19810203 City Council Minutes194
January 24, 1981 - continued 0
Goetz was impressed with the fine cooperation from the Lake Ballinger Community Club. COUNCILMAN
NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ, TO GIVE.APPROVAL OF GOING TO BID FOR THE REQUESTED
IMPROVEMENTS FOR AN EXPENDITURE OF..FUNDS UP*TO $9,000, TO COME FROM THE IN - -LIEU PARK -FUND: Council-:
woman Allen suggested a second,sports court be included as one court appeared to be rather inadequate.
Mr. Jessel responded that spac&.is,limited and topography could be.a problem, and current ' ly part of
the open area is used for football play. He said he would prefer to try one court as a test before
considering a second one. THE MOTION CARRIED.
PROPOSED.NOISE'ABATEMENT AND CONTROL ORDINANCE
Police Chief Marlo Foster reported that the proposed ordi.nance had been submitted to the Department
of Ecology and had been approved except for one section. The Edmonds ordinance differed from the '
State law requirements in that the hours of exempting certain sounds on weekends differed. The City
Attorney's Office felt that a variance from the State law.would be easier to justify and obtain if
the request for weekend restrictions were limited to those sounds originating from construction
sites. This had been a complaint from the public at thehearings. Therefore, the City Attorney had
rewritten Section 5.35.110 for this purpose, and Mr. Foster recommended adoption of the ordinance
and that the Mayor be authorized to request a variance to exempt construction noise from 10:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m.,on weekends. COUNCILWOMAN'ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO ADOPT
ORDINANCE 2193 FOR NOISE ABATEMENT AND -CONTROL AND THAT THE MAYOR BE AUTHORIZED TO REQUEST A VARIANCE
FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY TO EXEMPT CONSTRUCTION NOISE FROM 10:00 A.M. TO 6:00 P.M. ON WEEKENDS.
MOTION CARRIED.
RECOMMENDATION FROM PUBLIC WORKS.DEPARTMENT REGARDING CHANGE IN MAINTENANCE
OF SEWER LIFT STATIONS
Public Works Director Fred Herzberg had recommended cancellation of the contract with'Lloyd Kloes
dba Moose City Service for sewer lift station ma-intenance. His report to,the Council.enumerated.the
problems experienced under this contract and proposals for the work to be accomplished by City
staff.. He said he had met with.Mr. Kloes and invited him to be present this evening. Mr. Kloes had
been present earlier but had not remained. He did submit a letter to Mr. Herzberg, however, responding
to the complaints, and the Council was furnished copies of this letter. Mr. Herzberg.said he would
like to spend 4-5 months with in-house.staff doing the work, feeling it could be done for $30,000
less annually. If he found it could not be accomplished with the current staff he said he might ask
for an increase in staff to handle the',work, and he noted that if the proposed water/sewer rates
were.adopted one of the projects in that is.control-of filtration.. They had discussed having two
people to run it, one being needed full-time and one part-time, and that part-time person could also
be used for this. Water/Sewer Superintendent Jack Mitchell said he had checked every place he could
think of for,other people with whom they might contract the work, but he had no success. He said -
he, himself, had worked on the lift stations in 1972 and -they were operable then, but now there are
problems.due to lack.of proper,maintenance. Councilman Naughten said they were looking at every
dollar possible to save, and even if his service were satisfactory, if the City could do it at a
saving then it should. Mayor Harrison.recommended going ahead as suggested by Mr. Herzberg.
COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, THAT BASED.ON THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDA-
TION, THE MAYOR BE AUTHORIZED TO GIVE 30 DAYS' NOTICE TO TERMINATE THE CONTRACT WITH -MOOSE CITY
SERVICE, AND THAT THE PROGRAM BE REVIEWED JULY 1, 1981. MOTION CARRIED.
There was no further business -to come before the Council,,and the meeting adjourned to Executive
Session at 9:45 p.m.
IRENE VARNEY MORAN, Cilf Clerk, HARVE H..HARRISON, Mayor
February 3, 1981
The regul-ar meeting of the Edmonds City'Counci-1 was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Mayor Harve
Harrison in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. All present joined in the flag
salute.
PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor John Nordquist Fred Herzberg, Public Works Director
Bill'Kasper Sue Crawford, Jim Adams, City Engineer
Larry Naughten Student Rep. Ir , ene Varney Moran, City Clerk
Katherine Allen Mary Lou Block, Planning Director
Ray Gould Art Housler, Finance.Director
Mary Goetz Marlo Foster, Police Chief
Jo -Anne Jaech Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Jim Jessel, Parks & Recreation Director
Bob Franklin,..Technical Studies Engineer
Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney
Mark Eames, City Attorney
Jacki6.Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
0
19 S
0 February 3, 1981 - continued
Counci-1.0resid.ent Allen reported..that Councilman Nordqu,ist had adv'ised her that'he would be out of
town thi's-eve.ning.. Also,:Student.Re'preseritative Sue,CraWford.had called to say -she had Another
important -meeting to attend this.evening so she could not be present.
CONSENT AGENDA
Items�(E),,(G), and (,H).were.removed from the Consent,Agenda. COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY
COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, 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 January 27, 1981.
(C)� Acknowle.dgment,.of receipt of Claim for Damages from Alan R. Mork in the amount of $113.85.
(D) Adoption of Ordinance 2.194, establishing Council meeting times.
(F) Passage of Resolution 486, designating streets for sledding.
(4) Authorization to.j.oin Regional Water Purveyor Committee'..
PROPOSED ORDINANCE REORGANJZING.PLANNING DEPARTMENT [Item (E) on Consent Agenda]
Councilman Kaspernoted that this was to have been discussed at the Saturday work session (January
.31, 1981) but it was not. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED,,SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD,.TO'PLACE THE
SUBJECT OF REORGANIZATION�;OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON THE FEBRUARY 10, 1981 WORK MEETING:AGENDA
FOR:DISCUSSION AND ON THE.FEBRUARY
17, 1981 CONSENT AGENDA FOR PASSAGE OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.
MOTION CARRIED..'.[Item (E) on this evening's Consent Agenda was not approved.] -
AUTHORIZATION -TO PURCHASE1981 POLICE VEHICLE [Item (G) on Consent Agenda]
Co.uncilman Naughten asked,,for.an explanation of this.item. Public Works Director Fred H.erzberg
respondedthat the Counci'l,.in December 1980, authorized the ' Public Works Department to purchase a.
used vehicle -to replace its Water/Sewer unit which-ha&been,damaged. At the same time, the Police
Department.had'scheduled the purchase of a new detective/staff sedan in 1981 to re p lace a vehicle
with high 'mileage. Bids were received with the -low bidder being Alley Chevrolet, for a 1981 Chevrolet
Citation i-n the amount of.$7,764.82, includ-ing sales tax. Authorization was requested -for the
Police..Department to purchase the low bid vehicle, and for the Public Works Departmeni'in* turn to
purchase the used.Police Department vehicle (a 1976 Dodge Dart) which was being . replaced. . COUNCILMAN
NAUGHTE,.N MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN KASPER, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST., APPROVING -ITEM (G) ON THE
CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED.
AUTHORIZATION FOR MOOSE CITY SERVICE MONTHLY RETAINER FEE FOR-1981
LItem (H) on Consent Agenda]
Councilman Naughten noted that at last week's Council meeting -it was decided to terminate this
servite, and now there was a request -for approval. Public Works Director Fred -Herzberg responded
that this was only for January and February of 1981. Moose City Service had requested an increase in
the amount of monthly retainer for sewage l.ift station maintenance, from $1,467.36 to $1,666.90, and
although the Council decidedlast week to terminate the contract, it was still to run through . �
February:1981. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ, TO DENY THE INCREASE.
Councilman Gould observed.that although it is thought -the work in question can be done by City
forces,. it should be donewithout adding additional people. Mr. Herzberg said they.are going to try
to do it within existing forces, but as he stated last week, they may have to add 1/2 a person.in
manhours. THE MOTION CARRIED.
MAYOR
Mayor Harrison submitted the name of Larry Trent . for appointment to the Board of Appeals. The
Council..had interviewed.Mr. Trent just prior to thi.s.evening's meeting. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED,
SECONDED -BY COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ, TO CONFIRM THE:MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF LARRY TRENT-TO POSITION.1 ON
THE BOARD OF APPEALS, TE.RM,TO,-EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 1984. MOTION CARRIED.
Mayor Harrison offered for consideration�two other -appointments, that of Gloria Mae Campbell to the
Edmonds Arts Commission,,and that of Doug Herman to.the Architectural Design Board. The Edmonds
Arts Commission had interviewed s,!'x'applicants and.recommended appointment of Ms. Campbell. Doug
Herman is V"ice-Presid6nt.0if Blueprint Homes', Inc., and would fill the builder's position on the
Architectural Design Board,which recently was vacated,by Ken Mattson. Councilman Gould was pleased
that the Arts Commission had gotten involved in the selection, but he felt the Council should
interview the candidates. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, THAT THE
COUNCIL1NTERVIEW BOTH CANDIDATES FROM 7:00-TO 7:30 P.M., FEBRUARY 10, 1981. MOTION CARRIED.
Milo COUNCIL
Councilman ' Gould proposed.,that,the City Council approve a modified Price -Waterhouse rate structure
which he felt.would answer, -many of the concerns the.citizens had expressed. He said he would like
to.have the concept'approved,at this meeting, and then have Price-Waterhbusec.tpresent'��.al.rate,-structure
for.approval based on,that concept. His proposed concept included: (1)'Rate relief to low-income,
senior�citizens (age 61), at.a 25% reduction of the.base rate if single, with annual income of
$7,000 or less, or of $10,000 or less if married; or a 50% reduction of base rate if single, with
annual -income of $4,000 or less, or of $7,000 or less,if married. (2) Encourage water conservation
by charging for water partly.on the basis of consumption.. (3) Lower capital costs by $210,000 by
not purchasing the secondary treatment site. (4) Establish,a flat -rate sewer bill for single family
February 3, 1981 continued
dwellings. (5) All drainage improvements to be reflected in the sewer utility only, so that outside
customers such as other cities.will pay their fair share. (6) A flat rate sewer charge per dwelling
unit for apartment dwellers sothey Will pay the same as resi.dential, single-fami'ly'homes. (7)
Other customer sewer charges will be based on water consumption rates in such a fashion that if the
water consumption is "average" the sewer bill then will be the same as a single-family residential
flat rate. (8) The structure will.produce an "A" bond rating and a debt service coverage of 1.5
within three years. (9) Capital,improvements of $888,376 for water and $969,101 for sewer will be
bonded and construction-spread.over athree-year period.- (10)'The rate structure wilTbe reviewed
annually with the objective charge�d to the administration for 1982 and 1983 to reduce utility
charges in three ways --cut maintenance and operating expenses, sell, excess water/sewer owned prop-
erties, and cause other cities using Edmonds' utilities to pay their fair share of costs.
Councilman Gould noted that with regard to Item 6, Price -Waterhouse opposed the concept of a flat
rate for apartments, saying they.would.no longer be uniform or equitable and it would jeopardize
future EPA grants since it would,not be in compliance wi.th the provision of charging classes -of
customers equitably. Further, that they could not be associated with this concept because they
would be open�to criticism from State.auditors, but they -would provide work papers in order for the
same.for apartments as for single-Tfamily residences. Councilwoman Jaech asked whether it was not
schedules to be accomplished in-house. Councilman Gould, however, felt the sewer bill should be the
uniform to charge a flat fee for'each unit, single-family or apartment, but Price -Waterhouse had
indicated that apartment units use only 7/10.the amount that single-family residences use, so they
would be paying an additional 3/10. Regarding future EPA grants, Public Works Director Fred Herz-
berg stated that the City will be lookingfor a 75% grant for the secondary treatment plant when it
is built. Councilman Naughten and Councilman Kasper felt this should be the way -Price -Waterhouse
computed it in order for the Ci,ty to be in compliance with the provision of charging classes of
customers equitably.
Regarding rate relief for low income/elderly, Councilwoman Allen said she was not opposed to that,
but she would disapprove of asking them to fill out forms to.establish their need. She felt the
cost of consumption should be i�ncreased and the base rate decreased so that all citizens would Kave
some control --by consumption --over what their bills will be. Councilwoman Goetz felt the low
income/elderly should have the option to apply,for rate relief but thatthey should fill out forms
the same as they do fortax reli,ef, and Councilman Gould -felt that would be a responsible way to
control it. Councilman Kasper said he believed in subsid'izing.the hardship cases but not upsetting
the rate system, and Councilman Gould said he thought th.is,.would be a conservative subsidy.
Regarding Item 4, the flat rate.sewerbill for.single-family dwellings, Councilman Kasper felt that
was the only way. Councilman Gould asked Finance Director Art Housler to have Price -Waterhouse ..
complete their proposal two ways --the way they propose i.t, with apartment dwellings based on water
consumption, and also giving the.City the data so the Staff.can calculate it if it is decided to go
with a flat rate to apartment dwellers. He also felt they should -be asked for more specific infor-
mation as to why that cannot be done; e.g., the statute that says the classes of customers would not
be treated the same. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT THE ANSWERS
PROVIDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD BE RECOMMENDED TO PRICE-WATERHOUSE'S QUESTIONS, AND THAT PRICE-WATERHOUSE
BE REQUESTED TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATE REVIEW OF ITEM 6 BASED ON THE WAY -IT IS PROPOSED IN COUNCILMAN
GOULD'S RECOMMENDATION. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilman Naughten noted that a.letter had been received from the Department of Transportation
regarding SR 524 indicating they had -encountered an impasse with.the condominium on the north side
of Puget Dr. between Olympic View Dr. and.9th Ave. as to.obtaining the easement for a sidewalk
there.. It was suggested that.this should be discussed with the people there, and Public Works
Director Fred Herzberg -said the State al,ready had done that,.but he would also. Councilman Kasper
said this section of sidewalk is essential for the schoolchildren. It was noted that'the State
already had started condemnation, so waction was taken.
Councilman:Naughten notedthait there had been . a memo from'the' City Attorney'regarding a request for
relief from.an LID assessment for an elderly person, with the statement that the City never has been
in a a position to loan money to..people to pay their taxes. City Attorney Wayne Tanaka stated that
as a.practical matter it would.take five years after the person stopped making payments before she
would be dispossessed of the property. Mr. Tanaka said he would send the individual a letter
explaining.the City's position.
Councilwoman Goetz referred to the'"pr opose"d'rate' increases by Sound Disposal for garbage pickup: in
the City. She read aloud the proposed raiies-�n� felt they were in line with those of other'dispdsal
compani.es in other cities. Councilwoman Allen noted that the.proposed new Apex Disposal Service
rates will be lower. Affer'some discussion, COUNC . ILMAN GOULD-MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ,
THAT A HEARING BE HELD FEBRUARY 17, 1981 REGARDING THE NEW.RATES PROPOSED BY SOUND DISPOSAL AND APEX
DISPOSAL SERVICE ANDTHAT BOTH COMPANIES BY'NOTIFIED BY THE STAFF OF THE HEARING. MOTION'CARRIED.
Because of the probable length of the report.on'the Meadowdale.sewer and drainage design (Item 7 on
this evening's agenda), COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN JAECH, THAT THIS -ITEM BE
MOVED TO ITEM 6. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilwoman -Goetz noted that the Mayor had provided a proposal for reorganization and some reclassi-
fications in the Executive Office. Council President Allen proposed that this be discussed at next
week's Personnel Committee meeting, and that was acceptable.
Counci-1woman Jaech advised that she would be out of town for the meetings of February 17, February 24,
and March 3.-
Council President Allen',stated that next week will be a work,session for the Council and there will
be a Personnel Committee meeting prior to the.regular meeting.. The -Personnel Committee will be a
closed session, but the whole organ-izati - onal s - ituation will bediscussed following the closed session,
as well as those i-tems on the Februa�y 17 agenda. She said,she would like to discuss reserve funds
for the library and'Fire Department which wa's bro.ught up -at the January 31 work session.
197
February 3, 1981 - continued
Councilman Kasper said he.would be.out oftown February 19 so he asked that the,meetin'g on design
developme'nt'cbst estimates..for the.'library construction be-res . cheduled from that date. It was
decided to have that meeting at 8:00,a.m., February.17, 1.981.
AUDIENCE
Ron, Olson; a City resident who,. had, addressed the Council , two.we�eks previously regarding the status
of the City's,court, said'he was.'more confused when.he left,'that.evening than.when.he arrived. He
therefore -had taken it upon. -himself to investigate the amounts of filing fees in-varfous cities, and
he -discussed those fees. He.also-.*noted that although Edmonds does not have a court now it does have
a.Probation and Warrant Officer, and he asked whether.that person is legally empowered to serve
warrants. City Attorney.Wayne-T anaka responded that he d ' oes not serve warrants but.tries to cont act
.people with outstanding.warrants to get them to pay them. Mr.. Tanaka said the warrants ' are , valid as
..the Court decision stated.that�.everything which had been c ' ompleted prior to that, decision was valid.
�.As a precaution, steps are being taken to have those warrants reissued in South District Court.
'Edward Re.ich, 7316 210th S.W., suggested that the Council be consistent in the'time that meetings
are.started, and he discussed�the confusion generated by the time being changed from one meeting to
the next. Regarding the water and sewer rates, he'felt-the flat rates would be the most fair to all
the people as recommended.by Councilman Gould. He also.felt_peopl.e should be sent questionnaires in
their utility.bills to get their feelings on this. He said the State has established a $14,000
maximum income (for a married couple) to qualify for tax relief.
CONTINUED HEARING ON PROPOSED.STREET DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE
City Engineer Jim Adams said the problem still exists in establishing a method -to finance street
improvements, in developing areas without imposing a financial- burden on the cu�rent single-family
residents.. Street revenue ' funds are insuf - ficient to construct or upgrade streets,,s,idewalks, and
storm drainage,.so a policy is needed for obtaining the -necessary revenue for these improvements.
Mr. Adams suggested several options, and recommended the onewhich appeared to him to be the most
feasible, that of forming a Street Local Improvement District (SLID) to construct street and drainage
improvements within a spec.i,fic.boundary,.and using.a...method of assessment based on the increase in
value of the property due to. -the improvements. For the economically disadvantaged,.there is a method
to defer -the assessment up to the' total.bond.period. Another option not previously mentioned,was to
do.,nothing-for the present and require covenants on-al.l.the properties now developing, requiring
them to support any future SLID. when the people in that area wish to have one. The hearing was
opened to the public.
Edward�.Reich, 7316 210th S.W.,.su'bmitted a -petition with 31 signatures opposing.any LID.for�storm
drains, curbs, sidewalks, or.other street improvements, and supporting a program whereby developers
of the properties pay into a fund for the street improvements. He sai'd their streets do not need.
improveme ' nt.at this time and the residents there are.not.financ.ially able -to pay for such improve-
ments. He said many people in -that area are on fixed incomes and.some already have had to,sell
thei-r homes because of the...recent sewer LID.- Further, he said the area -needs street,ligh.ts-but not
streets, and people who are not -able to'pay for the improvements now will not be able to pay for
.them in another 10 years.. He felt -the City was picking on that.area because they just came into the
City., and he said a lot of: -those people did not want to come into the City in the first plate. No
one else wished to speak,- and the public portion of the hearing was -closed.
Mayor -Harrison read aloudiAhe petition presented by:Mr.-Reich.. Councilman Gould suggested that
nothing be.done for the present.� He said many of the-City's streets.are in bad -repair and a bond
iss,ue is needed to solve the.whole thing; -then the.people-could say whether they want to pay for
impr,oving.-the streets...Mayor.,Harri-son observed that�this area is not in need of,improvement immediately,
and he*thought the CID process could be carried out in due-time6y requiring*'covenants on the properties.
He.said those who have already:improved the,ir streets,should not.be.-as.ked to..pay,f0r:th6se:1 and the
fmportant,thing.is to get the new devel,o,pe.rs to commit themselv'es-to the LIDs. Councilman Kasper.
notedthat the' primary r*easoning.behind a GO bond issue was to maintain the streets --not -to,-build
new.s.treets. COUNCI ' LMAN,NAUGHTEN MOVED,,' SECONDED bY'COUNCILMAN G'OULD,-THAT40THING-BE DONE, -AT THIS
TIME IN THE ANNEXED* AR`EA, BUT,fHAT COVENANTS BE, PLACED ON', THE PROPERTIES TO THAT POINT 'IN TIME'WHE*N'
501% OF THE PEOPLE WANT AN LID, THE.,COVENANTS BEING NOTJO PROTEST,,AND TO SUPPORT,.ANY SUCH'.LID.
COUNCILMAN KASPER AMENDED.�THE MOT . ION, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN' ALLEN, THAT NO F-URTHER ESCROWS WILL
BE COLLECTED IN THIS ANNEXED.AREA WHEN A SUPPORT WAIVER AND -NO PROTEST PROVISION IS GRANTED BY THE
DEVELOPER. THE MOTION TO -.AMEND CARRIED, WITH COUNCILWOMEN GOETZ AND'-JAECH VOTING -NO.' THE MAIN
MOTION.,,AS AMENDED THEN CARR-IED. Mr. Reich asked when they could.connect to the recently installed
sewers, and Mr. Adams advised ' . him that they all have been tested now and are available to anyone "Who
nee.ds.to connect at this.time.. Also-,-he-said the sewer assessments will be ready in approxim'ately'
one month.
REPORTION MEADOWDALE SEWER. -AND DRAINAGE DESIGN
Representatives of Reid, Middleton,& Associates reviewed their written report which had been provided
to the Council earlier. They discussed the history of.the Meadowdale area and the two basic problems--
the1ands ' l.ide potential and,the public health hazard. Areas not acceptable for on -site disposal
were shown and it was noted that fill over such areas is not acceptable.
Mound systems are acceptable
in some.places but they are limited to 12% slopes and,cost $7,000-$9,000 and all trees and brush
must be cleared. The mounds w-ill still add to the ground water problem. Areas acceptable for,on� . -
site disposal then were shown. There must be 20,000.sq. ft. on -a lot for drainfields per City
ordinance —Although there.are some areas in the extreme eastern portion that are�functioning well
there..is.no.-g.uarantee they will.function well in the,.future so it was determined�that it'was not
warranted -to exclude them,from the sanitary sewer.-requireme'nt Three alternatives -were shown for
correction,of-the problems,,, ranging,ip�cost:from 1.7,million:dQllars to 2.2 million dollars, with
a1ternative 2A being recommended at a cost of 1.9 m'illi.on dollars. It was recommended further that
the improvement be done by LID, with assessment bated on zone front footage. It was'noted that the
February 3, 1981 - continued
0
City is looking into assessment by cost -benefit method, based on the increase in value the sewers
would provide. It was recommended that storm drainage be.installed prior to sewers,, which would
take 10-11 months. The sewer construction which would,follow could--take*up to one year. The
hearing was opened to the public.
John Johnson, 16122 72nd W., said he had attended many meetings on this subject during the past year
and he.had learned very little after the first meeting. He -said there were discrepancies and
inconsi.stencies in the report, and he resented people making decisions which woul-d result -in a
$104,000.sewe * r.assessment an.d.$350 monthly payments in such a casual -manner. He said they �ad been
led,.�. to believe they were gbing to get,,trench drains but now they found.that was ju.st a side.issue
and they would have to get everything.
Mr. Breckner,'15908 68th W., asked whether they could appeal the Health Officer's decision as he
felt Dr. Hyatt's report saying there'is a*sanitary problem in the entire district was not accurate.
He said Mr. Herzberg had recommended.'a program II'months.previously and he never found out why
action was not taken on that recommendation. Instead, he said, another costly stuay was made. He
felt.the existing problem is relatively small and involves an area where sewage erupts on the surface
of the ground and that Mr. Herzberg's previous recommendation would fix'it. He also noted that'
there are right-of-way problems to be addressed.
Grace Brussel, 16202 72nd'W., said she could not possibly pay the assessments as she has a small
government pension and social security.on which to live, and she said she will not give Up her -home.
Steve Lee, 16520 72nd W., said Plan 2A would cross the center of his house, and he noted that he
pays a sewer charge each month and cannot� connect to'it.
Carol Ebson,"7370'N. me'adowdafe.M., 's'p6k*e in favor of sewers saying her home has taken the runoff
for 15 years -and sometimes the.smell is terrible, and they get flooded out of their driveway. She
said i.n-dividual cost problems can be worked out and.the issue is whether or not to put in the
ted: �tha't this
sewers... Sh-e,no, issue came up five years ago.and wa's'voted down, and it will.co.me up
again and will cost more later.
Jerry Steele, 15720 68th W.,"sa , i'd the'study.did not take in the City -approved townhouses in that
area. Mayor Harrison responded.that those are tied into the,Lynnwood sewers. Mr. Steele then said
the people were compfaining 26 years a . go about -what they are complaining -today, and the City -was
remiss in all,owing:development of,'homes in the County and'in Lynnwood. He di-d not believe-the'storm
drain system would work, and he' asked'.whe're they would stand in that case. He added that the cost
of the proposal would force him into subdividing and he did not intend doing that. He has five
acres and never has had a backup. He said most of the people in the area are of retirement age and
on fixed incomes.
Mrs. Stellings, noaddress given, asked.if a grant will be received * to'helo fund this" Mr. Herzberg
responded that the City'is on'�the priority l.ist for the th'ird quarter of th'is'year. He 'said the
`there, 'and he th ught the -grant
money is there, the system is there, and the priority mechanism is' 0
would be -received when Edmonds..gets t6the top of the list.
Dick Beers, 49th Ave. W., beyond the moratoriumarea, sai,d.those who had been to all of the meeti.ngs
and listened to the reports have become more and more. convi-n.ced that this. entire concept is full of
holes. He said he stood to gain nothing but to lose eve'rything,with continued procrasti-nation as it
costs him money everyday that he cannot build a house. He said this was based on.20-year old data.
He had received a septic tank permit -from the County in 197 ' 8, but in 1968 this had been declared an
unsafe area. He had no doubt that there is some health hazard there, and he asked how many.selptic
tanks are not functioning -well.- He's'aid they had been told they -would ha've'to''Selectone' of the
programs or not get' the *grant money, b.ut now they are told they just are* on a,,,priority, Tist.
Harold J�n6way.,-",16,1�05,75th�iW..',,sai,dt.th6�.-efflue ' nt from his neighbors to the' -north flows.through his
garage and he has seen solids -go through,.that area. He said e' ' verytim ' e a bathtub p ' lug ' is pul ' led in
that house he can tel.1-by the''increased flow of a -stream going'through his walll�an.d in front of his
garage is an area -absolutely black which'is due to sewage or chemicals. He said they are -drowning
in that,,and he favored almost any plan that would get him out of that -predicament. He d.id not want
to sue his neighbor, but he' thought everyone should be responsible for water flowing from the.ir
homes.
John Minear, 16020-70th W.,, said water,always had gone down the hill to his property., and there
always -had been,a stream of,water., '.fle wanted to know how they-were.gqing to' pay for'wha'tis-done.-`
His house is on top of the hill and has 40-1000 sq. ft., but 25,000 so. ft. of his property is down
the h-ill.., He hoped he would be charged only for the pa'rt of'his property that his house is on and
not the part that is unusable as he is retired. He said his mother has 20,000 sq. ft. and she has'
only social.security, and he asked if there was a way that they would not have to pay the assessment
until the property is sold. . . I I . C
Dan Lenke, 15073 70th Ave. W., said when he bought his home he could not move in until the County
approved his septic system. He has one acre and said it will be expensive to sewer.- After -he
bought his home he said the.County continued to issue permits and they knew thdre-was a problem. He
felt ' the City was remiss in ignoring the problem and he felt both the City and the County were
responsible.
Bi1l-Alguard,15915 70th W., asked,if storm sewers still would be needed if the sanitary sewers are
put in and,.,that water removed... He said -there are areas -that could be'served by septic'tanks.and'
that he is in one of those and.does hot need or want.sewers. He said if sewers'go in thai will
force development in the.area as people will have to subdivide to pay the cost of the sewer assess-
ments. He also noted that there are young people in the area'deep in monthly payment's, in addition
to the older people who cannot,afford the assessments. He also stated that all of the water does
I
'I
I
0
February 3, 1981 - continued
not come from Edmonds, some.of it-coming"from Lynnwood. He.felt payment for storm water runoff
should-be.s6ared on a City-wide....program. He as'ked-.that.if . the City is going to sewer this area that
it come up,with an equitable way to cost it. He felt the zone front foot system was not right for
this area,.and he asked that.consideration be given to.hardship cases, as well as the young and the
old.
Jack Linge,,6970,160th S..W., said.there is no health hazard in the upper area and that the Roger
Lowe report ' -indicated a 33% improvement could be obtained with interceptor drains. He felt the
..whole storm sewer system should be funded by bonds paid by the entire City. He said if the slide
area.is stabilized that would.improve the situation,.and he recognized that,, the.slide area is a,
.hazard. He asked if they-couId consider sewering only the potential slide area,or the area directly
above. -He felt an alternative would be the cost benefit method. In his own case he said he would
be receiving extremely low,val- ' ue from a sanitary sewer system as his own.septic system is adequate,
and if it is decided to sewer the whole area the betterment to his property,would be,zero. He said
covenants- could be placed -.on the upper properties to be sure they would not be reduced in size and
he noted.this was a recommendation of Roger Lowe. He thought a second covenant might be made on
people like Mr. Johnson with five acres and one house with.,three acres not suitabl.e for building.
He asked that if the City was going to go to a betterment.situation that it try to think of ways to
keep1t equitable, and if.the benefit is in the lower secti*on, that those,'_,Oeople-Zpa�_�the bulk of the
cost. No one else wished.to speak, and the public portion of*the hearing was closed.
Councilwoman Allen statedAhat it was too late this evening -to make a decision and that there were
other items on the agenda. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT THIS ITEM
BE PLACED ON THE MARCH 3.,,1981 AGENDA AND THAT IT BE DISCUSSED AT THE FEBRUARY 24, 1981 WORK MEETING.
Councilman Gould wanted to.read the report again and he asked for input from the Staff on,the benefit
method of cost payment. He hoped some research could be done on some way to offset the cost problems
for people on fixed incomes. THE MOTION CARRIED. A short.recess was announced.
CONTINUED'HEARING ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, INCLUDING MODIFICATIONS/VARIANCES,
FOR PUBLIC LIBRARY AT 700 MAIN ST.
Planning Director Mary Lou..Block said there had been a misunderstanding on the architect's part as
to how to -measure the height of.:the building and.it had been determined since last week that as
designed.it will be within the 25' limit except for a small amount that is pitched but also falls
within the Code requirements. Cliff Jackson of Arai/Jackson Architects said they had recal'culated
the grades with the assistance of the Planning Department and they had avean datum that allows the
library to fall within the requirements of the ol'd.Code. Councilman Naughten-added.that the Council
had1walked the site and he had found that there would, -not be much of an impact with the additional
5'. He said the sight poles did help and they were convinced -there would not be a view impact.
Councilwoman Allen again said she would like the parking changed to 50% for compact cars instead of
25%. She.had no objection to parking on Durbin St. and she said State standards are at 50% for
compact stalls. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN-MOVED, SECONDED BY CONCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL
USE.PERMIT AS RECOMMENDED.BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION WITH THE TWO MODIFICATIONS: (1) TO ALLOW THE
BUILDING TO INTRUDE INTO.THE'SETBACKS AND (2) TO DEVELOP A PORTION OF DURBIN ST. FOR REQUIRED
PARKING; FURTHER, TO ALLOW 50% OF THE PARKING STALLS TO.BE'SIZED FOR COMPACT CARS, WITH UP TO 25% OF
THE REQUIRED SPACES FOR COMPACT CARS. REASONS GIVEN WERE'THAT CURRENT TRENDS AND STATE STANDARDS
FOR PUBLIC PARKING LOTS ARE 50% FOR COMPACT CARS; THAT THE SETBACKS -FALL WITHIN THE CURRENT CODE
ALTHOUGH THEY DO NOT FALL.WITHIN THE OLD CODE, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO DETRACT FROM THE AREA AND THEY
ARE A MINIMUM i IMPACT, AND THERE ARE NO OTHER OWNERSHIPS IN THE BLOCK AFFECTED BY THE SETBACKS. THE
MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCIL REPORT ON SALARIES.OF EXEMPT EMPLOYEES
Councilwoman Allen said this had been discussed by the Council.' THEREFORE, COUNCILWOMAN'ALLEN
MOVED,'SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN-NAUGHTEN, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE
lei
TO PROVIDE FOR AN INCREASE FOR ALL EXEMPT EMPLOYEES OF 10%.OF ALL, -SALARIES --UP TO $20,000,'RETROACTIVE
TO JANUARY 1,1981, AND THAT MERIT INCREASES'WILL COME'AT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAYOR ON EVALUA-
TION AT THEIR ANNUAL EVALUAT-ION DATE, AND THOSE WOULD BE LIMITED TO NO MORE THAN'5% OF THE TOTAL
SALARY. Councilwoman Jaech asked for clarification as to merit increases for nonexempt employees,
and Councilwoman Allen said,none were considered. Councilman Gould observed that*the "up to.5%" for
merit increase is compounded because it will be on the total. He said that by saying the merit
.increase may be up to 5%.they.were.not granting 15% pay increases, and the 5% will be the absolute
maximum,, not to be granted -.,as a routine matter. He.said a merit increase should be much lower and
the maximum only granted -in such cases where there is a grade change or something like that and it
will have -to be substantiated by an evaluation. CouncilwomanAllen said the maximum would be for
maximum meritorious service., The Mayor's salary was not addressed but will be addressed at next
week's Personnel Committee meeting and -the attorney,was instructed to draft the ordinance with a
blank for -the Mayor's sala,ry which will be filled in at the time of passage. THE MOTION CARRIED.,
ON APPRAISAL OF PROPOSED,8TH AVE. STREET VACATION -AND COUNCIL ACTION ON THE
.REPORT
PROPOSED VACATION
Councilman Kasper left the Council Chambers because he is a party in this matter.'and he'did not
return,until�the meeting -adjourned. City Attorney Wayne Tanaka reported that he had written the
appraiser,,Roy,Stringer,.on January 15, 1981., Mr. Stringer had responded that.he did not feel his
figures needed justification, -that everything was self-explanatory. Mr. Tanaka had requested that
'Mr- , Stringer write a letter to that effect, but none had been received. Mr. Tanaka advised that the
Council's options were to.accept the appraisal, strike a comprbmi's'ej or getanothe'r I ap'p'r*-aisal-, . but
some deci-sion,should be reached. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN'MOVEb, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN JAECH,-THAT
ANOTHER -APPRAISAL BE.OBTAINED-AS SOON -AS POSSIBLE'.' THE MOTION'CARRIED.
�COUNCIL'PRESIDENT
Council President Allen asked that the progress report from.the Brackett's Landing Marine Preserva-
tion Task -Force be moved from the March 3 agenda to the March 17 agenda. She called the Council's
200 February 3, 1981 - continued
0
attention to a letter from Russ Berg and asked that they.read it. Also, she said Councilman Nord-
quist had asked fora discussion of.pol.i.cy on awarding..contracts.. She asked that such be placed on
the February 24 agenda.
There was no�further business to come before the Council, and the meeting adjourned at 11:25 p.m.
IRENE VARNEY MORAN,, Uty Clerk HARVE H.,HARRISON, Mayor
February 10, 1981 - Work Meeting
The regular meeting.of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 8:35 p.m. by Council President
Katherine Allen in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. All present joined in the flag
salute. Mayor Harrison arrived shortly after the call to order.
PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor
Katherine Allen
Sue Crawford, Student Rep.
John Nordquist
Larry Naughten
Jo -Anne Jaech
Mary Goetz
Ray Gould
Bill Kasper
STAFF PRESENT
Fred Herzberg, Public Works Director
John LaTourelle, Planning Consultant
Mary Lou Block, Planning Director
Marlo Foster, Police Chief
Jack Weinz, Fi,�e','.Chi.e_f,-"'-
Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
Jim Adams, City Engineer
Jim Jessel, Parks & Recreation Director
Art Housler, Finance Di.rector
Bill Nims, Traffic Engineer
Abe Blandin, Street Division Supt.
Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
Council'President Allen announced that she had invited Wayne Cowley, a management consultant, to
speak to the Council. Mr. Cowley described the,services his firm provides and presented a proposal,
the'first part of which would be a survey to determine whether.an in-depth study would be benefi-
cial. He said he could save the City a great deal of money by implementation of his management
program. The preliminary survey would cost $375 and the cost of the full study could not be deter-
mined until the survey is completed. The proposal was discussed briefly, after which COUNCILWOMAN
ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN GOETZ, TO PLACE A DISCUSSION OF THIS PROPOSAL ON THE FEBRUARY 24,
1981 WORK MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.
PRESENTATION BY ED ALIVERTI RE PERFORMING ARTS CENTER
Mr. Aliverti showed a film promoting the proposed Performing Arts Center and brought the Council up-
to-date regarding its status. He also expressed thanks for the City,!§-*1-s6pport.
REPORT ON -TRAFFIC PLANNING STUDY BY NORTHWEST ENGINEERING
TraOic Engineer Bill Nims briefly described the traffic planning study which was fu-nded by a
federal grant. The study'inventoried existin'g conditions which formed a basis fo*r identifying and
evaluating potential problem areas. Bob Parrott of Northwe ' st Engineering Company further des * cribed
the study which he noted recommended improvements -for 27 hazardous and capacity deficient locations
throughout the City. Detailed copies of the report had been provided to the Council. No Council
action was required.
REPORT ON SIDEWALK CONDITIONS AND IMPROVEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
Street Division Superintendent.Abe Blandin reported on the inspection made of sidewalks in'the older
downtown areas of the City. Increasing reports of falling accidents and requests of citizens had
prompted -this survey. It was noted thatthe City Code requires that sidewalks in need of recon-
struction more than ten years after the acceptance of'the construction by the City shall be recon-
structed solely at the cost of.the abutting property owners. The Code further requires that where
sidewalks do not exist but are needed, the Council can require the abutting property owners to
construct'them. It was recognized some areas should be repaired by the City, such as where a water
meter has settled, roots of trees planted by the City have lifted the walk, hydrants have washed out
the area under the walk, etc. Sidewalks which should be repaired/constructed by individual property
owners, as -well as those which should be done by the City, were,identified. -It was requested that
the Council pass a resolution to initiate a sidewalk reconstructi.on program within the boundaries
stated in the report. The Public Works Department was in the process of taking care of those which
were determined to be the responsibility of the City. This was discussed and it was noted th ' at the
timing of this was inopportune, but it was recoqnized that the work will have to be accomplished
because accidents are occurring as a result of.the condition of the sidewalks. COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN GOULD, THAT THE.CITY ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION TO
IMPLEMENT THE SIDEWALK RECONSTRUCTION PROGRAM, ONLY WITHIN THE AREA SHOWN ON THE MAP PROVIDED WITH
THE REPORT. MOTION CARRIED.
I
I
I
Ll
9