01258and not PRDs. Muryl Medina, the applicant, said this is a single-family
development and not duplexes, but the single-family dwellings are attached.
Each owner will own 1/9 interest in the common area in addition to his
home. She said they will abide by City engineering requirements for drainage.
As for existing drainage problems in the valley, she said she understood
that the major contribution to blocking of drains was the use of bark which
runs off in heavy rains, and also the lack of landscaping on the lots
there. She said her units were designed to take full advantage of the
topography with minimum cutting and filling of slopes, and they intended
ing natural plantings that will attract the
replanting to bring back exist
migration of birds. She said it was her intent to make this a nice develop-
ment and she had done others in Edmonds of which she was proud. She added
that she had never had a complaint on her developments from the City Staff,
including Planning, Engineering, and Building departments. The public
portion of the hearing was then closed.
f ,
Chairman McGibbon noted that there was going to be some kind of development
there and the question was whether the PRD was preferable to conventional
development. He noted that the PRD allows flexibility in siting the buildings
and attached units permit more open space and retention of trees. He was
hopeful that the traffic problem in the Shell Valley area would be,mitigated
in the near future by additional access to the valley. Commissioner LaBelle
observed that, considering the zoning, this probably was one of the best
he commission,
proposed uses tad seen for this property,. -.COMMISSIONER
LaBELLE THEN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMIS1=79
SIONER ROSS,:TO APPROVE.PRD FOR
THE; REASONS�STATED.BY`THE STAFF;.E'.G.', THIS DESIGN;LAYOUT.WILL PRESERVE 68 ,
OFETHE SITE -IN COMMON AREA'AND GREENBELTS;,CUTTING`AND.FILLING�WILL BE
MINIMIZED'.'AS WILL IMPERVIOUS SURFACES AND TREE REMOVAL;.`THE DESIGN. LAYOUT
IS IS°H. :WITH THE PRD CLUSTERING CONCEPT PREVIOUSLY UStb..'IN SHELL
VALLEY;'THIS"USE�IS IN: HARMONY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; AND THERE WAS A`.
FINDING MADE OF NO SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT.. MOTION CARRIED.'" ?
The width of the walkway will be left to the ADB. Commissioner LaBelle
said he would like to have some comments from the Staff regarding some
options that might be considered for that valley as he felt additional
access was a good number of years down the road. Andy Jaeger said, with
respect to this particular PRD, that the devel'oper had contacted him and
indicated her willingness to keep them completely advised regarding the
PRD. He said she had been conscientious in that regard and his only further
comment would be to urge follow-up of Commissioner LaBelle s proposals and
to consider the collective impact of future PRDs on the valley. Mrs.
Medina thanked Mr. Jaeger for his comments and noted that they would be on
the "same side of the fence from then on and possibly together coouulldihelp
solve the problem. Ms. Block said she, too, felt it was a very g
to have an overall review of the valley. She suggested a discussion in E
about a month with everybody involved to be contacted, and she suggested �f
that the Planning Commision develop some specificaddressed
questions to be
so the Staff could do some preliminary research. Chairman McGibbon asked
if the topography would justify a change in the zoning from RS-8 to something
higher. Ms. Block responded that if he was thinking about the drainage,
Shell Park was developed prior to the existence of the present Drainage
Ordinance. COMMISSIONER SMITH MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER LeBELLE, TO;.
CONSIDER•SHELL VALLEY ON JULY 25, 1979. MOTION CARRIED.
REVISIONS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PARK AND RECREATION PLAN
Ms. Block introduced Recreation Administrator Steve Simpson who presented a
capital improvements priority list which had been established by the Edmonds
Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee. He explained that any changes to
roved
the 1974-1980 Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Plan must be reviewed/approved
by the Planning Commission and the City Council, and the Staff had
revised this document to prepare for an IAC grant application to be submitted
in July. The only major change to the document was in the Capital Improvements
Plan. Commissioner Smith questioned the first item on the list: "Acquisition
of waterfront, ravine, greenbelts, and new park properties in the amount
of $1,800,000, for which no funds had yet been appropriated. Mr. Simpson
said most would come from grants and the rest would have to be voted by the
EDMONDS PLANNING COMMISSION
Page 4 - May 23, 1979