Loading...
1975 07 011 LI CITY COUNCIL MEETING -Rescheduled Regular Session Couu^ciJRoom -City Hall July 1,1975 8:00 P.M. 2236. Members present:-Councilman Bill Moe,Norman Johnson,Michael Boyle,Gordon Ebbert and Otto Skaug.Councilmen Bob Hill and Don Swanson were not present. Mayor Ebbert called the meeting to order and stated the meeting held was rescheduled due to lack of a quorum on June 24,1975.Mayor Ebbert proceeded to call for approval of the Minutes of the previous meeting of June 10,1975.Motion by Skaug,second by Boyle to approve the minutes as written.Motion carried. REGULAR BILLS AMOUNT PAID GENERAL $5,947.32 STREET 5,96p.81 FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING 9,246.22 WATER/SEWER 7,106.26 SANITATION 21.00 WATER/SEWER CONSTRUCTION - 1972 8,296.25 EQUIPMENT RENTAL 4,959.55 Motion by Skaug,second by Moe that the regular bills be paid.Motion carried. Warrant No's.3185 through 3285 in the amount of $41,537.41 were approved for payment. CONSIDERATION OF BIDS =LAKEVIEW TERRACE'TRANSMISSION MAIN A letter was read from Ron Baker,Assistant City Engineer,stating that on June 11,1975,five bids were received for the construction of a twelve (12")inch water transmission main which would connect Reservoir No.2 (at Lakeview Terrace Park)with Pressure Zone No.2 at Hill Street and Juniper.The low bidder is Ridge Contruction of Clarkston with a bid of $66,447.15.This bid is $9,887.85 below the Engineer's estimate and $7,804.91 below the next lowest bidder.Other bids submitted were: Selland Construction Co.,Wenatchee,=$78,825.34;DeBlasio Construction Co.,Yakima =$94,085.25; Howard Cass,Moses Lake =$74,252.06;and L & S Construction Co.,Moses Lake =$77,209.07: Ron Baker added that previous cities and firms employing Mr.Ridge have commented favorably on his work of a similar nature,and he recommended the City Council award the contract to Ridge Construction subject to DSHS approval. Motion by Moe to award the bid to Ridge Construction of Clarkston,Washington for $66,447.15.Second by Boyle.Motion carried.. CONSIDERATION OF BIDS -WELL #31 PUMPING EQUIPMENT Aletter was read from Asst.City Engineer Ron Baker,stating that on June 25,1975 a single bid was //f^ti? received for furnishing and installation of a pump,motor and modification to plumbing and controls. The bid was submitted by Grant County Mechanical for $69,962.55,which is 46%higher than the Engineers'estimate.Staff has reviewed,with planhoiders,reasons why additional bids were not submitted.The major problem was the pump suppliers did not believe they could meet efficiency specifications;as required,and would not provide subcontractor quotes.Several planhoiders indicated if major work items were bid separately,it would probably result in several bids and lower prices. Ron Baker recommended the one bid be rejected and the work be re-advertised as three separate contracts, those being:(1.) Pump and Motor.(2.)Modifications to Electrical and Controls.(3.)Plumbing. Also that Staff would review with suppliers and consider revising efficiency requirements for the pump and motor to facilitate a lower bid price on this work. Ron Baker also noted in his letter the project is supported in part (40%)by a grant from the Department of Social and Health Services under the provisions of Referendum #27,a part of Washington Futures Program. Ron also commented that in talkingwith pump suppliers was advised,if we reduced our specific^;;:n; particularly in gallonage from 1500 to 1300 that the pump suppliers would have an easier chance i^-.met our specifications of 75%efficiency."The way the present bid was put out,if.the pump did not r?.-n;i the • •efficiency requirements,we would penalize them so much per point,and that could run into quito «bit of money,and that is why the lack of bids primarily.We could go to a smaller diameter pump and drop from 10"to 8"and have an ultimate output of 1200 or 1300 gallons per minute,and probably receive more bids at the next go around.The present pump delivers arptnd 500 gallons per minute.The nevy pump will supply the transmission mains in Zone 1. Motion by Skaug to adopt Ron Baker's recommendation and re-advertise for separate contracts,and reject the one bid received on June 25,1975.Second by Moe.'motion carried. &. 2237 QO 0 City Council Meeting Minutes:2 July 1,1975 ORDINANCE NO. 725 -PUBLIC HEARING -REZONE LAND WEST OF LARSON PLAYFIELD (second reading) A letter was read from Stanley Bech,Associate City Planner,stating that after receiving numerous requestsr to conduct conditional use or non-conforming businesses in the area southwest of Larson Playfield,the Planning Commission decided to formulate a rezoning plan for the area.Aftera public hearing on May 29, 1975 the Planning Commission unanimously voted to recommend to the City Council a rezoning plan and ordinance be given final approval. Stan pointed out the area on the map for the proposed zoning along West Broadway,Wapato Drive,Inter-Lake and along Peninsula Drive and Russell Street.The streets shown as 'proposed'will be followed when the area is platted. Mayor Ebbertopened the public hearing and called for questions or comments from those in attendance. Jerry Fay,Public Works Director had a question on*the access. Stan Bech noted that Section 3 of the ordinance,after reviewing it further with staff,found that this would deter any type of access except street right of way, and Section 3 should be amended to read: " As a condition of this zone change,that access points shall be allowed off of Broadway, and that one of these access points shall be a dedicated street right of way bordering Larson Playfield." Mike Boyle asked as to what the reason,is for changing it now?Stan stated that it would deny a person buying a lot on Broadway from putting In a'curb cut,and by rewording it,it would permit him to do so. John Calbom,Ci+v Attorney, commented that the control could come from the platting procedure. Stan replied the ordinance would assure that the street right of way would have to be next to Larson Playfield. Motion by Boyle to close the public hearing.Second by Johnson.Motion carried. The ordinance was read by title only.Motion by Boyle to adopt the ordinance with recommendation by Staff to amend Section 3 as stipulated by Stanley Bech.Second by Skaug.Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING -RESERVOIR NO.5 =SITE SELECTION A letter was read by Jerry Fay, Public Works Director,stating he requested a public hearing be held by the City Council to solicit input from property owners in the area of the proposed Reservoir site. The reason for requesting the hearing is the negative feedback received from property owners as the result of a letter sent them showing possible site locations and requesting their approval.The hearing will give the Council the opportunity to assess the situation and provide staff direction with regard to citizen concerns.The area selected from an engineering and system operation standpoint is superior to other locations that have been reviewed,being in the area of Hamilton and Admiral Road off of Nelson Road,East of Highway 17. Jerry Fay added he would like to present detailed information regading engineering on the project,and hoped with this input and the citizen input the Council would be able to make a decision on whether we want to pursue this location for the reservoir site. By use of the overhead projecter,Don Bachus, Design Engineer, gave background of reservoir selection and location Involving elevation most desirable for adequate water pressure and costs for the different sites noted in the area.No. 1 site,and most desirable,is located behind Wonderbread Bakery;it is approximately one-half mile from the water main and Clover and Nelson Road, and about 3000 feet to the canal.Elevation at this site is 1180 to 1195 feet and the approximate cost for this location would be $553,000. The other three sites shownare lower in elevation with costs ranging upwardsto $789,000, Mayor Ebbertopened the public hearing at this point to hear comments or questions from citizens in the area. Property owners in the area of the desired location of the water storage tank were present voicing their objection to the site,were: Tommy Thompson,owner of property immediately joining the piece in back of the Bakery. Russell Hadley,Admiral Road Dick Hirst,Admiral Road Jack Ragan Those submitting written protests were: K.Shlgeno Amy Cockman Verda and Harold Hirst S.R.Hoare Bill Eller Mr.&Mrs.Adam Schaffner Russ &Evelyn Hadley Mr.&Mrs.Richard Hirst Submitting a written -no protest:-Charles Bedford L City CouncilMinutes: 3JutyUl975Allprotestsweregenerallyforthefollowingreasons:1. Generally oppose to the water tank being located in their area which is outside the citylimits.2.Obstructtheirviewand/ordevaluetheirproperty.3.Eventuallyfeel the City will annex the areaifthe water storage tank is located in thearea.Therebeing nofurthercommentsfromthose attending the hearing,MayorEbbertcommentedthatthepublicportionofthehearingprovedit isworthhavingthesepeoplecomehere.Alloftheobjections aregoingto beweighedand givenproperrecognition. Hethenturnedthehearingoverto theCouncilfortheircommentsandquestions.NormanJohnsonstatedhe personallyfeels,- to consider the rights of the owners of thepropertyand try to find a.. location wherewe don't interfere with peoplethat havemovedfromthecity.JerryFaystated, the city didmakeacommitmentwhenweacceptedthegrantthatwewouldhavethereservoirout to bid within 4 months ofacceptance.We are running verytightto meet thedeadline.Weneedadecisionwithin the next fewdays,otherwise we wouldhave torequestan extensionanddo not knowwhat the outlook would be onthat.There is a lot ofmoneyinvolved and there are a lotofcitiesinneedofthismoney.MayorEbbertasked those in attendanceowningpropertyin the area of theproposedsites,whichofthe foursiteswouldtheyleastobjectto.Those presentindicatedit would besiteNo. 4 (nearBigBendCommunityCollege).Motion by Moe toclosethePublicHearing.SecondbyJohnson.Motioncarried.Motion by Moe to take noactionatthistime and have city StaffaskBBCCif they would partwitha small parcel of landacrosstheroad,andhave that information for the Council at the July 8th meeting.SecondbyJohnson.Motioncarried.PUBLIC HEARING -SDCYEARSTREET PROGRAM -RESOLUTIONNO.713Aletterwasreadfrom Jerry FaystatingthePlanningCommissionhasreviewedandapprovedtheSixYearStreetConstructionProgram from1976-1981.InordertomeettheJuly 1, 1975deadlineforacceptingthisProgram,requestedthe.Councilhold apublichearing,whichwassetforthismeeting.2238J/77Jerry Fay briefly summarized the proposed Six-YearStreetProgramstatingthescopehas beenrevisedaspresentedinthepasttotrytopresentamorerealisticprogram.Streetswiththepossibilityofimprovementsclassifiedaccordingtothegreatestneedcapableofbeingfundedwithinthenext6yearswithcityrevenues,grantfunds,LID orspeciallevieswerealsoconsidered.CurrentlythereareprogramsattheStateandFederallevelfrom 80%to 90%funding.AlsonotedinformationincludedInthebackofthe6-yearStreetProgramtheentirelistofstreetsintheprogramlastyearinordertoseewhathasnotbeenincludedthisyear.MovingIntothelistofprojects-ThirdAvenueratedasbeingtheNo. 1project,basicallyaresurfacingprojectwithilluminationorstreetlightingandsometrafficcontroldevices.DivisionStreetfrom4thAvenuetoNelsonRoad- aresurfacingproject.Valley Road fromGrapeDrivetoStratfordRoad -becauseoftheconditionofthatroaditisareconstructionprojectwithstormdrainage,curbs,sidewalks,trafficcontroldevicesandlighting.PeninsulaDriveproject- This is onewherewe would look Intheareaof apossibleLID. This isalsoareconstructionproject.Areasleftopen forconcernregarding todeteriorationofstreets.Some oftheareasforexamplearetheKnollsVistaandBasinHomesareas.Alsoanarealeftopentoproperlyhandleunforeseenprojectsthatcomeup.The$402,000totalrevenuepackageforthe6yearshavebeenprogrammed into morefavorablesituationsinreceivingfederalmatching moneyon Third Avenue,Divisionand ValleyRoadbecausetheyfallinthattype of criteria for matchingmoney,and thatwouldbe80%funding. ForPeninsula Drive - there isstillasmallamount of money left undertheUrban Arterial Boardwhichisa90%matching fund. Theresurfacingprogramsarebasicallyforpromotionof localImprovementdistrictsthroughout the city with possiblymoneybeing provided by the city toassistthe property owners if they are willing to go ahead with an LID.Then we have acontingencyfundtobeusedfor any oftheprojectsabove or some emergency type ofnature.Jerryclosedhisbriefsummarystatingthatthisisessentiallytherealmeatofthe6-yearstreetprogram.MayorEbbertopendthe public hearing andcalledforcommentsor questionsfromthoseInattendance.There werenone.He,therefore,closedthepublicportionofthehearingandaskediftherewere anywrittencommentsthathadbeensubmitted.Therewerenone.HethenturnedthepublichearingovertotheCityCouncilandaskedfortheircommentsorquestions.Skaugasked ifitis arbitrary on the priorityof.ThirdAvenue, Division andValleyRoad,can they beintermingledorchanged?•_.;.';JerryFaystated that wetried toprogramthatneedhigh priorities, andwefeelthisis thepriorityestablished.Some ofthefactorsthatcangointothisiswhattheroadsarebeing.usedforandlookatourpriorityarray.Alsotrafficisalwaysoneofthemanyfactors.n 2239 f i013 City Council Minutes:.4 July 1,1975 Jerry Fay added that the Street Program can be amended.It Is very simple to amend it and submit it to the State and still have the ability to spend ourmoney on any one particular project. Motion by Boyle,second by Skaug to close the public hearing. Resolution No.713 was read by title only. Motion by Skaug to adopt the Six Year Street Program 1976-1981.Second by Moe.Motion carried. ORDINANCE - REQUEST FOR ZONE CHANGE -UNITED METHODIST CHURCH A letter was read from Stanley Bech,Associate City Planner,stating the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on June 12, 1975, held a public hearing to consider a zone change request from the United Methodist Church.The church's request was to rezone Tax #4709,3949 and 4711 from their present R-2,Single Family Duplex zoning to R-3,Multl-Family zoning.R-3 zoning would eanble the church to sell Tax #4709 and 3949 to the Grant County Mental Health District for the possible construc tion of a group homeand to hold Tax #4711 for future apartment or nursing home development. The residents of the area voiced their opposition to extending the R-3 zone to Ironwood Drive.Because of this opposition,the Planning Commission decided not to rezone Tax #4711. The rezoning plan which was recommended by the Planning Commission for City Council approval was: That the area bordered by Lark Avenue,Juniper Drive,Terrace Avenue and Kiefer Drive be changed from its present R-2 Single Family Duplex Residential to R-3,Multi-Family Residential,(excluding the nursing home, which is presently zoned R-3). This plan includes Tax #4709 and 3949 as requested by the Methodist Church, and ties well with the existing R-3 zoning. Stan Bech added that the residents protested the zone change off of Ironwood Drive and they had no objection to the group home. The ordinance was read by title only. Motionby Skaugto adopt the first reading of the ordinance. Second by Boyle.Motion carried. fr RESOLUTION NO.714 -REQUEST TO BUILD ON UNPLATTED LAND -PETE ERICKSON A letter was read from Stan Bech stating the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on June 12,1975,voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council that Pete.Erickson be granted permission to build a storage garage on unplatted property directly behindhis residence at 418 East Sharon Avenue. The Planning Commission stipulated that:1.Only one building or structure shall be permitted and that structure shall be a private storage garage. 2. The area on which the building can be placed be defined as that part of Grant County AssessorTax#1290 lyingdirectly adjacent to the North boundary of lots number 2, 3 and 4, East Addition •#1 and shall be80 feet in depth from the North to South, and 157 feet in length from East to West. Stan added that the Planning Commission recommended the resolution because there is no immediate neighborhood conflict,and there were no protests at the planning commission meeting. The Resolution was read by title only. Motionby Boyle that the resolution be adopted. Secondby Moe. Motion carried. RESOLUTION NO.715 -UTILITY EASEMENT - WELL NO.31 PROTECT -P.U.D Jerry Fay forwarded for action by the City Council a resolution authorizingthe City Managerto grant an easement to the Public Utility District of Grant County for electrical utility purposes in conjunction with the Well No.31 project. The resolution was read by title only.Motion by Moe, second by Skaug to accept the resolution as presented.Motion carried. EASTLAKE OVERLAY =REQUEST TO CALL FOR BIDS A letter was read from Jerry Fay stating the overlaying of Eastlake Drive will complete the construction required by the Eastlake SewerMain Reconstruction. Since completion of the sewer main contract was anticipated during the Winter of 1974, it was planned to do the asphalt repair as a separate contract. The construction cost is estimated to range between $5,000 and $8,000.As plans and specificationshave been completed, we are requesting Councilauthorizationto advertise this projectfor bids. Motion by Moe that the request be granted.Second by Skaug. Motion carried. ,\T \o tf /—v 2240 City Council Minutes: 5 July 1*1975 SEAL COAT PROGRAM V Aletter was submitted from Jerry Fay reviewing in detail the streets programmed for seal coating and, because of uncertainties regarding the benefits of seal coating,1b had the District Engineerfor the Asphalt Institute inspect the streets with him.The District Engineer advised he felt seal coating was not the answer in most cases and our money could be better spent on sealing cracks in the streets. The reason is that most of the cracks in the streets programmed for sealing are cold temperatureshrinkagecracks and will reappear approximately one yearafter being sealed.Accordingly proceeding with a nrogram of crack sealing and repair on streets programmed for sealing.Referring to those areas where street deterioration is beyond repair by sealing.Also plan to use various techniques in some sections to establish a good method of preventative street maintenance,and view them annually to deter mine the effectiveness of the various methods. The majority of the labor used forthis work will be temporary employees provided at no cost to the CitybytheGrantCountyActionCouncil.They will be.supervised by a member ofthecity staff and they will be used for the duration of this project only. An inventory has been made of the streets requiring crack repair and have estimated the cost to be $19,000.This price includes the cost of a router to perform the work,and requesting Counciltoauthorizeto go out to bid to purchase a router, which can be used for future crack sealing and also for use in saw cutting pavement. Jerry Fay added he has been in touch with the Port since submitting the letter to Council, and they have a router which the City can rent or lease,therefore the city will not have to purchase a router. Although there still will be costs for equipment that we don't have now, and asked for permission to proceed with the program and purchase of needed equipment. Motion by Moe that permission be granted to go ahead with the crack repair instead of the seal coat, and purchase the needed equipment along with the rental of the router.Second by Boyle.Motion carried. CIVIC CENTER COMPLEX AND RECREATION CENTER A letter was read from City Manager Chet Waggener stating the City Council has directed that Revenue Shairing funds be reserved for construction of new Civic Center facilities.Approximately $600,000 is now available, with approximately $700,000 availability anticipated by the Spring of 1976.The City Council also authorized a report on the physical facility needs and Master Plan for a Civic Center. That report was submitted to the City Council by Harvey Vernier, Architect,in May of 1974. Although several study sessions were conducted, a decision was not made regarding facilities to be constructed with revenue sharing funds and/or funds to be derived from a general obligation bond issue.The City Counciltabled the issue on February 11,1975.On June 10,1975 the City Council voted to have the Civic Center Study removed from the table and the Staff directed to bring various alternatives back to the Council.Submitted with the letter are possible alternatives with estimated revenues and expenditures,plus a condensed facility problem statement. Should the Council proceed with an immediate decision,it is doubtful that plans could be prepared for construction of the facility for this Fall.Likewise,should the project require issuance of general obligation bonds,preparation of preliminary plans and education ofthe public precludes a reasonable submittal for a November election. Because of these factors and to provide for maximum input from the community,the City Manager suggested the City Council consider appointing a Citizens Committee to study all alternatives and report back to the City Council with their recommendations.The Committee should have broad community representation from various ages,occupations and professions,and should exclude members of existing advisory boards,commissions,etc.To achieve a broad cross-section of community involvement suggested that applications for volunteer citizen participation be prepared for Council approval.The Council would then be able to screen all applications to guarantee community-wide participation. The need for improved public facilities has been recognized and well-documented.A major problem lies in scattered locations of public offices,causing inconvenience to the public in securing services from City Government.Police and Fire facilities are totally Inadequate,as are Recreation facilities. Offices for Justice Court,Planning,Finance',Building,Administration and Engineering are crowded and lack space for expansion. In finding solutions for total reeds',it may be logical for the Citizen Committee to recommend phasing of the facilities complex. Should the Council concur with this recommendation,the City Council would provide legislative direction to the Citizens Committee and City Staff will be available to provicje technical data and research assistance. Mayor Ebbert asked how current are figures on the submitted alternatives?— .'Chet Waggener stated they have an escalator figure attached to them from Mr.Vernier's estimates approximately one year ago.We should get back with Harvey.Vernier and get more accurate estimates.They show some ratios at least between the costs of the different proposals. Chet Waggener elaborated somewhat on his suggestion of a Citizens Committee stating that one of the L 2241 City Council Minutes:6 July 1, 1975 things necessay in a project like'this is to have some way of determining what the citizens would be willing to accept in terms of total scope of project.There are many variables associated with this; different levels of interest ranging from various segments of civic center complex to recreation center,probably all of which are needed some time in the future.A Citizens Committee could sound the pulse of the community in terms of what they might consider highest priority,and terms of priorities they would establish with the amount of money that perhaps the people would be willing to accept as a bond issue in order to secure those alternates.Some things the City Staff could help the Citizens Committee with would be investigation of grant monies available on this type of project and in turn mak ing application as an endorsed community proposal.Also suggested the Citizens Committee and Staff working cooperatively with other agencies that may be able or wish to use facilities in'the area and try to investigate that to the extent or probability of that use.All of these have a factor on how much of the project might be advisable to do. I have also noted the possibility of phasing.It seems that one of the things that might be fairly logical would be for the Citizens Committee to recommend to the City Council,although ultimately all of the projects should be done,but they might be able to establish some time lines on those;some of them are urgent to do immediately and others might be delayed a few years,and probably look toward a long range program that would have community support behind it. Should the Committee recommend issuance of bonds;the success of a bond issue should be at least 50%assured before starting the sales program to sell the people before voting on them.That can most effectively be done by early citizen participation in the decision making process. The City Manager suggested the City Council would probably want to solicit applicants,and not simply wait for people to come in,and also emphasized that the applicants represent a cross-section of the community.Also suggested that any member of city staff should not be on the committee;to serve the committee only in an assistance capacity for data,etc.As to size of the committee,he suggested at least 30 to 40 people and then break down into sub-committees,and would probably want to organize with a chairman and perhaps a co-chairman with an executive committee to report back to. Mayor Ebbert asked as to what is the procedure to get this committee started?Chet Waggener suggested getting as much publicity as we can and that we actually prepare application forms so people can show some of their own background and in that way help the City Council in making their decisions on appointments to be sure to have broad community representation on the committee and —»» not have a particular special interest group that is dominating the committee. Motion by Moe to endorse the committee system and authorize city staff to prepare application forms and to get publicity out to get people interested to serve on such a committee,and to follow the general guidelines presented in the City Manager's letter.Second by Boyle.Motion carried. STATUS/IN FORMATIONAL a.City Manager -Scheduled an Executive Session with the Council after the meeting. b.Mayor Ebbert -Appointments to Planning Commission; /oo+0* ~]tc Mayor Ebbert requested confirmation of appointments to the Planning Commission, that of Kent Jones to complete the term of Leonard Gardner,which expires December 31,1975,and Glen Hult to complete the term of Brad Ekstedt,which expires.31,1977. Motion by Johnson to accept the appointments.Second by Boyle.Motion carried. Mayor Ebbert -Airwest Petition:A proposed committee is being'set up to assist Hughes Airwest to terminate their commitment in this area.They are Clyde Owens, Chairman,and the others are Russ Biggers,Dick Robinson,Robt.Wallenstien, John Walsh, Motion by Skaug,second by Boyle to form this committee to work on the petition for Hughes Airwest.Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 11:00 P.M. y^e^Jbr A- MAYOR,Gordon M.Ebbert ATTEST: City Clerk,R. R.Gagnier