10/01/1985 City CouncilF��
THESE MINUTES SUBJECT
TO OCTOBER 8,1985 APPROVAL
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
October 1, 1985
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Larry
Naughten in the Plaza Meeting_Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag sa-
lute.
PRESENT
Larry Naughten, Mayor
John Nord.quist
Steve Dwyer
Laura Hall
Jo -Anne Jaech
Bill Kasper
Lloyd Ostrom .
Jack Wilson
CONSENT AGENDA
STAFF PRESENT
Peter Hahn, Community Services Director
Bobby Mills, Pub. Works Supt.
Mary Lou Block, Planning Manager
Ron Schirman, Asst. Fire Chief
Duane Bowman, Asst. Planner
Jim Adams, City Engineer
Jerry Hauth, Hydraulics Engineer
Pat LeMay, Personnel Director
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Art Housler, Admin. Svcs. Mgr.
Caroll Palmer Maurer, Recorder
Items B and G were removed from the Consent Agenda. Mr. Snyder noted another individual had
requested that the parcel materials for agenda item F be segregated in accordance with a prior
subdivision. He referred to Revised Exhibit A, which had been forwarded to members, and stated
that it would be incorporated with Resolution 628. Mr. Snyder mentioned that these parcels had
been subdivided in accordance with City ordinance, and that segregation had been requested for
the 'purpose of .prepayment. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO
APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent
Agenda included the following:
(A) Roll Call
(C) Acknowledgement of Receipt of Claim for Dama es from JoAnne Sprague for Mary J.
Robertson ($97.00) and M.G.S. Tires ($423.173
(D) Report on Bids Opened September 17, 1985 for Sale of Two Surplus Pick-ups and
Acceptance of High_ Bids from Jerry DeYoung ($228 for 1965 Ford and $508 for 1974
Dodge)
(E) Report on bids Opened September 25, 1985 and Authorization to Award Contract for
Yost Pool Tank and Deck Repair to Jager Co. ($100,286.34)
(F) Passage of Resolution 628 Amending Final Assessment Roll of LID 210 by Segregation
of Parcels 177, 187, 199, and 201
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1985 [Item (B) on Consent Agenda]
Councilmember Hall referred to the third paragraph on page 13 of the September 17, 1985 minutes,
and noted that it was the Lynnwood Pool staff that had complained of cold droplets falling from
the cover, rather than the Lake Forest Park Pool staff. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, THAT THE MINUTES -OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1985 BE APPROVED AS AMENDED. MOTION CAR-
RIED.
AUTHORIZATION TO RETAIN FUJIKI AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE DESIGN OF A DRAINAGE SYSTEM IN MEADOW -
LE AREA ($14,550)'Item G on onsent ends
Mr. Hauth gave background information on this agenda item, and noted that after the mud slide at
the Solie residence last November, the City had taken temporary measures to divert the ground
water collection system away from the area of the slide. The staff had requested a proposal to
design a permanent reroute of the groundwater collection system from Fujiki and Associates.
However, due to current problems associated with insurance. Fujiki is only able to obtain
$500,000 coverage. Although the Solies have filed a claim against the City for up to $20 mil-
lion, staff believes that the limited involvement of Fujiki can be adequately protected with
this $500,000 coverage. He noted that due to the limitations of the temporary measures taken by
the City, it was very important that the system be repaired before additional damage is done.
Mr. Hauth also stated that this could be paid from the 412 fund (Extension to.Meadowdale Drain-
age System). COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, FOR AUTHORIZATION
TO RETAIN FUJIKI AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE DESIGN OF' A DRAINAGE SYSTEM IN THE MEADOWDALE AREA
($14,500). MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Kasper noted that he would like to be further apprised
of this situation during the Executive Session which would follow tonight's meeting.
AUDIENCE
Sharon Claussen, 18222 Andover, stated that next week's Council agenda would include discus-
sion of employee and elected official indemnification. As Chair of the Planning Board, she strong-
ly recommended approval of an ordinance to indemnify City employees and elected officials. Ms.
Claussen pointed out that she was pleased to volunteer her services without pay to the City of
Edmonds. However, she would feel much more comfortable if citizens who are civic minded enough
to volunteer their time were not held liable for actions taken in this capacity.
Duane Bowman, 250 Fifth Avenue North, was concerned because his job entails exposure on a
dai y basis. He noted that uring is six years of employment with the City, he had always as-
sumed indemnification by the City. However, a call to the City Attorney had revealed that if he
were sued on behalf of the City, he would have to hire his own defense attorney. Mr. Bowman
stressed that to jeopardize his family when he had been acting in good faith for the City was
unacceptable. He noted that even if the suit were awarded in his favor, he would still have to
pay his own attorney fees. Mr. Bowman noted that the City of Mountlake Terrace had such an ordi-
nance that could be used as a draft. He urged the Council to pass an ordinance next week that
would be almostiverbatim to that of the City of Mountlake Terrace. Councilmember Hall requested
that Councilmembers be furnished a copy of this ordinance early enough to peruse it. Mr. Snyder
stated he couldldraft such an ordinance for the Council based upon six models that were available.
Jerry Hauth, 34655 Hanville N.E., Kingston, reiterated Mr. Bowman's concerns, and added
that there was a great ea o exposure or City employees in his department. He noted that this
impending responsibility hanging over their heads had literally hamstrung the employees, due to
the fact that they did not have protection. He emphasized that the lack of liability coverage
was a staggering, frightening situation.
REVENUE STATUS REPORT FROM CULTURAL ARTS STADIUM AND CONVENTION
Bruce Agnew, Snohomish County Councilmember, noted that the Cultural Arts Stadium and Conven-
tion District was a very important public project. He gave a status report on the project and
asked the Council to reaffirm their commitment for 50 percent of the City's hotel, motel tax
revenue, as well as to approve implementation of a 5 percent admissions tax on all ticketed
events for the CASCD project. He noted that this was subject to voter approval as a bond is-
sue. Mr. Agnew stated that the current site proposal would split the facilities between two
sites. Under this plan, the smaller community theatre would be constructed on the Edmonds Communi-
ty College campus, with the college assuming all maintenance and operations costs. This would
relieve the taxpayers of $150,000 of day-to-day administrative costs. It would also include
space necessary to support new arts curriculum programs for Edmonds Community College and the
Edmonds School District. Mr. Agnew noted that the large theatre might be housed at the Lynn-
wood High School site near Alderwood Mall, or it might be mated with a hotel/convention complex
in that area. Its location would make it not only highly visible and accessible, but would also
optimize its economic impact. It would also promote tourism and strengthen the local economy.
Additionally, the CASCD is trying to attract some private sector funding for this project. He
stated that the annual operating subsidy for the large theatre would be approximately $550,000,
of which Snohomish County would contribute 50 percent. Mr. Agnew mentioned that the City of
Edmonds contributes about $7,500 currently for this purpose, and requested that the Council ex-
tend the one year commitment and give a more substantial funding base.
Mr. Agnew stated that the admissions.tax was a new one similar to that levied on theatres in
.Everett and in Seattle. He noted that it was a substantial source of revenue to cities all
around the country. This new tax would bring in a conservative estimate of $100,000 for perform-
ing arts center events. Mr. Agnew mentioned that Lynnwood would bear the financial brunt of
this, due to current proposals to construct up to ten theatres in the Alderwood Mall area. The
ticket would also have a .9 percent local sales tax attached to it. Other potential sources
would be an admissions tax on the small theatre at the Edmonds Community College site, which
would bring in about $5,000. He pointed out that the Cultural Arts District had been considering
a deferment forinonprofit groups.
The consultant hired by the CASCD Board had estimated a $350,000 operating subsidy figure.
They would like to reduce the construction costs by about one third before submitting a final
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 2 October 1, 1985
proposal to district voters. The CASCD Board also intends to settle maintenance and operations
cost issues before this proposal is submitted. Mr. Agnew noted that the CASCD had a firm
commitment from the County, and that the preliminary analysis from all the cities was positive.
However, he wished to make certain this commitment was firm.
Councilmember Hail introduced Jerry Gallaway, Executive Director, and Helen Cunningham, Secre-
tary of the CASCD. Councilmember Kasper asked if the decision was firm to split the facilities
between two sites. Mr. Agnew responded that a vote had been taken to explore this option,
based upon three conditions. If these conditions could be met, it was fairly certain that the
CASCD Board would approve a split site option. He noted that besides the Lynnwood High School
site, the Lynnwood bus barn had also been under consideration., but it would require co -location
with a major convention center. Mr. Agnew reminded members that the college site was already
in place. However, he had reservations whether the college would be able to handle the administra-
tion costs, and added that the total cost for both sites was $500,000.
Councilmember Dwyer asked if Lynnwood's participation was contingent upon having the larger
facility. Mr. Agnew replied that Lynnwood went on record as supporting the Alderwood Mall site
because of their concerns about traffic on 208th. The CASCD had been of the opinion that the
large theatre should be placed where the ultrastructure is and where it would not create traf-
fic problems. He added that this was the Alderwood Mall site. Councilmember Dwyer commented
that Lynnwood seemed to be taking the brunt of the tax burden. He queried if this willingness
was contingent upon their getting the arena where they so desired. 'Mr. Agnew responded affirma-
tively. He added that the split site was a win -win compromise. The larger facility would be
designed for major attractions. The college facility would book the larger site when it was
needed for large acts. The problem with the college was that it was in the wrong place. Mr.
.Agnew conceded that the split site option did not focus attention on one particular spot.
However, there was a problem with access and transportation. He was of the opinion that the
voters would support a one time only construction bond, and added that the taxpayers in the Dis-
trict would not be asked to spend any money for a convention center, but only for an arts center.
Mr. Gallaway commented that this project had become more complex as time had passed. He noted
that the consulting study had been strongly in favor of Lynnwood High School as the number one
site, because it was a good, commercial location with easy access and high visibility. However,
he conceded that there were problems with splitting the sites, in the form of adding about
$400,000 to the capital costs. However, the operating deficit would be considerably higher if
both facilities were at the Edmonds Community College site.
Councilmember Kasper asked if any consideration had been given to expanding the District. Mr.
Agnew replied that there had been some talk about people living in the Mukilteo School Dis-
trict annexing into the area. In addition, the City of Mill Creek had indicated interest in
annexing into the District. This would lessen the tax burden on the individual property owners
if the bond issue were approved.
Councilmember Dwyer noted that the 5 percent admissions tax would result in taxing one person's
business within the City of Edmonds. He suggested that a response be solicited from the Edmonds
Theatre owner, as well as from the Chamber of Commerce. He was of the opinion that this should
be done in advance of the hearing. Councilmember Ostrom stated that if anyone had any comments,
they could attend the public hearing on October 15, 1985, when the Council would consider approv-
al of this taxing consideration. Councilmember Ostrom stressed that this hearing should be well
publicized, so that there would be more public participation. Councilmember Hall was of the
opinion that the public would have ample opportunity for testimony at the October 15 hearing.
COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, THAT A PUBLIC HEARING BE HELD ON
OCTOBER 15, 1985 TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE CULTURAL ARTS STADIUM AND CONVENTION DISTRICT TAX
PROPOSAL, AND THAT THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AS WELL AS ALL INTERESTED PARTIES BE INVITED TO ATTEND
THIS HEARING. MOTION CARRIED.
HEARING ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION ON PROPOSED CONTRACT REZONE FROM BN TO RM-3 AT APPROXI-
MATELY 87 0 76TR AVE. W. R-3-85 W BC L
Mr. Bowman noted the recommendation of the Planning Board for rezone to RM-3 for the subject
parcel. Webcol, Inc. filed an application to rezone the 2.8 acre parcel of land from BN (neigh-
borhood business) to RM-3 (multiple family - low density). On June 12, 1985 the Planning Board
held a public hearing to consider the rezone request. Mr. Bowman pointed out that the applicant
intended to construct twenty multiple family dwelling units on the site, and that an application
was concurrently being processed to subdivide the property into five lots, under file P-2-85. He
stated that the property was an environmentally sensitive site, due to the steeply sloped banks
located along the south and west property lines. However, the applicant would preserve those
steeply sloped areas through a greenbelt covenant as part of the development of the property.
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 3 October 1, 1985
With regard to the Planning Board findings, the proposal was only in conflict with the Comprehen-
sive Policy Plan Map, which designates the property as Commercial/Business. However, the Compre-
hensive Policy Plan also states that this property could be reclassified for another use. He
displayed a viewfoil of the subject property and noted that this was the last tract of land zoned
BN within the City limits. Mr. Bowman noted that the entire area surrounding the property was
low density. He showed another viewfoil highlighting the boundaries of the area encompassed by
the greenbelt restriction.
Councilmember Kasper asked about the original proposal. Mr. Bowman replied the original pro-
posal for sewer lots had been narrowed down to six, with the potential for dividing the sixth
lot. However, the applicant changed the application to a five lot subdivision. He added that
the applicant would be committed to the site development plan which would comply with all Architec-
tural Design Board requirements.
I
Councilmember Jaech asked for clarification regarding purchasing additional capacity in the Lynn-
wood sewer treatment plant. She noted that Edmonds owned 25 percent of the existing plant by
contract, and queried what had happened to the City's capacity in that plant. Mr. Bowman respond -
this was a rezone request, so first priority must go to land presently within the City that is
already zoned. Councilmember Kasper asked if the zoning were changed, whether this would result
in increasing the amount of usage for the land. Mr. Bowman replied that in this case, it would
not be, because the applicant could construct 20 dwelling units. Councilmember Kasper asked
about the depth of the property. Mr. Bowman responded that it was 222.60 feet on the north end.
Craig Anderson, 13322 Highway 99 South, Everett, stated that he was a land surveyor represent-
ing R. C. Coleman. He displayed a map with different colors of the area, and noted that the
subject parcel was separated by the various zones. He added that the arterial provided a good
buffer, and that the steep bank also created a buffer between this site and the single family
homes to the west. The applicant was also proposing a layout which would maintain the existing
vegetation.
Richard Coleman, 10519 123rd Ave. S.E., Snohomish, stated that Webcol, Inc. was a
partnership which had been dissolved within the ast two months. The project was now under R. C.
Coleman, Inc. Councilmember Kasper asked about the maximum density for this parcel. Mr.
Coleman replied that 40 units were allowed for that amount of square footage on the site.
Mayor Naughten noted that this site would impact the traffic on 76th Ave. W., and asked if this
had been discussed during hearings. Mr. Hahn replied that a memorandum with comments from the
City Engineer regarding traffic impact was currently on his desk. Mr. Bowman added that 76th
Ave. W. could handle new development on this site. Ms. Block mentioned that with the current BN
zoning, the potential was much greater for more traffic, because of drive in business.
Councilmember Hall mentioned that the site design seemed to be an excellent usage of the land.
She noted that it served as a transition and was also much lower usage of the density than it
could be. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, THAT THE PROPOSED RE-
ZONE FROM BN TO RM-3 BE APPROVED AT APPROXIMATELY 18720 76TN AVE. W., THAT THE FINDINGS OF THE
PLANNING BOARD BE ADOPTED, AND THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE DIRECTED TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY ORDI-
NANCE. MOTION CARRIED.
HEARING ON PROPOSED 5-LOT PRELIMINARY PLAT AT APPROXIMATELY 18720 76TN AVE. W.
P-- W CL
Mr. Bowman stated that this was a concurrent application for the five lot subdivision. The Hear-
ing Examiner conducted a public hearing on August 22, 1985 to formulate findings and make a recom-
mendation to the Council. He recommended that the Council approve this request, subject to a
number of conditions listed in his previously submitted report. Mr. Bowman recommended action to
adopt the Hearing Examiner's findings and decision approving preliminary plat P-2-85
Craig Anderson, 13322 Highway 99 South Everett, displayed a map of the five lot subdivision,
and showed a rendition of the proposed fourp exes. He noted that there were a total of 45
parking spaces, and showed cross sections of the proposed lots. Mr. Anderson pointed out that
the building heights were 38 feet, which would not impede any views. Councilmember Nordquist
asked if he or Mr. Coleman had any objections to the Hearing Examiner's findings. Mr. Anderson
replied that they accepted the findings as submitted. Councilmember Kasper asked about play equip-
ment, and added it was his understanding that it was confined to the use of the area. Mr. Ander-
son replied affirmatively, and added that the applicant had agreed to install the play equip-
ment. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, THAT THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
BE GRANTED FOR FILE P-2-85, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS LISTED BY THE HEARING EXAMINER, AND THAT
THE CITY ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO PREPARE THE NECESSARY DOCUMENTS. MOTION CARRIED.
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 4 October 1, 1985
1
HEARING ON PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2526 REGULATING CONSTRUCTION OF SATELLITE DISH ANTENNAS
Ms. Block gave background information on this agenda item. She noted that the Planning Board
had been directed by the Council to explore the possibility of modifying the Community Develop-
ment Code to regulate satellite dish antennas. After holding two informal meetings, the Planning
Board held a public hearing on July 24, 1985 to consider such regulations. The Board took final
action on its recommendations on August 28, 1995. She added that the minutes from those hearings
were included in the agenda packets. Ms. Block summarized the draft ordinance, and noted that it
included provisions which would require satellite dishes to be in rear yards, if at all possi-
ble. She noted that roof construction of satellite dishes was limited to certain height restric-
tions. Ms. Block pointed out that the language also provided for a hearing by the Hearing Examin-
er for a waiver. Councilmember Ostrom asked about the diameters of these antennas. Mr. Snyder
responded that the maximum diameter was nine feet if it was a residential neighborhood roof mount-
ed antenna, 12 feet if it was ground mounted, and 12 feet in a general commercial zone. He added
that nine feet was the smallest practical size in order to receive a reasonable signal.
Sid Swartz 23611 Woodway Park Road, urged that the Council adopt the proposed ordi-
nance. Re was of the opinion that it was not only a fair, but also a reasonable ordinance. Mr.
Swartz noted that there had been a satellite dish moratorium in effect since June 1, 1985, and
Since that time, it had been difficult to conduct business as usual.
Councilmember Hall asked for clarification regarding the last sentence in the first paragraph on
page three of.the draft ordinance. Mr. Snyder stated that the different zoning categories had
different height limitations. This sentence cautioned that setback requirements were not waived
by any of the height limitations. Councilmember Hall requested clarification of the last sen-
tence of the "Size and Height" paragraph on page three. Mr. Snyder replied that the concept
behind this was that any roof antenna installation in a standard base provided by the manufactur-
er or installer would be limited to the lower of the height limitations indicated in the zoning
code. Councilmember Hall suggested that for the benefit of the public, this sentence be clari-
fied.
Councilmember Kasper asked.if there were an ordinance in effect for television antennas. Mr.
Snyder replied affirmatively, that they were structures under the ordinance. However, to his
knowledge, there had never been a complaint. Ms. Block added that the only complaints they re-
ceived were for radio antennas.
Councilmember Ostrom mentioned that page four discussed the impracticality of receiving a usable
satellite signal. He queried if the reasoning for this technological impracticality had to do
with the obstruction of trees. Mr. Snyder replied that there was a certain angle on the horizon
in which satellites pass through a certain quadrant of the sky. Trees, or the lay of the land
may impede the signal. Mr. Snyder added that the Federal Communications Commission had preempted
the field by passing a regulation relating to satellite dish antennas. The result of this was
that owners and sellers could not be placed at a disadvantage in the commercial satellite televi-
sion marketplace.
Councilmember Jaech asked if the location was checked whenever someone obtained a satellite dish
permit. Ms. Block responded affirmatively, that it would be checked just like a building per-
mit. Councilmember Jaech queried why some kind of screening had not been addressed, so that
people did not have to view satellite dishes. Mr. Snyder replied that discussion had centered
around the fact that people keep a wide variety of ugly things in their back yards. The Planning
Commission did not want to become involved in such an issue.
Councilmember Kasper asked about the ramifications of an overlap in the Code regarding satellite
coverage for impacted homes in the area. Mr. Snyder responded that the Planning Commission had
addressed solar cells to cover this contingency. Councilmember Hall asked if joint satellite use
in a neighborhood had been discussed. Ms. Block replied that the difficulty with joint use was
that the rotor could only be pointed.to one angle at a time. However, the draft ordinance dis-
cussed franchising to cover this possibility. Councilmember Dwyer was appalled by the prospect
of roof mounted satellite dishes; however, he noted that property owners should be accommodated
if a signal was not available in any other way. Councilmember Hall predicted that the future
would yield smaller satellite dishes to serve the same function. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, FOR PASSAGE OF ORDINANCE 2526. MOTION CARRIED.
There was a recess taken at 8:45 p.m., and the meeting reconvened at 8:55 p.m.
Councilmember Jaech announced that Councilmember Nordquist had to leave during the recess, due to
illness.
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 5 October 1, 1985
HEARING ON PRO OSAL TO CLOSE 7TH AVE. S., NORTH OF BIRCH STREET
Mayor Naughten requested that those who shared the same thoughts designate a spokesperson so
that all public testimony could be heard this evening.
Mr. Adams, City Engineer, displayed a viewfoil of the proposed area. He gave background informa-
tion, and noted that the Fire Department had reservations about any street closure. He contin-
ued that the staff had recommended "no parking" on 7th Ave. S., from Elm to Birch. This recom-
mendation was based on the fact that the pavement width is twenty-two feet, which is insufficient
for two travel lanes and a parking lane, and that the houses in the area have average space for
5.3 cars on site. He noted that there was also limited sight distance, due to the topography.
Barricading the; roadway at the crest of the hill would eliminate all through traffic except emer-
gency vehicles. He showed slides of Birch Street and 7th Ave. S., as well as of the proposed
barricade site at the crest of the hill. All slides depicted the narrowness of the roadway and
the lack of automobile maneuverability. Mr. Adams noted that originally the recommendation had
been to limit parking on Elm and 7th Ave. S. However, only the temporary closure for one month
of 7th Ave. S. was being recommended tonight. If the street were closed for a month, at that
time further consideration could be given to this issue, and a decision made regarding a more
permanent barricade if the Council decided the closure should be permanent. At that time, the
City Engineer would also change the street map to include sufficient space for a cul-de-sac, if
the adjacent property was developed in the future.
Councilmember Kasper asked if citizens on Birch Street had been notified of this action. A num-
ber of citizens' in the audience indicated that only one sign had been posted.
Bob Throndsen, 1290 6th P1. S. announced he had been designated to speak for four families
along 6t Pl. S. and Birchstreet. He noted that everyone in the community was affected by any
action taken regarding 7th Ave. S., and added that they were delighted with the proposal for
street closure. Mr. Throndsen continued that the street was a "suicide hill", because it was
very narrow, and that it was an "accident waiting to happen" He added that equally important
was the safety of the adults and the children in the area. Mr. Throndsen stated that there
were 13 children in the area ranging in.age from 3 years to high school age. He emphasized that
7th Ave. S. had become a race track since it had opened approximately five years ago. He added
that this closure should be permanent.
Rox Geiselman, 700 Birch Street, registered his opposition to the closure of 7th Ave. S.
and requested that the Council consider all of the issues before making a decision. Mr.
Geiselman noted that he had lived at his present address for eight years. Prior to the time
7th Ave. S. was opened, whenever snow fell, no one could exit on Birch Street. However, during
the period that this street had been open, people have been able to exit using 7th Ave. S.
whenever snow fell. He pointed out that 7th Ave. S. not only provided ingress and egress,
but also the property owners' insurance rates would be affected if it were closed. Mr.
Geiselman also stated that 7th Ave. S. provided the fastest route to the local hospital.
He noted that the speeding problems were ones of enforcement, and suggested that traffic control
be implemented ,via signing and posting, enforcement and by limiting parking during peak periods.
As an example of the lack of signing, he queried why drivers were not informed of the fact that
children were at play in the area.
Tom Goodrum, 708 Birch Street, concurred with Mr. Geiselman's comments, and added that
everyone on Ith Ave. S. has a garage that should be utilized for its intended purpose. He
could not understand why people did not use their garages and driveways, rather than blocking the
street.
Carol Ha es, 709 Elm Place W., was of the opinion that 7th.Ave. S. was entirely too narrow -
for par ing an ',two lanes of traffic. She echoed that it was a suicide hill and should be
closed. Ms. Hayes suggested that the gate be opened in case of snow, so that residents could
egress, and added that it only snowed about three days a year.
Barbara Jefferson, 704 Birch Street,, questioned why the road had not been made wider when it
was originally constructed. She noted that there were speeding problems in every county, not
just on 7th Ave. S.
Marrily Hall, 631 Birch noted that she had lived at her present address for 16 years, and
that some definite cha Birch,
were needed. She emphasized that the taxes she and other citizens
paid should be utilized to widen 7th Ave. S. as well as to flatten the hill. She noted that
the streets upon which.snow had fallen overnight were rarely sanded early the next morning. Ms.
Hall was of the'lopinion that this street should not be closed. She asked if it would be possible
to install speed bumps in order to deter speeding on 7th Ave. S. Ms. Block stated that speed
bumps were not legal on public streets.
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 6 October 1, 1985
i]
Ron Dudack., 12337 - 7th Ave. S. stated that he preferred a wider street, but would ac-
cept the blockage of 7thAve. S. as a less expensive alternative. He was also in agreement
that the suicide aspect of the hill should be eliminated, and this could be accomplished by a
barricade. He asked Mr. Adams, City Engineer, if he had ever considered installing a turn around
in front of the vacant lot. Mr. Adams responded that they were presently considering street clo-
sure, and that a well signed turn around would be designed at some future date.
Roy Cosper, 651 Birch Street, voiced h.is opposition to closing the street. He was of the opin-
ion that the only reason this suicide hill was in existence was because no one wanted to spend
the money to flatten it. He had been told when the first development was created that the narrow
street would be made into a full width road in the future. However, the other developers were
not required to widen 7th Ave. S. He noted that the Council was now considering whether the
residents should "put up with less than satisfactory access". Mr. Cosper stated he had wrecked
his automobile trying .to egress during snow conditions.
Maisa Riekstins 611 Birch, announced that a stop sign had been installed on this street
ear er in the spring. However, a vehicle had plowed down this stop sign and it was subsequent-
ly removed, with no replacement. She emphasized that even when it was in place, this stop sign
had not been honored by motorists. She urged the Council to accept the proposal to close this
hill.
Mr. Hahn noted that the City Code stated streets could not be built to provide for parking. He
pointed out that on the average, every house on 7th Ave. S. and on Elm had a two car garage
and an apron with a minimum of two vehicle spaces. In addition, he pointed out that Elm Place,
7th Ave. S. and a few other streets provide between 50 and 100 parking spaces on the street for
people to use. The City ordinances also state that streets increase storm water runoff. There-
fore, whenever possible, the City would not provide impervious surface for increasing the runoff.
Mr. Hahn noted that from a development point of view, other factors should also be taken into
consideration. He noted that the parking was all on site, and the access was primarily from
6th Ave. S. He added that it would serve no purpose to widen the street for the sole purpose
of providing an additional parking lane.
Councilmember Kasper noted that it had been a mistake to construct a twenty-two foot wide street
as the only route through the whole area. He was not willing to vote for permanent closure of
this street. Perhaps over a period of time it might be closed, but in the long run it needed to
be open for fire access. He added that 7th Ave. S. had been designed to be a through street.
Councilmember Kasper was of the opinion that the closure should be temporary until such time as
the City was willing to spend the money to flatten the hill. He added that in the long run, a
sidewalk might have to be removed, and the city might have to budget for this. He commented that
during inclement weather, it might be necessary to reopen the road for access purposes.
Councilmember Ostrom agreed, and added that the street should be closed for a month, and that
this closure could be continued until such time as the City had funding for an engineering modifi-
cation. His belief was the wider the street, the faster the speed.
Mayor Naughten asked if anyone had considered making it a one way street going north. This would
eliminate some of the speeding.
Councilmember Hall was concerned about the additional traffic generated on 220th as a result of
this street closure. She agreed that widening a street invited more traffic at a higher rate of
speed. She also was in agreement that eliminating one sidewalk might help. Councilmember Hall
suggested that fill on one side of the hill might eliminate the suicide aspect of it. She was of
the opinion that it should be closed temporarily, and lessening the crest of the hill could be
considered as a budget item.
Councilmember Ostrom stated that if it snowed, the street could be temporarily reopened.
Councilmember Dwyer noted that he would like a 60 day limit to the closure, in order to obtain a
better idea of whether or not the patterns actually would change. Councilmember Wilson agreed
with the 60 day time frame. However, he was of the opinion that the Council should be reviewing
the situation during this 60 day period. Councilmember Kasper pointed out that the 60 day period
was necessary to determine the ramifications of the full impact. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, THAT 7TH AVE. S., NORTH OF BIRCH STREET BE CLOSED, SUBJECT TO A
60 DAY REVIEW. MOTION CARRIED.
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 7 October 1, 1985
MAYOR
Mayor Naughten asked about the Council decision regarding the classification study.
Councilmember Hall noted that the minutes of September 24, 1985 discussed Council action on this
issue.
It was noted that the City Clerk had addressed the issue of meeting on November 4, 1985, rather
than November 5. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, THAT THE CITY COUN-
CIL MEET ON MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1985. MOTION CARRIED.
The Mayor noted !that there had been an article in the Enterprise which stated Edmonds' sister
city,,Lynnwood, was worth $l billion. He pointed out that in 1984 Edmonds had reached that
point,, in 1985 it had reached $1 billion, 74 million, and in 1986 its worth was projected at $1
billion, 150 million.
Mayor Naughten mentioned that the National League of Cities still needed a delegate and an alter-
nate to attend the convention in Seattle during December. Councilmember Nordquist volunteered to
be the delegate„ and Councilmember Hall stated she would serve as an alternate.
COUNCIL
Councilmember Kasper commented that there was a City ordinance which prohibited glare lights, and
he would like tolsee this enforced. He stressed that the key to such enforcement was informing
the public that such glare lights are illegal within the City limits.
Councilmember Jaech announced that the interviews for the City Council resource person would be
conducted next week. She also wished to clarify newspaper articles regarding action taken last
week on the Highway 99 Study. She stressed that the Council had adopted a concept, rather than
giving the "green light" for people to start filing permits in City Hall. Councilmember Ostrom
agreed with Councilmember Jaech, adding that he had hoped for more lead time in order to really
study the issue,',and queried whether the Council should delay consideration of this .ordinance for
a week or two. Mayor Naughten stated that this could be done at the next Council meeting. Mr.
Snyder cautionedlthat the actual ordinance would be much longer and much more complex than the
Highway 99 Report. He added that the Report only singled out what was being changed, and that it
represented the clearest guide to step-by-step changes. Councilmember Hall was in agreement
with Councilmember Jaech, adding that it was not "open season" for Highway 99. She was of the
opinion that it represented a red flag for some of the citizens who were quite concerned about
this issue.
Councilmember Ostrom stated that he had volunteered his services on the Open Space Tax Relief
Committee to work with the County. However, he had volunteered not knowing that the property was
across the street from his house. Therefore, he wished to withdraw, in the appearance of fair-
ness. Councilmember Kasper volunteered to take his place.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a recess taken at 9:58 so that the Council could meet in Executive Session to discuss
property acquisition The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m. at the conclusion of the Executive
Session.
I
JA ,UELINE G. PARRETT, City Clerk
LA Y S. MGHTEN, Major
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Page 8 October 1, 1985