19800819 City Council Minutestoo
August 12, 1980 - continued
•
time, and that the.law requires that misdemeanors occur in the officer's presence in order to be
charged. He felt that passage of a noise ordinance would be helpful but it should not be considered
a complete solution to this or similar problems.
Kenneth Gray, 7915.207th.S.W., said that the car was the issue. Francis Holt,.20716 78th P1. W.,
asked that dispatches be made by telephone instead of radio because there are radio scanners.
George Dahlquist said the noise ordinace should .be a 24-hour- or.diinance'.:because . number of people
work shifts. Mary -Johnson, 114 Caspers, said.the swearing.read in the statement was not necessary
to be read and.was offensive to others.in the audience who were.at the.Council meeting as interested
citizens. Phil King, 7910 79th P1. S.W., said the neighborhood did not -want to force the Rachs to
get rid of the car or the motorcycle, but they don't want them starting the car. He felt they
should get a winch, and he.said the neighbors just want to get back to the normal, quiet neighborhood
they had prior to January --he had lived there four years. Mr.. King said he likes to watch race cars
but he does not like -them in his neighborhood, and•he noted .that.other children in the neighborhood
have. .dirt bikes;., but. he said. they ,b.el ong ,on dirt. The public portion of the hearing was closed, and
people present for this hearing left befdre any formal action was taken. Councilman Naughten spoke
with them and asked that they advise the Council in 30.days whether the problem is resolved. Council-
woman Goetz left at this time, 10:35. p.m., and Councilman Nordquist had left at approximately 10:00 p.m.
COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY.000NCILMAN GOULD, THAT THE.CITY.ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO
DRAFT A NOISE ORDINANCE TO THE BEST OF HIS ABILITY AND PRESENT IT.TO.THE.COUNCIL SEPTEMBER 2, 1980.
MOTION CARRIED.
MID -YEAR FINANCIAL REVIEW
Finance Director Art Housler reviewed the City's financial status, noting that both revenues and
expenditures are down from 1979. A $180,000 ending cash balance is projected for 1980.
There was no further business to come before the Council, and the meeting adjourned to Executive
Session at 11:35 p.m.
IRENE VARNEY MORAN, &1ty Clerk HARVE H. HARRISON, Mayor
August 19, 1980
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 8:15 p.m. by Mayor Harve
Harrison in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. The meeting -was preceded by a brief
celebration in recognition of the City's 90th anniversary. All present joined in the flag salute..
PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor
Jo -Anne Jaech
Bill Kasper
Katherine Allen
John Nordquist
Ray Gould
Mary Goetz
CONSENT AGENDA
ABSENT STAFF PRESENT
Larry-Naughten Charles Dibble, M.A.A.
Fred Herzberg, Public Works Director
Jim Adams, City Engineer
John LaTourelle, Planning Consultant
Mary Lou Block; Planning Division Manager
Irene Varney Moran, City.Clerk
Marlo Foster, Police, Chief
Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Jim Jessel, Parks_& Recreation Director
Art Housler, Finance Director
Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney
Jim Murphy, City Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY.000NCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE.THE CONSENT AGENDA, MOTION
CARRIED. The approved items on .the Consent Agenda' -included the following:
(A) Roll call.
(B) Approval of Minutes of August 12, 1980.
(C) Report on bids opened August 12 for 1980 street improvement projects and award -of -contract
to Associated Sand and Gravel for.$169,791.85.
(D) Final acceptance of work by.Zylstra Construction.for Senior.Center building improvements
and setting a 30-day retainage period.
COUNCIL
Councilman Nordquist.-suggested that.the-review ,of operating hours of convenience stores (Item 9.on
the agenda) be. moved up on the agenda... He. noted that the'.previbus,discussion' on this item did not
1
1
11
1
LJ
I-
1�
0
August 19,.1980 - continued
concl.ude until 1:30 a.m. and the representatives from Southland Corporation had waited.until very.
late to be heard. COUNCILMAN.NORDQUIST THEN MOVED, SECONDED.BY:000NCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO MOVE ITEM 9
ON THE AGENDA TO FOLLOW ITEM 5. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Allen requested tha.t..there be a recess during.this evening's meeting in order to have
an Executive -Session to discuss legal matters regarding City.and Port property.
Councilwoman Jaech asked if the City was meeting the requirements of RCW 43.21C.060 as to incorporating
environmental policies into codes by.September 21, 1980. Planning Division.Manager.Mary Lou Block .
responded that they currently are working on the necessary -ordinances which will be presented to the
Council for consideration prior to that date.
Councilwoman Jaech requested that the City Attorney draft.something for all of the board and commission
members similar to that which was.provided the Council regarding association with nonpartisan groups.
She said some.board members had inquired of her whether they could be a member of the Council of
Concerned.. C1 ti zens .
Councilwoman Jaech noted that:.M.A.A. Dibble -had written a.memo regarding neighborhood disputes in
which he suggested that the Council consider adopting an informal conference procedure presided over
by a.deputy prosecutor to hear and evaluate the complaint. COUNCILWOMAN JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY
COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO SET FOR DISCUSSION AT THE SEPTEMBER..9., 1980 WORK MEETING THE ,CONSIDERATION OF
ESTABLISHING AN INFORMAL CONFERENCE PROCEDURE FOR NEIGHBORHOOD DISPUTES. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman Allen noted that. James Falconer, President of the. Lake Ballinger Community Club, had
requested a meeting of all the concerned parties to establish a boundary line between Edmonds and
Mountlake Terrace through Lake Ballinger. Councilman Nordquist.said he would contact Mr. Falconer
• to establish a meeting to include the City Attorney, the Publ.i.c.Works Director, and himself.
AUDIENCE
Grant Woodfield., 9820 228th P1.. S.W., complained about.the Albertsons development at Westgate. He'
sai.d the City.is being scarred..by...the_grading being done,.that.there is a 20-year growth of greenbelt
being destroyed and being replaced with 8' trees. City Engineer Jim Adams said there will be a
retaining wall built with a two -to -one slope at the top.. Mr. Woodfield said he had been unable to
find out from Albertsons what is being done. Councilman Gould asked that the City Staff serve in a
coordination function for a meeting between Albertsons and interested people, and that a report be
made to the Council as to what transpires.
There was a large number of people.in.the audience who were.present to contest the recent increase
in water/sewer.rates. Some of the concerns expressed were that the rates were not equitable because
multi -family units where most of the water runs through the sewers are on the same rates as single-
family homes where much of the water in the summer months is used for watering yards and does not
run through the sewers; that the increases were unreasonable,many being over 400%; that additionally
the utility tax rate had increased; thatthe citizens were.not given proper notice as to the increases
and the,amounts-of those increases;.and that the rates were unfair during the summer when much of
the water used does not go through the sewers but is used.in.the yards. Speaking on this issue were
Harold Schierman of-.1161 7th.S..,.Imre Br.unauer of 935 Pine.St.,.Don Horn of 539.4th S., Mrs. Halstead,
Al Albers of 524 3rd N., Donna.Berg,of.540 3rd, John Kolstad of 21524 96th W., Carol Hayes of 709
Elm W., Cleo Smith of-1050 Spruce, and Hal Gleason of 9804.253rd S.W. Public Works Director Fred
Herzberg explained the rate structure and reasons for the increases, displaying the figures discussed
during the hearings held previously —He described the poor financial condition of the utility
account which was attributed to.poor.accounting methods.used formerlyand he described the line
replacement.work which must be -done. The people were told that the City now has a professional
accountant.wh.ich it did not -.have a few.years ago and that.in.addition to correcting the accounting
• system -he had caused the City's bond.rating to be increased -because of the improved accounting
system.. Finance -Director Art'Housler stated that he had come -to work for the City in February of
1978 and recognized the problem within the accounting system. He said he now has a professional
accountant who monitors the utility account. Councilman.Gould advised the audience that it was
difficult for the Council to do what they did, but as a legislative branch they had to step in and
do something to keep the City from becoming another New York City. He noted that the Mayor had
vetoed the Council's action, but that the -Mayor's alternative.was to provide the necessary funds by
means of.20-year bonds which would have been much more.costly.. He read a portion of the auditor's
report which reflected the reasons.for.the poor financial status. Councilman Gould said he would be
willing to consider another methodif more equitable rates could be determined. Councilman-Nordquist
added that because of the work of. the Public Works Director..the City's fire rating had been saved,
so that citizens' -fire insurance rates would not be increased.. He discussed former proposals to
join Metro and to change the location of.the treatment plant, either of which would have been more
costly. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST THEN MOVED,.SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN JAECH, TO REVIEW THE WATER/SEWER
RATES ON SEPTEMBER 30, 1980. MOTION CARRIED. The intent will be to look for what may be more
equitable rates and possibly split rates for summer and winter.
Rachel Bell, 264 Beach P1.., stated .that. somehow her.name.had been placed on a list of people who are
in favor of the change to the Council/Manager form of government and she wanted to state publicly
that she is not in.favor of such a change.
Laura Hall of 1140 Edmonds St. said she was speaking in behalf of five citizens who had contacted
her within the last few days regarding appearance of fairness on the -parts of some Council members.
She had been told that three Council members attended a meeting in support of the Council/Manager
form of government and she had been asked whether that was a violation of the Appearance of Fairness
Doctrine. City.Attorney Wayne Tanaka.responded that the -Appearance of Fairness Doctrine is restricted
to those types`of hearings where there are two contesting parties, and -this issue -does not involve
two'small groups pitted against each other, but -it is a major iss'ue of -City-wide concern. He said
the Council members are free to join those groups because the decision will not be made by them but
102
August 19, 1980 - continued •
will be done in an election. Councilwoman Jaech stated that she had checked with City Attorney Jim
Murphy.before becoming involved with the group, to assure that it was proper. Councilman Gould also
stated he had called Mr. Murphy to be sure it was proper for him to be a member,of the committee,
and he added that they could not have four members on the committee as that would constitute a
quorum of the Council.
Natalie Shippen of 1022 Euclid questioned the rezone contract on the Port property where an industrial
park is proposed, as she was concerned that the height permitted may be.100', the same as the CG
zone on Highway 99. Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block responded that the final contract
includes a stipulation that no buildings be higher than 35' or two stories.
At this time a short recess was announced, and the Council adjourned to Executive Session.
Following the recess, Ray Martin of 18704 94th W. questioned whether Section 1.14.040(4) of the City
Code was being violated by Councilman Kasper's participation in the hearings on the Community'
Development Code. He quoted this section of the Code saying it forbids a Council -member from taking
any action, including voting, discussion, or persuasion on any matter coming before the City Council
which would affect property, other than the public official's or his-family's own residence, in
which the public official or -his family may have a financial or pecuniary interest. Mr. Martin
stated that Councilman Kasper owns three parcels of developable land in addition to his adjacent
home on which at least eight single-family residences could be built under the existing Code and.
that Councilman Kasper is planning the development of that property. Mr. Martin felt that'ihrough
the PRD medium Councilman Kasper could increase the number of units for a greater potential•profit,
and that the PRD issue is very important and should not be affected by any person's possible interest
in developing his property under a more.advantageous-set of rules. He asked that either Councilman
Kasper remove himself from further participation in this issue or.that a public hearing on this •
question be held at the next Council meeting, August 26, 1980. Councilman Kasper responded that
this was a complete surprise'to him. He said when he was appointed to this Council position he
indicated in his application and in his financial disclosure that he had this property in his back
yard and had owned it for 15 years --his mother's property --and that he was developing it into nine
or ten -lots.. Further, that he -had never proposed anything in a PRD; and he also had stated that he
works for Security Pacific Mortgage Company and -they have one piece of property in the City on which
they have foreclosed and he would abstain from voting on that. He said he had abstained from voting
on the Walker property which abuts that property and all he could say -was that this is his property
and his back yard, and he had been 15 years dealing with'the City on this property and he did not
see where the Code affects what he is doing. In fact, he said his streets will be larger than the
proposed Code will require. He added that he had no objection to a hearing on August 26. City
Attorney Wayne Tanaka suggested that his office be given an opportunity to examine what Mr. Martin
had said and provided and then they would advise the Mayor regarding a hearing,•but such a hearing
di.d not necessarily have to be held at a Council meeting. Councilman Gould stated that it is
critical that in all aspects of dealing with the public that the Councildo everything they can to
keep it -open to the public, and any.hearing should be a public hearing.
HEARING ON INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION TERMINAL FEASIBILITY STUDY
Public Works Director Fred Herzberg recommended Alternate "C" of those alternatives suggested.by
Community,Transit. and he made a number of comments regarding that proposal. For the.short term he
noted that railroad siding had been removed and the sidewalk installed along Admiral Way. He felt
the bus shelter at the north end was acceptable but the shelter in .front of the Senior Center should
not be removed as it is essential for the seniors. He agreed that it is important that the buses be
allowed to go southbound and he indicated the covered walkway on the,pier is acceptable. For the
mid-term,he-saw no reason -to e1:iminate the ferry parking lot and -lease the space for commercial
development, as proposed:, He felt it would only add to the parking problem and also that it was •
outside the intent of the study. He felt the Port should comment on the 60' of right-of=way for
ferry pier widening on the south,•and he noted that some of the trees proposed to be planted along
Admiral Way appeared to eliminate some parking which would be a.concern. For the -long term he said
the'Kiss & Ride area for future commuterrail eliminates more parking and he opposed the elimination
of parking. He felt,the`same•results could be achieved by keeping James St. open. It appeared that,
the new terminal on the pier would replace the -bus shelters on,Admiral Way which was -not practical,
as.the seniors could not be' -expected to walk out on the pier.to obtain -transportation. He reiterated
that -the shelter in front of the Senior-Center.must be retained. He..felt the turn for the bus from
the ferry terminal to Admiral Way may be too sharp for.a.bus.to negotiate. He noted that the out-
lying Park & Ride lot could serve people going to the ferry.as well as Seattle. The hearing was
opened.
Vic Sood, Director of Community Transit, said he had seen.Mr. He.rzberg's comments for the first time
this evening, and he requested time to review them. He assured the Council that the bus shelter in
front of -the Senior Center would not be eliminated, and he.noted that part of the purpose of a Park
& Ride lot in the Edmonds -area has been to have a shuttle bus to the ferry and thereby remove some
of the parking from the waterfront.
Harold Morgan, from the Department of Transportation, who is in charge of the design of the Edmonds
Park & Ride lot, enumerated the public's first three choices of location of the lot. They were:
(1) the old North Star gravel pit, (2) and (3) a tie between 230th/Aurora and the proposed site of
the performing arts center on 212th S..W. He said.the public input.will be strongly considered, as
well as that of other agencies, and selection hopefully will -be finalized in the first quarter of
1981.
Bob Morrison, 250 Beach Pl.,-asked. :what time frames were being considered and whether this•was•to
be the last hearing on the short=term proposals. Councilman Nordquist responded that he serves on
n
LJ
103
•
August 19, 1980 - continued
the transit board and at this point they only.were asking for opinions on their ideas, and the next
step'will be to have Mr. Sood's,feedback. He noted that the bus system is only three years old and
has not taken any federal funds yet.�.Mr. Sood added that they -are not looking for decisions yet,
but want to work with the City to satisfy everyone. Mike.Christoffer, also of -Community Transit,
indicated that the long-term implementation target date is 1990 and the short-term date is 1982.
The mid-term will- be between -next year and 1990. No one else wished to speak.on this matter, and .
the hearing was closed. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED -BY COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ,.THAT SEPTEMBER 23,
1980 BE SET TO HEAR THE`COMMUNITY..TRANSIT FEEDBACK TO -THE PUBLIC.WORKS DIRECTOR'S AUGUST 11, 1980
MEMORANDUM. MOTION CARRIED. Councilwoman Allen was not..present for the vote.
REVIEW'OF OPERATING HOURS OF CONVENIENCE STORES
Police Chief Marlo Foster provided an updated report regarding -police activities around 7-Eleven
stores. He said this activity is of no burden to the police. He also noted that one small city at
the south of Puget Sound -is asking.the Liquor Board not,to issue liquor permits to convenience
stores in.their city, and so far there are no convenience stores there. He felt this issue probably
should be referred to the Planning!Division with'the"suggestion that any business open all night
should be controlled by a Condi-tional.Use Permit. Thereby.any business in a BN zone could apply for
a Condi.tional Use Permit to have .the late -night operating hours and the neighbors could voice any
objections. He stressed that this was only intended for�the.BN zone. M.A.A. Charles Dibble noted
that although the Police Chief's report indicated the frequency of incidents.is greater in the late
night hours, when you break down the -figures they really are quite infrequent. Councilman Gould
said.another consideration was what kind of atmosphere the convenience store creates in a community,
aside .from the -police activity, such as litter, pinball machines, etc. He said he would like tq
hear from the Lake Ballinger people what has transpired between them and the Southland Corporation.
•
Jim Chapman, 23321 71st Ave. W.., a.board member of the Lake Ballinger Community'Club, said they had
met last Thursday with the 7-Eleven.people and discussed the issues of concern. He enumerated their
concerns and the responses from 7-Eleven. He felt-the.communications between them had been very
beneficial. He noted that the Community Club had gone.on record as supporting the proposal to close
down the night operations but said they may want to reconsider their.posit.ion and get together with
7-Eleven when their next meeting is scheduled in October. He requested that the Council -not take
any definite action until they have talked further.
John Westman, 3625 Geyer Lane,. Everett, the .District Manager of 7-Eleven in this area, said it did
take a while to get communications setup betweeen them but he thought they had made remarkable -
strides. He said twelve people from -the neighborhood gave.valuable-input at their meeting, and they
would like to continue in that vein. He had taken traffic counts four successive nights, with 3,208
cars going by their store, north and south, and wi'th'749.cars turning in, indicating they do not
generate all of the traffic. He noted that a short-cut has been created from Highway 99. to 205th
.
and there is a.speeding problem. They had met with the traffic engineer and discussed the possibility
of setting up a 4-way stop sign on 242nd or a pedestrian wal.kway.with Gaut ion lights, as there is a
traffic hazard there.
Councilwoman Jaech observed that..the discussion.concerning operating hours for convenience stores
originally came about because.there..was a.total.ly new.,.unknown.store coming into the area which
intended putting in 8-12 stores in the Edmonds area and sites were in BN zones and could impact
those areas. She advised Mr. Westman that his cooperation in working with the neighbors was appreciated.
Bob Boye, 24325 76th W., said'h.is..driveway is across from the 7-Eleven and he was one of the people
who previously supported closing from midnight to 6:00 a.m.,.but he had changed -his mind. He felt
most of the problems in the neighborhood take place in.the daytime, not at night. Also, he realized
it would hurt the store's business tremendously. He was very.impressed.with the action they had
•
taken so�far.to work out the.problems. He noted.that they have a.security officer -who works with
all of. -their stores them
giving training in how to stave.off problems and they work closely with the
police., He felt problems at convenience stores would vary.from location to location and there
should be a!method to control localized problems, and.he thought the Conditional Use Permit may be
the answer. No:one else wished to speak, and the discussion returned to the Council. COUNCILMAN
NORDQUIST..MO.VED; SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO CONTINUE.THE REVIEW OF OPERATING HOURS OF CONVENIENCE
STORES.ON.00TOBER 7, 198*0 IN'ORDER..TO_DISCUSS THE POSS.IBILITY OF.:UTILI,ZING THE.CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT IN'REGULATING OPERATING.HOURS. . Councilman Gould.added that.,the motion.will cause the Staff
to bring to.the Council whatever paperwork is necessary.for Conditional.Use Permits. Planning
Division Manager Mary.Lou Block'sugggested that this could be incorporated into the.new Community
Development Code draft presented for review next week. THE MOTION.WAS WITHDRAWN. -COUNCILMAN GOULD.
THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT NECESSARY AMENDMENTS BE MADE TO THE NEW COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT CODE DRAFT TO INCORPORATE THE CONDITIONAL USE..PERMIT'S.SPEAKING TO THE SITUATION OF CON-
VENIENCE STORES IN BN ZONES. MOTION CARRIED.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION TO INITIATE STREET VACATION, PORTION.OF 8TH AVE. N. and
CONTINUED.DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO OFFICIAL.STREET MAP TO ADD PROPOSED
CUL-DE=SAC, VICINITY 8TH AVE.-N. AND ALOHA ST - P.C. RESOLUTION 654 (ST 5 80)
Councilman Kasper left the Council Chambers during this discussion. Planning Division Manager Mary
Lou Block -noted that the Council
had directed the City Attorney to daft this. resolution. The
r
proposed resolution set a hearing date of October 14, 1980-which provides ample time for the Planning
Commission to hear it adequately prior to being.heard-by"the City Council. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN.NORDQUIST, TO PASS
RESOLUTION,474, INITIATING PROCEEDINGS TO VACATE
CERTAIN PROPERTY'PREVIOUSLY DEDICATED..FOR STREET PURPOSES -AND SETTING.A.HEARING DATE.OF OCTOBER 14,
1980. MOTION CARRIED. The.discussion of the proposed,'amendment to the Official Street -Map to add a
cul-de-sac in this
area will be appropriate at the time the+vacation hearing is held. COUNCILWOMAN
ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, TO CONTINUE THE ACTION.ON
THE PROPOSED CUL-DE-SAC TO
OCTOBER 14,1980. MOTION CARRIED. Councilman Kasper returned to the rostrum. Councilwoman Goetz
left the meeting at 11:30 p.m.
August 19, 1980 - continued •
CONTINUED DISCUSSION RE SPRAGUE ST: LID PROPOSED RESOLUTION,OF,INTENT-ION
City Engineer Jim Adams demonstrated the.ownerships of the various parcels involved, the McGinnesses
and Harrises owning 70%. There are two subdivisions involved, that of the McGinnesses and that of
the Harrises. The estimated costs of the required improvements were shown. The existing water main
is 4" steel which is adequate at present, but with the addition of the -subdivisions it will require
upgrading. Mr. Adams said this street does not.appear on the 10-year capital improvement program
and he had no knowledge of any precedent of City participation in similar projects. The developers
of subdivisions put in the water mains.
Peggy Harris said her previous question had not been answered as to why they should have to put in
the water main if they are .going to pay the.increased water rates. Mayor Harrison responded that it
seemed logical to adjust the priorities to accommodate the street improvement. Councilwoman Allen,
however, said the fill which had been placed on some of this property and.precipitated the subdivision
action never has been removed and that problem should be settled before going further. She felt
they were considering an LID.on something that was illegal. Councilman Gould addressed Mrs. Harris
regarding the water and said the 4" existing line is satisfactory and the City has no reason to
replace it, but the people who are going to develop the property need more water and like all other
developers -they have to put in the water line. He said it might well be that one of the mains
coming to serve this. block may.have to be replaced, and that is what the increased water rate money
will pay for and that*is why she had -to pay her share of it. Sproule McGinness stated that the dirt
situation had -been resolved and the 4" line is adequate to serve any houses to be built in that
block, but the reason for increasing it is for fire protection as he had been told the lines will
not handle the modern -Fire Department equipment. Fire Chief Jack.Weinz stated that the Code requires
that it be an 8" main with the additional development, but there is no fire hazard right now. Mr.
Adams interjected that it has been their policy, rather than having people improving the streets in •
front of their property (creating half -streets), that a covenant be placed on their property requiring
that the property owners support an LID for the entire improvement. He said the people on this
street seem to want their street paved at this time. He noted that .all of the improvements.li.sted
are required by the subdivision.
Mayor Harrison said the issue was whether or not to include the.water main, which would be an
accommodation to the developers. He proposed that the water main be included in the LID but the
City pay for that portion that would front on the five individual properties other than those of the
Harrises and the McGinnesses. COUNCILMAN KASPER MOVED THAT THE WATER MAIN BE INCLUDED IN THE LID
WITH THE CITY PAYING FOR THAT PORTION.THAT WOULD FRONT ON THE FIVE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTIES OTHER THAN
THE HARRISES AND THE McGINNESSES. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN SECONDED THE MOTION FOR DISCUSSION. Ken
Hardesty, one of thefive individual property owners, asked what. the Code provides --that the developer
put it in, or that the City and developer put it in. Councilman Kasper responded that if there is a
fire hazard, it is there. He said this is the only time that it can be done economically and the
City is obligated to'do the Hardesty property but not the Harris and McGinness properties. Mr.
Hardesty responded that if the City had enforced the Code to begin with there would not be the*LID
now as Mr. McGinness was turned down twice -for a Conditional Use Permit. Councilman Gould felt to
do this was totally inconsistent with past practice. Public Works Director Fred Herzberg said the
City had not participated.in cases where the developer has to put in a piece of pipe, but it had
participated when it wanted to loop aline beyond the property, and in those cases the City has paid
only for the pipe itself and the developer pays for installation. He said if this kind of precedent
was set they would have to double the water rates again.
A Mrs. Goldstein asked whether it happens often that people do not follow the rules and a big problem
results. She asked if she could take.that chance in order to make some money on some property, and
whether it was the people you know. She felt that no matter who it is, everyone should be treated
the same.
Don Schroeder, 528 8th Ave. N., said he would like to know how the dirt was resolved. Mr. Hardesty
said the neighbors -met with Mr. McGinness and agreed on the landscaping but that does not affect the
LID. He thought because�Mr. McGinness went for a subdivision his violation was 500 cu. yds. instead
of 2,000 cu. yds.
City Attorney Jim Murphy, who was in thee aud,,i:ence--,,i having i arr_i ved,: some, ti,mer.,after commencement of
the meeting, stated that the Council had asked the Staff to meet with the property owners to try to
resolve the problem, and the matter -was resolved to the satisfaction of the property owners regarding
what would be.done by. Mr. McGinness. This was in lieu of penalties. Mr. McGinness was to subdivide,
provide a drainage plan, alter the grade, put in.the.'street, and remove some of the dirt when the
LID and .point of the road were established.. Then, during the subdivision process, the water line
question arose --this was not known at -the other meeting. Mr. .Murphy said there was an individual or
:two who asked for the penalties, but this was supposed to be a compromise. Also, it was understood
in writingthat_this was going to take -place --except for the water line.
Mary Hennen,. no address given, said she owns the property with the 12' high wall adjacent to it
(caused by fill). She said two property owners were not at that meeting,.Mr. Walsh and herself.
She was out of the country at the t.ime..of.the. meeting but she took a letter to the Planning Division
when she returned, and within the required.time,.to object to some of the subdivision actions, but
she said Mr. Murphy would not accept it on a technicality.
Bill Whiteside, one.of the property -owners involved in the.LID, asked what a covenant would entail,
and Mr. Adams explained. Mr. Walsh, another of the,property.owners.involved in the LID, said he did
not think everyone agreed to the LID., -Mr. Hardesty.sa.id.they cou.ld_.not go against it.because the
Harrises and McGinnesses have 70% of the property. A.VOTE WAS..TAKEN..ON THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR,
WITH,COUNCILMAN KASPER CASTING THE ONLY.YES.VOTE, THE MOTION FAILED.
Mayor Harrison then surygested that the developers. be allowed to.p.ay for. -the water line on an -LID.
After discussion of the various options, COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN*MOVED,. SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, TO
105
• August 19, 1980 - continued
PASS RESOLUTION -OF INTENTION..257., SETTING A HEARING DATE OF. SEPTEMBER 30., 1980 FOR THE PRELIMINARY
ASSESSMENT ROLL OF --THE PROPOSED LID ON. SPRAGUE ST., BETWEEN,7TH AND 8TH, SAID LID TO INCLUDE WATER
LINES AND HYDRANTS, AND THE WATER LINES,:AND HYDRANTS WILL BE.CHARGED TO THE. DEVELOPERS. Councilman
Gould clarified that the street.improvement will be borne,by.everyone in the LID and the costs .of
all.things connected with the water .line, including the.hydrants, will be borne by the developers.
THE MOTION CARRIED.
PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT.ORDINANCE
Because of the lateness of the hour., no..action was taken on this item. The Public Works Director
had suggested that the appropriate Council Committee may,wish.to consider it before scheduling a
public hearing. The Clerk was advised that it would be referred to the Public Works/Community
Development Committee.
There was no further business.to come before the Council, and the meeting adjourned at 12:10 a.m.
0
IRENE VARNEY MORAN, CiVyl Clerk HARVE.H. HARRISON, Mayor
•
August 26, 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
Bill Kasper Jim Adams, City Engineer
Katherine Allen Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
John Nordquist John LaTourelle, Planning Consultant
Ray Gould Mary Lou Block, Planning.Divis-ion Manager
Larry Naughten Art Housler, Finance Director
Mary Goetz Dan Prinz, Acting Police Chief
' Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Jim Jessel, Parks & Recreation Director
Jim Murphy, City Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City C1_erk
CONSENT AGENDA
Item (D) was removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF.THE.CONSENT AGENDA... MOTION.CARRIED, WITH COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ
ABSTAINING BECAUSE SHE WAS ONE OF.THE PARTIES INVOLVED IN ITEM .(C)._ The approved items on the
Consent.Agenda included the following:
•
(A) Roll call.
(B) Approval of Minutes..of.August 19, 1980.
(C) Acknowledgment of receipt of Claims for Damages from Ove Green in the amount of $103.98
and from Wallace B. Goetz in the amount of $310.54.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROHIBITING, PARKING :BY...APPROPRIATE.YELLOW_MARKING [I.tem (D) on the Consent
Agen a
Councilman -Gould felt there shou.l,d.be a.public hearing on this and Councilman Kasper asked where it
would be used. Public Works._Director.Fred Herzberg said the intent was to address 5th.Ave. where
the condominiums are, because of sight distance problems,, but the ordinance was written so it could
be used City-wide. He said he has the authority to put up signs and mark the curbs yellow, but the
intent of this ordinance was to preclude installation of a.forest of signs. COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, TO PUT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE,ON.THE SEPTEMBER.2, 1980 AGENDA FOR A
PUBLIC'HEARING. MOTION CARRIED..
MAYOR
Mayor Harrson.proposed.passage.of an ordinance which had been provided to him this evening by the
City Attorney
to clarify the.,in.tent of Secti.on.1.14,040(4)..of the Edmonds City Code regarding partici-
pation_ by public officials in ma.tters,affecting property,, and which was directly related to the
first item .on the regular agenda (Item 5 - Advisory Decision on.Public.Official's Participation).
City.Attorney..Jim Murphy`explained.that._the proposed ordinance was nothing.more than a recitation of
the way*that section of the Code has been interpreted over the.past years. He noted that Mayors and
past Council members had owned property that was subdividable or not a part of their residences and
this
section never was interpreted.to mean they could..not act.on City-wide l.egi.slation such as
adoption.o.f_the budget.; utility rates, tax levies,
or amendments to.the..zoning code. Mr. Murphy
felt that since the question had,arisen; a"clarification should be set forth in keeping with the