Loading...
12/16/1986 City CouncilTHESE MINUTES SUBJECT TO DECEMBER 23, 1986 APPROVAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DECEMBER 16, 1986 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 Laura Hall, Council Pres. Steve Dwyer Jo -Anne Jaech Bill Kasper John Nordquist Lloyd Ostrom Jack Wilson Tom Peterson, Student Rep., STAFF PRESENT Mary Lou Block, Planning Div. Mgr. Jim Barnes, Parks & Rec. Div. Mgr. Peter Hahn, Comm. Svc. Director Bobby Mills, Pub, Wks. Supt. Sharon Thatcher, Personnel Mgr. Jack Weinz, Fire Chief Dan Prinz, Police Chief Art Housler, Admin. Svc. Director Hal Reeves, Building Official Scott Snyder, City Attorney Jackie Parrett, City Clerk Margaret Richards, Recorder Councilmember Dwyer entered the room at 7:05 p.m. and did not vote on Item (B) on the Consent Agenda. CONSENT AGENDA Items (B), (F), and (I) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved items on the Consent Agenda include the following: (A) ROLL CALL (C) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES FROM BLUE CROSS OF WASHINGTON AND ALASKA ($6,465.33) AND DONALD L. AND LEONA G. HEDMAN ($5,226) (D) ADOPTED ORDINANCE 2595 ESTABLISHING NEW AND INCREASED FEES FOR DOG LICENSES AND INCREASED LATE PENALTY FEE (E) ADOPTED ORDINANCE 2596 CREATING NONEXPENDABLE CEMETERY MAINTENANCE FUND (G) AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE ENGINEERING AGREEMENT WITH THE TRANSPO GROUP, INC. FOR SIGNAL AT SR 524 AND 80TH AVE. W. ($10,000) (H) FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF WORK BY UTELCON, INC. FOR UNION OIL WATER LINE LOOP ($87,567.88) AND SETTING 30 DAY RETAINAGE PERIOD APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 9, 1986 [ITEM (B) ON THE CONSENT AGENDAJI Councilmember Hall requested that her comments regarding the National League of Cities conference on page 9 be more inclusive. They are as follows: She said a Mariachi band was at the baggage claim unit at the airport, but much to her dismay the luggage was there upon arrival. Councilmem- ber Hall said she was amazed that the NLC spent millions of dollars to gain the attention of the membership. Councilmember Hall noted that Dr. Hines name on page 9 is spelled 11-I-N-D-S. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED. APPROVAL OF INTERLO.CAL AGREEMENT FOR FUNDING CULTURAL ARTS, STADIUM AND CONVENTION DISTRICT: ITEM F ON THE CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Kasper inquired if a clause was written into the agreement which allowed the City. to utilize the tax as it desired. City Attorney Scott Snyder replied affirmatively. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE ITEM (F). Councilmember Ostrom inquired about the $15,000 expenditure made in 1984 to Creative Arts. Coun-; cilmember Hall said that expenditure was for the survey. Councilmember Ostrom inquired what BOORA was. Councilmember Hall said that is the architectural firm. Councilmember Ostrom noted that approximately $250,OOO will have been expended for the Cultural Arts, Stadium, and Conven tion District. He said that tax payers were being asked to vote to expend those funds. Council. member Hall noted that an election was held which formed the District and then went to the bal-i lots. Councilmember Ostrom said he did not understand why the City continues to spend large sums of money. Councilmember Hall said that the expenditures are being decreased, and the agreement; is merely to extend the contract for one year. MOTION CARRIED. I PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2597 VACATING PORTION OF UNBUILT RIGHT-OF-WAY OF 6TH AVE. S. LOCATED Councilmember Kasper removed himself from the dais because of involvement of the corporation that he is employed with in this issue. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED 13Y COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO APPROVE ITEM (I). MOTION CAR-, RIED. Councilmember Kasper returned to the dais. AUDIENCE Mayor Naughten opened the audience portion of the meeting. Tom Petrowitz, 267 - 4th Ave. S., said he received approval from Staff approximately one year, ago to enclose his patio. However, he was informed recently that the structure required a vari-, ance. Wayne Petrowitz, 11322 - 180th S.E., Snohomish, said his mother owns the property in question but lives in Arizona. lie said his brother, Tom, will be out of town at the end of the week. Mr. Petrowitz said his brother, Tom, was not trying to violate the Code but, rather, abate the; noise by enclosing the hot tub. He said the neighbors have commented that the noise has been abated. Mr. Petrowitz said he believes there has been a lack of communication between Tom and the Build- ing Department. Mayor Naughten inquired if a hearing was held on the issue. Tom Petrowitz replied negatively. Councilmember Hall noted that Attorney Chester Bennett wrote her a letter regarding the issue. She expressed concern regarding the procedure to follow. She asked Staff if they were aware of, the problem. Community Services Director Peter Hahn replied affirmatively. City Attorney Scott Snyder said the case has been referred to him for prosecution. He said he'l has visited the site and spoken with Mr. Petrowitz. Mr. Snyder said if prosecution is pursued, Mr. Petrowitz has a forum in municipal court, as well as the option to file a variance. He said he did refer the issue to the Community Services, Committee to see if they wished to pursue an avenue other than the normal procedures. Mr. Snyder expressed concern that Mr. Petrowitz had several avenues to pursue to resolve the issue. Councilmember Jaech recommended that the issue be discussed in an Executive Session should the. Council decide to discuss the issue further since the matter has been referred to the City Attorj ney for prosecution. I EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 2 DECEMBER 16, 1986 Councilmember Hall said because the ma-tte'r.is in litigation;- the Council will not consider it and act on it by motion at the meeting unless the Council chose to discuss it during an Executive Session. Mr. Snyder noted that the Council would be the final hearing body if a variance was filed and appealed. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if prosecution would be ceased if a variance was filed. Mr. Snyder said he has not yet filed charges. Councilmember Ostrom said he did not feel that the issue was a Council matter but, rather, purely administrative. Wayne Petrowitz inquired what the administrative procedure was. Mayor Naughten said a variance could be applied for. He suggested that Mr. Petrowitz contact him on Wednesday to further discuss resolution of the matter. Mayor Naughten closed the audience portion of the meeting. PRESENTATION BY SNO-ISLE REGIONAL LIBRARY DIRECTOR AND LIBRARY BOARD RE: NEW LIBRARY SERVICE HOURS Library Director Tom Mayeh announced that the Edmonds Library will be open on Sunday afternoon from 1 to 5 p.m. beginning in March through the end of May and again in September. He noted that other libraries that operate on Sunday find it to be the busiest day of the week. He also an- nounced that a part-time young librarian will be hired in August to assist the young patrons. Councilmember Hall noted that the children's section through Friends of the Library won an award. Mr. Mayer said the issue was featured in an article in one of the library media jour- nals. He noted that Mr. Wilkerson, as well as two other members of the Library Board, were present in the audience. Mayor Naughten asked the members of the Library Board to stand for recognition. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if the assessment for. support of the library will be affected. Mr. Mayer replied negatively. He said the library service contract is based on property tax and not per capita or service charge. Councilmember Kasper inquired if service on Friday evening would be decreased. Mr. Mayer re- plied affirmatively. He said the library will be closed at 6 p.m. He noted that service will be less affected on Friday because it is the slowest day of the week. COUNCIL DELIBERATION ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER DECISION UPHOLDING STAFF DENIAL OF BUILDING Community Services Director Peter Hahn reviewed for the Council that Mr. Peck had submitted a building permit application. The Building Official, after reviewing the various reports produced for Mr. Peck, had determined that the engineering measures were not sufficient to mitigate sub- stantial slide probability and denied the building permit. Mr. Hahn said Mr. Peck appealed the Building Department's determination. However, the Hearing Examiner upheld Staff's decision. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION AND DENY THE APPEAL. Councilmember Hall commented that the issue related to the problems in the Meadowdale area as a whole, and the Council must address the issue of mitigating the landslide potential to the degree possible. Councilmember Hall said she did not believe that the proposal submitted by Mr. Peck satisfactori- ly mitigated the substantial slide probability. Councilmember Ostrom concurred. Ile said he felt the actions and procedures of the Building De- partment were appropriate. MOTION CARRIED. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 3 DECEMBER 16, 1986 J S - City Attorney Scott Snyder said he would submit the Findings of Fact & Conclusions of Law for adoption on January 6, 1987. HEARING REGARDING THE EXISTENCE OF NONCONFORMING USE RIGHTS FOR PROPERTY AT 8339 - 212TH ST., S.W. AND CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION AND INTERPRETATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF CH PTER 16. 5.010 OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE REGARDING DRIVE-IN BUSINESS USES Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block reported that the property at 8339 - 212th St. S.W. was developed in 1965 as a gas station under Building Permit #650290. The development included two gas pump islands and a building with three service bays. Conditional use permits were not re- quired for gas stations at that time. however, in 1970, the City Council passed Ordinance 1480 which required gas stations in BN (Neighborhood Business) zones to obtain conditional use permits. This gas station ceased operation in February 1986. At that time, at least one self-service pump island existed. Since then, Rainier Bank has attempted to redevelop the subject property by replacing the three bay service building with a convenience store and reinstate the self-service gas sales. A building permit application was filed in August 1986, less than six months after the station was closed. It was the Staff determination at the time this application went to the Architectural Design Board (ADB) that no conditional use permit was required because the gas station use had not lapsed and was not being expanded. The proposed retail store is an outright permitted use. Ms. Block noted that a copy of Ordinance 1480, a plot plan of the original gas station, and a copy of Section 17.40.010 were attached to the Council packets. Ms. Block said because a gas station has been located on the site since 1965; because a self-ser- vice pump island was in operation at the site as of February 1986; since the proposed redevelop- ment of the site does not expand the nonconforming use; and since the use has not been discontin- ued for a period of excess of six months, this constitutes an existing nonconforming use under the provisions of Section 17,40.010 of the ECDC and has no requirement for either a conditional use permit or to be abated. Councilmember Jaech raised a point of order. She noted that a hearing was previously held regard- ing the issue, and the Council remanded it to the ADB and felt that a conditional use permit was necessary for the proposed business. She inquired why another hearing was scheduled before the Council and who appealed the Council's decision. City Attorney Scott Snyder said he drafted the Findings of Fact, and it was under his recommendation that the issue was before the Council again. He said he discovered approximately a week after drafting the Findings that the Hearing Examiner rendered a decision that gas stations were not an outright permitted use or a use that could be approved under a conditional use permit in the BN zone. He said he had suggested: 1). that the Council defer its finding on the conditional use issue in order to be consistent with a parallel application that was going through the process; 2) because no evidence at the hearing before the Council was presented regarding the establishment of the nonconforming use and abate- ment issue, he recommended that a hearing be set requesting the public and applicant to present evidence regarding the date that the use was established and whether or not it had been extin- guished. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the Council, then, was reconsidering the issue. Mr. Snyder said the Council has required additional testimony to obtain a proper factual basis to make a finding of whether or not a nonconforming use was established and, secondly, would the new proposal expanded require it to be abated or extinguished. Sarah Mack, Hillis, Cairncross, Clark, & Martin, 500 Galland Building, 1221 Second Avenue, attorney representing the applicant, said the Council was charged with deciding whether the pro- posed gas pump island in conjunction with the convenience store is an expansion of the existing use. Dale Chandler, Rainier National Bank, 11410 - 83rd Pl. N.E., Kirkland, was present. Ms. Mack queried Mr. Chandler about his profession. Mr. Chandler said he is an asset/property, manager for Rainier National Bank. Ms. Mack inquired if he was familiar with the existing and proposed use on the subject property. Mr. Chandler replied affirmatively. He said the existing use was an Exxon Station with three service bays, a self and full -service gasoline island and automotive repair. Ms. Mack submitted photographs, which were marked as Exhibit N1, depicting the existing signage relative to a self-service island to the Council. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 4 DECEMBER 16, 1986 Ms. Mack inquired if Mr. Chandler was aware that a self-service gas pump island had existed on the site. Mr. Chandler said he inspected the property and saw signage indicating that one of the gas pumps was self service. Ms. Mack inquired about the lot area of the existing use. Mr. Chandler said the lease indicated that the lot area of the service station related uses was ap- proximately 23,000 square feet. Ms. Mack inquired about the lot area of gasoline sales under the proposed use. Mr. Chandler replied approximately 8,000 square feet. He reviewed a site plan on the overhead projector indicating the gasoline area, walkway, and cash register in the conve- nience store. He noted that one gas pump island with two dispensers was originally proposed. Councilmember Ostrom asked how many hoses would be attached to the dispenser. Mr. Chandler said he was unsure because he did not know which tenant would occupy the site. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if more gasoline would be dispensed than had been previously. Mr. Chandler replied negatively. Ms. Mack inquired about the floor area of the existing gas station building. Mr. Chandler re- plied 1580 square feet. He said the floor area of the proposed use is approximately 50 square feet. Ms. Mack inquired about the number of islands proposed. Mr. Chandler replied one. Ms. Mack inquired about the height of the former gas island canopies. Mr. Chandler replied approxi- mately 15-1/2 to 16 feet. Ms. Mack inquired if the height of the proposed gas island canopy will be limited to the height of the former canopy. Mr. Chandler replied affirmatively. Ms. Mack inquired about the number of employees required for the existing gas station compared to the proposed use. Mr. Chandler said the existing station utilized two to three employees whereas the proposed use will utilize one to two employees. Ms. Mack inquired about the volume of gas sales for the existing use and projected volume of. sales for the proposed use. Mr. Chandler said the historic high sales for the existing use was 960,000 gallons, and the projected volume for the proposed use is 500,000 to 600,000 gallons. Ms. Mack inquired if Mr. Chandler's opinion was that the gas pumps/convenience store constituted an expanded use. Mr. Chandler replied negative- ly. Councilmember Nordquist inquired if the gasoline tanks were still in place. Mr. Chandler said Exxon removed them approximately February 15.. Councilmember Jaech inquired about the volume of gasoline sales at the Plaid Pantry located at 660 Edmonds Way. Mr. Chandler said the business has not yet been in operation for a full year. A partial lease year sold 220,00 gallons. He said he would be happy to supply that information to the Council. Councilmember Jaech inquired about the total square footage of the proposed structure. Mr. Chandler said the use was proposed to the ADB in two phases. The square footage is 4,630. Councilmember Jaech inquired about the building size of the existing use. Mr. Chandler replied 1,580 square feet. Roger Hertrich, 1020 Puget Drive, said he believed that the City should maintain control of major changes in the City to insure proper planning. Mr. Hertrich voiced what tie believed was the intent of Section 21.105.020 of the ECDC. He said the intended use of the existing business was automobile oriented, and a conditional use permit should be applied for as required for a primary use. He said the intended primary use of the proposed business is a convenience store, and the secondary use is the sale of gasoline. Mr. Hertrich cited Section 21.15,090, Conditional Use. He said the City should enforce such uses to be consistent and compatible to other existing or permissible uses in the same zone. Mr. Hertrich. noted that a convenience store is unlike a local grocer because the items are prima- rily fast-food items and beverages. Mr. Hertrich said the proposed use of the subject property is entirely different from the former use. !le recommended that a conditional use permit be required to maintain control and enforce- ment of the Code to.avoid potential problems. Mr. Hertrich noted that the applicant did not address the issue of traffic. He said the condi- tional use permit would allow investigation of traffic volumes. Ile said convenience stores gener- ate the highest volumes of traffic, and the addition of gasoline sales increases that volume by 25.6. Ms. Mack referred to a letter she had submitted to the Council regarding the role of the Council. She said the applicant was assuming that Mr. Hertrich was incorrect in that the Council EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 5 DECEMBER 16, 1986 is not deciding whether or not a conditional use permit was required for the proposed use. She said that issue was better suited for the Planning Board to decide if the Code needed amendment:, and it was her understanding that the Council has referred that issue to it. She reminded the Council that it had decided that the Hearing Examiner was Correct when he said a conditional use permit was unobtainable for a self-service gas pump. She said it is the applicant's legal posi- tion that the use is permitted outright based on the Council's recent interpretation of the zon- ing code. She requested that the Council make a finding, based upon the evidence before it, that the gas pump island not be considered an expansion of an existing nonconforming full -service gas station. Councilmember Jaech noted that a use would not necessarily be permitted outright if a conditional use permit was not required. Mr. Snyder concurred. He said certain operations are permitted, some are permitted with a conditional use permit, and all other operations are prohibited. Ms. Mack noted that gas stations were a permitted use in the BN zone prior to 1970. The Council amended the Code in 1970 to include gas stations as a drive-in business and required a condition- al use permit. Mr. Chandler said evidence was presented to the Council that addressed each of the items ad- dressed in the Code regarding traffic. Mr. Hertrich clarified that he did not state that a conditional use permit should be required for convenience stores. He said the proposed use is a different use. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the Council must make reference to tire material it received from Ms. Mack to enter it into the record. Mr. Snyder suggested that it be given an exhibit number and that copies made available to the public for review. The material was marked as Exhibit #2 by the City Clerk. Councilmember Ostrom referred to a memo dated December 11 from the City Attorney. He inquired about the date on which the initial use was instituted. Mr. Snyder said Ms. Block had earlier provided the Council with the date that the use was installed and a site plan, and that it was a permitted use at that time, and that she had also provided a copy of the ordinance permitting ga's stations in BN zones. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if Mr. Snyder was of the opinion that the Code prohibits intensification of the existing use. Mr. Snyder replied affirmatively. He noted that a court found that a Bellingham ordinance did not prohibit intensification of a case simi'- lar to the issue before tire Council but that the City's ordinance does look to that issue. Coun- cilmember Ostrom inquired if expansion would be allowed under the proposed use of a gas statio'n in combination with a convenience store. Mr. Snyder said there is no law that he is aware of that addresses the creation of a new use with regard to the addition of a nonconforming use to a permitted'use. He said the Council could assume that the City's ordinance is as expansive in its terms but leaves that category open. Mr. Snyder said a convenience store is an outright permit- ted use. He said if the Council finds that a nonconforming use existed, the addition of a permit- ted use on the same lot would not be an intensification. Councilmember Hall inquired if the former business sold trailers, candy bars, or maps. Ms. Blocf said she believed that trailers were rented. Councilmember Dwyer confirmed that maps were sold. Councilmember Hall said because of lack of a specific ordinance, the Council would be "plowing some new ground". Mr. Snyder noted that the Uniform Fire code requires that tanks be immediately removed from thin ground or immobilized whenever a service station ceases operation. Councilmember Jaech inquired if the property was subdivided. Ms. Block said she believed it was one parcel. Councilmember Kasper noted that the Council had, in the past, denied an application for a car wash on that lot because it felt that particular use was undesirable as a neighborhood business. He inquired if that application was separate from the existing use at that time. Ms. Block said she was unfamiliar with the ownership. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember Dwyer said the question before the Council was whether the nonconforming use was proposed to be expanded. Fie said the testimony indicates that the nonconforming use will not bi! expanded. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 6 DECEMBER 16, 1986 Councilmember Kasper concurred with Councilmember Dwyer as well as the City Attorney's Findings. He said the proposed use, in his opinion, was an improvement to the existing use. COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, SINCE THE PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE DOES NOT EXPAND THE NONCONFORMING USE AND SINCE THE USE HAS NOT BEEN DISCONTINUED FOR A PERIOD IN EXCESS OF SIX MONTHS, THAT IT CONSTITUTES AN EXISTING NONCONFORMING USE UNDER THE PROVI- SIONS OF SECTION 17.40.010 OF THE ECDC AND, THEREFORE, DOES NOT REQUIRE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. Councilmember J.aech inquired about the procedure regarding the motion to remand the issue to the ADB. Mr. Snyder said the setback issue will be reviewed by the ADB. However, the issue of the conditional use permit has been dispensed with. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Snyder said the Findings of Fact 6 Conclusions of Law will be on the January 6, 1987 Consent Agenda. HEARING ON HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF 10 LOT SUBDIVISION WITH MODIFICATIONS AT 1100 DALEY PL. APPLICANT: HANCHETT FAMILY/P-6-84 Planning Division Manager Mary Lou Block reported that on October 18, 1984,.the Hanchett family made an application to subdivide their 3.24 acre property located on the east side of Olympic Avenue into ten lots. Tile proposed subdivision includes modification requests to allow a private access road right-of-way width of less than 40 feet and pavement width of less than 22 feet. The Hearing Examiner held extensive public hearings on this proposed 10 lot subdivision on June 2, 9, 10, and 17, 1986. After resolution of the SEPA issue, the Hearing Examiner rendered a decision on November 4, 1986 recommending approval of the proposed subdivision subject to the conditions listed in his report. Ms. Block said that it is the Staff's recommendation to adopt the Hearing Examiner's recommenda- tion. She noted that all pertinent documents and exhibits from the Hearing Examiner's record were on file and available for review in the Planning Division. Community Services Director Peter Hahn reviewed a vicinity map of the proposed plat on the over- head projector. Councilmember Ostrom inquired about the width of the property adjacent to Olympic Avenue. Ms. Block said it is 20 feet wide. Ms. Block said the title report indicates the Hanchetts as the owners. Councilmember Ostrom inquired when ownership was acquired. Ms. Block replied in 1970. She said old photographs indicate that the property was utilized as a road. Councilmember Ostrom inquired about the ten foot easement to the PUD. Ms. Block said that easement was for utilities. Councilmember Ostrom inquired how the property was "set aside". Ms. Block said the. strip was retained as potential access to the site and purchased under that auspice at the time the property was purchased. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if the previous owner of the Hanchett property also owned that strip. Ms. Block replied affirmatively. Councilmember Dwyer inquired if the abutting properties were singly owned. Ms. Block said she did not know. Mr. Snyder noted that the strip is currently the subject of a quiet title action by one of the appellants. He said the Council has the ability to grant or condition an application in approv- ing a subdivision application. One of the findings that the Council is required to make and may condition its determination on is proper and appropriate access. Councilmember Dwyer inquired about the Coomer case. Mr. Snyder noted that approximately two and a half years ago, the Council conditioned an approval of a subdivision that was subject to be divided in half on the determination of whether access existed. The abutting neighbor claimed adverse possession rights. The Council conditioned approval on a quiet title action and the title was acquired. Councilmember Hall submitted a letter to the City Clerk which she received from Dorothy Petrich, which was marked as Exhibit N1, supporting the development of the property. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 7 DECEMBER 16, 1986 Councilmember Kasper inquired if the Council could adopt. the Hearing Examiner recommendation but condition its decision on provision of a sound barrier, for the adjacent property. Mr. Snydei said the Council is able to impose reasonable conditions to mitigate the impact to adjacent prop... erties. Kevin Hanchett, 8504 - 231st S.W., said the three main areas of concern associated with the development of the property are: 1) drainage, 2) access, and 3) noise. He said those areas have been closely scrutinized and resolved to the satisfaction of the Planning Department and Hearin6 Examiner. Mr. Hanchett said there is no anticipated increase in groundwater runoff on the property after its development. To counter the problems of erosion during construction, the Virginia Erosion Control Handbook procedures were adopted to prevent mudding of the stream. lie said there will, however, be an increase in stormwater runoff. A water retention system designed for. 25 year storms will be installed on the site to control surface runoff from impervious surfaces. The increase in surface water discharge after development will be approximately 2 gallons per minute;, which is equivalent to 25% of a garden hose discharge. Mr. Hanchett said failure of past planning actions and decisions have resulted in reliance upon the 20 foot strip as the only means of access to the property. He said all other access routes; were investigated but rejected. Mr. Hanchett reviewed the various access routes that were rejected with the Council. Mr. Hanchett said because an easy access was not properly anticipated originally, the property must utilize the only remaining access available. Granting of the modification to utilize the strip as an access, fie said, is not a special privilege but, merely, a response to circumstances. beyond past or present control and a grant of the same development privileges which have been afforded to others in the immediate vicinity. Mr. Hanchett said Staff has found that approval of the modification is in compliance with they goals of the Transportation Department section of the Comprehensive Plan and does not conflict: with the purposes of the zoning ordinance. Ile said the modification is the minimum necessary to allow the Hanchett family the same rights and privileges that other properties in the area are! now enjoying. Mr. Hanchett said because photographs exist which depict use of the road as an access as recent- ly as 1971 and easements exist dating back to 1932, it is his position that the strip is an exist- ing facility. He noted that Section 18.80.00 of the ECDC allows for reconstruction of existing streets or facilities to nearly as conforming as possible. He contended that the road qualifies as a street under the definition section of Section 21.90.120 of the ECDC. He said if the Coun-' cil chose to accept that definition, the proposed access would not require a variance, but merely, acknowledgment that the road is an existing facility and could allow construction. Mr. Hanchett said Mr. McCormick has filed a claim of adverse possession rights, but he said that claim should not affect the Council's .decision -making ability because the court upheld the Council's position of granting a preliminary plat contingent upon adequate access being granted before final plat approval in the case of Coomer vs. City of Edmonds. Mr. Hanchett reviewed slides taken of the proposed access and adjacent property, as well as art aerial photograph of the subject property, which depicted a scar line through the trees of the. previously existing road. Mr. Hanchett noted that noise is generated from all sources in the vicinity and not just from the roadway. He said the hourly noise level increase from Daley Place will be between 2 to 3 decibels, which will be the impact to the McCormick and Humula homes. Sound level increases of 0 to 2 decibels are barely perceptible, and 3 to 5 decibels are noticeable. Mr. Hanchett. said the construction noises cannot be considered as part of the noise impact because they will not be long-term impacts. The Washington Administrative Code 5.30.110 allows a specific exemp- tion for sound originating from temporary construction sites as a result of residential activity. Mr. Hanchett noted that impact to the McCormick home has been a matter of contention because: of sleep interference. He said the McCormick bedroom is located at the far end of the house: and not adjacent to the roadway. Mr. Hanchett noted that noise is relative to its surroundings. He said the Council must consid- er the relative noise of Olympic Avenue compared to the noise impact of the proposed access. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 8 DECEMBER 16, 1986 The Hearing Examiner, he said, found: 1) that the studies conducted for the Hanchetts were extensive and exhaustive, 2) that the noise increases were barely perceptible and, therefore, had no significant impact, 3) the noise levels were below accepted government standards of 55 deci- bels; below Washington State Department of Transportation standards and, therefore, should not be considered as an adverse impact on the development. Mr. Hanchett requested the Council to grant the preliminary application and allow construction to commence. Councilmember Ostrom noted that mention was made that an easement was granted in 1932. Mr. Hanchett replied affirmatively. He said the easement extends to the southeast corner of the property. Councilmember Ostrom inquired who the easement was granted to. Mr. Hanchett said he did not recall the grantee's name. He said the easement was provided because the southwest cor- ner at one time was an independent lot and landlocked from the roadway. The easement was granted and assigned a separate legal description with the intent to sell it to the individual who owned the property. However, the transaction was never consummated so a separate legal description remains in existence. Mr. Hanchett noted that the access road formerly served several homes where lots 4 and 5 are now located. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if the Matteson, Humula, and Garton residences were part of the original tract. Mr. Hanchett said he believed they were. Jerry Lovell, Lovell & Associates, said the properties were part of a five -acre tract and later segregated in the late 1950's. * Hulda Humula, 516 Olympic Avenue, said she has lived at her residence since 1956. She said the proposed access road has not been utilized since 12th Avenue was established. Ms. Humula said she was quite disturbed by the remarks made by Councilmember Wilson and Council - member Hall at the October 14, 1986 meeting previous to voting on the motion to deny the environ- mental impact study request. She said they rebuked the appellants for exercising their constitu- tional rights of appeal. She said the statements indicated that "they had already had their minds made up as to the issues to be decided". Ms. Humula said in view of their statements, they should be disqualified by the Council to hear the case before it. She quoted statements made by Councilmember Wilson and Councilmember Hall at the October 14 meeting. Mayor Naughten reminded Ms. Humula that her allotted time had elapsed. Ms. Humula said she resented the fact that the public is not given sufficient time to voice their position. Councilmember Hall inquired if the day that Ms. Humula listened to the tapes was the day that Councilmember Hall allowed her to use her office to listen to the tapes. Ms. Humula replied affirmatively. Mr. Snyder said the Council has no rule of permitting disqualification by the Council of a mem- ber. Rather, it is up to the individual member. He queried Councilmember Wilson and Councilmem- ber Hall as to whether they had made a decision or formed a judgment with respect to the matter prior to the December 16 meeting. Councilmember Wilson and Councilmember Hall replied.negative- ly. *Peter Breysse, Associate Professor of Meritus, University of Washington, said the noise level generated by the proposed access will be excessive at times during sleeping hours and could cause sleep disturbance. He said the decibel reading may be close to 30 late at night, and a passing vehicle may indicate 60 to 65 decibels. He said that that reading is 8 to 10 times higher than the background level. Ike noted that the disturbance of sleep depends not only on background noise but the sensitivity of individuals as well as age factors. Fie submitted copies of noise studies, which were marked as Exhibits #2 through 6. Councilmember Ostrom inquired about the decibel reading at the north end of the McCormick house at 11 p.m. Professor Breysse said the background level would be approximately 30 decibels. Councilmember Ostrom inquired about the decibel reading of a passing car. Professor Breysse replied approximately 60 decibels. Councilmember Ostrom inquired about the effect of distance. Professor Breysse said the decibel reading is lowered by 6 as the distance is doubled. He noted that measurements are taken 50 feet from the center line of traffic. Councilmember Nordquist inquired if studies were conducted with regard to the heat pump noise level from one of the residences. Professor Breysse replied negatively. He said the back- ground level is the major factor as far as sleep disturbance is concerned. Mr. Snyder requested that the applicant be given the opportunity to review Exhibits N2 through 6. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES *See Council Minutes of December 23, 1986 Page 9 DECEMBER 16, 1986 Arnold Kegel, Consulting Engineer, 9800 Evergreen Way, Everett, said he reviewed the studies that were submitted at the request of Derrill Bastian as well reviewed the site and investigat- ed possible accesses that may be available. He said there will be considerable disturbance op the property when construction commences. Mr. Kegel said he discovered four potential accesses to the site: 1) the proposed access, 2) access from the north, 3) access from the northerly property from Olympic Avenue, and 4) access from the south. He said the alternate accesses are "better than the proposed access". The optimum access point, lie said, would be via lot 14 to th�2 south. Derrill Bastian, 602 Fisher Business Center, 3500 - 188th S.W., Lynnwood, said lie felt the time allocation allocation of twenty minutes was unfair and denied the appellants due process of law because it does not allow them sufficient time to present their case. Mr. Bastian said the major concern is granting of a variance. He noted that Section 20.75.075 of the ECDC requires that all conditions of a variance must be met in order to permit a modificatioy'l of the requirements of the ordinance. He reviewed a section of the Introduction of the Hearing Examiner's report. He said the findings for a conditional use permit are very different than those required for a variance. lie said the Hearing Examiner recommended that a conditional use permit be granted for the reduction of the right-of-way width. He noted, however, that the condi- tional use permit referred to in the Staff report is for the removal of 500 yards of earth. Mr. Bastian said no Findings of Fact have been made in the Hearing Examiner's report for the granting of a modification or a variance. He contended that the report is unlawful under the City's owi1 procedures. Councilmember Ostrom expressed concern that sufficient time had not been allotted for the hear. ing. Mayor Naughten said the hearing may have to be extended. Kevin Hanchett, previously identified, stated that he tailored his presentation to the time restraints and fully expected the appellants to adhere to those time restraints also. Mr. Snyder noted that the Hearing Examiner has made a recommendation to the Council. The Hearing Examiner's report and public testimony was a part of the hearing. He said the Council could consider the present hearing as a summarization of previously given testimony contained in thie record. He reminded the audience that the record before the Council is comprised of not only the hearing before it but also previous hearings. He said the Council has access to those recordi; and may review those at its leisure prior to making a decision. Councilmember Ostrom noted that the hearing is de novo, and the Council should hear any relevant issues. Councilmember Hall said the hearing may have to be extended. She said she was concerned about fairness. Each party has been allotted their time. She said if the Council abides by thh rules, it won't get into any trouble. Mr. Bastian referred to a California case regarding variances, as well as a Seattle case. Hre submitted the documents to the Council, which were marked as Exhibits N8; 9, and 10. He noted that those cases better outline the intent of a variance than the City Code does. Councilmember Ostrom inquired if Findings of Fact 22 through 27 contained in the Hearing Examinr er's report are not the criteria that are to be satisfies{ according to the Code for a variance'. Mr. Bastian replied affirmatively. He said, however, the statements are conclusions rather thaji Findings of Fact. Councilmember Nordquist stated that he appreciated the efforts that Mr. Bastian had made in mak- ing his presentation. However, he said he was unable to review the material at the meeting and listen to Mr. Bastian's presentation at the same time. He suggested that, as has been the past practice of other attorneys, Mr. Bastian submit materials in advance which he desired the Council to review for delivery to the Council in their packets. Mr. Bastian said delivery of a document by the attorney to the Council outside of the hearing process was unlawful, immoral, and a viola- tion of the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine. Mr. Snyder noted that statutes that govern thie Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provide an exception where the contents of ex parte communica- tions may be revealed, placed in the record, and the opposing parties allowed an opportunity to examine the same. Based on that statute, Mr. Snyder said the Council has a procedure of permit- ting ex parte communications to be included in Council packets that are distributed to the Council as well as the public. "DMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 10 DECEMBER 16, 1986 Mr. Snyder noted that the document referred to by the attorney was a brief and materials submit- ted at the last hearing and not a part of the hearing before the Council at the present time. Councilmember Ostrom recommended that when voluminous materials are submitted to the Council that a hearing or decision be continued to another date to allow the Council an opportunity to review them. Councilmember Hall said the hearing process will be workable if all parties adhere to the sense of fairness. Roger Hertrich, previously identified, submitted literature to the Council provided by Mr. Ahlbeck, one of the appellants. Mr. Hertrich said he attended previous hearings and gave testimony. He said he felt as though he has lost :the ability to present his position on a continued basis because of time restraints. He said he believed major affected parties should be given ample time to present their case. He said he would appreciate continuation of the hearing and/or remand the issue to the Hearing Exam- iner. Mary Matteson, 7315 - 180th St. S.W., said she owns a home at 520 Olympic Avenue. She said that property was on the market for sale at one time, and the Hanchetts had the opportunity to purchase it prior to construction of the garage but never contacted her. Ms. Matteson said access could be provided to the Hanchett property via the northerly side of her property on Olympic. Avenue. Dorothy Petrich, 532 - 12th Avenue N., said she felt the development of the Hanchett property would enhance the City as well as bring in revenue. She said the City of Edmonds is not a rural town but is a growing and improving community. Ms. Petrich said she was heartily in favor of the development of the Hanchett property. Joan Stephenson, 443 - 12th Pl. N., said she and her husband are interested in the development of the Hanchett property because it will enhance their view and deter burglars. She said she was not in favor of access via lot 14, however. Ian McMillan, 411 - 12th Avenue N., said he moved to his home prior to the development of Emer- ald Hills. He said his view was approximately 180 degrees .at that time but has been diminished to 50 to 60 degrees because of the growth of the trees on the Hanchett property. Mr. McMillian said he represented at least 15 families who were in favor of the development of the Hanchett property. Jeff Palmer, 17510 - 76th Avenue W., said he believed the Hanchett family lias sufficiently mitigated the impacts of the proposal and should be granted the same protections and privileges enjoyed by other Edmonds residents. lie requested that the Council give sufficient weight to the facts and uphold the Hearing Examiner's recommendation and grant preliminary approval of the project. Brenda Wren, 520 Olympic Avenue, eldest slaughter of the McCormicks, said she slept in the bedroom that bordered the north side of her parents' home for eleven years. She said Mr. Hanchett's statement that none of the bedrooms will be affected by the proposed access was incor- rect. Mr. Hanchett said he was referring to Mr. and Mrs. McCormick's room and not the indi- vidual children's rooms. lie noted that the children no longer resided at,that residence. Mr. Hanchett reiterated that no studies were conducted on the property by Professor Breysse. He said anything beyond the extensive studies regarding the noise level is merely conjecture. He said that Mr. Kegel's research is an exact breakdown of the considerations by the Hanchetts. He noted, however, that Mr. Kegel did not consider availability of property but the Hanchett's were forced to consider that issue. Mr. Hanchett said that anybody who contended that sufficient time was not provided to review the project should review the record, which will depict the amount of testimony given and time devoted. Mr. Hanchett said considerations for the right-of-way are different due to the substandard setback from the McCormick house. He said the fault cannot be placed upon either the Hanchetts or McCormicks but, rather, can be attributable. to an oversight in the original building of the plat. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 11 DECEMBER 16, 1986 Mr. Hanchett noted that California cases are non binding on Washington courts and even les! binding to the City Council. They are, he said, merely persuasive, and do not need to be consid- ered. Mr. Hanchett said there was some confusionregarding the Hearing Examiner's. Findings of Fact. He said Conclusions are basically Findings of Fact. The Hearing Examiner cleared up the discrep:. ancy between the conditional use permit and the variance in his amendment to his recommendatioiii to the City. Mr. Hanchett said the Findings. of Fact stated all of the necessary factors for, the purpose of a variance. Mr. Hanchett requested the Council to act upon the Staff's recommendation and Hearing Examin-- er's recommendation and render a decision in favor of the applicants that evening. Mr. Snyder clarified that zoning changes and subdivision plat approvals are not appeals to the City Council. State statute establishes alternatives for reviewing certain actions. He noted that the City had adopted the Bearing Examiner system. tie said the hearing before the Council is' not an appeal but a review of the hearing Examiner's recommendation. He said the Council is fre6 to consider all of the evidence from previous hearings. He noted that de novo appeals may not even enter into the issue. Councilmember Ostrom noted that the Council does hear de novo hearings. Mr. Snyder said it has been his interpretation of the ordinance that de novo goes to the burden of proof. The Council considers the issue as a Inatter of first impression and is allowed to consider the record devel oped before the Hearing Examiner and other public bodies. lie said de novo can refer to a new hearing with no prior history as well as a hearing without a specified burden of proof. Councilmember Ostrom noted that the Hearing Examiner recommended that the conditional use permit be granted for the reduction of the right-of-way width. . Councilmember Ostrom said that issue was clearly not the subject of a conditional use permit and that the amended Findings of Fact and recommendations addressed excavation. Mr. Snyder said although there were some inconsistent, paragraphs, paragraph 21 of the Conclusions contained in the Hearing Examiner's report specified that the following paragraphs were considerations of the modification provision and quotes the proper section. Mayor Naughten closed the public portion of the hearing. Councilmember Ostrom recommended that the hearing be continued to a later date to allow the Coun-. cil time to review the material that was submitted that evening. Councilmember Hall recommended that the Council discuss the issue and then decide whether or not to continue the hearing. She expressed concern regarding the access road and the impact to the. McCormicks. She was also concerned that the McCormicks' position was that they were not aware of the easement. She noted that an access road did exist previously and would be the best access point available. She said she would like to see mitigating measures taken to abate the noise if preliminary approval is granted. i Mayor Naughten adjourned the meeting at 10 p.m. COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEM BER KASPER, TO EXTEND THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Hall said she was sure that the McCormicks were informed prior to the development: of the road that that was an easement. Because of a statement made earlier by Councilmember Hall, Mr. Snyder inquired about her discus- sions with previous owners and individuals. Councilmember Hall said she had contacted individuals before the issue before the Council at the present time arose. Mr. Snyder inquired if Councilmem-; ber Hall has conducted individual investigation of the issue before it. Councilmember Hall re- plied negatively. Councilmember Jaech requested that the Council be allowed more time to review the record. She . noted that no one should receive, accept, or discuss new evidence since the public portion of the hearing was closed. Councilmember Kasper noted that the newly presented information was not rebutted by the opposing parties. Mr. Snyder said the requirement is that the opposing parties have an opportunity to hear it and rebut it, but not necessarily that they have to rebut it. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 12 DECEMBER.16, 1986 Councilmember Hall inquired if all 'of the information was contained in the Hearing Examiner's report but out of context. Mr. Snyder replied affirmatively. He noted that the Council has the option to either correct the record or remand it the the Hearing Examiner. COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO CONTINUE THE COUNCIL DELIBERATION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE 10 LOT SUBDIVISION WITH MODIFICATIONS AT 1100 DALEY PLACE TO DECEMBER 23, 1986. MOTION CARRIED. Councilmember Hall inquired if the Council was amenable to deferring Items #7 (Recommendation to Renew Employee Assistance Contract), 8 (Presentation of United Way award to Administrative Servic- es Department), 9 (Proposed Ordinance Amending 1986 Budget as Result of Unanticipated Transfers and Expenditures of Various Funds), and 10 (Budget Work session and Approval of Proposed. Ordi- nance Adopting 1986 Budget) to a later date. Councilmember Hall recommended that Item #7 be placed on next week's Consent Agenda, and that Item #10 be placed on the regular agenda next week. Item #8 was placed on the January 13, 1986 agenda. PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2598 AMENDING 1896 BUDGET AS RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDI- TURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS Administrative Services Director Art Housler reported that action by the City Council transfer- ring monies from the Council Contingency Fund and increasing expenditures of certain funds re- quires amendment to the 1986 Budget. He said this is a housekeeping item necessitated by.legal audit requirement. State law requires adoption of an ordinance or resolution whenever money is transferred from one fund to another. It has been the practice to consolidate transfer transactions into one ordinance instead of adopt- ing an ordinance or resolution each time a transfer is authorized by the City Council. Mr. Housler recommended adoption of the proposed ordinance. Mayor Naughten inquired if the public wished to offer their input. No public input was offered. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION TO ADOPT THE ORDINANCE 2598 AMENDING THE 1986 BUDGET AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS. MOTION CARRIED. MAYOR Mayor Naughten requested confirmation of Jim Waymire to the ADB. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, TO CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF JIM WAYMIRE TO POSITION #1 ON THE ADB, TERM TO EXPIRE NOVEMBER 5, 1987. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Naughten read the Board/Commission reappointments as follows: Arts Commission, Position #6, Ann Saling, term to expire 12/31/1990; Board of Appeals, Position #4, Tom McNerney, term to expire 12/31/1990 and Position #5, Bert Stole, term to expire 12/31/1990; Civil Service Commission, Position #1, Don Wells, term to expire 12/31/1992; Cemetery Board, Position #1, Rosemary Specht, term to expire 12/31/1990 and Position #2, Ruth Sater, term to expire 12/31/1990; Disability Board, Position #2, Robin Hickock, term to expire 12/31/1988; Library Board, Position #3, Geraldine Buckmeier, term to expire 12/31/1990; Plan- ning Board, Position #1, flank Lewis, term to expire 12/31/1990 and Position #2, Richard Kirsch- ner, term to expire 12/31/1990. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO CONFIRM THE APPOINTMENTS. MOTION CARRIED. Mayor Naughten noted that the Christmas concert at the Westgate Chapel was an excellent con- cert. He recommended that the Council attend the concert in the future. Mayor Naughten reminded the Council that the Christmas party will be held on December 19, 1986. COUNCIL Council President Hall noted the following Council absences: Councilmember Hall, lecember 2 and December 25, 1986; Councilmember Nordquist, December 2; Councilmember Jaech, December 2 and Decem- ber 9. COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JAECH, TO EXCUSE THOSE ABSENCES. MOTION CARRIED. EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 13 DECEMBER 16, 1986 Council President Hall reminded the Council that a budget meeting was scheduled next week in place of the Council committee meeting in the Plaza meeting room of the Library. COUNCIL PRESIDENT HALL MOVED TO INITIATE A RESOLUTION TO VACATE THE PROPERTY OF MR. HANSON ANO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION. THE MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Council President Hall said Duane Bowman had given her a request of Wesley Hanson to initiatie a street vacation. He dedicated 30 feet of his property in 1980 along 78th Avenue West as part of the approval of his two -lot short subdivision (S-56-79). Since that time, the City has amended the Official Street Map under file ST-2-85 to reduce the proposed street right-of-way for 78th. Avenue West. Mr. Hanson would like 20 feet of the original 30 feet dedication re- turned to him. Councilmember Jaech said she felt the issue should be channeled through the nor- mal administrative procedure and suggested it be remanded to the Community Services Department. Council President Hall noted that Student Representative Tom Peterson is a national merit scholar. Council President Hall reported that the City Council file cabinet was lock jimmied but has since been replaced and repaired. She said the lock has been changed on the door. Any Councilmembe- requesting a key will receive one. Councilmember Kasper inquired about the City's position regarding acquisition of the YMCA site. Mayor Naughten reported that the Boy's Club is considering acquisition and is contacting possible patrons to see if enough interest can be generated. Councilmember Kasper noted that Staff informed the Council that the property was sold. Public Works Superintendent Bobby Mills said if the Boy's Club makes an offer on the property, a thirty -day waiver will be executed. Councilmember Wilson noted that he and his wife, as well as several other members of the communi- ty, will be traveling to Japan. The primary goal of the visit is one of protocol to three univer- sities on behalf of Edmonds Community College. fie said two Mountlake Terrace City Councilmember;s will also travel to Japan. That city is presenting the universities with business cards with their name and the appropriate Japanese words to make the card more meaningful, as well as small gifts. lie suggested that the City also consider printing up cards as well as a few gifts. Mayor Naughten suggested that he and Councilmember Wilson further discuss the issue on Wednesday. Councilmember Dwyer recommended that Student Representative Tom Peterson be invited to the Coun- cil work dinner meeting on December 30, 1986. Ile noted that Tom's tenure expires in December. The Council said they did not wish to meet on December 30, but the meeting was not cancelled because the Budget has not yet been finalized. The meeting adjourned at 10:28 p.m. These minutes are subject to December 23, 1986.approval. JAG UELINE G. PARRETT, City Clerk LARRY q. NAUGHTENJ Mayor EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Page 14 DECEMBER 16, 1986 I