00657•
difficult if not impossible to expect the Owner to simply
proceed with the project where it was left off some two years
earlier without substantial lead time to pick up the pieces
t
ie4,t�
4'
and get started.
We have been advised by letter from the City of Edmonds
Community Development Department that the ordinance approving
:<
ft`
'
the,PRD became effective on July 30, 1979 and that, accord-
from
in 1 the rejecbe completed within two years
3t-must
the effective date. We were, therefore, advised that the
4
project must be completed before July 30, 1981, or an appli-
cation for .an extension must be filed prior to that date:i`:.
applicationrequests an additional two-year extension
.This
based upon the highly unusual-circumstances.we have outlined.
extensive challenge to the Councl's approval has been
F
.The
costly and has resulted in a substantial loss of'time. To.
have proceeded in view of the pending litigation would have.
posed a serious, unacceptable financial risk to the Owner..
We -feel strongly these circumstances justify ,an extension of
`.view
" the time for completion of the PRD,.particularly in of
the fact that no change has been made in the design concept.
y
r.
i
.i
r