morrison of 250 Beach.P.l.,submi-tted,a_list.of'questions...relating to the waterfront. He was
concerned mainly,about parking.and 'felt:.that the parking l.ot'..buil.t..for the fishing -pier was in
actuality being used for the new.restaurant.on the waterfront.. He was told that there -will be
• signing to differentiate the fi*shing'pier. parking from the restaurant parking. Mr. Morrison felt
there should be -a series of meetings for.the waterfront people over a.period of several months.'to
plan for development of the waterfront.
11
1
Dan Walther -of 704 Driftwood.Lane.refer.red to.15.36.030 B, "Conservancy - Marine,"-andasked how far
"seaward" is as used therein. Mr..Murphy.responded that.State law gives jurisdiction'to the midpoint
of the Sound; that the City does not own the bedlands but the jurisdiction and regulation authority
of the City goes to the midpoint so long as it does not con.flict.with pre-emptive federal authority.
Mr. Walther was concerned that Sunset. Ave. is.closed at.10:00 p.m., and then the people go down to
the beach areas near his home.
Mr. Murphy then explained for...the audience the concept.of.the Policy Plan in relation to the Zoning
Map. The public portion of the hearing..was.then closed. Councilwoman Allen -observed that the
MOTION: Comprehensive Plan needs updating. COUNCILWOMAN-ALLEN MOVED.THAT.TITLE 15 BE- APPROVED, CONTINGENT
Failed UPON ITS REVISION AND TAKING -INTO CONS�IDERATION THE QUESTIONS RAISED THIS•EVENING, WITH REVISIONS
PROBABLY BEING REFERRED TO'THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD. .,MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilman
Naughten felt there were some points.that should be studied. He suggested -the Council take time to
reflect on this evening's input and perhaps go for approval.wi.th any changes on May 13, after reviewing
MOTION: all the material. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY.000NCILMAN KASPER, TO PLACE TITLE 15 ON
THE MAY,13,.1,980 AGENDA, NOT FOR PUBLIC HEARING,.BUT TO PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE MATERIAL
RECEIVED FROM THE PUBLIC AND TO'SUGGEST ANY CHANGES. Councilman Gould said'he*would like to see the
portion:addressed on the neighborhood shopping.concept--.the low scale buildings a-s questioned by
Mrs. Kasmar. He also felt the PRDs .should be looked at..again..in relation to steep slopes and not
being used just anywhere. -He also suggested.that if Mr. -.,Morrison would have an opportunity to'
specify some of his suggested policy changes and submit,them.that,would be helpful. Councilman
Kasper stated -that they were not,. -in the basic rewriting of the Policy Plan at this time, and if they
tried to rewrite the Policy P1an.and..PRD.change, etc., they would get themselves trapped. He felt
that was something for the Planning Advisory.Board...Councilwoman,
.Goetz said this was 'a philosophy
and she had no.problem in adopting a philosphy as long as.it.can be changed. Mr. Murphy said,
36
May 6, 1980 - continued
however, that everything comes out of this and it should not be adopted with the idea that they
would come back later and correct their mistakes. Councilman Kasper asked if specific sections
could be left open. He felt'if they could not get through this section they would be at an
impasse. He noted that -there -had been many hearings and a lot of people in the room were
present at Council meetings that addressed.some of the subjects discussed tonight, and he had
heard some of them -tonight over again. He said they could not just keep,going back. THE
MOTION THEN CARRIED. A short recess was announced.
HEARING ON PROPOSED REZONE TO RMH THE AREA.SOUTH OF•208TH S.W., NORTH OF 210TH S.W., EAST
OF.'76TH',AVE...W." AND WEST OF 70TH AVE,. W. (R-7-79)
Acting Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block said this was not actually a rezone but a
zoning of property recently annexed to the City. She identified the area on a vicinity map and.
described the surrounding zoning. There is some RML and BN to the south on 76th Ave., some CG
directly south, RS-8 and Public Use in Lynnwood to the north and east, and RML to the west.
Ms. Block noted that the RS-8 in Lynnwood is a.holding area until sewers are in and'then it
will be rezoned to RM.. The land included in this proposal is fairly undeveloped and when it is
developed to RM capacity the increase in traffic will require an,addi.t.ional traffic lane and a
signal at the intersection of 76th/208th. Neither of the RM zon.ings in the City of Edmonds
corresponds exactly to the existing County zoning, but RMH was considered to be the closest,
and based on the policy to zone annexed property as closely as possible.to its previous zoning,
the Planning Commission had recommended approval as RMH. Their findings of fact were provided..
In answer to a question, Ms. Block stated that there is no RMH on.76th until 196th St. The
public portion of the hearing was opened, no one wished to speak', and the public portion was
closed.
MOTION: COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED TO REZONE THE.SUBJECT PROPERTY TO,RML,.RATHER THAN RMH, BECAUSE RML
WILL BE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA THAN RMH; BECAUSE THERE -IS-NO PROPERTY CLOSE TO THIS
PROPERTY WHICH IS RMH.; AND BECAUSE THE COUNCIL HAD MORE OR LESS ADOPTED THE PHILOSOPHY TO KEEP
•
THE DENSITY DOWN -WHENEVER POSSIBLE. COUNCILMAN KASPER SECONDED THE MOTION FOR DISCUSSION.
Councilman Kasper noted that this property.is adjacent to the school property and when you get
into an educational area you find that units are more of a bachelor.type. Councilwoman Allen
read from the Planning Commission minutes wherein Councilman Nordquist had stated that when
these people went before the Council for annexation the Council had agreed that they would keep
in essence the same zoning as they had and the.City would try to rezone them to a like zoning.
This was discussed, and Councilman Gould noted that the Planning Commission also had some
difficulty making this decision. Councilman Nordquist.said there -were some people in the
audience at that hearing who were concerned that they would lose the multiple zoning which'they
had purchased for investment. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS
NAUGHTEN, JAECH, NORDQUIST, GOULD, AND GOETZ VOTING YES, AND WITH COUNCIL'MEMBERS KASPER AND
ALLEN VOTING NO. MOTION.CARRIED. The ordinance will be prepared -for next week's meeting.
HEARING ON CONTROL.OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS
Acting Planning.Division Manager Mary Lou Block said the intent of the proposed ordinance was
to allow a.person to have one commercial vehicle under 10,000 pounds parked .in a residential
area, but he could not,have more than one nor any over 10,000 pounds unless he had a Conditional
Use Permit. This would enable the City to control problem cases but would allow flexibility to
accommodate individual situations. The hearing was opened to the public. Bob Steiner of 1010
Brookmere spoke in favor of.the.proposed.ordinance. He related problems he has had because one
of his neighbors owns a,tow,truck company and parks -up to four tow trucks at his home. Mr.
Steiner said that late at night it sometimes sounds like a truck, stop with the trucks coming
and going. He has been trying to sell his home and found it difficult to present it as being
in a quiet, residential neighbor.hood.with•the presence of the tow.trucks. James Falconer,
President of the Lake Ballinger Community Club, and residing at 23829 74th W., expressed concern
about residential neighborhoods being impacted by the noise and.vibrations-which are created by
heavy equipment vehicles. He was also.concerned about safety as hi:s neighborhood -doe's not have
•
sidewalks and the vehicles go fast and.sometimes.have open rear ends which are inviting to
children. He was -also concerned with'the unsightliness of some of such vehicles, recognizing
that they are work vehicles, but feeling they do not belong in residential areas. He also felt
such vehicles were hard on the residential roads. He expressed the hope that the restriction
would not include vans which some people use in their businesses. No.one else wished to speak,
and the public portion of the hearing was. closed. Councilman Gould felt this was a good ordinance
but not strong enough. He -felt the part allowing repairs to be accomplished in the residential
areas should be'stricken, feeling it was.a loophole. It provided a maximum of two days for
repairs, which he.felt would let a person take the vehicle home for weekends, ostensibly to
MOTION: work on it. He felt any repairs should be done at a repair shop. COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED,
SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE PRESENTED WITH THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENT:
IN PARAGRAPH 12.14.022 A, STRIKE ALL THE WORDS.AFTER THE WORD "UNLOADED" ON THE SECOND LINE.
.MOTION CARRIED. The redrafted ordinance -will be on next week's Consent Agenda.
PRELIMINARY HEARING ON 4-LOT SUBDIVISION AT 9122 MAIN ST. (P-1-80)
This property was subdivided within the last five years so further subdivision within that
period must be heard by the Planning Commission and City Council.. Details of the proposal were
provided in the Planning Commission minutes. Three modifications were requested: (1) Allowing
a 20' access instead of the required.25.';.(2) Allowing more than -three lots to access off a
private road; and (3.) A11'owing Lot 4 to have a.length/width ratio less than the required .4.
The long; narrow configuration of Lot 4.was an existing -condition and the lot already was
developed. An adjoining lot south of.the.site-which Mr. Brubaker owns was created by an -improper
subdivision, and Ms. Block indicated that if this proposal were approved Mr. Brubaker would
probaby go back through the.Planning Commission to have that lot added to this subdivision to
legalize it. Ms. Block recommended approval of this subdivision,.subject to the standard
37
May 6, 1980 - continued
requirements and:with the modifications requested. Fire Chief Jack Weinz said he would require a
fire hydrant at the south end of.the.'.cul-de-sac due to the length of the cul-de-sac and the driveway.
City Engineer -Jim Adams said -the design of the cul-de-sac had.not.yet been approved by the Engineering
Division, but he was certain there was sufficient area to put in.a -standard.turnaround. Mr. Adams
commented that this subdivision could help to alleviate.an existing problem•in Shell Valley in that
the water line loop can be completed to provide water to Shell Valley from two directions. The
public portion of the hearing was opened, no one wished to speak, and the public portion was closed.
MOTION:
COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ MOVED TO GIVE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO SUBDIVISION P-1-80, INCLUDING ALL THE
Amended
MODIFICATIONS AND CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. COUNCILMAN GOULD SECONDED THE
MOTION FOR DISCUSSION. Councilman Gould noted that Lot,3.is.a 45,000 sq. ft. lot. COUNCILMAN GOULD
Amendment
MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN .GOETZ, THAT.IT IS THE UNDERSTANDING WITH THE
APPROVAL OF.THIS SUBDIVISION THAT -LOT 3 WILL NOT BE SUBDIVIDABLE AND, FURTHER, THAT ALL THE REQUIRE-
MENTS OF THE CITY ENGINEER FOR.A..WATER LINE CONNECTION WILL BE.INCLUDED. THE MOTION TO AMEND CARRIED.
THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED, THEN CARRIED.
HEARING ON..PREZONING FOR ALBERTSONS.PROPERTY IN CONJUNCTION WITH PROPOSED ANNEXATION
The property currently was zoned BC (Community Business) in the County. The property is part of a
site on which Albertsons plans to build a food center store;.the other part of the site is within
the City of Edmonds. Albertsons wished to have the property zoned BN upon annexation to conform to
the rest of the site. The Planning Commission had found that the criteria for rezone were met and
had approved the proposal. Their findings of fact were provided. Albertsons-had received a Conditional
Use Permit for some shared parking with the adjacent bowl-ing alley. Ms. Block stated that this was
the first of two required City Council hearings on the.matter and, if approved, the necessary ordinances
would be presented at the second hearing scheduled for June 16, 1980. The public portion of the
hearing was opened. Douglas Mulvanny, architect for the project, was present to answer any questions,
but none were asked of him. The public portion of the hearing was closed. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST
MOTION:
•
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN.ALLEN, THAT, BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION, THE CITY ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO DRAFT THE NECESSARY ORDINANCE PURSUANT TO
P.C. RESOLUTION 656, AND THAT THE SECOND HEARING ON THE MATTER BE SCHEDULED FOR,JUNE 16, 1980.
MOTION CARRIED.
REVIEW OF SAFETY STANDARDS AT UNI.ON:OIL BEACH
1
MOTION:
Amended
Amendment
This review was prompted by the recent drowning of a scuba diver off the Union Oil Beach. Parks and
Recreation Division Manager Jim-Jessel reported that local divers believe there is no unusual hazard
at Union Oil Beach that would endanger divers who are familiar with Puget Sound. The current and
the bottom's slope to considerable depth are not unusual for.Puget Sound•waters, but they may surprise
out -of -area divers. The recreation staff recommended that a sign be posted at the beach warning of
the strong currents and steep drop-off, but that no other.action was necessary. Mr. Jessel said
divers believe the sign would be excessive, but that it may help divers think about the hazards they
will face before they enter the water. They believe the Union Oil Beach is an interesting under-
water area that is an asset to the diving community. In general, it had been found that most deaths
from diving occur on the surface and it appears to be a training problem. Councilman Naughten'felt
that area should be closed -to divers unless there is something done about safety. He suggested that
if it were closed, possibly someone.would do something about -the safety there. Councilman Gould
suggested that Union Oil might be asked to do something similar to what has been done at Brackett's
Landing. City Attorney Jim Murphy, who is a diver, said the.Union Oil Beach is an entirely different
environment from that at Brackett's Landing in that it is.very deep and critical mistakes can be
made. He did not think the City would want to be involved.i.n any kind&,of'responsib,i-lity for that.
He added that•although it is more dangerous than Brackett's Landing, it is safer than'a lot of
places where divers will dive anyway. He did not think diving should be encouraged there, but he
saw no reason to restrict it.. He noted.that at Brackett's Landing the City has said it is an under-
water park and divers have been invited there. Laura Hall,.1140•Edmonds St., said she has had
visitors who bring diving classes from eastern Washington, and she thought posting it*would be
helpful to those who are not familiar with the waters. Councilman Gould felt any signing should be
as negative as possible, saying.sports diving is not recommended. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Dr.,
said what has been done at the park is excellent but again more and more people have been invited,
and he felt the less invitation.to the oil dock, the better. He asked what a person would do if he
fell off the fishing pier as the life preservers get stolen,and there is no safety platform. Mayor
Harrison advised him that that situation was being studied. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT SIGNS .BE POSTED AT UNION OIL BEACH AND DAYTON ST. BEACH STATING: "DANGER --
DIVER'S WARNING. STRONG CURRENTS, BOATERS, AND STEEP DROP-OFFS.." The question arose as to the.
necessity of signing Dayton St. Beach. Planning Consultant John LaTourelle said he had never seen a
diver at Dayton St. Park, that.they.are out in the water'bu.t they do not come from the park, they
come from the diving shop. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN AMENDED.HIS MOTION, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD,
THAT THE SIGNING BE PLACED W UNION OIL BEACH ONLY. MOTION.CARRIED.
CITY COUNCIL PERSONNEL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.REGARDING MANAGEMENT COMPENSATION
AND'-COMMUNITY"DEVELOP#LENT DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Councilwoman Jaech reported that the. City Council had asked the Personnel Committee to study the
City's management salary schedule and.report its findings and recommendations. Because the study
was pending, department heads did not receive January 1•,.1980 salary increases except for the cost -
of -living increase. A preliminary study had indicated that management salaries were low in comparison
to those of other cities in the area.and that some managers' and supervisors' salaries were too low
in comparison. with those of employees they supervise. In.some cases supervisors were earning less
than those employees under their supervision. Councilwoman Jaech explained how the comparisons were
made and the results.` The Personnel Committee proposed,changes which would place Edmonds' management
salaries in the middle of those of the eleven cities which were studied. This would result in an
average salary increase of 7.8%. The monthly cost of the recommended increases.for the balance of
1980 would be $2,180, including benefits. The total added.cost this year would be $22,823. The
Exempt Position Classification Schedule was also modified, as were the salary ranges. The Personnel
Committee recommended that the Council approve the position classification schedule, adopt the
38
MOTION:
MOTION:
May 6, 1980 - continued •
proposed ordinance,.and direct the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance transferring $22,823 from
the Council Contingency Fund to the General Fund, and amending the budget.
The organization of the Community Development Department was studied at the same'time. That depart-
ment has three divisions: Planning, Building, and Parks and Recreation. The position of Director
is vacant but much of the nonadministrative part of -that position.is being. performed by John LaTourelle
in the role of consultant. The Parks and Recreation Division has expanded with the acquisition of
the Anderson Center and i-s expected to expand further. The Personnel Committee felt that division
should be a department and report to the Mayor.. They recommended.that.P1anning and Building remain
divisions of the Community Development Department. They further recommended that the Director
position remain vacant as long as John LaTourelle is retained in the role of consultant. Council-
woman Goetz expressed the concern that Mary Lou Block had remained in.the position of Actin
Manager of the Planning Division for a .lengthy period, and.suggested.she should be given permanent
status. Councilwoman Goetz complimented the Personnel Committee fora very fine job on this project.
Councilman Gould responded that it had been a difficult analysis and took a lot of work. They had
looked at the world around..and internally.to be sure they treated people fairly. COUNCILMAN GOULD
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, THAT ORDINANCE 2136 BE ADOPTED, REORGANIZING THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Mayor Harrison stated that the proposed ordinances had been prepared and
placed on the Council Agenda with no consultation with the Mayor. THE. MOTION THEN CARRIED. COUN-
CILMAN GOULD THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, TO.ADOPT ORDINANCE 2137, SETTING FORTH THE
REVISED EXEMPT EMPLOYEE SALARY RANGES AND SPECIFIED SALARIES FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS AND DEPARTMENTAL
ASSISTANTS. Councilwoman Allen questioned whether there was enough money in the Council Contingency
Fund for the transfer of funds requested for.the increase in department heads' and departmental
assistants' salaries. M.-A.A. Dibble responded that the Finance Director had indicated to him that
the funds were there. Councilwoman Allen's understanding was that.there had been some, budgeting
included to cover this when -the budget.was.established, and Mr. Dibble stated there had been approxi-
mately a 3.1% average increase budgeted. Chuck Cain, 1060,6th Ave. S.,,a.member of the Civil Service
Commission, said that.not long ago they had an opening for Assistant -Fire Chief and because of the
salary structure none of the men would apply for the job. He heard the salary would be raised so
•
they would apply for the job, and he urged the Council to pass the ordinance. He also felt that the
Fire Department is undermanned and he asked that the Council do something about that in next year's
budget. He felt there should be at least five more men on duty. He is a volunteer fireman. Laura
Hall, 1140 Edmonds St., asked Mayor.Harrison if.he had been consulted.on.this and he replied that he
had not. She asked him if this was by choice, and he said -it was not. Councilman Gould stated that
it is the duty of the City Council to set the salary ranges and set specified salaries for department
heads. Councilman Kasper felt they ,were going to be in a deficit position before the year is over
and, although he thought the Committee.. had done an excellent job of ranging, he thought the increases
were somewhat excessive in view of the private sector. He.thought,the raises should be about 50% of
what they were. Councilwoman Goetz said.she'did not think the salary ranges were out of line, and
she noted that they were in the middle.of the comparison study. Also, she thought the efficient
running of the'City should be continued and, she felt there was the possibility of losing some of the
Staff and she did not think they should take the.chance of losing any of the Staff. A ROLL CALL
VOTE WAS TAKEN ON THE MOTION, WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS GOULD, NAUGHTEN, JAECH, NORDQUIST, AND GOETZ
VOTING YES, AND WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS KASPER AND ALLEN VOTING NO. MOTION CARRIED.
There was no further business to come before —the Council, and the meeting adjourned to Executive
Session at 11-:55 p.m.'
r
IRENE VARNEY MORAN, Ci y Clerk HARVE.H.,HARRISON, Mayor
May 13, 1980 - Work Meeting
•
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 th.e.Edmonds
Civic Center. All.present joined in the flag salute.
PRESENT
ABSENT
-STAFF PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor
Katherine Allen
Charles Dibble,.M.A.A.
Jo -Anne Jaech
Ray Gould
Fred Herzberg, Public Works Director
Bill Kasper-
Jim Adams, City Engineer
John Nordquist
Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
Larry Naughten
Marlo Foster, Police Chief
Ma.ry Goetz
Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Art Housler, Finance Director
Mary Lou Block, Acting Planning Div. Mgr.
Richard Pearson, Code Revision Proj. Mgr.
Jim Jessel, Parks & Recreation Mgr.
Jim Murphy, City'Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
CONSENT AGENDA
MOTION: Items (E) and.(G)..we're removed from,the.Cons:ent 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.May 6, 1980.