19840717 City Council MinutesJuly 17, 1984
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 salute.
PRESENT STAFF PRESENT
Larry Naughton, Mayor Jim Adams, City Engineer
Jo -Anne Jaech Duane Bowman, Assistant City Planner
Steve Dwyer Jim Jessel,'Property Manager
Laura Hall Pat LeMay, Personnel Director.
Bill Kasper Bobby Mills, Actg. Pub. Wks. Supv.
John Nordquist Dan Prinz, Actg. Police Chief
Lloyd Ostrom Jack Weinz, Fire Chief
Jack. Wilson Steve Simpson, Parks & Rec. Dir.
Steve Dahl, Student Rep. Jackie Parrett, City Clerk
Scott Snyder, City Attorney
Shirlie Witzel, Recorder
• Councilmember Nordquist arrived at 7:40 p.m.
CONSENT AGENDA
Councilmember Jaech raised a point of order regarding how correction of an action taken during the
July 10 meeting should be handled. At this point, Councilmember Hall raised a point of order,
stating she intended to pull Item (B) of the Consent.Agenda and the correction could be handled
.then. City Attorney Scott Snyder advised that Item (B) should be removed from the Consent Agenda
for correction.
Mayor Naughton announced that Item (D), Report on Bids Opened June 27, 1984, and. Award of Contract
for the 1984 Street Overlay Program, had been removed from the Consent Agenda and Item (G), Ordi-
nance -Amending Code Section Relating to Civil Service Commission, had been added to the Consent
Agenda.
Items .(B.) and (E) were removed from the Consent Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO APPROVE THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT.AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. The approved
items on the Consent Agenda included the following:
(A) Roll call.
(C) Acknowledgment of receipt of claim for damages from Patti A. Hoy ($6,293.97).
(F) Adoption of Ordinance 2442 creating position of Community Services Director and Ordinance
2443 creating position of Administrative Services Director.
(G) Adoption of Ordinance 2444 amending Code Section relating to Civil Service Commission.
n
�J
426
July 17, 1984 - continued •
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JULY 10,.1984 rItem (B) on Consent Aqendal
Councilmember Jaech explained that Item (0), Discussion of Final Approval of 7-Lot Subdivision at
743 Aloha St., had been removed from.the July 10 Consent Agenda and discussed in error since the
Council had earlier granted approval by passing it with the "balance of the Consent Agenda." Since
this was now Item 4 on the current agenda, she said the Council could reconsider that approval and
asked the City.Attorney to explain factors that may be considered in granting final approval. She
added.that Item 4 could also be used to discuss those concerns submitted to her by residents of the
area. Mr. Snyder explained that the Revised Code of Washington provides that the City Council must
proceed to approve a plat that hasreceived preliminary approval unless two situations are present:
1. The subdivision.has not met the requirements of the.preliminary approval, or 2. It is not in
compliance with state law or local ordinances. Mr. Snyder said all requirements have been met,
according to the staff, and his review indicated nothing in violation -of local ordinance or state
law.
Councilmember Kasper indicated the confusion of last week may have.resulted from the two subdi-
visions that are being pursued. One is the 7-lot subdivision which received final approval last
week and another is the short subdivision that is now in process.
COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, THAT MINUTES OF JULY 10, 1984, FIRST
SENTENCE UNDER CONSENT AGENDA BE AMENDED TO SHOW "ITEMS (D), (G), (J), AND (K) WERE PULLED FROM THE
CONSENT AGENDA." MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Dwyer asked if people present wishing to express their concerns about Item 4 may do so
at that time. Councilmember Hall indicated that Item 4 does not belong on the agenda any longer.
Councilmember Jaech noted that if something pertained to the subdivision as a result of the dis-
cussion, the Council could still reconsider the approval. Councilmember Hall said the Council must
adhere to procedure and not backtrack on decisions. Mayor Naughten indicated the Council could
allow comments from the audience but no action could be taken. •
Mayor Naughten. noted that he and the staff had reviewed the minutes to determine action taken by
,the Council concerning underground utilities. An interpretation of the Council action was distri-
buted to Council members and the Mayor asked if this were correct. He asked for clarification of
the information the Council is requesting in developing a plan and financing for underground
utilities. Councilmember Hall said the minutes stand as written and the item should.be discussed on
the date set
REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS ON NEW AID UNIT FItem (E) on Consent Agenda
Councilmember Kasper asked if a custom designed and built unit were the only way to obtain a unit or
if one could be rebuilt from within and.accomplish the same goal. Fire Chief Weinz said custom
building was the only way to obtain the aid unit. In response to. a question from Councilmember
Kasper regarding funding, Chief Weinz said an attempt is being made to start a replacement fund.
There is $35,000 in the fund and no other vehicle purchase is planned. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED,
SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT BIDS ON NEW AID
UNIT. MOTION CARRIED.
At this point, Mayor Naughten invited those wishing to speak on agenda items to sign the sheet
provided at the door.
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE 2444 RELATING TO BUILDING PERMITS IN THE MEADOWDALE AREA AND
LIFTING MORATORIUM
City Attorney Scott. Snyder explained that the amended ordinance before the Council reflected the
additions requested by the Council on July 10, the liability insurance and recording notice of the
hazards. Mr. Snyder reviewed his findings on liability insurance costs which are usually under-
written by Lloyd's of London. He estimated the cost for four year coverage would be from $5,000 to
$10,.000 depending upon the liability involved. He said paragraph lE of the ordinance provides for •
execution.of a covenant by the owners of property within the hazard area containing notification of
the Lowe report as well'as a general indemnification agreement that will run with the title to the
land. Councilmember Ostrom noted that deletion of the liability insurance is indicated since it is
not practical to impose that type of requirement. When the Council requested the provision, they
were not aware of the cost to the property owner. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL -
MEMBER KASPER, TO DELETE PARAGRAPH.D AND RENUMBER PARAGRAPH E TO D OF SECTION 19.00.020, PARAGRAPH
ONE.
Councilmember Hall said she agreed with the motion, evidenced by her vote the previous week. She
said the liability insurance was.too large a load to place on people. Councilmember Kasper defended
the action taken by the Council in requiring insurance. He said it was a question that had to be
raised and there were valid points for exploring the question of.insurance.. Councilmember Dwyer
indicated that he would vote in favor of the motion; however, he said there is need for insurance in
this situation. The question is a balancing of burdens, those borne by the residents of the City as
a whole and the burdens placed on Meadowdale residents by this requirement. The financial difficulty
that people building homes will.experience only reinforces Councilmember Dwyer's opinion that, in
the event of a calamity, there will be no ability to pay if liability is assigned to the landowner.
Rather than imposing this burden- on those people building in Meadowdale, the residents of the City
as a whole are assuming the burden of paying the cost of the City defending itself against a law-
suit, which it probably would win. Councilmember Wilson said he agreed with preceding statements
and favors the motion. He asked the City Attorney if there.is anything else that can be done to
protect the City and its citizens as well as the residents involved. Mr. Snyder said there are
administrative procedures that are followed every day that will aid in this matter. He agreed that
people do look for those with the ability to pay in the event of lawsuits. There are two additional
groups involved in any construction, the architect and the contractor who would be involved in any
suit. In addition, geotechnical engineers, soils and foundation design people would also be in-
volved. In the application review process, the staff will be looking not only at the credentials of
the geotechnical engineer or architect, etc., but also at their ability to pay, whether they have
liability insurance and whether they are bonded. MOTION CARRIED.
r-I
L-A
42
•
July 17, 1984
- continued
COUNCILMEMBER
JAECH MOVED,.SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO:ADOPT ORDINANCE 2445. Councilmember
Dwyer commented
on a letter.from Michael Lantz, Jr.:, objecting to use of the.words earth subsidence
and landslide
hazard area in what is now paragraph .1D.. Mr. Snyder said the language comes from the
Lowe Report.
The issue in question is whether people are being notified legally. He said anyone
applying for a
building permit, *a subdivision plat, or a.Planned Residential Development will be
provided with
a map.and .tol'd,a copy of the report is on file and available. .The map and report will
supply notice.
The Council may use what language it likes, the main issue is to provide the notice.
Another provision
of paragraph D is provision of notice to second and third generation buyers. In
Mr. Snyder's opinion
there.is no slander on title problem. Under common law there is the duty to
give notice of
hidden defects.in the property. The situation needs to be made clear so the City has
a defense in the
event of a catastrophic event.
COUNCILMEMBER
KASPER MOVED TO AMEND MOTION TO ADD THE WORD "POTENTIAL" TO PARAGRAPH 1D IN FRONT OF
THE WORD LANDSLIDE.
MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. MAIN MOTION CARRIED.
DISCUSSION ON
FINAL APPROVAL. OF 7-LOT SUBDIVISION AT 743 ALOHA ST. (HARBOR LANE/P-5-81)
COUNCILMEMBER
JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO,OPEN THE MEETING FOR PUBLIC INPUT ON
THE SUBJECT.
A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS.TAKEN WITH COUNCILMEMBERS JAECH, DWYER, KASPER, OSTROM, AND
WILSON VOTING
YES, COUNCILMEMBER HALL VOTING NO.
Mayor Naughten advised the speakers they would be limited to three minutes each. Councilmember
Ostrom raised a point of order, stating that a public hearing should be publicized and therefore
this cannot be considered a public hearing. Mayor Naughten indicated that the Council would only be
taking public comments.
Leonard,Peopl.es, 802 7th Ave. N., said there is an accumulation of over 150 years Iresidency among
the neighbors surrounding the subdivision being built at 818.7th Ave. N. He complained that the
• Planning meeting had scheduled discussion of the subdivision for 10:30 p.m. and it was 11:05 before
the hearing began. He commented that a staff member 'was conducting himself in an unprofessional
manner at the hearing and Mr. Peoples had received the impression the matter was cut and dried. He
said there was no concern for safety on the part of the builder. An eight foot.hole was left in his
backyard where children play-. He also indicated that the egress from the property -constitutes an
extreme hazard and the lights are a nuisance. He added that an easement on the east end of the
property could also serve as an egress. He noted that the egress is less than 400' from 196th St.
S.W. The add-ition.of cars from the seven houses of the subdivision will increase the hazard to the
children since there are already many cars from the churches and the school as.well as the playfield
on 7th Ave. He said there will be too many houses in a small_ area. He maintained there is enough
strength inthe safety factor alone to stop the street. He indicated that his foundation is break-
ing as a result of installing two sewer connections. He concluded that they are entitled to a safe
.place to live.
Hank Lewis, 21723 97th Ave. W., project manager for the subdivision, reviewed the history of the
project. The property is owned by Bob. Henning. A 7-lot subdivision was proposed in 1981 and
approved by the Hearing Examiner and City Council with no.opposition. There were three homes on the
property, meaning an increase of..only four homes. The land is being purchased,by Homeland Homes and
the subdivision has been completed with one change., addition of a sidewalk the entire length of the
property line on 7th Ave. at the election of the developer. Mr. Lewis said a hole was left open by
accident but that would not happen,again. The sewer main was tapped as part of the engineering
requirement; but Mr. Lewis expressed doubt that the foundation was damaged in the process. He
expressed appreciation for the City's concern for the residents, but feels developers also have
rights when they have met the requirements attached to a subdivision.
Councilmember Dwyer asked if the hole had been covered. Mr. Lewis said the hole was closed up by
the end of the day.
• Mark McNaughten, 1047 Spruce St., addressed the concerns expressed by Mr. Peoples. He said the hole
in Mr. Peoples' backyard was coned, in a sanitary sewer easement, was attended all day and was
filled in at the end of the day. Mr. McNaughten questioned the extent to which a development may
proceed and still be called back when all the requirements of a preliminary'approval have been met.
He said they would be glad to sit down with the neighbors.and discuss any concerns.
.Bob Zoller, 824 7th Ave. N., said the proposed road will be within ten feet of his house. He
corrected statements made by Mr. Lewis, one of the three houses was a chicken coop and said the hole
left open is approximately eight feet from the house not fifteen. 'A better plan would have been to
locate.the;road elsewhere.. He said his wife and Mr. Peoples had attended the public hearing and
felt.the staff person was not acting in a professional manner and that the decision was cut and
dried. He said he did not expect theCityCouncil to change anything but did wish to be heard. He
said his wife had the opportunity to testify at the public hearing.
Darcy Crouser, 909 7th Ave. N., stated that 7th Ave. is capable of handling the extra traffic from
these homes. She said in conversations with Mark McNaughten she had found him honest, open and
sincere. Ms. Crouser expressed appreciation for the sidewalk that will,be constructed. She feels
the main opposition seems.to arise from the fact the property has been virtually vacant for many
years. She believes the development is a step forward and supports the subdivision wholeheartedly.
Since no one else wished to speak, Mayor Naughten closed the hearing.
Councilmember Dwyer said both the concerns expressed, the safety factors and the seeming lack of
professionalism of a staff member, can be handled administratively.
Councilmember,Kasper commented on the attempts. to construct a sidewalk on 7th Ave. during past
years. He noted that the construction of the sidewalk by Homeland will leave approximately 600'
that is critical and he will move later in the evening to include that portion on the 6-year
transportation improvement program.
ROM
July 17, 1984 - continued •
HEARING ON.HEARING EXAMINER RECOMMENDATION ON REQUEST TO MOODIFY GREENBELT COVENANT TO THE PLAT,
OF ROB'S ADDITION (BRUBAKER/P71-80)
Assistant City Planner Duane Bowman explained that the Hearing Examiner had held a public hearing on
this request on February 16,.1984 and issued a report containing his .recommendation on March 15,
1984. The Hearing Examiner recommended that the greenbelt not be modified. Councilmember Nordquist
arrived and took his place at the Council dais.
Councilmember Hall noted that she had been a member of the Planning Commission at the time this
matter was first heard. Mr. Snyder said the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that persons
sitting on advisory boards of the City are not barred from taking part in further action. The only
bar would be if there were anything that would prevent a person from hearing the matter without
preconceived judgment.
Mr. Bowman displayed a transparency of the area in question and explained the location of the
utility easement and the elevation line defined in the greenbelt covenant. He said the lot is 240'
in length. Mr. Bowman said an easement had been granted between the developers of the plat of Maple
Creek and the Brubakers to lots 3 and.4 of the plat of Rob's Addition. The Hearing Examiner said
the issue of,access was not germane to the issue. Modification of the greenbelt restriction would
give lot 4 the ability to be subdivided into an additional lot. He said installation of a water,
loop through the greenbelt would not necessarily destroy it, since the City has the capability to
bore under tree roots. It would depend on how the contract is let. The greenbelt covenant speci-
fically prohibits any structure.being erected below the 370'. elevation; it does not prohibit instal=
lation of utilities. He added that two things prevent subdivision of lot 4: 1. The utility ease-
ment that crosses the lower portion of the lot, and 2. The greenbelt covenant that prevents any.
structure being built below the,370' elevation.
Mayor Naughten opened the public hearing, limiting each speaker to five minutes.
Robert Brubaker, 4 Park P1., stated he had applied for removal of the greenbelt restriction from the •
south 114' of lot 4 of Rob.'s Addition. He said the Hearing Examiner responded to a different issue
because he had not received the portion of Mr. Brubaker's application containing description of the
114' in question. He said action by the City Council on any matter other than his application would
serve no purpose. He recounted the decision of the Planning Commission regarding the greenbelt
covenant and argued that the steep slopes exist north of the southerly 114' of lot 4. He said the
slopes are actually 15-17% on the portion in question, facts not known in 1980 when the restriction
was imposed. He said the original intent to preserve the steep slopes in the.greenbelt would not be
altered by granting his request. Refusing to modify the greenbelt restriction renders the south
114' of his lot useless. He requested removal of the.greenbelt restriction from the south 114' of
lot 4.
Rick Spellman, 21016 Shell Valley Wy., asked people affected by the proposal to stand. As residents
of the 2100 block of Shell Valley Way, he said, they are opposed to any modification of the green=
belt. He said the greenbelt had been set aside for aesthetic and practical necessities to benefit
current and future residents of the area. Slides he provided,were shown to the Council. The neces-
sities he.spoke of included: a basic backdrop for the neighborhood., which was planned around natu-
ral settings; provision of a noise buffer from Main St.;.affixing soil on a steep enbankment which
would be -jeopardized by tree removal and street access; maintenance of the -last stand of trees
outside Yost Park that is not subject to..removal and development. The residents of Maple Creek
development purchased their homes for seclusion, privacy, and the short dead-end street. Conditions
that existed when the greenbelt was first imposed still.exi.st and are enhanced by the greenbelt.
Mr. Spellman recounted that portion of the 1980 public.hearing before the Planning Commission in
which Mr. Brubaker, Sr., agreed to establishment of the greenbelt covenant. Mr. Spellman stated
that removal of the greenbelt would not be in the best interest of the community.
Todd Gruenhagen, 21035 Shell Valley Wy., agreed with Mr. Spellman's statements. He said it was
apparent that Mr.,Brubaker asked for the modification to enable him.to subdivide lot 4. The roadway •
dividing the Maple Creek subdivision is narrow with no on -street parking provision and is a cul-de-
sac. Additional development would impact the street. He noted that both Mr. Brubaker, Sr., and Mr.
Brubaker, Jr., were aware of the implications of the greenbelt when it was imposed just four years
ago. He asked the Council to give weight to the recommendations of the Planning Commission and the
Hearing Examiner and deny the modification application.
Bill Lebo, 21028 Shell Valley Wy., indicated that they had invested in a life style. There have
been on-going..water problems in the neighborhood and reduction of the greenbelt would serve to
exacerbate that problem. The existing conditions were a basis for the investment in their home. He
said changing those conditions would not be an equitable decision and would result in a definite
change in the lifestyle in which they had originally invested.
Melanie Ahl, 21010 Shell Valley Wy., said they had purchased their home in February of 1984. The
greenbelt and park were large factors in their decision. Her house would be only eight to ten feet
from the access driveway to any proposed new house on lot 4. Any expansion would impact their
privacy and the property value of their.home. She agreed with statements previously made by resi-
dents of Shell Valley Way and asked the Council to make no decision that would -hurt their investment
in their home.
Robert Brubaker, previously identified, stated that access and traffic are not part of the greenbelt
issue. Retention of the full greenbelt does not eliminate the right of access to Shell Valley Way
and this right would be exercised in a regular manner. He said only one tree would be threatened by
any proposed structure. Knowledge of the greenbelt provision as indicated by residents should also
have included knowledge of access rights from lot 4 to Shell Valley Way. The steep grades were
shown to be north of the 114' in question and described other developments that had much greater
slopes with which to contend.
CJ
•
July 1.7, 1984 - continued
Councilmember Hall asked.if:'the
only change that has occurred since 1980'is
the realization of the
lesser grades on the 114' in
question. Mr. Brubaker. stated that the greenbeltt,was
required because
of the steep slopes and the
area in question was apparently overlooked. Mr.
Brubaker, Sr.', had been
told it was too steep to build
on and agreed to the restriction without checking
it out.
Councilmember Dwyer asked if
there was an allegation that anything had been
done other than Mr.
Brubaker, Sr., having made a
bad bargain. Mr. Brubaker, Jr., said the City
Council and Planning
Department had convinced him
all of the property was.too steep to build on,
but not on purpose, the
area was just overlooked.
Since no one else wished to
speak, the hearing was closed.
0
1
429.
In response to a question from Councilmember Kasper, Mr. Bowman. described the history of the
development of.Rob's Addition beginning as a 4-lot subdivision 'and becoming 5-lots. Councilmember
Kasper noted that the access to lot.4 exists, a -building pad exists and there are only one or two
trees involved.
Councilmember Ostrom expressed doubt that the City Council should try to change the 1980 greenbelt
decision, even if some of the facts were not known. It would.be difficult to determine the inten-
tions of the Council at that time, nor is it an issue what developers have done in, other locations.
The greenbelt was required for good reason in 1980. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL -
MEMBER NORDQUIST, TO UPHOLD THE DECISION OF THE HEARING EXAMINER AND ADOPT HIS -FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS.
Councilmember Kasper noted that he would support the motion. Although Mr. Brubaker would have the
right of access, an additional house would be too much for Shell Valley Way. MOTION CARRIED.
HEARING ON STORAGE OF AUTOMOBILE HULKS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AT 536 PINE ST.
Acting Police Chief Dan Prinz.described the situation that had been investigated because of a
complaint from a neighbor. Pictures had been taken and were distributed to the Council. The
vintage Cadillacs stored on the property were described. The two that are not stored under the
carport would be considered automobile hulks. A certified letter was sent to the owner of the
property on May 17 giving notice to.remove the two.vehicles within ten days,,.and the owner requested
a hearing on May 31. Chief Prinz read the definition of an automobile hulk.
Mayor Naughten opened the public hearing.
Barney Doyle, 529 Forsyth Ln.., stated that he supported the complaint although he is not its originator.
He said he lives directly behind the house and the design of his house provides.a direct view of the
automobiles stored on the property. He said his property,value has been damaged and the subject
property is a neighborhood eyesore. In addition, he said this represents a health problem since he
has seen rats., as many as three at one time, several time in the past. He agreed that two of the
vehicles are hulks and should be removed.
Gary W..East, 17723 15th Ave. N.E., Seattle, attorney for Mr..Olsen, said aesthetics is not the
issue, but the police power of the City of Edmonds, which directly regulates abandoned and junked
motor vehicles. He said, the ordinance was adopted in the interest of the public safety, health and
welfare and not to improve the outlook of the neighbors. He said automobiles described in the
ordinance are all abandoned or junked and a me -hod is provided for governing junkyards or the junking
or abandi.-zing of vehicles. The vehicles in question are not abandoned. Mr. Olsen pursues a hobby
of restoring Cadillac automobiles, he also drives, trades and sells these automobiles and has done
so for years. The property was purchased to provide sufficient space within which to pursue his
hobby and he has attempted to ameliorate the aesthetic effects on the neighborhood. There is no
hea:lth,,hazard posed by these vehicles. The rats in question were disturbed during a condominium
construction. Mr. East argued that the definition of an automobile hulk as found in the ordinance
does not fit the vehicles in question. Mr. Olsen has owned at least one and possibly both vehicles
prior to passage of the ordinance.in 1979, constituting a pre-existing use. Mr. East submitted a
written argument and photographs of other vehicles in the area which fit within the hulk definition.
.He..stated the ordinance is vague and can be arbitrarily applied to satisfy aesthetic demands of the
neighbors.
Councilmember Hall asked if Mr. Olsen possesses a.home occupations permit since he is storing and
repairing as well as selling these vehicles from his property. Mr. East said this was not a home
occupation, but a hobby.
Since there was no one else wishing to speak, the hearing was closed.
The Council examined.the..photographs and written argument. Councilmember Dwyer asked Chief Prinz to
identify the automobiles that are determined to be inoperative. Chief Prinz said the white cadillac
contains only framework in the interior, no upholstery. The other maroon cadillac appears to be
inoperative. The four setting in the carport have not been determined to be operative or inopera-
tive.
Asked if Mr. Olsen had volunteered to move the vehicles when he found a place for them, Chief Prinz
said that conversation was between Mr. Olsen and another officer and he could not answer. The
officer had indicated so in her report. He added that the ordinance also addressed the issue of
these hulks being in view of the public, throwing tarps over them would not comply with the ordinance.
Mr.. Snyder noted that the ordinance was adopted pursuant to a state statute specifying a variety of
provisions regarding abandoned vehicles.
I]
43V
July 17, 1984 - continued •
Councilmember Dwyer stated his opinion that the ordinance is constitutional. He does not perceive
a problem in applying .the terms "substantial amount of.labor".or "vital part." He does find a
problem in that Mr. Olsen alleges the cars are not missing vital parts and would not require a
substantial amount of labor.to make them operative. He asked who holds the burden in proving the
cars are inoperative and if there are guidelines as to what testimony establishes that.
Mr. Snyder stated that a Council, decision should specify which of the vehicles are found to be hulks
and the remedy is removal of the specific vehicles. The burden of proof would rest with the City to
establish the nature of the vehicles as hulks and the Council would have to find, on the evidence
before it, that the vehicles are hulks within the meaning of the ordinance.
Councilmember Jaech questioned whether the City has made the necessary effort to determine if the
definition of hulk applies to these vehicles. She read paragraph A of Chapter 8.50.050'of the Code
and said there should be better evidence.that these are hulks. She suggested the hearing be con-
tinued to the next regular Council meeting giving the Police Department the opportunity to determine
the status of the cars.
Councilmember Hall indicated that.she would be willing for the matter to go to another. hearing. The
nature of Mr.. Olsen's hobby would indicate that some of the vehicles would be hulks. She suggested
that the possibility of a permit should.be examined and the establishment of a buffer that would
protect neighborhood views.
COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER,,THAT THE HEARING BE CONTINUED TO AUGUST
7 WITH A REPORT FROM.THE POLICE.DEPARTMENT AS TO THE STATUS OF THE VEHICLES. Mr. Snyder said there
were very specific time limits within this ordinance. The'safer way to proceed would be to issue a
new notice and order since the record contains mostly hearsay evidence on both parts. He suggested
the Council should dispose of the.ma-tter this evening.
Councilmember Jaech asked if any action taken by the Council this evening would provide a vested
interest to Mr. Olsen. Mr. Snyder.explained that the -ordinance is not a zoning matter and neither
vested rights nor nonconforming use doctrines apply. MOTION AND SECOND WERE WITHDRAWN.
Councilmember Ostrom commented .that vehicles.which are worked on as a hobby should not be considered
as hulks, since they are not abandoned. He questioned whether.a hobby should be interpreted as a
nuisance. If the Council were to impound the cars, they would be saying a messy hobby is illegal
and, he said, that is not necessarily true.
Since there is no proof that Mr.
Olsen does not intend to do something with the
vehicles, COUNCIL -
MEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY
COUNCILMEMBER WILSON, THAT THE APPEAL BE UPHELD,
BASED ON THE FACT
THAT THE CITY HAS NOT SUSTAINED
ITS BURDEN OF PROVING THAT THESE WERE IN FACT AUTOMOBILE
HULKS AT
THE TIME"fiHEY WERE ALLEGED TO BE
AUTOMOBILE HULKS. MOTION CARRIED.
HEARING ON PROPOSED 3-LOT PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AT 15724 70TH AVE. W.
Mr. Bowman outlined the findings
and recommendations of the Hearing. Examiner in
this issue.
Mayor Naughten opened the public
hearing.and asked that testimony be limited to
three minutes each.
Randy Sleight, 121 5th Ave. N., Suite,200, representing the applicant, said Mr. Campbell agreed to
comply with the conditions set forth in the Hearing Examiner's report.
Since no one else wished to speak, the hearing was closed.
COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO ADOPT THE FINDINGS AND DECISION
OF THE HEARING EXAMINER IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED 3-LOT PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AT 15724 70TH
AVE. W. MOTION CARRIED.
HEARING ON APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION IN THE MATTER OF A SHORT SUBDIVISION AT 7831 228TH •
ST. S.W. (S-4-84) (APPELLANTS: MARQUARDT, PENROD AND BOWEN)
Mr. Bowman said the Planning Department staff decision to approve this short subdivision was appealed
to the Hearing Examiner and subsequently to the City Council. The staff recommendation is to uphold
the Hear 9g Examiner's decision to deny the appeal.
Mayor Naughten opened the public hearing and asked the speakers to limit their testimony to five
minutes.
John Marquardt, 22708 78th Ave. W., said his major concern is the drainage problem that will be
created as.a result of the short subdivision. When their properties were built, all but eight
inches of top soil was removed and the same problem exists where the proposed short subdivision is
planned. Two of the appellants have had to add top soil, which is now level with the bottom of
their glass sliders. He said they want to insure that ample drainage is planned. He suggested that
tiling to 228th and into the drainage ditch would be the only way to accomplish this. He added that
the planned lot is a bare minimum according to the code and will crowd the area, possibly diminish-
ing the value.of the properties in the -area plus loss of privacy.
Bob Penrod, 7901 228th St. S.W., said the subdivision will create a cramped area by putting a house
in the backyards of seven homes, with loss of privacy and consequent depreciation of the value of
the surrounding homes. He said.it would also create difficulties for the four properties that now
experience drainage problems. In addition, the front lot li.ne of the proposed lot will be 20' from
the house that is now on the property.
Jerry'Lovell, of Lovell-Sauerland & Assoc., Inc., 23106 100th Ave. W., representing the applicant,
said the proposed property is situated at a higher elevation than the properties to the east. He
0
• July 17, 1984 - continued
feels the drainage problems described by the appellants are solvable. Mr. Lovell described a
possible solution to the drainage from the roof and driveway of the Withers property into 228th St.
S.W. He also noted that a percolation test indicated that.some drainage could be handled adequately
through the soil and this,would suffice to prevent the drainage problems in question. He
submitted some drawings prepared by Mr. Withers showing the drainage line that could be installed.
Mr. Lovell indicated that the proposed lot complies with the zoning. As to loss of privacy, he said
that often happens as areas develop.
Since no one else wished.to speak, the hearing was closed.
Councilmember Dwyer asked if the drainage plan must be submitted to the City Engineer prior to the
granting of the short plat and if the granting of the short plat is an appealable order. Mr. Bowman
said the applicant must provide compliance with Ordinance 19.24, the City Storm Drainage Ordinance,
before the short subdivision could be recorded. If they cannot meet those requirements, the City
would not accept the short subdivision and it could not be recorded. Mr. Bowman said a requirement
of a short subdivision is a hold harmless agreement against the City for proper installation and
maintenance of their storm drainage system. He said Chapter 21.05 provides for appeal to the
Hearing Examiner of the City Engineer's decision concerning any drainage plan, appealable to the
City Council.
COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED,.SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DWYER, TO UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER'S
DECISION AND DENY THE APPEAL, BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACTS AND THE DRAINAGE PLAN DRAWINGS ON SHORT
SUBDIVISION`S-4-84. MOTION CARRIED.
HEARING ON 6-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
City Engineer Jim Adams reviewed the improvement program, explaining that state statute requires
that an.annual hearing be held. He then reviewed the items listed for the next six years for
street improvements, including the major improvements on page 1, resurfacing projects, pedestrian
walkways, signal projects, a new roadway, and roadway widening.
Councilmember Nordquist commented on the Interurban bicycle path, suggesting that spray painting a
bicycle outline on the street was effective rather than constructing a specific bicycle path. He
also noted that there is a PUD.substation in the middle of the Interurban which would impede a
bicycle pathway. He suggested a bicycle study would be appropriate using Meridian and 76th Ave. W.
and tying it into Seattle.
In response
to a question from Councilmember Kasper,, Mr. Adams said the Council
must adopt the
Improvement
Program by resolution after a public hearing. Changes may be made;
however, the
Engineering
Department has tried to determine the first year elements based on
the dollars anti-
cipated to be available.
Councilmember Kasper indicated that a sidewalk on 7th Ave. between Caspers St:
be added to the program. There are cars parked on the curb creating a serious
and Aloha St., should
problem, especially
since there
is so much traffic on the street.
Mayor Naughten opened the public hearing.
Patty Eldridge, 7717 200th St. S.W., asked if there is a provision for a walkway along 200th St.
from 76th to Maplewood. She was advised this walkway was included in the program. Ms. Eldridge
asked on which side of the street the walkway was planned and the time frame for construction.
Councilmember Hall noted the project was planned for four to six years from now. Ms. Eldridge asked
that the time frame be moved forward.
Since no one else wished to speak, Mayor Naughten closed the hearing.
COUNCILMEMBER HALL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER KASPER, APPROVAL OF THE 6-YEAR TRANSPORTATION
• IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM WITH THE AMENDMENT THAT 200TH ST. S.W. FROM 76TH TO MAPLEWOOD BE MOVED TO A
FIRST YEAR ELEMENT. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NORDQUIST, TO AMEND THE
MOTION TO INCLUDE A SIDEWALK ON 7TH AVE. N. FROM CASPERS ST. TO ALOHA ST. EXCEPT THE PORTION PLANNED
FOR CONSTRUCTION BY HARBOR LANE SUBDIVISION.
Councilmember Ostrom asked if the residents of the area would be assessed for any sidewalk constructed.
Councilmember Kasper said.construction under the Improvement Program would be funded by the gas tax
or total grants. COUNCILMEMBER KASPER ADDED TO HIS MOTION A FIGURE OF $3000 FOR COST OF THE.SIDEWALK
AGREEABLE TO THE SECOND. MOTION TO AMEND MAIN MOTION CARRIED. MAIN MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCIL
Councilmember Ostrom distributed copies of a petition he had received regarding the intersection of
Puget Dr. and Olympic View Dr. Increased traffic has prompted residents to ask that the traffic
light be reactivated at this intersection. COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
HALL, TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THIS MATTER ON AUGUST 21. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Ostrom then distributed copies of a letter addressed to the Mayor, which he also read
into the record.. The letter contained his resignation from the D-DAT Task Force Committee and
explained his reasons for doing so. He expressed regret that the resignation had become necessary.
Councilmembers Wilson, Hall and Kasper expressed their disappointment that Councilmember Ostrom had
.found it necessary to resign, citing the need for his input into the Committee.- Councilmember Dwyer
also expressed his disappointment, but commented that Councilmember Ostrom would have resigned only
after due consideration. Mayor Naughten accepted -the resignation and said he would appoint another
representative.
Since it was 10:00 p.m., COUNCILMEMBER JAECH MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OSTROM, TO EXTEND THE
MEETING FOR ANOTHER 15 MINUTES TO COMPLETE THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED.
4,3 Z
July 17, 1984 - continued •
Councilmember Kasper announced there would be no Community Services Committee meeting.
Councilmember Hall said the meeting with the Chamber of Commerce on Saturday was a good meeting and
had been attended by four Council members.
Councilmember Nordquist asked Mr..Bowman if the Planning Department had received an appeal of a
Conditional Use Permit for property on Edmonds Way, CU-40-84. Since Mr. Bowman had not received the
appeal, Councilmember Nordquist delivered a copy.
Councilmember Hall said she had-received.a compliment on the contractor, Tri-State, at Meadowdale
because they were sprinkling the roads for dust during the week and on weekends.
Councilmember Hall commented on reports received from Captain Hickok on the Fourth of July and Roger
Dalzell on the Crime Watch.
Councilmember Hall noted that a letter of resignation had been received from Dave Larson, a member
of the Planning Board. She read his letter for the record. Mayor Naughten noted that Dan Rice
would move into the vacated position and a new alternate member would be appointed.
Councilmember Hall invited Council members to her home to.meet with Secretary of State Ralph Munro
at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, July 18.
Council President Jaech read a letter from the Rev. Thomas W. Foster -Smith, a resident of the Town-
house Apartments on 3rd Ave. N. Rev. Foster -Smith asked the Council to consider changes in Ordinance
2103, which precludes residents from parking on any street other than the block in which they live
even with a residential parking permit. City Clerk Jackie Parrett explained that the ordinance as
written does not allow residents to park in any block other than the one in which they live. She
commented that there have been several requests about the same problem during the last few weeks.
Councilmember Kasper said the Community Services Committee would review the letter and the ordinance. ,
Council President Jaech said she had asked for Council opinions concerning where a watercolor
should be hung. A member of the Art Board had been in the Executive Office, had hung the watercolor
in the Council office and liked it there. The Council agreed that was a good place.
Councilmember Kasper suggested that the Highway 99 Study should be moved to a later agenda since the
August 7 agenda is too crowded. Council President Jaech moved the subject to the August 28 agenda.
Since it was 10:15 p.m., COUNCILMEMBER DWYER MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER HALL, TO CONTINUE THE
COUNCIL MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.
Councilmember Wilson had received calls from two people regarding the traffic configuration change
at the corner of Olympic View Dr. and Olympic Ave. There are two bushes obstructing the view of the
person heading north on Olympic. View Dr. making a right hand turn onto Olympic Ave. Mayor Naughten
asked the persons having the problem to give him a call.
The Council recessed to Executive session at 10:20 p.m., adjourning at 10:45.
0000
. PA RETT, City Clerk LARRI S. NAlItHTEN,May