19780801 City Council Minutes254
July 25, 1978 - continued •
Water System Comprehensive Plan for the City of Edmonds at a total cost estimate of $15,000.
Public Works Director Leif Larson had indicated by memorandum that-rebudgeting would provide the
necessary funds as additional grant funds had been received in the Water and Sewer Construction
MOTION: Fund over that anticipated at the beginning of the year. COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN MOVED, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMAN CARNS, TO APPROVE THE REID, MIDDLETON & ASSOCIATES PROPOSAL TO UPGRADE THE WATER SYSTEM
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, FUNDING IT BY REBUDGETING FROM ADDITIONAL GRANT FUNDS IN THE WATER SEWER
CONSTRUCTION FUND (412); FURTHER, THAT THE PLAN BE COMPLETED BY JANUARY 1, 1979. MOTION CARRIED.
There was no further business to come before the Council, and the meeting was adjourned at 11:40 p.m.
LZ zz��
IRENE VARNEY MORAN City Clerk HARVE H. HARRISON, Mayor
1
August 1, 1978
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order'at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Pro tem
Tom Carns in the Council Chambers of the Edmonds Civic Center. All present joined in the flag
salute. Mayor Harrison arrived during Council Discussion and conducted the balance of the meeting.
PRESENT STAFF PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor Charles Dibble, M.A.A.
Mike Herb Leif Larson, Public Works Director
Phil Clement John LaTourelle, Community.Development Director
Katherine Allen Fred Herzberg, City Engineer
John Nordquist Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
Ray Gould Art Housler, Finance Director
Tom Carns Noelle Charleson, Assistant City Planner
Larry Naughten Dan Smith, Planning Technician
John Wallace,.City Attorney
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
CONSENT AGENDA
Councilman Herb asked that Item (D) be removed from the Consent Agenda, and the Staff asked that
MOTION: Item (E) be removed. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CLEMENT, TO APPROVE THE
BALANCE OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The balance of the Consent Agenda contained the
following:
(A) Roll call.
(B) Approval of Minutes of July 25, 1978.
(C) Adoption of Ordinance 2011 authorizing condemnation proceedings to acquire Edmonds
Elementary School site.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM DAVID T. LOWE, JR. [Item (D) on Consent Agenda
Councilman Herb requested a Staff summary on this claim. The claim was for damages in the amount
of $10,000 for unlawful arrest and imprisonment. City Attorney John Wallace advised against a •
written report in light of pending litigation. He suggested that an Executive Session with the
Police Chief to discuss the matter would be permissible, but not a written report. Councilman
MOTION: Herb withdrew his request. COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO APPROVE
ITEM (D) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION OF INTENTION SETTING SEPTEMBER 5, 1978 AS DATE FOR HEARING ON PRELIMINARY
ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR PROPOSED BELL ST. LID; WEST OF OLYMPIC AVE. [Item (E) on Consent Agenda]
City Engineer Fred Herzberg said there had been a mistake in the description of the street affected,
and corrected copies of the proposed Resolution of Intention had been distributed to the Council.
MOTION: COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, TO APPROVE ITEM (E) ON THE CONSENT AGENDA,
ADOPTING RESOLUTION OF INTENTION 252. MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCIL
Finance Director Art Housler was asked to review his Report on Revenue Status. He had prepared a
detailed report which he discussed. It was his opinion that 1978 revenues would reach 96%-99% of
budgeted revenue, based on the present position. He was asked to submit continuing quarterly or
semi-annual reports to reflect whether the departments are working within the budget.
Councilman Naughten complimented Community Development Director John LaTourelle and his Staff
in regards to a letter from Albert LaPierre thanking the Staff for the personal attention and
cooperation in the project he is developing on 212th St.
Councilman Clement advised he would not be present for the August 15 meeting.
Councilman Gould reported that Councilman Carns and he had attended the last Parks and Recreation
Advisory Board meeting and the Board was very receptive to the proposed in -lieu park fee.
1]
2,5
• August 1, 1978 continued
E
1
1
n
LA
AUDIENCE
Henry Hurlbut of 1424 Olympic Vilew Dr. --asked that the Council:reconcile.City parking regulations with
those of. the State inasmuch as the City had adopted the Model Traffic Ordinance. He had been cited
MOTION: for parking within 30' of a corner and the City signage did not reflect that. COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED,
SECONDED BY..000NCILMAN CARNS, TO PLACE.ON.THE.SEPTEMBER.12,..1978.AGENDA.A.REV.IEW OF TRAFFIC CONTROL
SIGNING IN THE.DOWNTOWN AREA.
William Mathias of 540 Holly Dr. proposed a change in notification.to.affected property owners when
a construction is proposed. He believed property owners up to 500' away from the construction should
be notified. Councilman Carns advised him that a discussion.is scheduled for August 15 regarding
notification requirements on ADB applications and.he_sugges.ted.Mr. Mathias be present.
Community Development Director John LaTourelle asked that the Council set a hearing date
for LaPierre Enterprises (R-6-78) for a proposed rezone of property on 212th St., west
and east of the Dairy Queen. COUNCILMAN..CARNS.MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILWOMAN ALLEN, TO
DATE OF AUGUST 15, 1978 FOR LaPIERRE ENTERPRISES, FILE R-6-78. MOTION CARRIED.
CONSIDERATION OF AMENDED APPLICATION ON "PARKSIDE WEST" - PRD-2-78
of August 15
of 72nd Ave. W.
SET A HEARING
This item had been continued from the July 25 meeting when the Council asked for a partial redesign
incorporating several specific changes. Assistant City Planner Noelle Charleson said the redesign
was for five clusters of duplexes which resulted in.some space being gained between the units. The
new plan also designated guest parking and a walkway, and a detailed section of the walkway was
included. The City Attorney had drafted a covenant which .the applicants would sign to restrict
construction on the property to 26 units, the..open space.be.ing protected from further development.
Further, future owners of both Phase I and Phase.II.un.i.ts..will.forfeit the right to refuse to
participate in.any future sewer LIDs designed.to benefit the area within the City of Edmonds and
contiguous to the Parkside West site. David Kinderfather, architect for the development, referred
to the drawing of the walkway, noting that it will be 5'..wide except for one area where it is.
reduced to 4'10", and it will have a curb on each side. The existing rock retaining wall is 62'
high maximum in Phase II and 11' high maximum in Phase I, and Councilman Nordquist suggested a railing
along the walkway where that changes. Mr.. Kinderfather.was.very receptive to that suggestion and said
it could be made a part of the contingency. He sai.d the -City Attorney had prepared a document to
assure the other requirements, and he felt the new site.plan was much superior to the previous one.
He said it would provide more screening; .more open space on.the more level areas, retention of a
cluster of trees near the east property line,..and. reduction of cutting into the slope. Councilman
Herb commended him on the revision and said he had felt from the beginning that this was a good
plan. Councilman Carns asked why the streets were pr.ivate, rather than City -dedicated streets. Mr.
Kinderfather said it had been his impression .from the City Staff that they preferred the streets to
be private so the City would not have to maintain them. He said they.could be designed to be City -
dedicated streets if that was preferred. Community Development Director John LaTourelle affirmed
that impression. He said the City is reluctant to accept as public responsibility roads that do not
meet the width standards, and the reduction in width is appropriate in a PRD. Further, he said the
City is willing., and often eager, to allow private roads in a PRD because the mechanism for the
maintenance of the roads is there in the form of the required home owners' association. Public
Works Director Leif Larson said he agreed with Mr. LaTourelle's statement, and he noted that the
City's maintenance monies are limited.
Although the public hearing on this matter had been held at the July 25 meeting, Mayor Harrison
permitted some additional input from the audience. Jerry Steele of 15720 68th Ave. W. read -from
Section 12.14.062 of the Edmonds City Code with regard to PRD design requirements, and he felt this'
development would be contrary to the requirements and would have a bad impact on the neighborhood.
He considered this type of housing to be commune living and was opposed to having such in his
neighborhood. George Boden of 15901 68th Ave. W. also was in opposition because he felt this
would be inconsistent with the character of the Meadowdale district. He said that to.preserve
open space on a steep bluff was of less concern than the community when the area being preserved
offered very little utility to the people living in that area. Jack Linge of 6970 160th S.W. also
objected and voiced some of the same objections he had made at the previous meeting. He did not
feel the development was screened enough from all of the surrounding areas and particularly on the
north boundary where the road curved into the setback, removing screening there. Mr. LaTourelle
responded that this development fits the Policy Plan to a "T." He noted that on the north property
line there is an adjacent private road which took out all of the trees on the boundary of that property.
Mr. LaTourelle said this plan had been reviewed by the Fi:re.Department, the Engineering Department,
the Planning Commission, and all City Officials,responsible, and that there was 100% concurrence
.in.the approval of this plan. Mr. Linge then asked that if approved, there be no parking permitted
on.the west side of the street.
Councilman Naughten said the architect had taken the input from the last meeting and had come up with
a compromise. He noted that the current plan gave more open space and had more trees and that legal
MOTION: requirements will have to be met on drainage. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
(Amended) CLEMENT, TO APPROVE REVISED PRD-2-78, SUBJECT TO -THE ASSURANCE.THAT THE WALKWAY WILL BE AT LEAST 5'
WIDE AFTER DEVELOPMENT EXCEPT IN THE ONE AREA WHERE IT MUST .BE 4'10", AND THAT PARKING WILL NOT BE
PERMITTED -ON THE WEST SIDE OF 68TH AVE. W. EXCEPT WHERE IT..IS.DESIGNATED ON THE PLAN. There was
an objection from the audience because action was..being taken without further audience input, and
Councilman Clement responded that at the last meeting over two hours of testimony was heard in
addition to over twenty minutes of testimony this evening, and the same .people were speaking.
Councilman Clement did not feel any further public testimony would be germane, and Councilman Naughten
said he agreed. Councilman Clement went on to say that all the points Mr. LaTourelle had made
relative to retention of open space and meeting the PRD requirements were evident in this design.
He said he was pleased that there will be only 26 units on this property and he thought the addition
of the sidewalk with the railing and also the parking were improvements to the community as a whole,
and leaving the balance of the -property undeveloped also was a benefit to the community as a whole.
Councilwoman Allen added that the residences have been designed to fit the topography, the drainage
was taken into consideration, and the stream was saved. She felt it was a well thought-out development.
Z 5 6- -
August 1, 1978 - continued
•
Councilman Carns felt the architect had shown a tremendous amount of integrity, and also the
.developer, by altering substantially the plan and making it more palatable. But he thought this
'would be the first PRO approved in the City that is all multi -family with no single family units,
and he said he would vote against the plan because of that. ON RECOMMENDATION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY,
Amendment COUNCILMAN GOULD MOVED-, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, THAT THE MOTION BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE
PROVISION OF A WALKWAY RAILING, AS DISCUSSED, ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE STREET AND INCLUSION OF THE
COVENANT -TO INSURE THAT -THE SITE WILL NOT BE DEVELOPED FURTHER AND THAT THE FUTURE OWNERS OF THE
UNITS WILL FORFEIT THE RIGHT TO REFUSE TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY FUTURE SEWER LID DESIGNED TO BENEFIT
THE AREA WITHIN THE EDMONDS CITY LIMITS CONTIGUOUS TO THE PARKSIDE WEST SITE. Councilman Gould
said this PRD probably is a benefit to the whole community as opposed to putting single family
residences on the site, and he felt that those things gained are important to the overall appear-
ance of the community and the lifestyle. He felt this plan fit what the City was trying to do
with the PRO ordinance. THE AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION.THEN CARRIED. THE MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED,
THEN CARRIED, WITH COUNCILMAN CARNS VOTING NO.
HEARING ON P.C. RESOLUTION 596, RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO ZONING CODE RE
IN -LIEU PARKING REQUIREMENT IN DOWNTOWN BUSINESS AREA (ZO-5-78)
Community Development Director John LaTourelle reviewed the proposed changes to the Code. The
Planning Commission had recommended denial of the proposed amendment, but the Community Develop-
ment Department submitted a separate recommendation for approval, with one minor change. The
Code amendment would eliminate the grandfather parking status for buildings in the downtown
business area and would require installation of the necessary parking spaces when a building
is converted to a substantially different use. It would also extend the in -lieu parking option
to the individual who substantially changes the use of a building in the downtown business area.
There are a few buildings in the CW zone which would benefit from an in -lieu option, so the CW
zone would be included in the proposed amendment. The purpose of the in -lieu fund is to retain
the existing character of the City by preserving the existing buildings rather than replacing
them with on -site parking lots. It seeks to eliminate a potential parking shortage without paving
over the downtown. Mr. LaTourelle recommended strongly that the amendment be approved. He noted
that there is no opportunity to provide parking in many of the areas of the waterfront. He felt
this should be on the books when the moratorium is raised. The Planning Commission had recom-
mended denial on the basis that they were concerned for the administrative feasibility of the
parking fund ordinance. The hearing was opened to the public.
Virgini.d Evans, a real estate broker located in the Harbor Building, said she supported the plan
to buy land for parking lot development and the cost should be determined and then the buildings
needing it should pay the price. She said no matter what price is set today it would be impossible
to set a price in years to come on different pieces of property. She said she would be one of
the f.'i.rs-tto put in some money for parking. No one else wished to speak, and the public portion
of the hearing was closed. After some discussion to clarify some points in the proposed amend-
MOT:ION: ment, COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO INSTRUCT THE CITY ATTORNEY
TO DRAFT AN ORDINANCE INCORPORATING A REVERSAL OF P.C. RESOLUTION 596. MOTION CARRIED. COUNCIL -
MOTION: MAN CLEMENT THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS,TO SET A RATE DISCUSSION FOR AUGUST 22,
BRINGING FORWARD THE PARKING COMMISSION'S LAST RECOMMENDATION FOR RATE STRUCTURE. MOTION CARRIED.
HEARING ON APPEAL FROM ADB DECISION RE MAGNE HAGEN CONDOMINIUM
Associate Planner Mary Lou Block said this proposal was for the southeast corner of 5th Ave.
and Holly. When the applicant first submitted his proposal there was substantial development
proposed across a stream on the site. Because of impact on the stream the Planning Division
recommended against approval and asked the applicant to pull the building back from the stream so
as not to interrupt the stream flow. He was forced to pull back the building, leaving a 7.'
setback. The overall greenbelt area was increased, however. The Board of Adjustment approved
a variance to allow moving the corner closer to the eastern property line, and the applicant
shortened the entryway and made other changes and then returned to the ADB. At that time there
were numerous people in the audience concerned about parking, bulk and height of the building,
and traffic and parking on Holly Dr. The ADB had approved the development in spite of being
concerned about the recommendations of the Density Review Committee concerning density in
Edmonds. They had taken those into consideration but because this application had been received
previously and the Council had not taken any action on the Density Review Committee's recommenda-
tions, the ADB felt they had to approve the application under existing regulations. They approved
the application, and the neighbors appealed that decision. Mrs. Block showed two slides of the
site which reflected the dense vegetation. She said the Council could uphold the ADB decision,
overturn it, or make modifications to the proposal. She commented on the modifications which
already had been made. Zoning in the area is BC to the north, RS-6 to the east, BC and then RS-6
to the south, and across the street to the west is BC. The RS-6 to the east has mostly single
story homes and to those -homes the proposal would block any view, but Mrs. Block did not believe
they had Sound views. Community Development Director John LaTourelle added that the site plan
had been worked over for a long period and the parking had been redrawn several times. He said
the building had been moved around on the site and the applicant had gone to the Board of
Adjustment to get the variance to move it closer to the property line. Further, that there was
not much maneuvering room left for a building -of that bulk and height and, given that building
and those parking requirements,,a better site design would not be found. He.suggested that the
only other option the Council had essentially was to reduce the size of the building, which the
ADB did not think they had the authority to do. City Attorney John Wallace then reviewed for
the Council the criteria for appeal, and Councilman Carns noted that the appeal called for a
de novo hearing and that any further appeal. was to Superior Court within 10 days. Mrs. Block
noted that if the Council were to recommend a reduction in the number of units the only effective
reduction would be of one floor which has four units. She pointed out that if the reduction were
only of two units there could still be the same bulk. It was asked whether the entire lot could
be covered if the lot were developed as BC, and the answer was that it could be in theory, but in
reality the ADB would not permit complete coverage of the lot-. The public portion of the hearing
was opened.
1
1
•
1
LJ
1
L�
•
August 1, 1978 - continued
257
J
C�
1
E
MOTION:
(Withdrawn)
MOTION:
MOTION:
1
Don Westlin, architect fQr th-e deyelopment; reviewed the previous attempts to develop this site.
He said the applicants in 1977 had..proposed a family clinic facility which had been approved, and
in that proposal all of the cars were coming off Holly Dr. It was designed so a third floor
could be added which would have had a total of 24 cars. The clinic was to be open until 9:00 p-m.
every day, six days a week. He noted that the owners are residents of Edmonds and have their
professional offices in Edmonds. '-,He identified the owners as Drs.,Robert-Bettis and Mark Hanson,
at which time Councfilman-Herb removed himself from the proceeding as'he goes to those doctors
and has talked to them professionally. Councilman Carns noted that Councilman Nordquist and he
are members of the City of Edmonds Disability Board and one of the applicants is the Disability
Board doctor. The.City Attorney did not feel it was necessary that they be excused from the
proceeding because of that association. Mr. Westlin reiterated the actions which had been taken
since the concept was developed for condominium. He said they were in.full compliance with all
requirements. William Mathias of 54 Holly Dr. asked for a reversal of the ADB decision. He said
there were 72 signatures on the appeal petition, partially from 14 units on Holly Dr. and
partially from other supporting people in the area. He said the proposed construction was in-
compatible with the immediate surrounding area and it should be denied on that basis alone. He
read from the ADB ordinance and found the proposal lacking in.accordance with some of the require-
ments. He said the general tone of the regulation requires compatibility and harmony with the
surrounding area, which would not be fulfilled in his opinion if the decision of the ADB were
approved. He said it should be clear that a 34' structure was not compatible with 1 and 12 story
buildings. He felt a shrinking of the project was necessary. Steve Dwyer of 529 Holly Dr. said
the citizens of Edmonds are asking for limitations on dwellings and the City is limiting them to
10 or less units. He said this structure would not accomplish the intent of the Policy Plan or
the Comprehensive Plan and that it would not be harmonious with the surrounding structures. He
felt a logical analysis of the situation showed a reversal of the ADB decision would be consistent
with the goals of the City. Ray Meek of 565 Hemlock said they had been fighting apartments in
their area since 1964 and had petitioned the Council in 1967 to be deleted from the Comprehensive
Plan in order to try to control the density and keep their area single family. Councilman Clement
asked Mr. Westlin to respond to the criticisms of lack of harmony, bulk and size, and not being
consistent with the surrounding area. Mr. Westlin said the 35' height is an average and the
building actually will be more like 30' above the highest plateau. He said if they were cut to
10 units the top floor probably would be two penthouse units and the mass would be the same.
Mayor Harrison suggested that the neighborhood might buy the property and resell it with a
covenant restroicting what can be built on it, and Mr. Mathias responded that as far as he knew
the property was not for sale. Dr. Robert Bettis of 18312 91st P1. W., one of the owners of
the property, said that property had been for sale for a long time before Dr. Hanson and he had
bought it and that there had been a large '.'for sale" sign on it. He said.they had never been
approached by anyone in the neighborhood who had any desires of buying it. Louise Dwyer of 529
Holly Dr. said they had expected a small, one-story medical building was going to be constructed
and they had not known the plan -had been changed. Dr. Bettis responded that the medical building
had approval to go three stories and.the parking also had a stronger impact. Steve Dwyer said
something eventually will be built and it seemed that this Council should say that what is built
will be consistent with the Policy Plan. Dr. Mark Hanson of 8207 182nd S.W., the other owner,
said the cars going to the property would not necessarily impact Holly Dr. as they would go
immediately from Holly to the property, and the other cars enter from 5th Avenue and would not
impact Holly at all. He felt it also should be considered that the property on 5th Ave. is
business property. He noted that most of the houses on Holly do not have a view.and there is a
mix of homes in the neighborhood, some being very new, some old, and some in between. He said
their building had been designed to maintain the beauty of the ravine and to enhance it with the
building. He said that over the years. the people had the opportunity to buy the property and that
it had been zoned BC for a number of years. He felt if these really were concerns they should
have been aired and the people should have had the property rezoned. He added that a lot of time
and funds had been invested in this.development. William Mathias then offered a group of photo-
graphs which illustrated the traffic situation on Holly Dr. Oscar_Scarlin, a realtor who said
he had been working with Drs. Bettis and Hanson, said he also had worked with the previous owner
of the property and that owner had planned to build an apartment building, and he lived right
next to it. The public portion of the,hearing was closed.
Councilman Naughten commented that anything that is built there is going to increase the traffic
and impact the neighborhood. He'felt the development should have less density -- not more than
eight units and removing one floor so there would be less mass. Not understanding that the
Council could modify the propsal, COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, TO
REMAND ADB-37-78 TO THE AMENITIES DESIGN BOARD AND ASK THEM TO SERIOUSLY CONSIDER LOOKING AT AN
ALLOWANCE OF ONLY EIGHT UNITS IN A TWO-STORY BUILDING, AND HE CITED HIS FINDINGS FROM THE CITY
CODE, SECTION 12,20,050, PARAGRAPHS (1)(C), (2)(A), (2)(B), AND PART OF (4). After discussion
in which it was noted that the Council could make such a modification, COUNCILMAN CARNS WITHDREW
HIS MOTION. COUNCILMAN CARNS THEN MOVED THAT ADB-3748 BE MODIFIED, ON THE BASIS OF THE FINDINGS
IN THE PREVIOUS MOTION, SO THE BUILDING DOES NOT EXCEED 25' IN HEIGHT AND DOES NOT CONTAIN MORE
THAN EIGHT UNITS, AND THAT EIGHT PARKING SPACES WILL BE ELIMINATED FROM THE HOLLY DR. SIDE OF
THE BUILDING. Councilman Gould agreed that 25' in height would be compatible with the surrounding
area if the parking is removed from Holly Dr. It was noted that the site still could be developed
as a business instead of a condominium, but the three-story medical clinic could not be developed,
as it was not started within a year after approval. THE MOTION CARRIED. COUNCILMAN CARNS THEN
MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN, THAT IF THE DEVELOPERS ACCEPT THE MODIFICATION THAT THEY
BRING THE MODIFIED PLAN TO THE COUNCIL FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT.
MOTION CARRIED.
SIX MONTHS' PROGRESS REPORT ON MAP SHOWING ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS
Planning Technician Dan Smith began a slide presentation relative to the environmentally sensitive
areas in the City. Because of the lateness of the hour .and because the Council wanted to give
this matter proper consideration, it was agreed that a postponement would be in order. COUNCIL -
MOTION: MAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY..000NCILMAN NAUGHTEN, TO.CONTINUE THE REPORT ON'THE ENVIRONMENTALLY
SENSITIVE AREAS MAP UNTIL AUGUST 8, 1978. MOTION CARRIED.
40
25S
August 1, 1978 - continued
There was no further business to come before the Council, and the meeting was adjourned at 11;00 p.m.
IRENE VARNEY MORAN City Clerk
August 8, 1978 (Work Meeting)
HARV H."HARRISON, Mayor
The regular meeting of the Edmonds City Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Pro tem Tom
Carns in the Council Chambers of .the Edmonds Civic Center. All present joined in the flag salute.
Mayor Harrison arrived shortly after the meeting was called to order.
PRESENT
Harve Harrison, Mayor
Mike Herb
Katherine Allen
John Nordquist
Ray Gould
Tom Carns
Larry Naughten
CONSENT AGENDA
ABSENT STAFF PRESENT
Phil Clement Charles Dibble, M.A.A.
Leif Larson, Public Works Director
John LaTourelle, Community Devel. Dir.
Noelle Charleson, Asst. City Planner
Art Housler, Finance Director
Irene Varney Moran, City Clerk
Dan Smith, Planning Technician
Jackie Parrett, Deputy City Clerk
Wayne Tanaka, City Attorney
COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN NORDQUIST, TO APPROVE ALL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA EX=
MOTION: CEPT ITEM (D) WHICH THE STAFF HAD REQUESTED BE REMOVED. MOTION CARRIED. Items approved on the
Consent Agenda were:
(A) Roll call.
(B) Approval of Minutes of August 1, 1978.
(C) Acknowledgment of receipt of Claim for Damages from Ken J. Bankson of the Haberdasher
Men's Shop for water damage due to sewer backup.
AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO EXECUTE LAKE BALLINGER REHABILITATION PROJECT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
[Item (D) on Consent Agenda]
M.A.A. Charles Dibble said the agreement would be satisfactory with the elimination of certain
words in paragraph 4 regarding the Study Advisory Committee. Words to be eliminated were:
MOTION: ". . .oversee the conduct of the PLAN and. . ." COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN
GOULD, TO ACCEPT ITEM (D) WITH THE CHANGE STATED AND TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE DOCUMENT.
MOTION CARRIED.
l
1
C�
COUNCIL
Councilman Carns said he had been advised that the City's dues to the South Snohomish County Chamber
of Commerce will be due at the end of August in the amount of $160. COUNCILMAN CARNS MOVED,
MOTION: SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN HERB, THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY BE INSTRUCTED TO DRAFT A RESOLUTION FOR NEXT
WEEK'S CONSENT AGENDA TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM THE COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND TO THE GENERAL FUND TO
PAY $160 ANNUAL DUES TO THE SOUTH SNOHOMISH COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. Councilman Gould noted •
that there is at least one Council member who feels the City's participation is improper and non-
productive, and he questioned whether the City had received $160 worth of information from the
Chamber. M.A.A. Dibble responded that people request information about the City and the area and
they are referred by the Staff to the Chamber for such information. He said the Chamber is per-
forming a function that otherwise would have to be performed by the City. Councilman Carns noted
that the other cities in South Snohomish County were members, and it was his opinion that the Chamber
was doing a lot of good. Councilman Naughten felt anything that promoted interlocal cooperation was
good. Councilman Gould questioned the legality of the City's membership, inasmuch as Councilman
Carns had felt it necessary to withdraw from membership earlier this year. Councilman Carns re-
sponded that it was not a matter of legality, that the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine had come into
play. City Attorney Wayne Tanaka agreed, and added that the City in its corporate capacity is
different from an i.ndividual's being a member. THE MOTION THEN CARRIED.
Councilman Carns proposed that towards the latter part of the year each Council member contribute
$25-$30 to host a cocktail party for all the other Boards and Commission members and their spouses,
possibly at the Senior Center. This suggestion met with general approval, and M.A.A. Dibble
and another Staff member will coordinate it.
Councilman Naughten commented that there are many people in the community who would like to be
involved as Board or Commission members, and he suggested no one should serve more than one term
so that more people can get involved. Mayor Harrison said it had been suggested to him by M.A.A.
Dibble and Community Development Director John LaTourelle that terms of service on Boardsand Commis-
sions should be cut to two years. COUNCILMAN NAUGHTEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN CARNS, THAT THE
COULCIL REVIEW THE LENGTH OF TERMS ON BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS AT THE SEPTEMBER 12, 1978 COUNCIL
MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.