Laserfiche WebLink
p —"TrintIr <br /> 357 1 11 <br /> 11 <br /> September 28,1983 'I <br /> ;I <br /> 11 <br /> moved by councilman Stephanson,seconded by Councilman Overstreet, <br /> . to approve the annexation as shown on the map marked Exhibit E a. <br /> designated as•new area"a.to adopt Resolution No.2335 as follows: <br /> A RESOLUTION of Intent to Annex certain property <br /> to the City of Everett. This property is located <br /> north of 100th street S.W.to the existing City <br /> Limit lines,and between Kasch Park and Walter E. <br /> Hall Golf Course on 18th Avenue W. (Loganberry <br /> Lane),and is described in Attachment A. <br /> Ithell=dereialYpffp':1 tOst:g'17;do;t::1:C(':,.Z.4'nexat"n" <br /> WHEREAS,Council,after public hearing Puzsuanh to ACE 35.13)l60 <br /> and doe consideration of poblic comment on the petition for annexation, <br /> Is fovorably disposed to the proposed annexation(and <br /> WHEREAS,a notice of intention pursuant to RCW 36.93.090 will be <br /> flied wi.the Snohomish County Boundary Review Board;and <br /> WHEREAS,Council may not take final action on the proposed annex- <br /> ation until the Snohomish County Boundary Review Board has issued a I <br /> final determination on the proposed annexation. I <br /> NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS( . . <br /> That the Snohomish County Boundary Review Board be advised that the <br /> Everett City Council is favorably disposed to the proposed annexation. <br /> m <br /> That the Council intends to complete its action on the proposed <br /> 1 annexation after the Snohomish County Boundary Review Board has issued (t ' <br /> a final determination on the proposed annexation. , <br /> us Roll was called with all Councilmen voting Yzs. <br /> Motion Carried . p, <br /> ced <br /> COUNC/L B/LL NO.839-87 <br /> 1 0 <br /> u ' <br /> FINAL READING; . <br /> ... <br /> • <br /> AN ORDINANCE authorizing the Mayor to approve <br /> change orders on City of Everett Public Works . <br /> Construction Projects Contracts. <br /> Councilman Michelson spoke against the ordinance because he felt <br />( the Council should be aware of this type of change to a cOntract. <br /> Councilman Aldcroft said he felt the Council would be notified of , <br /> all of these changes the same as they are notified of a,bid calls <br /> under the$10,000 amount required by the Chatter. <br /> s Al Theol,Public Works Director,etxploined that sometimes an <br /> eme,ency comes up where.a deciaion has to be made to instruct <br /> the contractor to act immediately on a project. With the change <br /> Mi. order coming to Council it quite often came after the fact and I I <br /> with the process under this ordinance there were many safety checks <br /> tO prohibit abuse cf this,but it would save time and money in the II <br /> long run. II <br /> . , <br /> -.r. -,.14111ill <br />