00870to each cul-de-sac or driveway. Ms. Charleson said the proposal sub-
over one-half of the
stantially meets the Policy Plan as it preserves
fors ll e of wood and the gs
Extefromr68th.w1Ms.bCharleson
,
open space on the site. did not believe
should be hardly visible impact,
adverse
;
the proposalenvironmental
would create a substantial
subject to the following conditions:
t.
and she rlended approval,
eco
(1) Provision of additional parking spaces along 68th; (2) Construction
by the home-
da
of a private roadway with 20 of paving to be maintained
(9) Use of stud -wall construction for all units
owners association;
with a change in elevation of more than 12', using a rockei onrof�al5'
",
foProvisi
r units with less than a'12' elevation cllConnecton of all lots to
W., (5)
-wide Paved walkway along 68th Ave. the
er system; a covenant to be recorded with
the Cyninwood sanitary sew
PRD and made a part of the home owners association agreement, prohibiting
tree -cutting after developcknAllenand
prtinent oblems with
Assistant City Engineer Di saiditherenareenormajor
He concurred with the design concept.
r.:
utilities or drainage in the area.
The ublic portion of the hearing was opened.
p
David'Kinderfather, architect for the project, said he would prefer to
be safer than on 68th,
put the additional parking on -site as it would
be worked out with the Staff.ed
Y
but he felt that could the stud wall.
to.the conditions stated by Ms. Charleson. He describ;.
sheathing and wood
to which sh2"x 6" stud wall with
e had referred as a
finish would comply with the building code. He said these units
which
would belluxury quality, attached, single-family_dons1wi11 bd basedeoned
He all foundations
t i
that term to "condominiums. said
and the floor plans have been adjusted to fit the
undisturbed soil
grades r Basements will be provided where the land naturally drops away.
flat will not
to provide a.space, but those units which are relatively
He a drawing of a section built on the maximum
:•
have basements. provided Jack Linge of
grade change which demonstrated the use of the stud wall.
had been attracted to this
6970 160t1 1 S.41., adjacent to the site, said he
for single-family units. Under thatusage
district because it was zoned
he iel.t.there might be permitted four houses on the first knoll, p
hird.
r:
on tareahe
three or four on the middle knoll,
He saho
id 68th .is a funnel road grin servesssibltheohomesuinsthat
misleading and that most of the area
He felt the, posted notices were
did not realize this was to be a "condominium" development.
'evening. He said
:
residents
Ile asked that no action be taken on this matter this
he felt it vrould be a major
there are sewer problems in the area and
to permit this type of development. Marsha Porui of Gal 160th
already
.
i
mistake
S.W. was concerned about the.multiple dwellings,. saying it is
6727 161st S.W. said he also
difficult to get out on 68th. Al Briggs of
what he thought was a single-family area, and he opposed
had density
r
chosen
this development. Ms. Clarleson explained that the underlying
She xallonanceed
was not being changed by this• development�wellingack
PRU and the attache he Asssetbstant
r
requiremenia of the the City
City Engineer Dick All addressed the sewer question, saying
system.
has arrangments with Lynnwood for connection to their sewer
that sight distance is not as badas it
discussed the traffic noising ian
He disc
the raising of some dips, and he said
d
had been because of intersection
traffic will be handled by the walkway. lie
tilest•wo-lanetroad
1
Meadowdale Rd. and 68th could be improved, butidc.tfelt
for the amount of traffic that feeds that area.
p
was more than sufficient
He said there may be more delays at the stop sign and statistically more
but there is no
h ,
f
accidents because of the numbers of cars increasing,
developing with this develapnrent. Regarding storm sewers,
major hazard
he indicated that with the extensive natural area that is left the water
development, and the effect
p
will be retained within the confines of the
be minimal to, the system. He said the
very
of the development will v y
EDMONDS PLANNING C011HISSION
,,<
Page 2 - Clay 24, 1978