Loading...
12/03/1985 City CouncilTHESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO DECEMBER 10, 1985 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 3, 1985 In the absence of Mayor Naughten and Mayor Pro tem Nordquist, COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECOND- ED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, THAT COUNCILMEMBER JAECH SERVE AS MAYOR PRO TEM FOR THIS EVENING'S MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Councilmember Jaech in the Plaza Meeting Room of the Edmonds Library. All present joined in the flag salute. PRESENT ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Steve Dwyer Larry Naughten, Mayor Peter Hahn, Comm. Svcs. Director Laura Hall John Nordquist Dan,Prinz, Police Chief Jo -Anne Jaech Jim Adams, City Engineer Bill Kasper Art Housler, Admin. Svcs. Director Lloyd Ostrom Bobby Mills, Pub. Wks. Superintendent Jack Wilson Duane Bowman, Asst. City Planner Tammy Schwartze, Student Rep. Scott Snyder, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder CONSENT AGENDA Item (B) was removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEM- BER WILSON, TO ADD ITEM (E), THE ACCEPTANCE OF QUIT CLAIM DEEDS FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM WESTERLIND AND WATSON FOR STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECOND- ED BY C. KASPER, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF.THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL (C) REPORT ON BIDS OPENED NOVEMBER 20, 1985 FOR WHEEL LOADER, AND AWARD OF BID TO N.C. MACHINERY ($40,597.38) (D) AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS TO REPLACE ASPHALT SPREADER BOX ($15,000) (E) ACCEPTANCE OF QUIT CLAIM DEEDS FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM WESTERLIND AND WATSON FOR STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Councilmember Hall stated her discussion on November 19, 1985 with Dr. Hyatt was omitted. She requested they be inserted. It reads as follows: Councilmember Hall referred to the pink sheet noting Snohomish County may not be "doing their job" compared to other counties. She asked Dr. Hyatt if the Health District found themselves in a position of being a negotiator and not having the time, nor staff, to deal with it. Councilmember Hall commented she was glad to see that a Finance Committee may be formed. Dr. Hyatt stated the County's contribution for 1986 will be equivalent to $7.47, and the highest contribution of a city --The City of Everett --will be $2.70. She said the problem has been the legislature took away the mandated millage. She added it has involved a lot of negotiation, noting at budget time the District is "like the kid that has no folks because the County says, 'go to the cities and ask for more money' and the cities say 'go to the County and get more money"'. AUDIENCE Kathy Nelson, 7415 140th P1. S.E., Bellevue, stated she was owner of an eight-plex on 220th Avenue. She said she was recently informed by an appraiser that the property on 220th Avenue West was going to be sold to the City. Ms. Nelson protested the purchase because she said it would decrease the value of her property because of backup onto one of the driveways. She asked what the time limitation was to file a protest if, in fact, that option was still available to her. Community Services Director Peter Hahn stated the City was just informed of this situation on December 3, which involves the street widening and the acquisition of some width of right-of- way. He said the City hasn't had sufficient time to ascertain whether Ms. Nelson was able to file a protest, but Jim Adams was researching the possibility. * Don Wells, 9137 - 186th P1. S.W., stated his concerns regarding Nutt Park were twofold: 1) the disposition of the home in the park and, 2) the residents of that home. Mr. Wells stated the Hutts had made a tremendous contribution to the City and surrounding area. Consideration is being given to the destruction of the home if the Mayor could not extend the tenant notice. Mr. Wells requested that this issue be placed on the agenda two weeks -from now. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO PLACE THIS ISSUE ON THE DECEMBER 17, 1985 AGENDA. Mr. Wells said the tenants would welcome visitation by Councilmembers to the property and would expressly be there on the afternoon of the 15th for.that purpose. MOTION CARRIED. HEARING ON PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION FOR PROPOSED CONTRACT REZONE FROM RS-8 TO BN FOR THE PROPERTYLOCATED AT 23105 100TH AVE. W. Asst. City Planner Duane Bowman stated the proposed contract for rezone was filed by Henry and Joyce Landau which limits the use of the property to single family residential or professional office uses. The contract would impose a greenbelt on the eastern portion of the subject proper- ty. Mr. Bowman noted he received letters from some of the surrounding neighbors and would like to have the minutes of the October 23 Planning Board corrected as to their statements. He also noted an addendum was not included in the packet and he distributed it to Councilmembers. Mr. Bow- man read Item (C) of the addendum under Recommendation to the City Council. He then referred to Page 3, Item (I), which specifies the greenbelt area requirements to set aside a total of 8,500 sq. ft., being the easternmost 70 ft. of the subject property, as amitigation and greenbelt area, and the easternmost 45 ft. consisting of the greenbelt area. He added that the property owner would agree upon the development of any portion of the mitigation area to install addition- al landscaping to screen the property from adjacent lots. He said there is a requirement by Code that a 15 ft. landscape buffer be provided on the south to screen the south residents. Mr. Bow- man showed a video tape of the subject property, noting the primary issue is how the single fami- ly areas to the south and east will be screened from any new commercial use. Councilmember Dwyer referred to Exhibit 5, Page 4, Paragraph 6. He asked how the two-year period regarding restric- tions on applications to amend the agreement was arrived at. Mr. Bowman replied it was standard language that is used in all contract rezones by the City of Edmonds. Councilmember Dwyer asked if someone would be successful in amending out the greenbelt by going back through the planning process. Mr. Bowman stated he didn't think so, but members of the Planning Board and City Coun- cil would have to make that decision. Councilmember Dwyer asked Mr. Bowman if he was represent- ing sufficient security for that provision in that it would not disappear in two years. Mr. Bowman stated his position was that he would not support the leading greenbelt. Councilmember Jaech opened the public portion of the hearing. Hank Landau stated he was the proponent. He displayed a diagram of the subject property on the overhead projector, noting it was occupied as a residential structure until last year. The engi- neering firm occupying the building has grown and is faced with the need to expand at the given location or move to some other location. Mr. Landau sent letters to the neighbors describing what the intent was in establishing an office building. A design plan was submitted to the Plan- ning Board. The recommendation of the Planning Board and City Staff called for a greenbelt larg- er than proposed. He noted other provisions were incorporated which provide for even greater protection than that which was recommended by the Planning Board. Mr. Landau stated he is pre- pared to accept the forty-five foot greenbelt and provide additional protection to the residents in the form of an additional twenty-five foot mitigation area and additional protection which isn't included in the contract rezone but is included in the addendum to the Covenant. Mr. Landau expressed his hope that the Council agree to the recommendations of the Planning Board and approve the rezone. Chacl.es Kalkworf, 23104 - 99th W., stated he polled the Berquist Addition and has been asked to speak on their behalf. They are opposed to the proposed rezone. He said he had documents stat- ing their reasons for opposition. City Attorney Scott Snyder informed the Council it was their prerogative to accept any written material in the course of the hearing. If they did accept the information into evidence, it should be marked as an exhibit and Mr. Landau given the opportunity to review it. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO ACCEPT THE INFORMA- TION AS EXHIBIT "M MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Kalkworf requested: 1) the Council impose a permanent preservation of the forty-five foot easterly portion of the greenbelt as recommended by the Plan- ning Board and, 2) a ten-yearpreservation period be placed on the twenty-five foot westerly portion of the greenbelt to provide sufficient time for the property owners to plant trees and allow them to grow to significant size so they would screen the areas to the east. He asked if these assurances could not be granted that the rezone be denied. Mr. Kalkworf then presented two photographs to the Council which demonstrated the trees on the greenbelt. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, THAT THE PHOTOGRAPHS BE ACCEPTED AS EXHIBIT "0" MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO AMEND THE MOTION TO ACCEPT THE PHOTOGRAPHS AS EXHIBIT "N". MOTION CARRIED. * See December 10, 1985 Minutes. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 DECEMBER 3, 1985 I f Robert Thorson, 9909 - 232nd S.W., stated he has lived in the neighborhood for twenty-three years. He said he has watched the neighborhood "go down the drain" and feels his property will soon be worthless. I Hank Landau stated he was trying to reach an agreement with the City regarding the contract re- zone and also with the neighboring property owners with respect to an amendment to the Cove- nants. He said he believed that the protection provided for Jn the contract rezone not only met the requirements that the City imposes but already exceed those even without the increased protec- tion provided through a separate agreement. Councilmember Dwyer requested Mr. Bowman to peruse Exhibit "N" for any statements that may be incorrect. Mr. Bowman stated he agreed with Items (1) and (4), but he was unsure of Item (2) regarding Paragraph 3 a (1) and (11) because he didn't have an attached copy. He noted Item (3) was an interpretation of Mr. Landau. Councilmember Dwyer asked what standard the Architectural Design Board (ADB) uses to determine whether or not they allow trees to be cut down. Mr. Bowman said their requirements are set forth in the ADB Review Criteria. Mr. Bowman stated he didn't agree with Paragraph 5 because fie thought the contract rezone does set up specific provisions for preserving trees. He didn't believe removal of some of the trees would substantially impact the value. He was also unsure of Paragraph 2 in Item (6). City Attorney Scott Snyder referenced Chapter 10.20, noting it provides that among the items that the ADB is to consider in any commer- cial development are grading and vegetation removal, and other changes to the site shall be mini- mized where natural beauty exists and, also, that landscape treatment should be provided to buff- er the development from surrounding property where conflict may result. Councilmember Jaech referenced Exhibit 1, Page 5 regarding the Planning Board's recommendation that a forty-five foot greenbelt shall be evidenced as a permanent restriction. Mr. Snyder stated the City Code pro- vides for the provision of permanent greenbelts and other restrictions to preserve natural ar- eas. He noted, however, that a future Council may choose to lift such impositions. Councilmem- ber Jaech asked Mr. Snyder if he has reviewed a proposed contract submitted by the applicant and, if so, did it meet with his approval. Mr. Snyder replied he had not received nor reviewed a contract. He noted the process would be for the Council to approve or deny the action directing Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law to be presented. If approved by the Council, the next step would be a submission of a contract by the applicant and an ordinance placed on the agenda at a future date for approval of both the contract and rezone. Councilmember Kasper expressed a con- cern regarding the imposition of a permanent restriction on the property. He asked Mr. Snyder if the Council had the authority to remove the restriction. Mr. Snyder said he believed the Council retained authority to remove it. Councilmember Hall asked if this issue was premature in view of the study at Westgate. Mr. Bowman replied it was not in conflict with development of the Westgate area. Councilmember Hall asked Mr. Bowman it if could be considered a spot rezone. Mr. Bowman replied negatively. 'Mr. Snyder stated the applicant's right to be heard vested when the application was filed, and if the rules were changed in midstream, serious constitutional prob- lems could arise. Councilmember Hall expressed a concern that property owners be assured that the Council made a wise decision prior to the study. Mr. Snyder stated the last time the Washing- ton State Superior Court reviewed the issue of spot rezones, they concluded rezones of any nature should be considered under the same set of rules. He noted these rules are currently in the ordinances regarding review of rezones. Councilmember Ostrom stated it would be difficult to make a decision and support it with Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law if it was based on what a future study may or may not do to that particular area. Councilmember Dwyer asked Mr. Snyder if the factors that the City Code sets out in considering a rezone apply in considering a con- ' tract rezone or was the Council considering a contract for adoption and for any reason not bargain- ing in good faith. Mr. Snyder said the same criteria is applicable that would apply to any re- zone. Councilmember Jaech closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember Dwyer expressed a concern that the two-year restriction period to apply for an amendment to the Agreements and Covenants was not long enough. Councilmember Ostrom concurred with Councilmember Dwyer. Councilmember Kasper asked Mr. Snyder if slope ordinances would affect the development of the property. Mr. Snyder replied there were Steep Slope Ordinances. However, he did not feel it was appropriate to interject any factual information into the hearing at that time. Councilmember Ostrom stated he would like a period specified longer than two years but was not certain how to accomplish that. Mr. Snyder clarified that the two-year/ten-year period provi- sion is that period in which the Council, at its sole discretion, would have no obligation to hear a rezone, noting the period was important because once that period has passed, amendments, modifications or changes in the zoning category would be heard under the quasi-judicial power and not legislative .power. Councilmember Dwyer asked Mr. Snyder how the Council would modify a provi- sion of the proposed contract rezone if they so desired. Mr. Snyder suggested -to include the modification as a Finding of Fact in the Council's decision relating it to one of the provisions of Chapter 20.40. Councilmember Hall called Mr. Snyder's attention to the recommended action of the agenda memo which included authorizing execution of the rezone contract. Mr. Snyder replied the recommendation was premature, noting the Council could authorize the Mayor to.sign the draft contract if the provisions were found to be in line with the Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law; if they were not, the Council could require it be submitted and come back on a consent EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 DECEMBER 3, 1985. agenda for approval or denial. Councilmember. Kasper~asked if the Council could act on a motion without any contract. Mr. Snyder said the Council would lose its ability to impose most of the re- strictions that were being discussed. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, 1) TO ADOPT THE FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW OF THE PLANNING BOARD TO THE EXTENT THEY ARE NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THE REMAINING PORTIONS OF THE MOTION; 2) ADOPT AN EXPRESSION OF THE COUNCIL'S WILLINGNESS TO ENTER INTO THE AGREEMENT AND COVENANTS, WHICH IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT 5, TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT DOCUMENT IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT FOLLOWS IN THE MOTION: 3) THAT THE COUNCIL FIND THAT THE TIME PERIOD OF TWO YEARS EXPRESSED ON PAGE 4 OF EXHIBIT 5 IS INSUFFI- CIENT TO SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 20.40.010.C, AND THAT A PERIOD OF TEN YEARS 15 MORE APPROPRIATE, AND THAT THE PERIOD OF TEN YEARS BE INSERTED IN THE PLACE OF THE PERIOD OF TWO YEARS. THE REASON, THEREFORE, IS THAT OWNERS OF PROPERTY IN THE SURROUNDING AREA WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CREATE THEIR OWN BUFFERS IN A TWO-YEAR PERIOD, SHOULD THEY SO DESIRE, AND THERE WILL BE NO ACTUAL GUARANTY TO THEM THAT THE GREENBELT AREA WILL NOT BE CHANGED UNLESS THE TIME PERIOD IN PARAGRAPH 6 ON PAGE 4 IS CHANGED, AND DIRECT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PREPARE APPROPRIATE FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDINANCE AND PRESENT THEM TO THE COUNCIL ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE CONSENT AGENDA. Councilmember Kasper stated he would vote against the motion on the.basis that he felt there was adequate provisions in the slope and buffer zones and ADB to take care of the problem without overlaying a restriction on the real estate. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM AMENDED THE MOTION TO INCLUDE CITING CHAPTER 20.40.010.F WHICH REFERS TO THE VALUE OF PROPERTY. Councilmem- ber Dwyer and Councilmember Hall accepted the amendment. MOTION C�RRIED, WITH COUNCILI4EMBER KASPER OPPOSED. HEARING ON RESOLUTION OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON OCEAN AVE. Councilmember Dwyer stated the written report that was to be drawn up was not submitted with the packet. He noted it was to be a recitation of the two committee meetings. He said the first meeting was attended primarily by residents of Ocean Avenue, and the second hearing was attended primarily by nonresidents of Ocean Avenue. .In preparation for the second meeting, a two -page document was drafted that is attached to the Agenda Memo in an attempt to arrive at Statements of Purpose applicable in situations other than just the present issue and to conceive of as many options possible and discuss them. Councilmember Dwyer added that everyone was in agreement with the first three Statements of Purpose, and the majority were not in favor of the fourth. Police Chief Dan Prinz stated the Public Safety Committee was asked to review this issue and come back with recommendations. Meetings were held, and the recommended action on the Memo was the general consensus. He said these recommendations were, at least from a Police Department stand- point, livable and certainly enforceable. He then read the recommended actions. Councilmember Jaech opened the public portion of the hearing. Scott MacDonald, 9921 Water Street, stated he sent a letter to the Council noting the positive effect that has taken place since the parking ban was imposed. He thanked the Council for enact- ing the ban. Mr. MacDonald said the problems they were experiencing in the neighborhood were isolated to that area. He added there was no public property around Ocean Avenue or Water Street, and said he was in agreement with the ban and hoped to see it continued. Harley Bray, 9116 - 192nd St. S.W., stated he has lived in Edmonds for four years. He said he and his family enjoy the view from Ocean Avenue and is unaware of any problems. He said the owner of the beach attended the October 22, 1985 meeting and said he had no objection to public usage. Shera Bray, 9116 - 192nd St. S.W.; stated she was present to oppose the ordinance against parking on Ocean Avenue. She said she goes there often and enjoys the view and would like to continue to do so without breaking the law. She stated the police have said only five percent of people abuse the area. To impose parking restrictions would be akin to closing a road because of speed limit violators. She thought those who used the area properly should be allowed to continue to and hoped the Council would support the rights of the many as opposed to the privileges of the few. Dick McCabe, 19226 - 86th W.,.said he's lived in Edmonds for twenty-eight years and has been utilizing Ocean Avenue for the last ten years to bird watch. He said he felt imposing a parking restriction would be improper. He commented on the manner in which the City posted public notic- es, saying the recent ones were too high. Mr. McCabe said the only reason for imposing parking restrictions on any street is for safety reasons. And if the Council elected to restrict or remove parking on Ocean Avenue on the basis of the arguments of residents of Ocean Avenue, he felt the Council should.consider extending the same privilege to every residential street in the City by virtue of the same argument. Rosemary Shuman, 9110 - 188th St. S.W., said she has lived in Edmonds for fourteen years and was r elated when she discovered the beach. She said she goes down to the beach to seek solace. If s the problem does exist, it is at night. The problems on Ocean Avenue are law enforcement prob- lems and not a problem the public should be penalized for. She said the City should consider EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 DECEMBER 3, 1985 purchasing a section of the beach the owner is willing to sell. ,Ms. Schuman didn't think one of the Councilmembers should be allowed to sit in on this issue since he is a homeowner in the vicini- ty. Doreen Crow, 17425 - 76th Ave. W., said she moved to Edmonds two and a half years ago from Yakima, where no views exist. She walks almost daily to Ocean Avenue, and said she has not seen nor heard any of the situations described by the residents...,She'noted she was aware that Edmonds has been labeled a "retirement community" and that the Council 'should consider the people who were fortunate or healthy enough to walk to the view. She said the broader issue denoted a tone to people outside the community to visit and shop but not to stay. Dema Howard, 8431 - 216th S.W., stated she wished to oppose the parking ban. She said her main concern was how many more streets would be closed if the parking ban was imposed. Ed Lasher, 19031 Ocean Ave., stated the residents were not trying to ban people from the area, just automobiles. He said the beach was not public, and it was dangerous crossing the railroad tracks. Mr. Lasher noted there were two public parks with ample parking designed for people to enjoy the view. He added the residents just wanted their own neighborhood like everyone else, and said they sympathized with people who wanted to enjoy the view. Margaret Pryor, 18717 Sound View P1., said viewers could park on'.Sound View and walk to Ocean Avenue. Clifford Pryor, 18717 Sound View Pl., said he did not agree with the ban or parking restrictions on Ocean Avenue. He said there were only three and a half places with a view in Edmonds with parking. Ruth Windust, 18823 Sound View Pl., stated she's lived in Edmonds for twenty-four years. She and her husband used to walk down to Ocean Avenue before he was confined to a wheelchair. She said if they are to enjoy the view, they have to drive. Katherine Erickson, 19027 Ocean Ave., said she agreed with Mr. MacDonald's statements. She asked Police Chief Prinz to reiterate his comments at the first Public Safety meeting. Police Chief Dan Prinz noted that problems do exist and arrests have been made, most of which are for possession of alcoholic beverages by teenagers. He said he didn't think the situation was out of control, adding many neighborhoods have similar problems. He said there is a problem with the railroad right-of-way. Greg Hummel, 21124 West Richmond Rd., Bothell, stated he was owner of one parcel along Ocean Avenue Tidelands. He said he was in agreement with the parking restriction. tie considered the beach and residence as private property and considered anyone on the beach trespassers. Richard Schaertl, 811 Somerset Lane, said he lives 150 ft. south of Ocean Avenue separated from the parking strip by a grass field. He said lie informed the previous administration of the noise pollution caused by people in their cars. He said he was concerned about fires and the safety of his home. Wendell Ensey, 19115 Ocean Ave., said there have been several fire incidents along Ocean Avenue over the past years. He said because it is a very narrow road, fire trucks and emergency vehi- cles have difficulty with ingress and egress. The problem, he said, isn't with people who wanted to enjoy the view but with young people in automobiles, noting there has been sexual activity. Mrs. Crane, 19021 Ocean Ave., said she has walked down Ocean Avenue with her dog and has seen fourteen -year -old girls engaged in sexual activity with twenty -one -year -old men. She said she has utilized the area less than a dozen times in nine years. Kathy Christoffersen, 23724 - 112th P1. W., stated she's lived in Edmonds approximately fifteen years and loves Edmonds. She said some of the same problems occur in her neighborhood. Ocean Avenue is a public street and should remain a public street with parking. Maria Tagwind, 757 Somerset Lane, stated she was present on behalf of herself and her father, Harold Wickstrom. She said their house is located at the south end of Water Street. They are awakened at night on a regular basis by the noise caused by people parked in their automobiles who not only consume alcoholic beverages but also engage in sexual activities. She said she was in favor of the parking ban. Ness Simons, 19013 Sound View P1., said he concurred with the parking ban. He said he appreciat- ed the concerns of people who wanted to take advantage of the view, but in self defense asked the Council to consider resolving the problem. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 DECEMBER 3, 1985 Jean Waller, 880 North Stream Ln., said she moved to Edmonds five years ago and has steadily utilized Ocean Avenue. She said she has not seen any problems.; Many of the alleged problems that occur on Ocean Avenue occur in her neighborhood, also. She said the problems at Ocean Ave- nue are the nature of the beach, and property owners should consider that before they buy. She added that Ocean Avenue is a "lovely area" and should remain a public street. Councilmember Jaech closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember Dwyer thanked Ms. Erickson and Ms. Bray for their;input during all the meetings and their courtesy in voicing their opposing opinions. He stated if parking was going to be allowed, he would like to see it restricted to the south end. He said he was not willing to accept the notion, that the area could not be policed. Councilmember Wilson stated there was a legislative and administrative problem to be considered, the legislative aspect dealing with creating a desirable environment, and the administrative aspect dealing with law enforcement. Councilmember Ostrom added the basic problem occurring on Ocean Avenue was a law enforcement problem. He apologized to the public for not resolving this issue. Student Representative Tammy Schwartze stated if parking is available on Ocean Avenue that there should not be restrictions imposed which confine people to their automobiles. Councilmember Kasper said the problem was an administrative problem that should be enforced and should no longer be an issue for the Council to consider. Councilmember Hall stated she appreciated the Public Safety Committee's recommended action. She said she didn't feel an apology to the public was in order because the Council had gone through procedure. She said she would like to combine recommended action F1 and 12, leaving q3-6 as is, and add enforcement. She stated a concern that residents were not utilizing the police force and asked Chief Prinz if the police department received many calls from the neighbor- hood requesting that automobiles be removed. Chief Prinz replied negatively. He noted when they are called, they do enforce the problem. He reiterated he didn't feel the. problem was out of hand and was controllable, but that the police department could not solve the problem through enforcement alone. Councilmember Wilson stated if the parking configuration were altered, it would become a legislative problem and not an administrative problem. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE WITH ADMINISTRATION AT A WORK SESSION. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SEC- OND. Councilmember Wilson asked Chief Prinz if the recommended actions would be more enforceable if passed. Chief Prinz responded negatively. He said negating some of the parking and changing the configuration may mitigate the problem. Councilmember Kasper said he felt it was Administra- tion's responsibility to come forth with a plan. Councilmember Hall expressed a frustration that this issue has not been resolved. She suggested incorporating the recommended action, add a seventh item of enforcement, and advise the Mayor. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUN- CILMEMBER HALL, TO INSTRUCT ADMINISTRATION TO COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL, USING THE RECOMMENDED ACTION AND PRESENT CONFIGURATIONS ON PARKING AND ANY LIMITATIONS THAT MIGHT EXIST, WITH A RECOMMEN- DATION THAT ENCOMPASSES THE'COUNCIL'S FEELINGS. Councilmember Dwyer stated he.felt the Council should be more specific. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON AMENDED THE MOTION TO ELIMINATE ANGLE PARKING ON THE SOUTH AND ENCOMPASS THE REST OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND INSTRUCT ADMINISTRATION WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS ON JANUARY 7TH. MOTION CARRIED. A recess was taken at 9:47 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9:57 p.m. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO CONTINUE THE MEETING TO 10:30 P.M. MOTION CARRIED. REPORT ON BOUNDARY SURVEY AND AUTHORIZATION TO ADVERTISE FOR SALE OF CITY PROPERTY IN VICINITY OF 200TH AND 84TH City Engineer Jim Adams displayed a site map on the overhead projector depicting the two lots for sale: He stated the property was subdivided in the late 1960's, but there were inaccuracies in the legal description and the plat submitted with the subdivision. The property was acquired by the City through foreclosure proceedings. The property has been advertised for sale. However, no reasonable offers have been tendered. Subsequently, a title research was done, the property was surveyed, and is before the Council at.this time. Mr. Adams displayed a copy of the new survey which was recorded. He said Ticor is prepared to issue title insurance on the property. The front property owner, who is now deceased, was the only one who was opposed to the sale of the property. Mr. Adams requested authorization from the Council to advertise the property for sale with a minimum acceptable bid of $25,000. He further recommended that revenue from the sale of the property be designated for the Capital Improvement Fund 325. Councilmember Kasper asked Mr. Adams how close the house was to the easement. Mr. Adams said it was within a foot of the easement. Councilmember Kasper expressed a concern that the selling price was too low. COUNCIL - MEMBER KASPER MOVED,.SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO PLACE THE PROPERTY ON THE MARKET AT A MINIMUM BID OF $30,000. MOTION CARRIED. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2540 LEVYING 1986 PROPERTY TAXES Councilmember Jaech noted the ordinance had to be passed on December 3, 1985. She asked City Attorney Scott Snyder what would happen if it was not passed. Mr. Snyder replied the City would EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 DECEMBER 3, 1985 not have property tax revenue for 1986. He said the levy could be passed in any form percentage, but that it had to be passed on December 3. Councilmember Kasper stated the Council previously discussed the levy and wished to set aside $60,000 in an emergency reserve fund, which would be generated from the 6% increase. Councilmember Jaech stated it w;as discussed that $100,000 would be set aside in an emergency fund because of 1987 shortfall need's with an additional $60,000 set aside in the fund. Councilmember Ostrom said a lot of items in the budget could be cut; conse- quently, he was opposed, to any kind of tax increase. Councilmember Hall stated she thought the consensus was to set aside $100,000. Councilmember Kasper said he was in favor of the 6% in- crease but was not in favor of increasing real estate tax as the only source of revenue. Council - member Ostrom said discussions should continue more towards directing the funds. Councilmember Jaech stated she felt the Council was in unanimous agreement to make budget cuts, but the re- serves were concurrent with it. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO PASS ORDINANCE 2540 LEVYING 1986 PROPERTY TAXES AT THE INCREASED RATE OF 6%. MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, * TO SET UP A $100,000 MAJOR FINANCIAL FUND, AND THE MONEY BE ISOLATED AND TAKE A SIMPLE MAJORITY TO SPEND. MOTION CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMEMBER DWYER OPPOSED. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO EXTEND THE MEETING, NOT TO EX- CEED 11:00 P.M. Mayor ! Councilmember Jaech referred to Mayor Naughten's memo requesting reappointment of Peter Beck to the Architectural Design Board. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S REAPPOINTMENT OF PETER BECK TO POSITION 3 ON THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD, TERM TO EXPIRE NOVEMBER 5, 1989. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Jaech stated the State has required Community Transit and Metro to place cutouts on Highway 104 for the busses to pull over, to be completed by the end of 1986; otherwise, the buss- es will not be allowed to stop on Highway 104. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO PLACE THE DISCUSSION OF THE WESTGATE PLANNING STUDY ON THE JANUARY 14 WORK SESSION. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting recessed to Executive Session at 10:26 p.m. and adjourned at 10:45 p.m. *See December 10, 1985 Minutes. . . .... . . ...... - / Jf(CQLffLINE G. PARRETT, City Clerk LA Y S. WGHTEN, Mayor FDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 DECEMBER 3, 1985